AN UNWISE PROPOSAL.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 108, 30 January 1908, Page 4

AN UNWISE PROPOSAL.

~To people interested in the proceedings of the University Senate Dr. St an 1 Jordan's views must be growing rather tiresome. ■ in debate after debate_ his name has been invoked, and his views made the basis of argument', as if his opinions hardly left Senators any freedom to have opinions of their own. Never, 'however, during the session, lias his ..(hustling " modernism " beeii adduced in support of a proposal, sd bad as that wlncli involves the abolishr ing of the matriculation examination and acceptance. as' passports of admission to the University of tlie certificates of secondary school teachers. The proposition was that this ,vation should be referred to a Recess Committee for consideration and report, but tho actual question discussed was not the wisdom of such , reference, but ' the propriety of the innovation itself.' The motion was carried, but the weight of argument was against the abolitionists. The, only material argument'for change jvas tnat the present system encourages " cramming " in the up-, per forms of the secondary schools:' A great' deal' .was said about "the life; of the schools bein r: dominated by outside ' influences," and- the necessity , foi 1 ," liberty of action" in the schools that arc now " cramped "by the "outside 'ex-* aminer," but these portentoiis generalities mean very little. The question before the then, was whether the •' removal ofj the, alleged .evil of "cramming '' is' so urgently necessary as to outweigh the many undesirable consequences which would be entailed. Some of those consequences were admirably pointed out by the Chancellor and Professors J,. M. Brown, Sale, and Shand. 1 The 'University 'could not leave the''selection of eligible students to the secondary schools without imposing ' certain• conditions .upon the. schools, ancl excluding some of. them from the list of " approved " establishment's. As the Chancellor pointed out, the University cannot ' undertake a task, so invidious as this. He further showed that the adoption of the'new proposal would mean that the Univer-/ sity would be required to examine the schools/which he appears to'v favour; and eventually the secondary schools would govern the teaching of the University colleges. An even graver objection was put forward by Professor Shand; who very properly Sees in the proposal the beginning of a devolution that'will end in file degradation of all the Uroversity standards. The. logical outcome of the proposal, he said, would be that degrees would be given on the recommendation < of the professors alone. The financial difficulty, and the undesirableness of extending the University's functions downward were dealt with by Professor J. M. Brown, and Professor Sale reminded the Senate of the notorious fact that what is required is not a removal of the admittedly low barrier ofE the matriculation examination, but the elevation of the jnatriculation standard. _ ', Against this host of objections the plea of "no cramming" cannot stand for a moment. At present the very low matriculation standai'd is. filling our Colleges' with people who benefit neither .themselves nor society by . their painful struggle in a sphere,for, which they are not intended., To substitute school certificates for'the examination would intensify this evil. But it would also cut the other way, and would result in the exclusion from the University of young people who would do good for themselves and for Society by taking a University bourse. Neither schoolmasters nor professors are infallible. Schoolboys and undergraduates have' before now had the pleasure of brilliantly confounding ■ the teachers and professors who have warned them to look only for failure, The' Recess Committee should find no difficulty in reporting unfavourably upon, a radical change that has so little to Commend it.