THE UNIVERSITY

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20978, 5 October 1933, Page 5

THE UNIVERSITY

STUDENTS* DEBATE

QTAGO ' BEATS CANTERBURY "That the present University of New Zealand is failing to justify its"' existence," was. the subject of a debate, carried on by wireless, between teams representing Canterbury College j and Otago University last night. The! speeches were broadcast by ' stations 3YA and 4YA. The speakers for the affirmative were Messrs Colin Hart (leader), W. Wall, and L. A. Efford (representing Canterbury College) and Messrs J. B. Stevenson, E.« S. Tuckwell, and G. Flavell (representing Otago University) : took the negative. Aims of University. Opening for the affirmative, Mr Bavt said that the purpose of university training was defined in its charter as "The promotion of sound learning." University education could be divided into its cultural or basic side, and its vocational or secondary side. Unfortunately the attainment of culture was hampered through social activity and the false atmosphere which was created by the attainment. of cheap glory by some students, while solid work on the part of others tended to be overlooked. The main cause of the failure of our university system was, however, that students crammed for their degrees purely for their personal advancement,' and the 'university was failing to produce -leaders of men.

For the negative, Mr Stevenson attacked Mr. Hart's definition of the purpose of the university, which he claimed was to obtain "knowledge for the sake of knowledge." The objects of university teaching were, "the attainment of knowledge, research, and professional services dedicated to mankind." So the. university had produced doctors and professional men who were highly respected in the community. Vocational Training:. Mr Wall claimed that the previous speaker had missed the point and that his definition of the subject was at fault. He went on to show to what lengths vocational 'training interfered with the cultural purpose of the university. "We show a tendency," he said, "to rival America, where a student recently wrote a thesis on dishwashing." Mr Tuckwell instanced the high position held by graduates of the university both in New Zealand and abroad, and spoke of the high regard which people outside New Zealand held for New Zealand degrees. He praised the methods of teaching employed here and challenged his opponents to show where the system failed.

The next speaker, Mr Efford, argued that the university should produce leaders in the widest cultural sense, men whose object was the betterment of mankind, and should not aim at the production of a mere degreegetting class of professional men. Otago's last speaker, Mr Flavell, accused Canterbury speakers of dwelling amongst the ideals of the classics rather than those of the present day. He said that we had every right to be proud of our famous scientists, such as Lord Rutherford, and our Rhodes scholars were recognised to be of a higher standard than those of other countries. After the leaders had summed up, Mr lan Donnelly briefly criticised the speakers. Canterbury, through a misunderstanding, had treated the subject rather lightly, while the Otago speakers "as perhaps one might expect fr.">m Dunedin," had been "thorough, earnest, and convincing." He placed Mr Flavell first and Mr Stevenson second, of the individual speakers, and awarded totals as follows: — Otago .. .. 176 points Canterbury .. 163 points