Explanation for delay in report

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32637, 19 June 1971, Page 22

Explanation for delay in report

An explanation of why a study of Roman Catholic education in New Zealand is taking more than four years has been made by a British sociologist, Mr A. E. C. W. Spencer.

It follows stringent criticism of the delay, particularly by the Catholic weekly, the "Tablet,” since Mr Spencer came to New Zealand in July, 1967, at the invitation of the Roman Catholic bishops to prepare an independent report on the school system. Mr Spencer acknowledges in a statement that the study has taken much longer than expected, but says that his agreement with the bishops did not specify a date for delivery of the report. He says that progress reports explaining the many delays the study has suffered, together with four articles intended for publication in the Catholic press to satisfy public interest in the study, were sent to New Zealand, but none were released for publication. Stating that he was in New Zealand in July, 1967, to supervise fieldwork, and that papers reached him in London at the end of January, 1968, Mr Spencer says within a matter of weeks concern was being expressed in the Catholic press of New Zealand about delay in the submission of the report. "I have been subjected to very strong public criticism

ever since for failing to de-1 liver my report,” he says. ’ “I have refrained from i making any public answer in i the belief that, as consultant 1 to the New Zealand Episcopal i Conference, I should report to them and leave it to them i to inform the public.” | Mr Spencer outlines steps ; he took to draft progress re- 1 ports for release to the I press. i “I also submitted four articles, the first of a series I ■ offered to write for the Catholic papers so that public interest in the study could be satisfied. None of this material was given to the press. “When I sent my third progress report in May, 1970, I reserved the right to speak publicly in my own defence if the two progress reports were not published.” Mr Spencer has made these reports available for publication and says they explain the many delays. "When the projected re-1 search was discussed in j Rome in October, 1965, there , was no suggestion of urg-,

ency. "I had earlier suggested the appointment of a New Zealand consultant, or an expert from Australia, to avoid the difficulties created by distance and unfamiliarity with the culture.

“My agreement with the Episcopal Conference did not specify a date for delivery of the report: because of the potential difficulties arising out of distance and cultural unfamiliarity, I would not have accepted the appointment on terms that obliged me to report by a specific date.”

The statement by Mr Spencer goes on to say he has not stinted either his own time or his financial resources in efforts to complete this study to the best of his ability as soon as possible. The progress reports outline delays caused initially by successive dock strikes holding up questionnaires from New Zealand for more than three months. He states that he decided to change the data processing arrangements, switching to computer processing. This attempt to speed things up added at least 15 months to the job because of coding problems. In addition he refers to “almost every conceivable technical hitch” mainly due to breakdowns in the peripheral equipment of the University of London’s Atlas computer. Mr Spencer’s second progress report in 1969 dis-

cusses the possibility of winding up the study. He says if it were possible to complete it within a month, he and his staff would be delighted. "But it is essential to study at least the data about parents' attitudes, opinions and roles, as well as information from sixth formers, before completing the formal report,” he stated. In his third progress

report, he outlines work < achieved and states that, there were fewer breakdowns in the computer centre. He also says that during the previous six months work earlier generalisations “are now less tentative and more definite.” Mr Spencer says in this ' report that he would have i been prepared to write an interim report dealing with < the most central aspect of the ;

organisations of Catholic education—the relationship between the State and the Catholic educational system —if this had been required. In his public statement, Mr Spencer details many extra hours worked by himself and his staff. “This huge extra workload, due in part to the effort to get the study finished as quickly as possible, even if

this cost more, has been paid for by myself out of the free resources of the Pastoral Research Centre (which gets everything I ’ earn from research, writing and broadcasting and from which I draw no salary) and from a second mortgage on my family home in London.” He says a month ago he reported it was not unreasonable to expect the completion of the report by the end of September, or the beginning of October. This, he adds, is the first and only indication he has even given of a completion date, and he would do his best to meet this expectation. “I regret very sincerely the need to make this statement,” Mr Spencer says. “I hope very much it will clear the air and make possible a calm and rational consideration of the issues raised by the report and its recommendations. “Absence of such a discussion will vitiate the efforts of that large number of New Zealanders administrators, teachers, parents, pupils, clergy and religious, seminarians and graduates—who make the study possible, and revealed the nature of the crisis in Catholic education in New Zealand.”