NOTES ON EDUCATION.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 301, 14 September 1908, Page 9

NOTES ON EDUCATION.

TEACHERS' APPEAL BOARD. ' ALLEGED WRONGFUL' DISMISSAL. ' (By SoCRATja.) In December last Di-M'Clure, 1 head teacher at Kiritaki; public "School; in tho Hawke's Bay' District, Received threo months' notice of removal from his position. The notico expired on March 18, but no communication with further reference to his employment/was' received from' the board until April 23, when'he received, a telegram instructing him to report for relieving duty at Napier :Sputli School. Mr. M'Cluro's salary at Kiritaki was, according to tho returns of 1907, '£180 per annum; his salary as relieving teacher was not specified, but it may bo noted that" the board would not grant his request for a guarantee of £160 per annum for two'- further, that the secretary.-of" tho'"bodrd 1 :Was' prepared to recommend h'iin for'an hssistantship at £155 per annum-.' --Mr: M'Clure.-held that as his transfer, implied' reduction" : in' salary, and therefore -his'reni'ovar amounted to dismissal fro^n 1 his-position- its , head-teacher at and'"decided'to call upon the hoard to show-'rea'Soriablb cause for such action. A teacher'SySpiVear coui't'was' duly constituted, with Mrr-''WRiddell, 1 ;' S.M., as president, and-"-'a'• representative of tho board (Mr. M'Lean)'["and"of tlic'teacliers' (Mr. White) as assessors: 1 "Tho ,'caso .'was' heard on August 31 last; Mr." W. Foster, secretary of tho New Zealand-'-Educational Institute, appeared for' T Mf.?M'Clui'(?, "and Mr, G. Crawshaw, secretary" bf the'Hiiwkii's" Bay Education Board, conducted the-case on' behalf of tho board. Mr."M , Cluro' : lost his case. The text of the CoiiK's "decis'iofi''has! already appeared in Tite'Do'MlxloJfV 'briefly reiterated, it amounted to this: Tho board's action in determining Mr. M'Cluro's engagement as head-teaeher"at 'Kiritaki was reasonable, having regard/to' the efficielit 'ad-? ministration of its affairs, - ami l also''having' regard to tho relations' which existed :be-, tween appellant and his "aiid 'bdtween him and his committee;."" Tho writer has before him a-'copy- of ;tlio "Dannevirko Advocate'-!-' of. 1 September-.1,-containing a very complete report of the pro-' ceodings. As indicated; • argument. centred upon the question of wrongful dismissal, tho'Court haying decided that it was -unnecessary to give any finding'as to whether transfer or removal frpm one'school' to'an'otbfei' amounted- to a dismissal. -Tho-evidence adduced upon tho board's contention,-viz.,- that' Mr. M'Clure's management of tlie'-Kiritaki School was detrimental to the efficient and economical working of the school, while no doubt of. assistance to the court in arriving at its decision, shows very clearly that whatever. Mr. M'Cluro's shortcomings..'may have been, he was most unfortunately, situated. - - The board's policy seems to have" been to-leave Mr. M'Cluro at tho mercy :of."a" set' of' circumstances in which no ;.teacl)6i"''has : ally right over to be placed,, and'which none but' a man of strong determination and., great force of character could" have Combated successfully, Men of this,type are, however, somewhat rare in tho profession—they can command a higher price for these qualities elsewhoro, twice as much, .in fact,-as that which is paid to the head teacher of the. Kiritaki Public School. -But; that-is. by tho way. ... - -. ' To return to Mr. M'Cluro.- The.-evidence showed that associated with the appellant in the management of his. ~ school was , an assistant named Mrs.. W.iiibley, whose husband was a member of the school'committee, and whose son had beeii a pupil under, Mr. M'Clure. It is not very difficult to. conceivo tho possibilities of such a situation, and it is therefore not surprising to learn, from the evidence of Mrs.. Whibley, that Mr. M'Clure had accused her.'of working, against him, and that- she did not think,: that.'slio was treated with due ; consideration: As a mother, she states in. her: evidence,'vkhe, in. ,1906, complained to,-Mr.'; M.'.Clureflwitih .reference to the progress of her son j'Mr.-.'M'Clure; however, would not present the son for'thc; examinations she desired. The boy subsequently went to Wanganui; ' and'passed the examination. This_ refusal by Mr.- .M'Clujo did not, she states, imperil her relations with him. ~..'. . Again, the agitation against, Mr. M'Cluro originated with the school.committee,,.which, on the evidence, seems; to . haveacted in a somewhat arbitrary -manner. At one meeting of the committee,, a message was sent to summon Mr. M'Clure, who attended. The chairman, after, a number .of charges had been laid, gave' Mr.. M-'Clure three months' notice to find another- school. Subsequently, tho badgered .tjeacher. was,given one month, and then one week. In con? nection with this tliero aro/two points to bo noted: (1) A school committee has no powerto give notico to a teacher., .concerning, -his appointment; (2) when -Mr, SrClure . asked the committee to place •; tlic- charges , raised by it in writing his request wa's .refused.-' -■ I now como to the evidence,, whidi.. relates.to Mr. M'Clure's relations with the education board, and am not a little: astonished: to note the somewhat extraordinary statements which Messrs. Crawshaw .(secre'tary).-anil'Sill (inspector) are reported,.to .have made.. For example, part of Mr. evidence is reported as follows Crawshaw, secretary to the education board, read a statement from tho committee, alleging that Mr. M'Cluro was unfit !fe'':bccupy tho headmastership. The inspector; lia'd never stated that Mr. M'Clure was unfit, to control the school. An inquiry was held. Mr., M'Clure. had not been notified to' be present'., -It, was an oversight. The "inquiry "lia'df " been advertised. A report had.,been'received, but it was only signed by one '.member . out of three. Would not deny that the school.conir, mittee had written asking for an independent examination by Inspector 'Smitli'.'"- "'Sii -other words, tho hoard's advise,r' had. never stated, that.Mr. M'Cluro was unfit' for his position; an inquiry had been held 'concerning 'air.. M'Clure's work at the 'school,,',and lie ,had not oven been notified toj'.jjo, present—worse,, the fact was advertised. ~ Three persons had, been concornod in the conduct or .the'i.'iij-. quiry, but only one had'.'signed'.' it! : '""Mr: Crawshaw later on make's'.'the,,','somewhat ludicrous admission that "wlienf the '.notice, of dismissal expired the hoard,"assufiied",,that Mr. M'Cluro would continue,at,Kiritaki, I ..as, a relieving teacher, and tliat' lio'-(Mrr-Cpiw--sliaw) did not know what t'Ho'position would have been had Mr. M'Clure walked 'out of tho school on that date!. , .... . In further reference to tho " report" of tho "inquiry" which was'hold; and'of which Mr. M'Cluro had received'-'no : iiotice, I will now quote the reported evidence "of the two mombers of the " commission - of" inquiry who did. not sign the " report^"'•' "Rev. Alexander Grant, member of the education board, deposed'; that ii&, 'was'"appointcd a member of a commission'to "inquire' into affairs at Kiritaki. ■', He did hot sign tho report' because ho did hot agree with tho statement that 'the' fact' that "Sir. M'Clure had fallen asleep'inschoql.was.not disproved.' lie thought it. was;not .'prgvedj. and tho statement should'^not" have been hi the report." ' " Pastor Ries'deposed bcr of tho commission, but"lie did not. sign tho report because he had not had it submitted to him for that purpose." A teacher's professional efficiency is guaged by his inspector's estimate of tho value of his work. Thero is no i other criterion-, in law, and thero should be 'no other'.in. faot. The evidenco of Mr. Hiil,'tho'board's'.'.ihspector, states that tho 190-1- inspector's, report on the Kiritaki school was fair; l9fe was "fair, but more favourable to tho upper part of tho school than the lower"; 190G was "poor" (note—this was the year of tho "inquiry") ; in the report for 1907, reference is made to a want of harmony amongst tho teachers, a fact which had been furnished to the inspector by Mr. M'Clure himself;' but satisfactory progress had been shown; since the last visit, a state of affairs the inspector attributed to tho spur'of 'tho. "inquirv.,'' A special report was made; which' Showed that both teachers and .some scholars wero late; He classified the report as 'showing a" very unsatisfactory position of affairs, '' Continuing his evidence, Mr. Hill saidiie'.did'not ciassify tlie school as inefficient in June,l9o'7y but it had gbno. back considerably "dufiiig'llib7nex£ five-months. : ' ', ' Later on ho is 'reported as follows':'—"He still held that Mr. M'Clure was not inefficient as a teacher, but he lackod energy. He

