RATIONING OF TEACHERS

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21090, 15 February 1934, Page 10

RATIONING OF TEACHERS

SCHEME CRITICISE!) I'KUMANKNT POSITIONS BEING TILLED A resolution deploring strongly the action of the Education Department in placing "rationed" teachers in positions at £6O a year and using them to fill the places of permanent teachers was passed by the monthly meeting of delegates to the Canterbury School Committees' Association last evening, and it was decided to ask the Dominion Federation of School Committees' Associations to place the association's views before the Minister for Education (the Hon. R. Masters). "The standard of education in New Zealand is low enough, in my opinion deplorably low," said Mr L. J. Yv'ilkins, who declared that it was not in the interests of Ihe children to place them in the charge of relieving teachers. "Anything that tends further to lower the standard of education is opposed to the welfare of the children, who are thus penalised throughout the rest of their lives."

Mr C. R. N. Mackic. the chairman, said that rationed teachers wore now stationed at their respective schools for 12 months. The headmaster of the Linwood School had told the board that unless the rationed teachers were guaranteed to slay in their positions for the full year he would not put them in charge of classes. The question of salary was one that really did not concern the school committees; it was a matter between the department and the teachers. The latter could accept or reject appointments at £6O a vcar. Mr J. S. Barnett said that similar arrangements for rationed teachers had been made at the West Christchurch School, which v/as now applying for two permanent teachers. He asked if any of those relieving at Linwood were taking the places of permanent teachers. Mr Mackic: One, I believe. Another delegate said that a school which was employing four relieving teachers had been told that any of them might be taken away at a minute's notice. Mr F. Norric considered that the association should be concerned with the salaries paid to teachers. He knew of one teacher with six years' experience who was receiving £GO a year, with a board allowance of £24, for work in the country that should be done by a permanent teacher. A member said that the Education Department was filling £2OO a year oositions with rationed teachers who received £6O. It could not be justified educationally or economically. Mr Mackic: The Minister states that the position has been relieved considerably by the institution of the rationing scheme. It is certainly better for the children to have the teachers employed for 12 months instead of for three. Mr J. Radcliffe, who moved the motion referred to above, said that teachers could not be expected to take the same interest in their work when they were receiving a totally inadequate wage. "In spite of the many statements to the effect that the country has turned the corner the children are being starved of education. Yet the Government can spend plenty of money attending tangis at Waitangi. (Laughter.)