EDUCATION REFORM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20628, 29 July 1930, Page 12

EDUCATION REFORM.

QUESTION OF CONTROL,

BOARDS AND DEPARTMENT. AN AUCKLAND VIEWPOINT. Tho control of education is discussed l\y Mr. A. Burns, chairman of tho Auckland Education Board, in a letter to tho Herald. Ha writes:--Wltilo the Herald's sub-leader of Saturday latt docs not advocate centralisation, it does say that the Education Board is wrong in assuming that there is any specific recommendation to take control from local bodies and give it to centralised authority. As many thousands of readers look to the Herald for guidance ir. public matters, I think that I should draw their and its attention to various aspects of tho report which I submit amply justify my board's interpretation which appears to be the samo as . that of educational administrators in other parts of New Zealand.

On page 39 of the report the committee states that tho "do lego provincial organisation of the New Zealand education system has become wholly at variance with the do facto existence of final authority to day in the hands of the Ministei and Department of Education." If theso words mean anything at all they mean that tho Minister and the department already exceed tho powers granted to them by Parliament. Tho committee then says that tho problem which it had to consider had been tho discovery of some new and satisfactory method of organisation which would both fit the facts of national and meet tho legitimate desires of the people for local control. The committeo has therefore admitted that the people do ilesire local control, and that such desire is a legitimate one.

The Fundamental Issue. Tho report, however, assumes that tho fact that tho finances are collected by the Government necessitates full control by departmental officials. This is the fundamental issue between bureaucracy and local control. Education boards arc composed of representatives of tho people, and if they do not prove satisfactory administrators tho members are liable to lose their seats, so that the pcoplo who pay the piper call tho tunc. It is their money and not, as tho report calls it, tho Government's.

On page 47 of the report the committee mentions the "overt transference to the central departmant of thoso branches of tho administration in respect of which it is essential that the education system must bo organised upon a national basis," thereby admitting that it proposes taking powers away from local authorities. In tho next few lines tho committee mentions tho proposed transfer to the boards of freer control of those matters which can better be dealt with locally, but I have not yet found in tho report any actual additional powers. On page 48 arc these words, inter alia: "It i 6 proposed that the senior inspector or district superintendent of education, as it is suggested he should bp called, should be, ex ofliciot, secretary and treasurer of tho boards, and that ho should bo assisted by such clerical staff as may lie necessary to rciiove him of the mechanical part of the work and leave .him free to coordinate and superintend tho whole educational organisation of his district." These last 13 words contain tho essence of what Mr. Lawrence, of Timaru, calls "llio crucifixion of local control of education and the glorificati'm of bureaucracy centralised in t.ho Department of Education in Wellington." Powers of Boards.

If this portion of (lie report is adopted it will entail tho appointment of nine additional "superintendents of education." The salary apparently will not bo less than that of the present senior inspectors (£700). On pages 49 and 50 appear 12 classes of power to be retained by or transferred to the department, but the "functions of local education authorities" on pages 51 a ltd 52 comprise only a few of the powers now held by tho local boards and most of them are those of the least importance. On page 55 tho committee recommend that (ho powers and duties of the national department should includo the. control of various enumerated powers, but there is no recommendation of any grant of powers to the local authorities which are to have only what is left after the national department lias t-aken over tho powers mentioned.

Throughout chapters IX. and X. of tho report tho committeo accepts practically all the statements of tho director of education, to which the boards were given no opportunity of replying. Mr. Strong in his evidence contended that certain expenditure was due to the boards, and was unnecessary, but the boards have always contended that this expenditure was duo partly to tho complexity of the department's own regulations and partly to unnecessary checking and supervision in Wellington. It is our duty to assist tho Government to economise where possible, but my board feels sure that expenditure will increase under the proposed change.

REPLY TO MR. BURNS. ADMINISTRATION CHANGES. CONCLUSIONS ON THE EVIDENCE. [ur TELEOKATir. —OWN couuf.si-osdest.] WELLINGTON, Monday. Comment was made to-day by tho Minister of Education, the Hon. 11. Atmoro, on the report of the remarks or' Mr. A. Bums at a special meeting of the Auckland Education Board held last week to consider the education report. Mr. Burns was reported to have saiil that the proposed change in administration "had been decided solely on the advice of Mr. T. B. Strong, Director of (Education, who tried to do the same thing three years ago," and "that, ho knew tho report had been written by two members of tho staff of tho Education Department,"

Tho Minister stated that he had taken tho earliest opportunity csf telegraphing Mr. Burns informing hirn that the report was not written by any members of tho Education Department, nor had the proposed chnngo in administration been decided on tho advice of tho director. "Voluminous evidence was received by the committee,'' said Mr. At more, "and this and persona] investigations by tho committco enabled it to arrive at the unanimous conclusions recorded in the recommendations now before the public." Mr. At more added that in hundreds of speeches ho had delivered throughout tho Dominion months l>eForo tho Education Committee was sot up, ho had personally advocated unification of control and many other reforms, and tho committeo had unanimously urrivod at its conclusions upon tho weight of evidence. The members of tho new boards that would bo formed would hold moro dignified and useful positions, as they would control tho three phases of education.