End of schools’ isolation from society

Press, 24 August 1977, Page 3

End of schools’ isolation from society

From MARGARET BUTLER, in Wellington

Education was, now more than ever, in the oublic domain, the Minister of Education (Mr Gandar) told the IP o s t-Primary Teachers’ i Association’s . conference yesterday. I The days, if they ever i really existed, when a school I could stand apart from its ( community had long since gone. ; New relationships had ( emerged between schools land society but more imiportantly, within society. Clearly there was a growing and urgent need for teachers, schools, and the Department of Education to keep parents informed of what they were doing. But it was more than just informing. “If we are to respond effectively to worries and uncertainties which may arise within the community, then we need to listen seriously and sensitively to parents’ views.” Many schools did respond ir a positive way to parental attitudes, and this was good, “but I also wonder to what extent we hear only j the articulate voices in the community.”

It was a fact of modern j education that secondary schools had a large measure of autonomy, and in some ways this autonomy was increasing. “To a very large degree, teachers now determine! what will be taught to the i individual child.” I Almost exclusively they (determined how it would be (taught and chose the mat-

erials which would form the basis of learning experiences. This imposed a responsibility on schools to ensure the community fully understood what they were aiming to achieve, and how they were going about it, said Mr Gandar. He said he was becoming increasingly concerned as groups began to emerge who were seeking to improve restraints upon the professional freedom of the teaching service. Undoubtedly, teachers and schools were in a difficult position as society at large began to express its expectations of the school system. They faced the problems of choice and balance. This was the balance between professional judgments and the demands of society. In the more controversial areas, this difficulty was accentuated, particularly as society generally expressed a wide variety of views. “I am aware that some

? .parents are already demand--lir.g the right .to withdraw i i pupils from classes because >jof philosophical or religious .’lor moral beliefs which they) ;|hold. .’I “Should they have this .(right?” Mr Gandar said. (“And has a school the right ilto demand attendance of • (pupils at classes where c.onj'tentious matters are dis.(cussed?” . j The conference was; .(opened by the Prime Minis-i Iter (Mr Muldoon), who] j asked whether the public ‘(was getting value for its] , money from the education _ system. “Are pupils better turned] \out to take their places ini ' commerce and industry?” heli ; said. “I refer particularly to! ' those who do not go on to j universities or may indeed not even complete secondary school.” 1 The education vote had ’ risen this year to a record ’ $796M, Mr Muldoon said. I The quality of education, as distinct from the allocation ilof resources, should be a :

major cause for concern at the conference. He asked teachers whether too much emphasis was ; being put on liberal studies at the expense of the basics — reading, writing, arithmetic, and speech. The leader of the Opposition (Mr Rowling) told the conference that the loss of teachers from New Zealand (was both a reflection of the (sharp erosion of living standards and a disillusionment | with working conditions within the profession. | Latest emigration figures ! showed that in the last recorded year, 532 teachers (had left New Zealand on a (permanent or long stay i basis. ( Indeed, said Mr Rowling, it seemed the Government’s emigration policy was “New Zealand’s own version of the neutron bomb. “It is a little slower act-1 ing, but given a few years on present trends New Zea-! land will be depopulated —I with all the buildings still] standing.”

The president of the P.P.T.A. (Mrs I. M. Gaskin) • told the conference that' ; pupils should not be penalt ised because their school > was in a district where in- • comes were generally low, and parents could not afford' • money to support constant ! fund-raising efforts. - No-one should suffer be--1 cause he was not in an old -school with a strong old! • boys' or girls’ association, -Mrs Gaskin said. No-one should have to choose his subjects accord- ’ ing to whether his parents ] were able or willing to pay' ’(fees to cover the cost of (i classroom materials. No child should be unable( to reach his full potential • ; because he was forced to( leave school before he was . ready to do so, she said. Secondary education had' (broadened to include things | not dreamt of a few years ago, such as outdoor educa(tion and liberal studies. “But. {they are far more expensive.' .Who is to pay?” she said.