TEACHERS AND PHYSICAL DRILL

Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 185, 5 August 1913, Page 4

TEACHERS AND PHYSICAL DRILL

As our readers may gather from a letter which appears in our correspondence columns to-day, the new system of physical drill is starting here under very unfortunate auspices. We have no intention of entering at present into the controversy which has recently provided so much material for Parliamentary debate, as to how and why Mr. Royd Garlick was appointed to his position. We believe he is thoroughly well qualified for discharging the duties of physical instructor. Nevertheless, the Hon. Jas. Allen probably regrets that he decided to illustrate the prejudive of the "Reformers" against patronage by the gift of a post of this importance without advertisement or competition, carrying a salary that many of our ablest Civil servants

have to spend thirty years or more to attain. But, considering the unfortunate position in which the Minister has placed himself, it is certainly inconsiderate of the Auckland Education Board to add to his embarrassment in any way; and this is certainly what the Board has already done by its tactless and inconsiderate action. As our correspondent's letter points out, the Board called upon all teachers to attend instruction in physical drill on Saturdays. Now, everybody knows that Saturday is the one clear da 3' in the teacher's week; and the reason for limiting attendance at school to five days in the week is that experience has proved that neither children nor teachers can stand the strain of continuous mental work without the Saturday aud Sunday rest. Many teachers maintain that the Board has no legal claim upon the time of a teacher

for more than five days in the week, and it was only after the Auckland

teachers had made it clear that they would resist to the utmost of their powers this vexatious and harassing innovation that the mandate with regard

to Saturday was withdrawn. JLiut apart from tliie, strong exception may be ta!:en to the manner in which the headmasters and senior teachers generally have been treated in this matter by the Hoard. All teachers, from h<>admasLtrs to pupil teachers, were summoned by circular to assemble tor physical drill, and were then expected to answer their names and to deport themselves generally like school children. We are not surprised to learn -that some of the senior teachers expressed their feelings by walking out oi the room when "roll call" began. We assume that healinafiters end 'lroodniieu-ceecs of our Large city schools will not be lequired to submit themselves personally to the ministrations of Mr. Koyd Ua.rlick; but in any case why should the I'oard treat the senior teachers in thi* humiliating and undignified fashion? it would htiiye. been 'quite easy for the Hoard to request the heads of the various schools to iiiform their respective stalls that their presence would be required at a certain time and place. The lioard mipht reflect that men and women of tventy and thirty years' service aaid ot higii standing in the profession are not accustomed to being treated in precisely the same way as pupil tfacher.-., and thy indignity thus publicly put upon them by the jJoard i-. not likely to promote the best interests of education here. Tho whole incident is most unfortunate, but the lioard will certainly no«l to aiter ita methods very materially bfforc it cm hope to make the new physical drill popular or successful.