TECHNICAL SCHOOLS

Evening Star, Issue 19021, 17 August 1925, Page 11

TECHNICAL SCHOOLS

DEFENCE OF THE SYSTEM ADDRESS BY PRESIDENT Tho annual meeting of the Technical Schools’ Association was held at Wellington to-day, and Mr J. H. Howell (president), in the course of his address, made reference to the ominous change in tho departmental attitude towards tho Technical High School and the maiming of its function by the proposed removal to the ordinary secondary school of tho commercial work. Let us (he said) briefly examine some of tho criticisms which have been recently passed on the . technical high school of to-day. The present attitude of the department towards them is sufficiently shown by the paragraph on the “ relation of secondary and technical education ” contained in tho report presented to Parliament in 1924, and it may be well to consider here some of the statements made. It is said that “ returns'show that about 50 per cent, of the technical day school pupils are taking either a commercial course or a general course leading up to matriculation. ... In the four large

centres special and expensivelyequipped technical colleges have been erected with tho object of fostering technical or vocational education in the schools as ordinarily understood, yet | about half the accommodation of these | colleges is occupied by pupils taking, general or commercial courses.’] j As it stands, this statement is most misleading, lor it must bo remembered that in tho case of eight centres— Pukekohc, Hawera, Stratford, Wanganui (boys), Feilding, Hastings, Westport, Greymouth—there is no _ other public secondary school in the district; and it follows that all pupils who wish to obtain secondary education must attend the technical high school, and therefore in these schools the percentage taking the commercial and general courses will necessarily be very largo. Tho percentages taking the commercial and general courses for Lie above schools is about 77 per cent. In the case of the remaining districts where there is an ordinary public high school it is found that the numbers taking the commercial and general courses form a much smaller proportion of the whole than the report states. The actual figures are only 3G per cent. The contention of the department seems to be that the teclniica.l high schools are doing much the same work as the ordinary secondary schools. Indeed, in a conference with Mj- late, 1 hold in Wellington, Mr Canghley stated definitely that 50 per ccnt._ of all the pupils " attending technical high schools are taking a_ general and commercial course that is not in any way different from tho course of any secondary school. Yet, as far as the technical high schools in _ the Jaigei centres are concerned, this statement is very wide of tho truth j and wheie the courses are similar in the _ two schools this is due rather to the institution nr commercial courses in the secondary school within the last lew years in imitation of those provided in the technical high schools for nearly twenty years past. , It may be of interest to consider hero the pronouncement technical high schools made by the faccondarv Schools’ Association in a report presented to the department in August, PJ-’d This has special reference to the schools in tho smaller centres, and reads as follows; “ While one of two opinions state that technical high schools should bo kept absolutely distinct irom secondary schools in every instance, there is a very strong and pronounced opinion expressed against the expensive duplication and overlapping that takes place between technical clay schools and secondary schools. Technical schools, it is argued, should not be allowed, as ihev do at present, to teach French and Latin and 10 prepare pupils ior matriculation. That is not their tunction. Further, far too many technical high schools have been established. Instead of this the department should have asked existing secondary schools to widen their curricula.” It would be interesting to inquire | in what technical high schools, other , than in the smaller centres where they j are the only secondary Latin j is being taught ; and whore this “ex- j pensive duplication and overlapping is i actually taking place. 1 know no cases | of either. If both school buildings and i stall's aro fully occupied, how can the | expense bo increased, and why should j tho term “overlapping” bo applied! It seems merely a catchword intended to prejudice tho case, for there is much j less reason to apply it with reference to . technical high and ordinary high , schools than to the smaller separated , boys’ and girls’ secondary schools i where amalgamation would certainly make for economy. Another criticism levelled against the technical high school is on the score of expense. This, perhaps, has even ) loss foundation in fact, lor the technical j high school in the larger centres has no special and little or no special equipment; for equipment and : buildings alike aro used by and would | in any case have to be provided tor | tho evening school, indeed, it is true : to say that the technical high schools 1 (in the larger centres at any rale) aro | the least expensive of all post-primary j schools. j

