THE UNIVERSITY

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 18, 21 January 1921, Page 8

THE UNIVERSITY

TO-DAY'S SITTING OF THE

SENATE

The New Zealand 'University Senate continued its sitting this morning, tho Chancellor (Sir Robert Stout) presiding- ' • . . Professor H. W. Segar and Dr. E. Robertson were elected Senate's representatives on the Board of Governors of the Auckland Grammar School. On the motion of Professor Segar. it was. decided that a candidate, who has presented himself for honours in, any subject, may present himself for honours: in any other subject, provided that all examinations 'be taken within six years after matriculation. It was also resolved that a candidate for honours, who began" his course before the Senate passed tho clause requiring that the candidate "must sit for honours not more than six years after the date of his matriculation, be allowed to sit for honours under the conditions laid down in the old Statute, viz., that the. examination for honours must be taken in the year following that in which the candidate completed the examination for the pass degvee; this concession to-be granted to candidates who take the honours examination' not later than. 1923. ■ . ■ The recommendations of tho Board of Studies as to the proposed diploma in social science, and as to the institution of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, were referred. to the Arts . and Commerce Committee. •■ , ' It was decided that the University DrigTee Examinations begin not earlier that Ist November,'and that the date for giving notice of intention to sit for examinations in November (at present Ist September) be made Ist August, and the date for the December examinations be Ist October,, instead of 16th' October/ , It was moved by Professor Wall that examinations for dejrrces in Arts, and Science at the'pass grade be'-cbnducted in, future according to the scheme approved by the Board of Studies at its iast meeting. The recommendations were as' follow :—(1) In each subject/a special board of examiners, consisting of the responsible teachers of the - subject, .together with an assessor. (2) Papers to be set by the assessor after consultation with the teachers in each college. (3) Papers at each centre to be marked by the teacher at that centre, and all the papers to be also marked by the assessor. (4) In doubtful cases opportunity to be given for the assessor to'meet the teacher concerned. In case' of. disagreement between the assessor and the teacher con-, ■ cerned the special board of examiners shall decide. (5) The assessor to, be paid for his services; the teachers to be invited to do this work without payment. (6) The results as a whole to be dealt, with by the chairman of the Wellington Committee of each Senate, .together with the chairman of Professorial Board. (7). In respect of the conduct'pf examinations at the advanced grade and. for honours, the committee recommends that the examinations be left as at present. ) The nroposal was discussed at length. Professor J. Macmillan Brown moved as amendment that the matter be. re- | ferred to a small committee. ■;the parting,of the ways." ■ The Chancellor said, that it could not be denied that on the matter' of this proposal they had come to the parting of the ways so far as the New Zealand. University was concerned. If the whole of the examination \work was to be left in the hands of the teachers, as was proposed, it would be'the. end of popular education. It seemed from what one of the professors had .said.that thu dto: fessors had agreed to this change without hearing the other side, and without hearing what thero was to be said against the proposal from outside. The Chancellor likened this .attitude to that of "certain bodies outside" who thought that industrial matters should be' settled by the workers without the proprietors' having any right to any say. The Soviet system of running . the university was 1, in short, suggested. 'Other people than the professors and Senate were interested ia the matter of the universities, viz., the peopje. This proposal was not going to 'be the final one; it was merely a step in the one direction—the leaving of the whole of the University work in the hands of the professors. This, he declared, would be a. calamity. If higher education was not popular it would cease to be of use. It was not fair to say that at present the professors had- no say in the /examinations, ibecause students were, not preBented for passes without their concurrence.", In Wales, for instance, the system of external examiners was in vogue, and in certain Universities in England also, including the.London University. He reiterated that the proposal would destroy the New Zealand University, and lead to separate universities. This, he j believed, would be a very great pity, and he would oppose the proposal. . Professor Hunter said that something would have to be done j it would be impossible for things to continue as they were. He gave instances of the unsatisfactory condition of things under the present system of examinations. The., delay of sending the papers Home, also, did not allow of students shaping their course of studies ahead. Professor Wall, in whose name the mo.tion stood, in replying, said that the proposal had received the fullest consideration by the Board of.Studies, and it was really put forward in the interests of the University. He would agree to the referring of tho proposal to a oommittee, but suggested that tile committee should sit as early as possible. The motion to refer tho matter io a. sub-committee was carried. 'Proceeding.) Owing to a misprint, Dr. Highfc was reported last evening as having said at the University Senate that " in Canterbury some of the University money had been applied, through the AV.E.A. classes, to propaganda." The word "some" should have been "none."