UNIVERSITY REFORM.

Evening Star, Issue 14628, 26 July 1911, Page 9

UNIVERSITY REFORM.

opinions of two professors. examination"Tnd organisation. Among the replies to thier recent circular the University Reform Association have received communications from Professor Chilton (Canterbury College) and Prolessor Fegar (Auckland University Collego). These gentlemen \vrito to the secretary of the association (Professor Hunter, of Victoria College, as follows : —Professor Chilton's Views.— T have to thank you for your circular dated May, 1911, with the various papers forwarded" therewith, and for your courtesy in giving me an opportunity oi ;•- cording any opinions 1 may wish lo express in the same form as those of the oversea authorities. I may explain that, although 1 am keenly alive to the necessity for reform in various matters connected with the University, and have done what little I could, both on the - Senate and in other wave, to promote changes that appeared to be desirable, I have not joined the University Reform Association, partly because I have never been able "to get a clear idea of the aims of tie association, and partly because I could not identify myself v.-iin the opinion* expressed by some of the promoters of the association. However, I am glad to take advantage of the opportunity offered by you of saying something on the questions forwarded with your letter. I find considerable difficulty in so doing because I cannot altogether agree with come of the statements made in your circular letter of No vember 30. 1910, forwarding these quesi tious. For instanco, you state that the " Senate, which is a preponderantly lay body, draws up curricula and syllabuses," while as a matter of fact there are at the present time seven active professors and one retired professor on the Senate, and w the curricula and syllabuses are in nearly \ all rases drawn up in the first instance by the professors of the university eol leges concerned, whether they are on the Senate or not. and any recommendation from the professors always receives careful consideration from the Senate, and is practically always adopt*! when '.here is a general concensus of opinio:! in its among the professors who make the suggestions. Again, you say that "' except in the case of medicine, the teachers are rot consulted as to the students \> whim; degrees are to be granted, although by regulations for ' keeping terms' the professorial boards have the power to exclude students from sitting for the degree examinations. In practice, ho\vev?r, it is a higher standard than that accepted by the university examiners, especially as there are attached to the colleges students who are exempted from attendance at lectures." With this statement 1 altogether disagree: the regulations ior keeping terms give the professes of the colleges full power to demand what »-'a-:</-ard they please from candidates for degrees, and the outside examination is thus a check upon their results, and should iut be looked upon as the sole test for the degrees, the other and equally impor:a. n .t part being the test required by he pro lessors themselves. So far from it b.v.rg practically impossible, for the colleges to demand a higher standard than that accepted by the university examiners, it has been the traditional aim in some colleges to make the college examination of a higher standard than the university one, and there has been no difficulty in seedling this object," although exempted students hare to be examined along with those who attended lectures. I append short answers to the two questions that you enclose, though the reuwi*s I have already made may be looked upon as part of the answer to question A. Question B appears to me to be altogether too general for a satisfactory answer to be given without going into far greater detail than is possible in a reply of this kind. QUESTION* A. Onsrht we to endeavor to substitute for the purely "external" examination some form of test in which the opinion of the teachers i* taken into account? As I have explained above, T consider tint the opinion of the. teacher is taken into account under the existing arrangements, and that the test impesed for degrees consists of two parts, the college examination and the outside examination, and therefore cannot be spoken of as a purely exte.rnal examination. While this a r ramiement is not ideally perfect, it is one which suits the special conditions of the New Zealand University fairly well, and from my experience, both as a student, and a professor in the New Zealand University, and as a student at the Edinburgh University. I am convinced that it is not desirable to give the whole power oi passing students into the hands of the teacher?. Some outside check is absolutely necessary, and is, I think, welcomed by all conscientious. teachers. My own experience is <j*>.t the system of having an assessor who acts as joint examiner along with the teacher is not satisfactory, as the tendency is for the assessor's opinion to be subordinated to that of the teacher. A separate outside «taminatkm is, I think, desi:able. Whether this should be conducted by examiners in iNew Zealand or from elsewhere is a matter that has bee.i discussed times without number by tho Senau* and other bodies, and can be decided only by comparison of the practical difficulties of the various systems that have been suggested. My own opinion is that in certain subjects, such as the one I hare to teach (biology), it is practically impossible to obtain in New Zealand suitable men to act as examiners (outside the teachers of the subject), and that the appointment of examiners for this subject in England has had a beneficial and stimulating effect on the teaching that far outweighs the disadvantages inseparable from employing examiners at so great a distance. With regard to the argument so often used that the outside examination reduces the professor to a coach. I can only repeat the statement that I have already publicly made that, if the professor is reduced to becoming a coach it is entirely his own fault, and not the fault oi the outside examination. There is far more- danger of coaching being adopted when there is no outside examiner, and the examination is decidedly wholly or mainly by the teacher. QUESTION' B. What general powers should lie given to the professors in the organisation of the University and colleges? This question is too genera! to admit of a full answer here. I can only say that I would be glad to see some closer cooperation between the professorial boards Vand the bodies of the university colleges in all matters affecting the internal working of the college. The financial questions in which professors might l)e concerned must, of course, be left entirely in the hands of the governing bodies. Chaiu.es CtnxTOX. Biological Laboratory. Canterbury College. Question- A. Ought we to endeavor to substitute for the purely " external'' examination some form of test in -which tho opinion of the teachers is taken into account? There are many points connected with this examination question which are not introduced by this interrogation; on the one. point which, is brought forward I cannot say that I have any strong opinion. I attach little importance to the theory that, the teacher should be in part at least the examiner of his own students. There are arguments against as well as for such a theory. In many universities, it is true, the teachers are also, in whole or in part, the examiners; but, this is so generally because ifc is convenient rather than otherwise that they should be, not because of any claim that they ought to be. I think the question here might be settled mainly from considerations of convenience. Question- B. What general powers should be given to the professors in the organisation of the university and colleges? In each college—1. The stall should have three or more representatives on the council. This is necessary to bring the councils into closer touch, with the institutions they govern. 2. No appointment to the staff, and no promotion m status, should be made by a tar?>ril without first obtaining from "the

Professorial Board a report on th« merits f of the candidates and a recommendation j as to who should bo appointed. Only the Professorial Board can properly understand the records and testimonials of candidates as well as the requirements of the various positions. Such a reform is absolutely necessary and urgent if a high standard is to be maintained in the teaching staffs of the colleges and the income of the colleges spent to tho best advantage. The quality' of tho staff is the all-important feature of a university, overshadowing every other. This reform is all the more necessary if (1) is not carried out. In the university—1. A hoard of studies, professorial in composition, should be instituted to carry out the academical work at present done by the Senate, leaving the business side of the administration iu the hands of the present Senate. This board would be subdivided into tho several faculties, and, .as far as practicable, the four colleges should have approximately equal representation, and each subject be represented by at least one acting teacher of the subject. 2. Iu the absence of this reform a great, improvement, on the present condition of things would be the making of for securing that one-lualf of the Senate should lie acting professors, representing as far as may be found practicable tho four colleges and the various subjects of study. 5. "One or other of these two reforms in the university is very necessary, on the assumption that tho general, structure of the university should remain as at present. But it is quite certain that no quite satisfactory solution of the various growing difficulties naturally arising from an artificial connection between four colleges, hundreds of miles apart, and examiners at tho other end of the world, tvill be obtained until the four colleges are converted into independent universities. I believe that public opinion will ripen in this direction move rapidlv than most people think. H. W. Segak, Professor of .Mathematics, Auckland University College. i