PROFESSOR CRITICAL

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 280, 23 August 1944, Page 4

PROFESSOR CRITICAL

Work Of f irst Year Students MUCH BELOW STANDARD (By Telegraph. —Press association.) AUCKLAND, August 22. A highly unfavourable report by the professor of history. Professor J. liutherford, on the standard of work done by first-year students in his. department, caused considerable discussion at a meeting of the Auckland University College Council. After various members had suggested possible causes for. the state of affairs described, the council agreed that a full investigation was impracticable, but resolved to ask the professorial board for a report on the extent to which such conditions existed in the college, with suggestions for remedies. “After making all due allowances for the difficulty first-year students have, in adjusting themselves to college requirements,” said Professor Rutherford at the conclusion of his report, “for nervousness in examinations and other disturbing factors, I cannot escape, from the suspicion that there is something radically wrong with a system of training in schools and with a system of matriculation that awards passes to the type of students who occupy the bottom half of my History I class.” The results of the first-term tests and of written work during the term, he said, were easily the worst he had experienced in 11 years in Auckland. Out of an effective total of 147, only 44 students had done satisfactory work. None of these was first-class, six were second-class and 38 third-class. About 60 were classified as weak, with marks between 45 and oO per cent., and perhaps half of these would scrape through the annual examination. The remaining 43 were very bad indeed and ought not to be attempting university work. “Sheer Illiteracy.

“One of the most disturbing signs of weakness is the. sheer illiteracy, of a large proportion of the weaker students,” said the report. About 35 students in this class are illiterate in the sense that they cannot write simple English sentences reasonably clear in meaning and reasonably correct in grammar and spelling, sentences, that is, sucii as would be properly required of a sixth-standard pupil in an English elementary school. Some students were under certain handicaps, but in most cases it was because the pupils had not been taught at school how to read accurately and profitably. The average capacity for clear, relevant thought was remarkably low. Commenting on the report. Professor A. B. Fitt. chairman of the professorial board, which ’•"d forwarded it, said that a similar situation existed in some of the other arts departments, including mathematics, but not in the science departments. The cause was difficult to determine. Possibly it was related to the war and was merely, temporary. Possibly the college was receiving a batch of students below average. It was a sc-rious matter and difficult to deal with. Among alternatives were to give special courses, to exercise a right of exclusion at the end of the first term, to insist on proper standards and refuse to devote much time to tirst-.vear students who would have to seek extra assistance outside the college. The last course was favoured substantially by the teaching staff, which was. in general, opposed to doing preparatory work. Some departments were not happy about tlie exclusion of students.

OTAGO COMMENT

(By Telegraph —Press Association.) DUNEDIN, August 22. General agreement with the views of Professor J. Rutherford, professor of history at Auckland University College, regarding the standard of literacy among some university students was expressed 'by the professor of history at Hie University of Otago, Dr. J. R. Elder. History more Ulan most other subjects, he said, required a good standard of literacy on the part of the student. Knowledge of facts alone was not sufficient, but a student must be able to put forward clear expositions of various aspects of his subject in a way that demanded a good control of language. “The general standard of English in students is poor,” Dr. Elder continued. "Large numbers of these students seem to lack initiative and the desire to read for themselves. War conditions have no doubt materially affected the position and during the past few years theer have been many students who have not reached the intellectual maturity which was formerly recognized ns the minimum university standard.” The war had no doubt also made if difficult for some students to concentrate on their work. When Professor Rutherford's statements were referred to him. the chairman of the professorial board said be had not received any complaints about the standard of literacy among students, though occasional mention had been made of the matter. “I was surprised to bear of

Professor Rutherford’s comments, Professor Lawson said. “Nothing as sweeping as his condemnation has ever been suggested nt this university.’’ “1 am firmly of the opinion that the standard of English among the students is not high." commented Professor L. B. Dodds, dean of the dental faculty. “There is a noticeable lack of ability on the part of students to express themselves in reasonably good English, but I would not say tb?t this has become very much, worse in reveut years."