'The criticisms which have been referred to above aro the result ol ignorance or of prejudice, but it they are not dealt with they are calculated to do much harm to a system of education that Ims grown up naturally to meet tho needs of the community, and has boon doing so successfully for a number of years. it is incumbent upon ah those who are alive to its value to see that the injur} 7 threatened is not allowed to bo perpetrated. THE FUTURE. And what is the future of the technical high school in the larger centres? The situation is more complex than in the rural towns, for here we find side by side tho older-established high school of academic type and tho technical high school of directly vocational typo. Tna question is; Should these schools continue to exist side by side and true to type, or should the academic high school take up vocational training as well and oiler courses in commerce, engineering, agriculture, etc. This, we may presume, is the chief matter that Mr 'Tate has been asked to advise upon, and it is well that it should bo considered here. The real issue lies between American and British practice. Except in the largest towns the modern tendency in America is to make post-primary schools after much the same pattern, each school offering a number of courses which, in the case of the larger schools or 2, (JOG or 3, (JUG pupils, is astonishing in its variety. In Britain, while the secondary schools in tho larger centres have greatly broadened their curricula, just as the universities have done, still it is true to say that there is no course provided which is not a foundation for q corresponding course at a university; but alongside these schools there have been established in recent years a great number of schools of different types—technical high schools, trade schools, central schools, supplementary schools —all of which offer definite training for definite callings, and are attended by those who expect to leave school at fifteen or sixteen years of age. Now, in organisms tho greater the differentiation of function the higher the development and the efficiency, is it not likely that this will'also be true of a school system, and that the British method of differentiation will prove more successful than the American method of integration. With a fairly

1 wide first-hand knowledge of both systems J. believe that, if New Zealand is | wise, she will follow the practice, of the Motiier Country, and wherever tho school population is large enough to allow it will aim definitely at variety and not uniformity of type. The fundamental reason for the need of two different types of school—the pre-university and the pre-vocationaJ type—is, I hold, this; In post-primary education we have to reckon with two kinds of pupils—(l) those who will remain at day school until fifteen or sixteen years of age, and then go to work, following up their studies in the evening schools where these are available and the student, is ambitious; (2) those who will remain at day school until seventeen, eighteen, or even nineteen years, ana on leaving will take matriculation or higher commercial at evening schools or proceed to the Liuversity. I am strongly of the opinion that it is in the interests of education that the needs of these two kinds of students should be met in separate schools, and that the attempt should not be made to combine them. The first class of pupil, whoso school life is to bo so much shorter, needs a specialised course definitely directed to train him for his future calling. The pupil with the longer school life can be given a broader foundation on which he may build a much higher edifice of education in the future. It is not economical, either of time or money, to put both kinds through the same course; and we commit a crime against the young if we compel them to waste any of their golden hours. But if both kinds of school are to be of really high type, they must receive their pupils at an earlier age than now before adolescent changes are in full swing. The school life will not then be broken just at the period of greatest physical and mental unsettlcmcnt, but tho pupil will bo throughout this period in an environment suitably adapted to his expanding powers. The great difficulty that the technical - high school has now to face is that of building up a worthy tradition with pupils so quickly lost; and this no school can satisfactorily do unless it can count on a fair proportion of its pupils remaining for four or five years. The establishment of junior high or junior technical schools entirely separate from senior high or senior .technical schools would undermine dur present schools and destroy their traditions. Mo doubt the necessity will arise for establishing junior schools in outlying suburbs which will send their pupils at fifteen to central senior schools; but each separate junior school should not bo regarded as in its final form, but rather as the nucleus of a future school with junior and senior departments. Even if it is not already evident, experience will, I believe, quickly show that where we have separate junior schools they should be of different typo according to tho locality—some with a bias to academic and some with 3 bias to vocational training. There is nothing in education that we have greater reason to fear than uniformity, unless, indeed, it be bureaucratic government. It may be urged that such a system is not adapted to a democratic country, and that the American system, where all pupils go through the same school, is sounder in principle. But it is not necessary to a democracy that the training of its citizens should be below a standard demonstrably attainable, or that the facts of its industrial organisation should be neglected. It is certain that there always will be those whose period of full-time training should be long, as well as those whose period of full-time training must be short; and it would be absurd to maintain that a similar course should be provided for both. What we need to secure in schools of all types is rather the recognition of the tnu.li that tho commonwealth demands from her citizens the most varied service, and that the labor of the crafts is as necessary and as dignified as that of the professions. “ All service ranks tho same with God.”