UNIVERSITY CONTROL

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 16, 19 January 1921, Page 2

UNIVERSITY CONTROL

NOT FOR BOARD OF

STUDIES

CHANCELLOR AS CRITIC

PROPOSALS OUT OF COUfIT.

Criticism of the resolutions passed by the Board of Studies of the University of New Zealand forms a 'large part of the report of the Chancellor (Sir Robert Stout) to the University Senate.

" For a second time," says tiie Chancellor, " the board appears to me to have gone beyond its function as. 4aid , down in the statute creating it, in recommending the issue of a .' Royal Commission on the University and University Colleges of New Zealand headed" by some eminent educationalist from the United Kingdom.' What the inquiry is to be about is not stated. Is the. Commission to be that of a 'visitor' to see whether the professors, instructors, iuid officers are fulfilling their duties and are competent to do so; -or is it to consider the present constitution of the UniversTty bodies? . It does seem peculiar that', though New Zealand was able to find within its boundaries members who were competent to be a Royal Commission in 1879, it is not now apparently thought" that a Commission would be properly constituted if it lacked ' some eminent educationalist from the United Kingdom.' Can it be that after forty years of University education, New Zealand is less able to find .3-University Commission, than it was in 1879?

"If the Commission is not to act as a visitor '13 supposed to act, then it appears tome unnecessary that any 'eminent educationalist'- from the United Kingdom should be asked to consider what the Dominion requires so far as the constitution of our University bodies is concerned.. Nc one who is a.stranger,to our history and to our environment can be expected to .appreciate the needs of University education in New Zealand. We differ in many respects in our social and political life- from our kin beyond the sea. Further, it may be pointed "out that we have the example of the various parts of the Empire to guide us in determining what. form our highest educational institution should take, and I feel certain that however eminent the,educationalist might be who w£>uld be selected to act as 'hsad of ,the Royal Commission' the people of New.''"Zealand, being a democratic Would not likely submit to a decision of. any, man who is'not personally acquainted with our history and conditions. We know, so far as the conduct of . examinations is concerned; what the practice of the ancient Universities of Oxford and Cambridge is: No teacher examines his own students. We also know that the charters of the most, recent English Universities provide.that external .examiners must be appointed. If the. system of, external examination is wrong, it is. strange that the ' eminent educationalists' of England have not found it out. . ...-,- QUESTION OF EXAMINATIONS.

pointing out the University had.no power to grant such a degree. There was, howevev, provision for granting a in Science, and there was »ilso provision for Doctorates in Literature and Law. No doubt, the Doctorate in Science could be extended to include engineering and agriculture. The proposal to establish a Ph.D. degree'had been turned down iiist yea: Vat the conference of Australian universities. The Chancellor noted that the board had refused to agree with- the suggestion that education should ; : be "made, an honouis subject and approved the in; elusion of agriculture in tho alts course; "The making of. agriculture," said Sir Robert, "a subject of the arts" course was done so as to encourage' our young colonists to get some acquaintance with the science of agriculture. At the.present thuy are to .be debarred from getting what might be only "■ a slight; course in the subject,, unless they take the agricultural degree. or desire to become Bachelor of Science. Is this wise?"

In reference to the statement by. the Chancellor that the Board of Studies had again refused to agree ..with the: suggestion that education should be made an honours; subject, Professor. T. Hunter pointed out that the Board of Studies had carried an amendment to the contrary, agreeing that education should be made an honours subject. •