“Serious Dilemma” About Teaching Of Mathematics

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27643, 27 April 1955, Page 14

“Serious Dilemma” About Teaching Of Mathematics

The dilemma about the teaching of mathematics in New Zealand was so serious that it warranted the establishment of a commission—and he said that advisedly, said Mr Duncan Mackay, principal of the Christchurch Teachers’ College, at a meeting of the Canterbury University College Council yesterday. The mathematics department report to the council showed about 600 enrolments, and assuming that as many as four units were being taken by some students, it would appear that there were at least 150 in the department with “five and a half teachers,” said Mr Mackay. That amounted to more than the 25 pupils to each teacher, which was the basis of post-primary school staffing, and the university required much more individual attention. The report also showed that in this situation, no tutorial work was possible in applied mathematics Stage I with the result that one class numbered 108.

“It is all very well for the university to say to such a large group, ‘Our standards are high and precise, so that if you pass all is well, and if you don’t, we can’t be worried,’” said Mr Mackay. Many would not be up to the pace required for the best, and they were bound to be disheartened.

Some years , ago, he said, it was reported that only 40 per cent, of candidates passed in Stage I mathematics. That was no reflection on the quality of teaching but on the understaffing. If there were failures, the supply of mathematics teachers for the schools was diminished, and work there suffered, with a resultant reduction in the standard or in the numbers of pupils taking up the subject at university. “A vicious circle exists,” said Mr Mackay. Serious under-staffing was mentioned in a “very temperate and objective way” in both departmental reports

before the council from two retiring heads, Professor W. Saddler (mathematics) and Professor L. G. Pocock (classics), Mr Mackay said. Neither professor had anything to gain personally by his report on staffing, as both would retire at the end of this year. Presumably both' wished the council to offer some remedy to their successors.

Professor Pocock attached great importance to the ancient history course, which was not taught elsewhere in New Zealand, and which he considered was equally neglected in England, but he said the department had not the staff to cope with it properly, said Mr Mackay, Started last year with eight enrolments, it now had 26. Professor Pocock said he had to take most of this, course himself on top of the. other teaching and correction work and “the really frightful burden of setting, vetting, proof-reading, and final correcting of 32 examination papers, which spoils an otherwise delightful profession.”

When Mr Mackay moved that the Professorial Board be asked to report on the apparent under-staffing revealed m these departments, Professor J. C. Garrett said he could imagine that other departments would also claim under-staffing. Professor E. Percival (chairman of the board) said the retiring professors might prefer the matter to be held over for discussion with their successors. “With so many problems, we say Let it stand over for a little while’” said Mr E. B E. Taylor. “I don't thtok anything will be lost by referring the matter to the Professorial Board Its report will at least be of value to the new professors and the new rector.” Professor H. E. Field said the board a * r eady had a committee investigating staffing, and that report could be retaker? before any further action was

By a narrow margin on the voices, it was agreed to request a special report.