Evening Post. TUESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1912. EDUCATION OF GIRLS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 25, 30 January 1912, Page 6

Evening Post. TUESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1912. EDUCATION OF GIRLS.

For the purposes of most of the examinations conducted by the education authorities of New Zealand, a girl ia a boy and a boy is a girl. Man regards himself as wiser than Nature, and he insists on putting young folk of each sex at the same hard laskb during the period of adolescence. It has often been urged that it is unfair to girls, in critical growing years, to compel them to compete on oven terms -with the 1 hardier boys. The girls are not so well fitted, physically, for sever© strain, however bright they may be mentally, and the girls usually take their studies more seriously than the boys>. Thus the girls, with a physical handicap, have th© additional disadvantage of less healthy recreation to refresh jjhe* mind I and body. Educationists, during recent prears, have pointed to the absurd length to which the co-education policy has been taken, but authorities, terrified by the difficulties of mapping out suitable separate . courses, have shirked the work of reform. A few ' days ago the Rev. A. Cameron vainly tried to persuade the University Senate to appoint a committee "to consider the question of allocating some of the junior university scholarships for competition by .girls only." He submitted that " the task set to girls in a junior scholarship 1 preparation with the present heavy syllahus must be mischievous in the extreme. Such arduous work at such a I period in a girl's life was really an offence against Nature." Ip words to command tho respect of all thoughtful men and women, the veteran statesman, Sir Charles Bowen, who has done enduring work for New Zealand, eaid that girls wera not inferior, intellectually, to boys, but their minds were different, and " to attempt to educate girls by the same standards as boya would be a mistake, socially and in every other way." The Chancellor (Sir Robert Stout), while admitting that there- was some truth in the statements about the strain on girls, suggested doubt about the , possibility of differentiation between boys and girls at the same university colleges. In his opinion,, the affirmation of Mr. Cameron's' motion would imply that women should have separate university colleges. Other' members had other opinions, and altogether the Senate found itself in such a state of philosophic doubt that it Tejected Mr. Cameron's proposal. We do not profess -to have a fullyplanned, scheme to take the place of the present one, which has manifest, evils. Reform on a basifc to do justice to the girls is beset with difficulties, but the existence of these difficulties is no excuse for the perpetuation Of a system which is> harmful. Some members of the Senate argue that because some .girls are not .destined to marry it ie ad>--1 visable to have- a system in which all girls can compete on even terms with boys, in all subjects, from the primary school to th© University. However, the vast majority will marry, and will havo household cares. Moreover, whether the girls are to marry or not, they have the right to have their health protected for tho battle of life. In the present circumstances, it is a case of "pacemaking." The girls may suffer keenly in after years for the exertion of gaining scholarships and degrees, with high honours, on even terms with boys. The bright girl is spurred on alike 'by the fond parent and the ambitious teacher, and the young pupil little dreams of the heavy revenge which Nature will wreak upon her for the folly of others. The innocent have to suffer for the guilt of others. We are hopeful that Mr. 'Cameron and other sound educationists will not be discouraged 'by the Senate's unwillingness to tackle a problem which calls for masterful thought and action.