SCHOLARSHIP SYSTEM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20627, 28 July 1930, Page 7

SCHOLARSHIP SYSTEM.

PRIVATE SCHOOLS' CLAIMS.

THE PROPOSED BURSARIES.

VIEWS OF ASSOCIATION.

On behalf of the Registered Secondary Schools' Association, its president, the Rev. 11. K. Archdall, headmaster of King's College, has written to the Herald objecting to certain statements issued by the Auckland Grammar School Board last week regarding the proposal to replace national scholarships by bursaries tenable at either State-controlled or private, secondary schools. Mr. Archdall writes:— In the statement of the Grammar School Board on the report of the Parliamentary Committee on Education there is one section so open to public misunderstanding that I am compelled to draw attention to it lest your readers draw an erroneous conclusion on a matter of some importance. I write as president of the Registered Secondary Schools' Association of New Zealand, which comprises the headmasters and headmistresses of schools which are inspected by the Government, but are not under State control.

The Grammar School Board, in pointing out the change proposed to be made in the conditions governing the tenure of national scholarships, now to be called bursaries, objects to the suggestion that they should be made tenable at private schools. They say that "the private schools have been awaiting their opportunity of attracting the children of the well-to-do and by the elimination of many clever pupils from poorer homes in the cities the richer classes would be enabled to obtain a larger proportion of university prizes." Spch a contention seems to me unfair and unworthy of such a board. As a matter of fact, the report states (page 28) that "the original intention that the whole benefit of the scholarship fund should go to deserving candidates genuinely in need of such assistance has been stultified. . . These scholarships arc now for the most part beyond the reach of deserving candidates from country schools or candidates whose parents are in straitened or even moderate circumstances." The fact that the name of the scholarships is to be changed into that of bursaries suggests that under the new scheme the financial position of the parents of each child will be taken into account.

Town versus Country. I do not personally agree with all the machinery proposed to lie set up for the carrying out of the policy, hut the policy itself is perfectly plain. It could not possibly result in "attracting the children of the wealthy" to any school, he it Government-controlled or independent. I can hardly think that the next paragraph means what it says and I do not like to attribute to any body of men sentiments which seem charged with a spirit of insinuation. They seem to suggest that the proposal to allow the parents of the pupils who gain such bursaries to settle at what kind of schools they should take them out will result in "the elimination of many clever pupils from poorer homes in the cities." If they mean that they object to the idea that the country child is at present at a disadvantage as compared with the town boy, surely they should say so and not make the remark in connection with their objection to making the bursaries tenable at private schools. The fact is that the proposal to make the bursaries tenable at private schools has nothing whatever to do with the question of town versus country. Moreover. if all the proposed bursaries are to be held by poorer pupils, as the committee rightly wishes, why drag in the reference to the richer classes and seem to suggest that the private schools wish to give the richer classes an unfair opportunity of gaining university prizes? Of course, university piizes are won on merit and are open to all competitors. The Grammar School Board seems to suggest that (he private schools, in asking for a mere piece of British justice (granted in all parts of the Btitish Empire except New Zealand), are anxious to prevent some poorer homes from getting these bursaries and would be glad to give some unfair advantage to the sons of the well-to-do in the matter of winning university prizes. That sort of suggestion is unfair and only recoils on those who make it. Parents' Eight o! Choice.

The fact is that the new policy will help tiic sons of the rich less than the present one does. Our association does not worry about that, as it holds that those who are allies to pay for the education of their sons should he ready to do so. On (he other hand, if the son of poorer parents is awarded a bursary on his merits, and his parents value an education based on religion and one with n greater measure <>f freedom from Government control, there is no reason in common justice whv they should not be able to use that bursary in sending llio child to such an independent school, if that school also helped them In meet the fees by financial additions to the bursa rv.

We hold that it is unsound for nnv State to seek to achieve a monopoly of education by giving their own schools an unfair advantage over all other schools. When the disciimination is against- schools based on religion and on a valuation of the child as a unity of spirit, mind and body, the policy is not merely inequitable, but morally suicidal. The Grammar School Board rightly fears the effect of any policy which would result in "reducing all schools to a duil level of mediocrity." Surely the board recognises that the existence of schools largely independent of Government control, as ours are, is the best possible means of avoiding the disaster of a "dull level." This has been frankly admitted by the public press recently Our schools, then, serve a national purpose, and chilill en have a moral right to attend our schools, if their parents desire them to do so. and still hold any national bursary which they have won. "Banish an Injustice."

Ihe present system crosses out the right of the parent to choose tho sort of school the son who wins a scholarship is to attend. This is surely a right of all parents, he they poor or rich. At present the State uses economic pressure to lessen the keenness of parents on the religious element in education and on those other educational values for which we stand This floes more to produce "a dull level of mediocrity" than anything else. The fact is that the proposal to make the bursaries tenable at independent schools would merely banish an injustice too long tolerated and would bring New Zealand into line with the rest of the British Empire. Our association has its own idea about other aspects of the report on education and in due course will seek to express i to the authorities. I mention the tact that we foive already sent a constructive suggestion to Wellington on the sub ject of examinations and school certificates to show that our association seeks to give a contribution to the solution of our common educational problems. We do not spend our time merely looking out for points on which our own schools may score but I am .Mmpellod to write this letter to correct the false inipressior. which would be created by this one secif ihe Grammar School Board's statement.