The Ensign. THURSDAY, JANUARY 25, 1912. AN ABSORBING SUBJECT.

Mataura Ensign, 25 January 1912, Page 4

The Ensign. THURSDAY, JANUARY 25, 1912. AN ABSORBING SUBJECT.

The University Senate, sitting in Wellington this week, has discussed j many subjects—many of them obviously more for the sake of the discussion than I from any hope of a profitable or valujable conclusion being arrived at. YesI terday, however, the Recess Committee submitted to the Senate a strong indictment against the educational system of the country in its neglect to provide for the serious teaching of history in the schools. The report stated that children in primary schools do not learn history properly. Considering it either unimportant or distasteful they drop it, as a subject in their subsequent education whenever they can. The report continued: "Teachers as a body have up to the present never learned history and are therefore unable to teach it adequately. Hence the people of thi>s Dominion are growing up in ignorance not only of the history of the world in general, but even of the traditions of the nation of which they form a part—an ignorance or that knowledge and culture which is at the very foundation of citizenship and patriotism.'' The Committee recommended that in primary schools history should be a compulsory pass subject for all the higher standards for free place and certificate of proficiency examinations and for all schools' leaving-certificate examinations. In secondary schools every pupil should learn history, and English history and civics should be a compulsory subject in the scheme of instruction for both junior and senior free places and for all examinations connected with these schemes. This report directs attention to an obvious weakness in the educational system of the country and it is no fallacy to say that very many of our young people have no fixed idea of the progress of events prior to ""their own arriving at the age of observation. Put a few questions to the average so-called well-educated young man or woman as to some of the leading events in the history of the world and the result is an embarrassed and helpless stare. The history of the youth of to-day extends to nothing beyond a confused 1 jumble of impossible dates, a hazy idea of perhaps one or two of the many brilliant deeds which England has emblazoned on her scroll of fame and a knowledge of the

fact that England., inhabited, forsooth.-, by semi-savages, was invaded, bv a strong man named William the Conqueror whoso descendants have reigned ever since. He might even remember the names of some of the rulers of England and at the most might have a confused idea of the doings of some of the great men of the times—doings that have shaped the course of the greatest Empire the world has ever seen, but as for a decent connected knowledge of his country's history, it is rare and, as is to be expected, a wider knowledge of the world's history k rarer still. Under such circumstances, the proper handling of the subject by the -educational authorities is to be welcomed, but care must be taken, if the subject is to be treated widely that the line between facts and fiction is carefully drawn — not an easy task. Early history is .never critical and painstaking in the of facts but is essentially artistic, its object being more to charm the fancy and warm the emotions than to instruct the understanding. A good story, pathetic and humorous, is appreciated for its OAvn sake independently of its truth. Striking features, dramatic situations, often told in dialogue, scene* in which virtue and vice are depicted on a collossal scale —these are the chief objects of the early historical writer, who mingles fact and fiction with the same naivete as his brethren, the early writers of epos and drama. Indeed their subjects are often the same —the heroes whose prowess saved or achieved the national existence, the odious foreign foe who was beaten back; in either case a delineation of character appealing strongly to the imagination and the feelings which would resent cold criticism but gladly welcomes eloquence and passion. History written under these circumstances has much of the character of the prose poem—the artistic or imaginative element predominates in it rather to excess. The growth of accurate knowledge in other departments, the substitution of the political for the heroic and chivalrous sentiment, lead to a more sober and scrutinizing style of history without sacrifice of artistic form. History then is of two kinds —the old ur artistic type and the new or sociological type. The artistic type remained the ideal of history until comparatively recent times. It was habitually careless and indifferent as regards research, but its chief distinction from the new history was a negative one; it had no con- , ception of society as an organism, no | suspicion of the depth and variety of the social forces which underlie and originate the visible events which it describes, often with admirable power. The new history is to a great extent characterised by opposite qualities. Its preoccupation about literary form is secondary, moral reflection it rather avoids, but it is laborious beyond precedent in research, and above all it is pregnant with the notion that society is a great aggregate of forces moving according to laws special to it, and similar to those producing evolution growth analogous to what we see in other forms of life. In seriously considering the framing of a system of teaching history then it will be seen that what we have called the artistic type is to be avoided as a study in history. To the literary student or the reader it affords a pleasant and profitable study, but to the plain seeker after history the new type is the only one that can be recommended. It is not too sweeping a statement to say that the history books, such as they are, at present in use in the schools of the Dominion are more artistic than valuable as mediums for the teaching of the subject and in remodelling the system these books will have to be vigorously weeded out. It is in the latter part of the Recess Committee's Teport that the greatest difficulty is likely to arise—the making of history a compulsory subject in some of the examinations. As we have often pointed out the present school syllabus is unpleasantly crowded and to make history a compulsory subject—or indeed to even ensure its proper study it will be found necessary to modify some of the subjects that are at present crowded in upon the children.