COLLEGE CONTROL

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 221, 14 June 1930, Page 10

COLLEGE CONTROL

Training of Teachers BOARD OR STATE? Conflicting Opinions A recommendation that training colleges should be placed under the dlr/ct control of the Education Department led to considerable discussion at the Council of Education meeting yesterday. It was embodied in a series of recommendations concerning the training of secondary school teachers, which were submitted to the council by one of its committee. The recommendations read as follows: “That the training colleges be placed under the direct control of the Education Department, with the assistance of an advisory council, consisting of (a) a representative of the Education Deparement, (b) the principal of the college, (c) a representative of the local education board, (d) one representative each of the secondary and the primary school teachers, and (e) the professors of education of the university college in the training college district” The proposal was finally left in the handt of a recess committee of council members for it to report at the next meeting. No Need for Change. In the opinion of the Hon. D. T. Fleming, M.L.C., there was no need for the control to be altered at alt What better advisory hoard could there be, he asked, than the Education Board of the district, and the head Inspector? There was no need for the change in any way. The department had already all the control it wanted, and with the proposed constitution of the advisory committee, nothing of real worth would be added to the present system. The representatives of the Education Board, for instance, would be Inclined to treat the committee ds a rather tiresome side issue., The professor of education, he thought, would probably be rather out of touch with the district. The boards were certainly nearly all opposed to the change, and if it were suggested that the control should change it would raise a turmoil throughout the country. “A Staff of Specialists.” Mr. F. H. Bakewell said that all the arguments which Mr. Fleming . had brought forward had confirmed him in the belief that the policy of the first part of the recommendation was a wise one. To his mind it was mainly a question of staff—the most important question of all. The staff of a training college should not bd appointed by an education board just as it would appoint its teachers. The staff of a training college had to be made up of specialists, and their appointment should be in the hands of the department. The time was not ripe, said Mr. J. E. Purchase, for any change in training college .control to be advocated. He pointed out that the Canterbury and Otago boards had taken a pride in the training colleges and had been very careful of their welfare. In that they had done well. Now a National Concern. The chairman, Mr. T. B. Strong, reminded members of the council that the training of teachers was now a national charge. The boards had undertaken the training of their own teachers in the past, but the position had changed in recent years. Teachers now bad to be trained for primary, secondary, and technical education. The question on which the council was asked to express an opinion was whether the training of teachers should be done with divided control. “There is no doubt that in New Zealand divided control has led to a considerable amount of friction,” he said. “However, the boards and the Education Department have on the whole lived very happily under the present arrangement, but I believe myself that when there is a national service to be performed it hud better be performed by a national body; when it is something local, of course, it should be done by a local organisation.” , After mentioning that the department had nothing to do in any way with the formulation of the recommendation, Mr. Strong closed by pointing out that he would vote for it, if only for the easier administration that it would involve. The Council Divided. Several speakers mentioned that it might be unwise to express an opinion when changes in the education legislation might possibly occur in the near future. After two amendments had been lost, the question was left in the hands of a recess committee for it to report at the next meeting. Other recommendations in z connection with the same subject were adopted as follow:— “That an addition be made to each of the four existing training colleges of a properly recognised and organised secondary training department.” x

“That in order that a certificate of secondary teaching may be obtained the student must have: (aj A university degree in subjects approved by the principal : (b) a satisfetory course of general training: (c) a satisfactory specialised course in the principles and practice of teaching as applied to secondary schools; (cl) a final year as a probationary assistant in a post-primary school.”