Education system

Press, 5 January 1980, Page 10

Education system

Sir, — If a recent correspondent, despite his ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of defeat by means of a delightfully witty letter, does indeed find children around him to be “orecocious” —i.e. cleverer than he — and “self-opinionated” —- i.e. more fluent than he ■— and arrogant, pushy, de-

manding, and attention-seek-ing — i.e. less respectful of him than he thinks everyone physically weaker should be — then I suggest your correspondent will not solve the problem (which is his problem) by hitting people.. And I hope, moreover, that he never seeks by force to achieve authority ..over other parents’ children, especially mine. — Yours; etc., KEN MCALLISTER. January 2, 1980. Sir? —There can be little - doubt that L. A. H. Bogren (December 28) has a valid point regarding the direction in which “trendy” educational theorists are pressing for greater status and importance to elevate children to a level where the precocious child grasps the proffered opportunity to stand out above his peers and dictate the course which education and leisure will take. The “child rights” attitude so prevalent in many schools makes it inevitable that basic subjects so essential for a sound education on which to found the basis for a worth-while career will fall below the standard of present curriculum. As regards behaviour, some enlightenment was revealed

during an interview on television this evening between one of the adults in charge ’ of the large influx of New - Zealand , children .to Dis- 1 neyland, and the two organisers of . such visits.- Their - praise of New-Zealand child- ' ren sounded- genuine , but . they admitted that usually •; . coping with behaviour was a problem — the 'tired New ; Zealand overseers helped. — > Yours, etc., V. L. E. REID. December 28, 1979.