Limit On University Roll Considered

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30712, 30 March 1965, Page 1

Limit On University Roll Considered

The University of Canterbury will consider restricting its student numbers, not only because of accommodation problems but because of a feeling on the council that there is an optimum roll beyond which it should not go. As a start, council and staff members will hold forums on the issue this winter.

The acting vice- ' chancellor (Professor j N. C. Phillips) had re- i ported a total roll this ■ year of 4452, an over- | all increase of 12.4 pei' cent. First-year student numbers rose from 1086 to 1306, an increase of 20.3 per cent, and placed a very heavy load on some de- i partments, he said. Professor Phillips said the present roll was now 1.6 per cent above the lowest predictions and 9.1 per cent below the highest. This showed that forecasts were fairly accurate for total numbers but notice should also be taken of four subjects with classes of 200 to 250 students, three with 250 to 300, and five over 300. English Roll “English I with 662 compared with 464 last year is quite phenomenal,” Professor Phillips said. Faculty increases were:— Arts, 17 per cent: science.

11.9; law, 10.8: commerce, I 11.3; engineering, 6.5; fine| arts, 15.9. Music was down by! 13.3 per cent. The chancellor (Mr C. H. Perkins) said such numbers must be causing considerable general teaching difficulties, particularly in departments under great pressure. When Mr G. Manning asked whether accommodation was adequate. Professor Phillips replied: “We are just managing this year but our future depends entirely on the sciences moving to Ham on time next year. Apart from the lecturing load, there is difficulty with tutorials where numbers are limited by the size of staff studies so they often have to be repeated.” “Is the limitation of numbers now in sight?” asked the Rev. W. M. Hendrie. A class of 662 was impossible to work well. In previous references to accommodation difficulties, the vice-chancellor (Dr. L. L. Pownall) had quoted roll projections of 10.000 students and more, said Mr D. W. Bain. All statements so far had revolved around space. But now the roll had reached 4500 was it not time to talk about optimum numbers? Even if all foreseeable accommodation needs were met, there must come a time when the university as an administrative and corporate unit became unwieldy. “A year or two ago we had forums on ‘Whither the Uni-

versity of Canterbury’,” said Mr Bain. This winter council and staff should discuss optimum rolls. Government policy was that all who qualified should be able to enter universities but it did not say how many should be taken at any one university. “I’d like to see us fix a number,” said Mr Bain. Second University Mr C. E. Fenwick said some people had said 7500 students would be suitable for the new university at Ham. At the present rate, that figure would be reached by 1970. If another university was built in North or South Canterbury, it would be three years before it could give relief, so the issue was becoming urgent. The pro-Chancellor (the Rt. Rev. A. K. Warren) said that if the time had come to consider a second university, planning must be long-term. Mushroom growth had occurred in the United Kingdom and the Robbins report suggested that universities ought to be close together for joint use of special and costly facilities.

When the council agreed to convene forums on the issue, Mr Perkins warned that restriction of numbers and new universities must be considered nationally but Canterbury could give a lead. It should never be forgotten that one large establishment of any kind had been proved to be more economic than two units of half the size.