N.Z. UNIVERSITY ACCREDITING

Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27747, 26 August 1955, Page 9

N.Z. UNIVERSITY ACCREDITING

NO RECOMMENDATION ON CHANGE

NOTICE OF MOTION NOW BEFORE SENATE

Further immediate investigation of accrediting for entrance to the University of New Zealand is advocated in a notice of motion by Mr D. W. Bain (Canterbury) which will be considered today by the Senate at its meeting at Lincoln. The committee on accrediting had reported to the Entrance Board that, “on the evidence at present available, it is unable to make specific recommendations in the meantime about possible beneficial alterations to the accrediting system.” There were widely differing opinions in the committee and in the community on accrediting and entrance standards, the report said. The New Zealand Council for Educational Research, at the request of the Senate, was investigating possible relationships between entrance standards and the failure rates in students’ first year at university. The committee recommended that, when this report was available, the Senate should take steps to re-examine the standards of entrance in relation to accrediting. “That would postpone action—possibly for three years,” said Mr Bain. Last year, the hope had been expressed that some advance would be made in examining some aspects of accrediting. The matter had been referred to liaison officers, the Entrance Board, and the Academic Board. “Little Progress Made” It appeared that the Senate’s own special committee had met for only one afternoon, said Mr Bain. “I regret that so little progress has bee*i made, and that the committee did not meet more often and longer,” he said. Dr. D. F;. Hansen said he was concerned that considerably more students seemed to be accredited for entrance than ever passed by examination. The proportion was somthing like 62 per cent, to 55 per cent. The view that this arose from using the same medium as when all were examined, «ven though the top students were skimmed off, was expressed by Dr. F. G. Sooer (Otago).' Mr M. A. Bull said that, as a member of the committee, he would assure the Senate that no relevant consideration had been passed by. There was no sign of lowering of standards for entrance, in his view. When the Chancellor (Sir David Smith) asked when the research council’s report might be expected, the Vice-Chancellor (Dr. G. A. Currie) suggested next year; but Mr K. J. Maidment thought it would be 1957, as searching questionnaires had to be collated. In the meantime, the machinery of accrediting was being detrimental to pupils in the schools, said Mr Bain. He then gave notice of motion to seek a more immediate investigation of accrediting itself, as distinct from subsequent failure rates.