PROTESTING TEACHERS

Evening Post, Volume 65, Issue 65, 17 March 1924, Page 8

PROTESTING TEACHERS

THE CASE STATED

10 THE EDIIOR. * S"'. "iour Auckland correspondent has sent you a Uriel sunuiiary. ol- a^graiiciluuinuny or .siep-nioilieny »colaing aunnnisluruu 10 tnu Leauiurs. of Aew Zealand uy uiu .-iuuKland " xleraid." ■' ? i'ermit me Lo.assure your readers that Ule oxiaiing uissatisiac-ciuii among■ teacners is not by uny inuaiia su unreasonable and petulant as me scolding ." lierald " «;6uld convey. It has been o^eadiiy growing ior se\urul years past, una is now more wiauspreua auu more embittered, it tnat is not too severe a word, tnau it nus beun at any tune since the' passing of tlio Teachers' Incorporation ana Court of Appeal Act in 1H95. ■leuciiers, you will.be r«iuy to aUmit, are not as a \yhole an unreasonable body of people; on the contrary, tliey have won from many authorities on niaiiy occasions some very flattering commendations not only for their proiessional efficiency but for their attention.to arid their eltorts in social and civic duties: There must be some reason, then, lor the pie-, sent feeling of irritation among Uie general body of the teachers, i can assure you, bir, that, as I am in a position lo know, it is almost universal among teachers, and that it is of spontaneous growth out of the circumstances of the service, and is not the result of agitation h-Olil outside. What, then, are the reasons? I shall venture to mention four of them. l'Vst, (here lias been 'observable a lendency; within the last few years to admonish teachers in public, which is bad for discipline and lor work, and for everyone concerned. When criticisms are made it is the untavourable part that is seized on for emphasis, and this gives a bad impression, and leaves.a sting behind. It also reacts injuriously on the teachers' prestige, and thus militates against good Secondly, the Department has developed in recent years a wonderful and child-like' lailh m regulations, and is everlastingly formulating new ones, which in most eases are not worth ■ what they cost to print. Ihe latest illustration consists of the much-talked-of headmaster regulations, which- apparently have been issued to teachers because a small proportion of the inspectors have been,doing what a very iew of the' headmasters have been doing— iu-.mely, neglecting duty. It is perfectly certain that -an inefficient inspector will be no more benefited by this regulation than will an inefficient headmaster—good inspectors are not made by regulation any more than good teachers. A curious thing is that in the course of discussion it has emerged that these particular regulations are copied from New South Wales, and are not of native growth, or related to our system. They have caused friction and annoyance, and cannot do any good. Thirdly., the Department has in these last years given indications of a determination, to put an end to what had been a highly, beneficial practice, namelj-, taking the teaching body into consultation through its recognised organisation, the Educational Institute. These consultations were, in the past, real and effective; more recently they have either been omitted, dr.have been merely formal, so far as the and more important matters are concerned. Fourthly, there is the long-continued delay .in redressing grievances. Take three instances in illustration, (a) For nearly ten years there have been under consideration certain small amendments'. in the leachers'. Superannuation Act. They are not controversial, they are not opposed, but they do not get into the House and through the House, and teachers wouldlike to know why. (b) Justice, reason, a"nd commonsense declare that average attendance is an utterly wrong basis for the payment of teachers' salaries, yet our Department, alone among those "of the -Empire if not of the world, adheres to it-to the injury of pupils and of teachers and at enormous cost in unnecessary bookkeeping in the board and Departmental offices, {c) The average roll of the school is the proper basis for calculating" school staffs' and committees' exnenses. but the old fallacy continues, to the injury of everyone concerned. This letter grows too long. Si.-, or I could give much more to the same effect. Let me'repeatj teachers are not unreasonable; they are earnest and self-sacrificing in their work, and they have of late, had scant recognition of that in official quarters. They complain, and, for all that appears to the contrary, with reason, that the heads of the Department do not support them. The "Herald's"' grandmotherly eludings may have political significance or may not. Teachers are not a political body—they have never had occasion to look to one party or another—and it is of the highest national importance .that that should continue. If it does not the responsibility will not be on the teachers.—l' am etc SECRETARY. N.Z.E.I. Wellington, 17th March, 1924. ' j TO mE El>l'rbß. Sir,—Your correspondent OMr. Hill), of J2th inst:. arid, the report of your Auckland contemporary's editorial of. 15th inst. —the first by confession and the second by inference-—both show an ignorance of the teachers' present, disabilities. Just now there is an unprecedented unrest in tho teaching- profession, and that mainly because the profession has no means of laying its case before ah unbiased tribunal. For years the N.Z.E.I. has been using every conciliatory method—deputations, letters, etc. —to show the Department that its policy in certain matters is opposed to the highest good of both teachers- and taught; but all without avail. The Department acts as judge, and states quite emphatically that the1 teachers have no grievance. In no other Department in the Government service would employees-have shown such-patience and forbearance; but now the profession is alive to the fact that their past methods, if "dignified, have been fruitless. One outstanding fact in unionism is that. both employers and employees arc assured of an unbiased hearing and judgment, and so. to gain that, teachers are rapidly beintr driven to form a union. If Mr. Hill, before writing to the Press, would carefully study tho amended regulations and their effect on the schools, he would not so strenuously support them ; and, if the Auckland "Herald." instead of adding insult, to injury, would enlist itself on the side of justice, it would bo showing its'lf more worthy of its high calling.—l am, etc.. JOHN B. HOPKIRK. 17th March.. . '