made tho statement that Mr. M'Clure suffered from some physical infirmity from tjio, fact that ho had heard that lie sometimes .fell asleep .in school. He did not himself see him. asleep in school, but noticed that lie was very dull ami heavy. Mr. M'Cluro did not receive a copy of tho charges ho was asked to answer at the inquiry, but he gave evi- : dence and cross-examined witnesses. Witnesi drafted the report, and one of tho commit sioners had not yet seen it." •Comment would almost appear to.be super .fluoiis, but the opinions of Messrs. Grund] .and:.lloss on this point are worth quoting. The opinion of Air.' W. T. Grundy, headmaster of Clydo Quay School, Wellington, was that tho report of the inspector on tha Kiritaki School in 1905 was satisfactory; 1906 was satisfactory, especially in regard to tho ; upper school; 1907 was also satisfactory. Ho ..thought it unlikely that a school could drop from tho'position of June, 1907, to thai of November,;, 1907,. if, it. had been working under tho, same conditions. Mr. Thomas Ross, secretary to the Kiritakl School Conimittco for tho" period 1906-07, testified that'the inspector (Mr. Hill) had said to him that better work than at Kiritaki would not-bo seen at school (a school ■■■ reputed for its good work). These'are the main features of this somo' what extraordinary case. It is difficult the impression that- Mr. M'Clure, under more favourable conditions, might hav« done very much better work. A man must be lifted up, not dragged down. Commenting on Mr. Foster's conduct of the case for the appellant, the "Dannevirko Advo- • cate" said: —"Mr. Foster has an incisive stylo, .and''possessing as he docs a wide acquaintance with tho working of schools generally, and having evidently mado a close study of the facts surrounding the Kiritaki case, he • allowed no point to slip, or to pass without emphasis. He thus extracted all the merit there was in the facts as they were placed before him, and the opinion was freely ~ expressed that very few trained solicitors • could haye put up a better fight for, a client -i than Sir. Foster did for Mr. M'Cluro." ... ;