STANDARDS OF WORK

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25440, 11 March 1948, Page 6

STANDARDS OF WORK

—♦ —- SCHOOL SYSTEM DEFENDED

MR MCCOMBS REPLIES TO CRITICS

“I would be the last to say that everything is just as it should be in our educational system; bdt I would also be the last to say that the work being done is as bad as some people allege.” said the Minister Of Education (Mr T. H. McCombs) in Christchurch last evening, when he addressed the Dominion conference of School Committees’ Associations. Mr McCombs said that, merely on the laws of chance, some pupils who entered the schools would not come up to a reasonable standard .of achievement. However, one bad scholar, did not make a bad educatiori system. In commenting oh a speech which he made in Dunedin, a newspaper (not published in Dunedin) had instanced the way in which members of Parliament spoke. The answer was, said Mr McCombs, that those same members of Parliament were not products of the present education system. There was always a tendency for people to say that things were not so good as they used to be, he continued. Quoting from Pepys’s Diary a criticism of school work in 1663, Mr McCcmbs said: ‘‘ln the last 300 years, our school system must have slipped a lot.”

Average Intelligence After referring to a British expert’s contention that the average intelligence of mankind was declining every yfear, the Minister said: “If the intelligence of the whole population is falling off, then they must have been real giants at the dawn of history.” Last century, an educational system providing English, arithmetic, spelling and writing had been insisted upon. To-day, educationists realised that other things were also required, although a good standard in these subjects was still essential. The trend in post-primary education in New Zealand had been to provide tuition for more children and more types of children. To-day, a measure of promotion by age was allowed. It was inevitable that the post-primary schools must, under this system, take children of lower ability into them. Hence the all-over average of attainment must be lower. But the cream of the children still * achieved the standard which they had formerly achieved. . It was anticipated, said Mr McCombs, that the new syllabuses for schools should be ready by the efid of this year. These new courses for Eng-.-list? and arithmetic would contain all the fundamental requirements, and would ensure an adequate standard of achievefiieht. There was nothing ih the present educational system to cohdone slipshod work either by teachers or by pupils. The aim of the schools was to turn out a complete citizen. To be a complete citizen, the pupil needed a standard of achievement ahd knowledge as the basis for fiis life’s work. . > In addition, the schools must also provide a basis of culture for the pupils. It was essential to ensure that the pupil, would be capable of thinking for himself, in the interests of the country as a whole. “I am confident that the methods in use to-day will go a great deal further in this than the old methods,” Mr McCombs concluded.

Standard of Spelling Speaking after Mr McCombs’s address, Mr W. J. Wilson (Wellington) said it was alleged that spelling was one of the weak points in the present education system. Replying, Mr McCombs 'said: “If the old standard of spelling was achieved by thrashing the children every time they made a mistake, then I’m not going back to it. If it was the result of good teaching, then I am iri favour of it.” Discipline, said Mr McCombs, was much better in the schools tb-day. The Children were interested, and. did not have to be driven to work. This was an excellent achievement. Mr H. D. Pritchard, senior inspector for the Canterbury Education Board, said it was very difficult to be sure that the standard of spelling had fallen. Two things might be contributing to a fall: (1) picture shows took children out of their homes where they might be reading books, and learning the forms of words by habituating themselves to them; and (2) the present was an era when corporal punishment for spelling mistakes was—rightly so—not the consistently severe thing it used to be. Such punishment was very unscientific, salutary if one liked, but cruel. Mr Pritchard added that after trie abolitioil of the proficiency examination there had been some “floundering” in the schools. The present leadership of the Education Depart-, ment was blamed for the “floundering” before its advent. Schools were now getting on to an even keel on new programmes which were better balanced than the layman reglly knew. The present school prescriptions were sane, modern, and cultural, and, concluded Mr Pritchard, no fear need be felt for the future of the schools.