PITFALLS IN NEW BRITISH SYSTEM OF EDUCATION

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 15, Issue 19, 7 August 1950, Page 4

PITFALLS IN NEW BRITISH SYSTEM OF EDUCATION

(By J. P. Kennedy, 1950 Kemsley Empire ‘Journalist) London, July 15.

That old Spanish proverb, “who robs the scholar robs the public”, might well be applied to the effects now being felt in Britain of the Working of the new education system that was introduced by the revolutionary Act of 1944, and to the dissatisfaction that some aspects of its working have given rise to. There is an ever-growing feeling that the Act has not proved the perfect panacea that it was intended to be.

Looking at the English and New Zealand systems from this standpoint, one finds that there are several divergencies. One of them is striking. The compfc*te revulsion against the use of exanullations in secondary schools in New Zealand as a test of the pupils’ aptitudes has found no parallel in England. The reverse"has been the case and England has gone to the other extreme and placed on examinations a crucial importance which they were never meant to have —at least for young children. Nfot Freedom When the Education Act was brought into force, it was laid down that as far as possible pupils should be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents. But today the average English parent, who desires a free secondary education for the child, has not the freedom of choice of a New Zealand parent. Today to enter a grammar school a child must pass a stiff entrance examination. This it does when it is either 11 or 12. No matter what may be said in defence of examinations, it cannot be argued that a child of 11 or 12 can be fairly tested on his or her abilities at that impressionable and difficult age. It is carrying matters too far to decide to which type of school—grammar, technical or secondary modern (the latter gives a general course) —a child shall go by those methods at that age. In effect, the whole future of that child is being decided on that examination, since the type of school that he goes to largely determines the occupation into which he will move on leaving.

Quite apart from the far-reach-ing effects that such a system has, there is also the fact that many of the children excluded from grammar schools by that examination would, if given time to develop, reveal other qualities which it is desirable to have in any school. It is not always the most brilliant student who is the greater t credit to the school. Often such a student lacks the stability of character and fixity of purpose which can carry a lesser student to a great success.

English parents are bitter, therefore, with good reason. In the first place the Act, as operated at present places an unfair burden on -a child just entering a disturbed emotional period—adolescence. Secondly, it prejudices his chance of gaining entrance to the type of school he seeks. Though he can be transferred from a lower class of school to a grammar school if deemed fit as a result of his subsequent work, he is in the position of a batsman going into bat on a sticky wicket after having made a duck in the first innings.

Thirdly, the parent is left with practically no chance of acting on his own initiative. Most grammar schools are today under the control of the local authorities and are free. Fees have been abolished, and

the result is that the parent who is prepared to make sacrifices, but who cannot afford the cost of a public school education, is hamstrung.

Rigid Tests Comparing English secondary school education wisi the Ne y Zealand article, one finds that their approach to the choice of a curriculum and teaching method is generally similar. But New Zealand departs from England by not insisting on these rigid tests for young children, and by even going so far as to say that an examination is not desirable for a boy of 16 or 17. For that is what the present accrediting system in New Zealand suggGStS. Undoubtedly the New Zealand view in this matter has been carried too far as is shown by the sniping that goes on at it by teachers throughout the Dominion. Yet even it gives the lad who cannot get accredited a second chance by preserving the old university entrance examination for him. Though that places him at a disadvantage it is surely better than a system which insists on an examination at an early age, with practically no effective right of appeal. There is room, in both England and New Zealand for reform in these matters. An examination, corrected by accrediting would seem to be the answer in New Zealand. Possibly something on similar lines could be done in England, though the problem here is infinitely more complex.