SCHOOL HOMEWORK

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21908, 8 October 1936, Page 8

SCHOOL HOMEWORK

VIEWS OF TEACHERS AND EDUCATIONISTS

DIFFERENT TYPE ADVOCATED

There appears to be no tendency in Christchurch secondary schools to reduce the amount of homework, according to enquiries made yesterday, when a recent discussion by the Wellington Colleges’ Board, which received a letter on the subject from the Education Department, was referred to headmasters. Strong advocacy of the substitution of xApre creative work for the present type of school homework was, however, put forward by Professor J. Shelley, who will retire from the professorship of education at Canterbury University College at the end, of this session. Similar views were expressed by Mr A. C. Maxwell, formerly headmaster of the Phillipstown school and now engaged in honorary vocational guidance work. “I do not think our boys do too much homework, and I am certainly not going to reduce it," said Mr R. J. Richards, headmaster of Christ’s College. “I have not heard any discussion of the matter down here.”

Mr G. J. Lancaster, headmaster of the Christchurch Boys’ High School, said that the school prospectus provided for one and a half hours of homework for the third forms, one and a half to two for the fourth and fifth forms, and two to three for the sixth form. For the lower forms the subjects for eaoh night were arranged by the n. ster in charge, and the time to be given to each subject was decided. In the other forms the boys were left to their own discretion on these matters. It was the duty of parents to notify the headmaster if their boys were doing too much homework, and po complaints had been made.

“While the matriculation examination exists there can be no reduction cf homework,” said Mr J. B. Mawson, headmaster of St. Andrew’s College. “When I get an opportunity of reducing homework I shall do so, but it is cnly speculation so far.”

Voluntary Work Suggested

“Homework which is merely a repetition of school work is disadvantageous to.the child in many ways, and is apt to develop a dislike of school,'’ said Professor Shelley. “Second, it is apt to restrict the child’s educational outlook, and make him narrowly scholastic. It would be better to encourage the child at home in more creative work along the lines of his own interests and capacities. What the teacher sets the children to do at home may be used as a means of developing their personalities. “If the same school homework is set for all children it becomes nothing less than a punishment for those Who are not particularly bright. If such children were encouraged to work at hobbies and more creative activities they would be able to feel that they really did count for something in the school, and would have a very different attitude to school work. As it is, there is nothing like enough activity during school hours, and ordinary book homework tends further to reduce the child’s opportunity for activity. In the upper classes of secondary schools homework might be used as an opportunity for further reading and study in special subjects in which the child is particularly good. This, again, would make for development of interest and individuality.” Professor Shelley added that the question of compulsory homework was one for the central authority to decide, but the nature of the voluntary homework of the kind he suggested should be left to the headmaster of each school. It depended on the facilities offered by the neighbourhood.

In' the Primary I Schools

Mr Maxwell, who referred to work in primary schools, said that he did not believe in compulsory homework. There would always be a certain' amount of homework necessary, but it was better for children to take up research work of their own. He did not believe in a lot of hard mental work for the child. In the Sixth Standard a little study might be necessary, but it should be limited to about half an hour, and should not be overdone. A small amount would have a good disciplinary effect, but it was better for the child to do something voluntarily; there was much homework of this kind that would prove pleasant for the child. "When we come to consider the conditions under tohich a child may have to do homework and the distractions that may be present," he added, “how can we expect them to work? Wilu parents and other children round, ano possibly visitors, with perhaps the radio going, it is absurd to expect them to be able to work. It is not every child who can get away to a room of his own.”