Notes by Colonus.

Bruce Herald, Volume XI, Issue 1013, 28 May 1878, Page 6

Notes by Colonus.

+ TEACHING MORALITY. iAt the late session of the- members of the Educational Institute of Otago, Mr Stout in a learned and ingenious disquisition dealt with the question, " Can morals be taught in secular schools ?" lam not at present going to discuss the views expressed by Mr Stout, .but merely *ish to observe that I do not think there is any absolute necessity to answer the question, because I do not think that in Government elementary schools the attempt should be made to teach either morality or religion — that is ostensibly in a formal manner. The ostensible purpose of the institution of our Government elementary schools is to teach children reading and writing, to habituate them to mental work in the exercise of their intellectual faculties, to enlighten their understandings, and to convey to their minds a certain amount of general information: To formally impose upon .Government .schoolmasters the task of teaching children either morality or religion, seems to me an utter absurdity. The question put by Mr Stout seems to involve the supposition that morality can be taught to children in the same way as arithmetic or grammar. How in the name of wonder would a teacher. set 'about the task of formally teaching children morality ? A lot of children are under ; the teacher's care for a few hours a -day, and if the teacher detects a child doing what is morally wrong, the teacher may well be.expected to reprove or admonish him ; but a teacher can have, comparatively, speaking, but little control over the general conduct and behaviour of each individual child, except as far as discipline is concerned; , the teacher cannot stand in loco parentis, or be expected to perform some important duties which parents owe to their children. It seems to me the only way a schoolmaster could teach morality in a formal way would be to address his .class in a sermon like a minister of religion addressing his congregation. As to formally " teaching children morality, independent of any reference to religion, w ; hat could .such teaching consist in more than telling children to observe certain rules of [ conduct ? This would be very briefly done. 'I suppose no proposal would be made to teach children moral philosophy, or rather the philosophy of morality. Whether or not a child grows up with a clear sense of 'rightf-arid wrong, and is habituated -to <act Tightly or riot, cannot depend nearly as much "upon t&e schoolmaster as upon. the influences to^which the mind of the child is subjected out of school, and especially in the family circle.- The moral influence of-the schoolmaster over each individual of a large number of cbi'dren committed to his care for a few hours a day must be utterly insignificant in comparison to the moral influence of parents. As.^^r : White observed at the meeting, the^avgr^und would seem to be a more proper pj^ace to instil moral precepts into children than the class-room. In ,tbe playground, where children have social ,in-_ tercourse with each other, the moral faculties are exercised ; but in the class-room, no more is required, than descriptive and intellectual work. I think we may depend upon the gqodjense, qr_ sense_of duty_o.f teachers, to supervise the moral conduct of their scholars without requiring that in govern* ment elementary schools sball be taught in a formal way either morality, or the philosophy of morality, or dogmatic religion.