EDUCATION NOTES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIX, Issue 14895, 22 January 1912, Page 4

EDUCATION NOTES.

BY MENTOR. ;, ' ' ,: . The criticism recently published by the Times and articles and ! correspondence in the columns of the local press by Professor Laby, of-' Wellington \ by Sir Robert Stout, and others :■'have- again directed public attention to the agitation> started some time ago by the University Reform Association for reform in. our university system. The Reform Association, a very vigorous ■ and- energetic body, has made a determined attack.upon the University and its methods as at present existing, and; it maintains that . weakness is apparent in the fallowing directions : (1) Absence of co-ordination between the governing bodies, inasmuch as the four colleges at present work with but little regard for one another or for the examining university ; consequently" there is, they say, a lowering of the standard of teaching. (2) The Senate is overburdened wtih technical detail, and is not, as it should be, the controlling and coordinating lay body ; it is too much occupied wtih minute details which should be the care of. the professorial boards. (3) The . professorial boards are out of touch with one another ; there is no regular exchange of ideas ■ and no cooperation ; intellectual isolation results and individual enthusiasm is diminished. (4) In three out of the four University College Councils the professors are excluded by statute from a seat, consequently while they are intimately familiar with the interior affairs of the colleges, they are hampered in giving the information and . advice which the councils require for the best administration of the colleges. (5) The Senate and the college councils are nominated by the Government or elected, by small groups which are often out of touch with one another and with the colleges. " The frequent elections to the councils," say the Reformers, " rarely arouse the slightest interest, and even in elections to the Senate the issues are personal and are not based on any question of university policy." * Other points which the Reform Association endeavours to make against the present system are That many students, particularly those taking the medical course, go to the Home universities to study ; that day lectures are practically non-existent at Victoria and Auckland Colleges ; that the University does not offer sufficient'; encouragement to the teaching of agriculture and to research work ; that our buildings are inadequate, our finances are straightened, and our libraries are unworthy the name; and last, but by no means least-— on this point the Reformers have made their strongest attack—our system of examination for degrees is assailed. The association advocates that our , local, professors should have the power" to award degrees and,that examination papers should no longer be set by recognised authorities at , Home. f'\ The criticisms of the- Reform Association will probably .do good,, for honest criticism is ever to ,be welcomed. Our University- has been in existence now for over 40 years, and.it is only natural that in that time a number of points should have developed-in which the system requires readjustment to meet the needs of a young and rapidly, grow- ■ ing community.' "Few will find fault with the strictures which the Reform Association has passed upon our buildings, our lack of funds, our inadequate ' libraries, and our neglect of research work. But, while the Reform ; party deserve , the thanks of the community, for endeavouring to secure improvement in these respects, it is to be regretted that they have " expressed themselves on other points in such a way as to create a totally wrong impression in the minds of those who are not cognisant of the actual facts of the case. In criticising the University of. New.' Zealand as it \ has recently done, the Times probably ; misunderstands the true position of affairs. The Reformers insist that our examination system is purely ' external'' and they constantly assert that our own professors have no part in awarding degrees. But such is by no means the case. As everyone who knows anything of our university system is aware, undergraduates must keep terms before they can present themselves for a degree. The term examinations , are wholly in the hands of ' the university professors; they can keep back whom they will. They allow; only those who are, in their opinion, fully qualified .to sit for a degree. In other words, the local professors select those of their students thoy think worthy a pass, and these ; students submit themselves for a final test'at the hands of an outside examiner. There is thus a combination of an internal and an external test, and this is precisely what is recommended by a large •' number of the educational, experts to whom the Reform Association appealed, for advice, and whose opinions, strangely _ enough, the Reformers claim as advancing their own contentions. ' '•

Thus, Professor Ashley, formerly of Toronto and Harvard, now of the University of Birmingham, states :—"But it is most desirable that a largo share (of the examination) should also" be taken, Tx)th by way of chock and also by way of encouragement and stimulus, by external examiners." Professor Beattie, a graduate of the New Zealand University, and now a professor at the University of Sheffield, states: "The teacher should have some say in determining . whether a candidate should or should not pass. At the same time, I am equally strong that his part should.be a subordinate one. . , . The external examiner should bo a. man of eminence in his subject. .... ." .1 would strongly urge that the external examiner must bo a man . who cannot possibly have any interest in the individual students, and should riot in particular have anything to do with teaching them." Professor CJoudy, of Oxford, writes: "For. certain subjects, such as classics or mathematics, ■ I am inclined to think the external examiner is the best. . . .-. In any case, I should not be in favour of examinations being wholly conducted by the professors or other teachers who have taught the examinees, as it is difficult for even the fairest-minded man to avoid prejudice in favour of particular students. At any rate, ho would hardly . escape tho . suspicion of partiality. Besides, it might make tho teaching of certain subjects fall into a narrow groove." Similar views are expressed by President Hadley, of Yale, Professor Nicholson, of Edinburgh, Professor J. S. Reid, of Cambridge, Professor R. Y. Tyrrell, of Dublin, Professor- G. A. Wood, of Sydney, and others. < • . True, a number of those consulted by the Reform. Association declare that the final verdict should rest with the professor who haa taught the student, but tho , majority urge that the assistance of an external examiner should be obtained, • and if an outsido opinion is to be asked; , surely it is advisable to, secure the judgment of a man in the front rank at Home. I feel confident that if the question were submitted to the vote of New Zealand graduates they would almost unanimously declare that they value the degrees they bold the more highly because they have been conferred upon them as a result of satisfying men who are acknowledged in tho Old Country to be specialists in their particular subjects.

That the pamphlet issued by the Reform Association has not conveyed a true idea |o£ the actual state of things here is proved by the statement of The Times that thework undertaken at our University Colleges is fixed, as regards the kino, quality, ■ and amount, by "outside and usually inexpert authority.' Everyone who knows anything at all about our university system understands that this statement is not correct. Professors and graduates are in a majority on the Senate, : the various courses of study are always considered by committees on which professors are in the majority,, and whenever any important change is in contemplation the question is invariably submitted to the different professorial boards for their opinion and criticism. In the face. of these facts, : it is evident that the criticism quoted above has not much force. This is not the only error into which .The Times has fallen m; making its attack upon", our university system.. It declares

that.each University College Council "determines; the, ; general;character andy hours of the teaching, ami interferes' actively in minor details. This is distinctly misleading - Both here and, I- believe, in the three .Southern colleges also, it is the invariable rule for : the courses of study and the arrangement of the ,timetable to be left altogether ito the Professorial Board. ... The courses of study and the time-tables, when drawn up, are certainly submitted to the College Council for formal approval, but this follows as a. matter _ of. course, and alteration or interference in these matters is a thing unheard of. It is certainly a matter for regret that,, when there are many matters in connection with our uni--System where 'the Reform Association might do good and welcome work, it should damage its cause by making statements so misleading or so ambiguous that they convey an entirely wrong impression to those not conversant with the actual facts of the case.