JOB OF DEFENCE

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 110, 12 May 1938, Page 11

JOB OF DEFENCE

WHO SHOULD DO IT?

TEACHERS' OPINIONS

NOT FOR SCHOOLS

j Those responsible for the policy of the country should serve in the defence forces rather than leave it to younger people who have no responsibility for policy, said Mr. S. J. Bennett, of Palmerston North, at today's session of the annual conference of the New Zealand Technical School Teachers' Association in moving a remit, that it be a recommendation to the Government that school drill be no longer a part of the defence system, oi* under the control of the Defence Department, but that it be non-mili-tary and under the control of the school authorities.

The remit was passed, but not without opposition. The use of the schools by the Defence Department for training purposes, said Mr. Bennett,, was merely a makeshift on the part of the adults of New Zealand who were afraid to think clearly about the , part they would have to play in the next war. They were thrusting work on to the teachers and trying to salve their own consciences by thinking that their boys received some meagre training for defence purposes at school. The' adults were definitely shirking their responsibilities as citizens and he thought the teachers should bring them back to those responsibilities rather than accept the responsibilities in the schools.

Mr. Bennett referred to the difficulties arising from cadet training in the schools and said that the work involved fell unduly heavily on a few of the younger members of the staffs. It was unfair to ask those few to accept such responsibilities. , MATTER OF FREEDOM. "We continue to impress upon ourselves and others the importance of having freedom in our schools," said Mr. Bennett; "How much freedom do the boys have when it comes to this question of cadet drill? Of course, some with religious objections or whose parents have religious objections, can get out of drill and some few take that opportunity.

"If you talk to the boys you find that very few want the drill. We should ask that the boys,or their parents- should have the opportunity of voicing their desire for drill and not take it for granted that they want drill if they don't get a letter from their parents asking for exemption." Was the cadet drill of any purpose at all from the teaching point of view? asked Mr. Bennett. He could see its importance from the' Defence Department's point of view. It gave a reserve of officers and a reserve of ammunition. It drilled boys in a few simple principles of Army drill, principles he had learned in 1915 in about one week. Boys spent hours leaning to shoulder a rifle or put it on the floor by numbers, and afternoons in saluting. In addition there was the training of boys in the use of rifles and, until recently, of machine-guns.

"The whole purpose, as far as I can see, of the cadet and military method is contrary to our teaching principles and ideals," said Mf. Bennett. "We are trying to encourage in the schools initiative and individualism.' Cadet drill on the contrary is for the purpose of losing that individuality, - The boys must , not be in $ny position of thinking, for'themselves, The : y must be in a position to obey orders without questioning. The whole purpose of;the i training is to instil that idea into their heads. Already we have had too much of that idea in the schools, too much of the machine mind in the community. The whole hope for our education is in the instilling of some individual freedom of development rather than in the Instilling of a desire to conform, to orders and find in orders a complete solution of all difficulties." i SHIRKING THE ISSUE. Adults were shirking the issue of defence training by thrusting the burden on to the schools, Mr, Bennett repeated, and the association ..should repudiate the idea that that was work for the schools. "If we are to have conscription, adults shbuld have it," said Mr. Bennett. ' "Better, too, that those above the age of 35 should have it. More especially those responsible tor policy should be in the defence forces. They should prepare themselves 'to do the fighting rather than thrust it on to the younger people who have no responsibility for policy.". ■ "I think the time is ripe for cutting military training out of our schools, said Mr. J. Pirie (Wellington), in seconding the remit* IN DEFENCE OF SYSTEM. Mr. T. B. Bowring (Christchurch) said that there would be just as much work for the younger teachers when the hew physical training scheme was begun. He detailed the military training given at his school in Christchurch, and said'that 'the boys had the right to choose to train or not, and had a wide selection of interesting sections to join if they did decide on the training- The cadet corps comprised a band, engineers who were supplied by the Defence Department with equipment that , the school could not give them, a musketry platoon, all keen, a platoon for n.c.o.'s in which training was given for leadership, an aviation squad that worked at Wigram Aerodrome, a radio section, and an infantry < platoon. The training was not dominated by the military men. Concerning the boys' freedom of choice Mr. Bowring said that he knew a lot of boys who objected to algebra and French but they were made ■ to learn it just the same. He hated war, as the worst curse of mankind, but his experience of military training was all right if the military aspect was not concentrated on, and for that reason he opposed the remit. "Is it not a fact," asked another delegate, "that the question of military training or not is within the discretion of the governing body of the school? He thought that things should- be left as they were, and that the defence system should not be eliminated from the schools.

VALUE OF TRAINING. '

Mr. B. M. Davis (Auckland) said he did not want to be accused of having military ideas, but he was against the remit. The policy of the military training in any school was the province of the principal or the board of governors and it could easily be carried out. In Auckland, also, the boys had their freedom of choice, and there were some who wished to join but were forbidden to do so by their parents. , . Mi". Davis spoke of the value of rifle shooting as a training in self-control and physical fitness and favoured the ceremonial parade as one of the means by which the country retained some of its national heritage. If the members of the Defence Department were approached in the right way they were only too pleased to co-operate with the pcjlicy of the school, and that being so, the remit was unnecessary. MISSED THE POINT. In reply, Mr. Bennett said that the critics had missed his principal point, that it was not the function of the schools to do the job of adults. The J