CONTROL OF EDUCATION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20626, 26 July 1930, Page 12

CONTROL OF EDUCATION.

Some of the comments made by members of the Education Board on the report of the Recess Committee are somewhat unjust and do not strengthen the arguments brought against centralisation of control. That portion of the report which has been laid on the tabic of the House does not include any specific recommendation to take control from local bodies and give it to a centralised authority. In some particulars, such as tho appointment of teachers, there is recommended centralisation —in this instance by a committee formed on the model of the existing Teachers' Grading Appeal Board —and this is a change that has already evoked impressive approval. But on the matter most vehemently discussed by the Education Board there is no explicit recommendation, and it is going beyond the contents of the report to say that the proposals it contains make it clear that absolute centralisation is intended. On the contrary, " the committee is strongly opposed " to the proposal of the Director of Education that all existing boards should be abolished and the administration reorganised, to place a completely centralised Department in direct contact with schools, " being convinced that the public of New Zealand would rather bear the burden of the extra cost of the present system than change if for one of bureaucratic: control." This opinion the committee elaborates, emphasising just as definitely the desirability of '* local control of education" as Ihe necessity for centralised direction in certain respects. The main resolution of the board overstates the position as set out in the report. The recommendation for a conference of boards and the arranging of a meeting with local members of Parliament take safer ground. There is a need for careful consideration of the bearing of the report on the administrative system, and every reasonable step ought to be taken in that direction before the board frames any considered protest.