The Dominion MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 1929. THE SCHOOLS AND CHARACTER BUILDING.

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 93, 14 January 1929, Page 8

The Dominion MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 1929. THE SCHOOLS AND CHARACTER BUILDING.

In previous official statements the general principles of the new Primary School Syllabus have been very fully set forth. Summed up, they affirm the accepted axiom of modern educational practice that the teacher may be told what he is to teach, but that he should be free to select his own methods of obtaining the best results. The regulations governing the Syllabus have now been gazetted with an introductory note elaborating the principles which should govern its operation. The aims of each subject are set forth in helpful language to the end, one presumes, that the teacher lacking in originality of method may have given useful compass bearings.. On one point of supreme importance the Syllabus, it is, satisfactory to note, is emphatic. “The whole of school life,” it is insisted, “should centre in character-training. Every subject of instruction, and indeed every lesson, provides the teacher with opportunities for teaching right conduct.”

“Incidental training of this kind,” it is enjoined, .is probably much more effective than set moral lessons, which tend to be uninteresting and tedious to children. The most potent factor is undoubtedly the personal attitude of the teacher towards character-training. If his attitude is one of half-veiled cynicism his influence is likely to be negative if not definitely harmful.”

It is to be hoped that the foregoing injunction will be earnestly and diligently honoured. Our secular system of education has been criticised for its alleged neglect of moral training. However that may be, there is little doubt that the private schools, by including Scripture lessons in their curricula, have profited to some extent by the impression created in a section of the public by this allegation. If one examines the question in detail, it has. to be admitted that the size of the primary school classes makes it more difficu.t for the State-employed teacher to make intimate moral contacts with his pupils than is the case in the private schools with their much smaller classes. At the same time this difficulty should not be accepted as an excuse for giving perfunctory attention to this most important subject. The secularists, may argue that moral principles can be inculcated without Scriptural authority. It is the teacher alone who by his work can justify that argument, and justify, too, the declared opposition of his official body,, the New Zealand Educational Institute, to the claims of the religionists.

There is no doubt that every schoolroom lesson represents opportunities for emphasising this or that moral precept. I here may be equal doubt whether in the stress of teaching large classes the teacher may find time to deal deliberately with them. Here one perceives a valuable opportunity for the head teacher. It is he, or she, who can really set the tone-standard of the school. With the elasticity provided by the new Syllabus it ought to be possible for the head teacher to give regular set moral lessons to the whole school.

On this point one is inclined to differ from the authors of the Syllabus in their implied depreciation of the set lesson. It depends on the temperament and calibre of the head teacher, who should be much more concerned about the character of his school than about his examination .results. . It is character, not the amount of information assimilated by the pupil, that makes for real citizenship.