WELLINGTON TRAINING COLLEGE.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 745, 11 June 1886, Page 30

WELLINGTON TRAINING COLLEGE.

At a special meeting of the Education Board on Wednesay, Mr J. Young brought forward bis motions concerning the Wellington Training College. He moved—“ 1. That a committee be appointed to consider the con--dition of the Training College. 2. That the resolution of the Board, giving extra pay to the Principal of the College for instructing the pupil teachers, be reconsidered. 3. That a committee be appointed to revise the curriculum of instruction for pupil teachers. 4. That it be an instruction to the foregoing committee to make arrangements for the forthcoming pupil teachers’ examination.” In the course of his remarks, referring to the first two motions, Mr Young said he was actuated by no ill-feeling toward the Training College, but thought it was not working satisfactorily. There was a Committee of Management, but it had been exceedingly difficult to get a meeting of the Committee together. Only one or two meetings had been held this year, and members appeared to be always anxious to get away. The Otago Education Board, when they found thingg were not working satisfactorily at their Training College, at once appointed a Special Committee, quite independent of the College Committee, to make inquiries. He desired the same course to be taken in Wellington in order to popularise the Training College. During the last six years the College had cost the Government something like LIO,OOO for salaries alone, and he askbd what had they got in return. The passeß and partial passes had been very much muddled up, and a majority of the pupils were reckoned twice over. During the last six years something like 40 certificates had been issued, but many of the pupils who had obtained these certificates were so far advanced that, with a little school management, they could have obtained certificates without going to the College, at all. Everv certificate had coat something like £4O or £3O. As the institution was conducted it was simply a waste of public money. A great deal was talked about retrenchment in Parliament, and here was an instance where retrenchment could be effected. The Institution was decidedly unpopular, and wherever he went, be heard it talked about, He did not wish the institution to be done away with, but he desired to see it put upon a proper footing. For his part, he would not be a party to such a state of things. any longer. He referred to the cost of the trainees in the four chief cities, and found that Wellington paid £95 per head, ot nearly double ■wbat was paid in the other centres, Mr Buchanan said it seemed to him a most extraordinary thing that Mr Young, being a member of the College Committee,, had not made an effort to bring the subject b®|°^ e iefore submitting it to the Board. Had he

I done so and failed, it would, have been his I place then to resign, and bring the matter before the Board. He sympathised with Mr Young in his protest against a waste of public money, but the matter should, have been brought before the Committee in the first instance. _ Dr Newman and Mr Bunny agreed with Mr Buchanan. Mr Young said he had not moved in the matter with an intention to ignore the Committee. His object was to get a special committee for a special work. He did not know that it was the business of the Training College Committee to go into the matter, After some further discussion, Mr Buchanan moved that the motion be referred to the Training College Committee, with a request that they report on the subject at the next meeting of the Board. . Jd[r Young consented to withdraw his first two motions, and Mr Buchanan’s motion was then put and carried. In speaking to the motions three and four, Mr Young said he believed that the scheme for pupil-teachers now in force here was the most antiquated in the Southern Hemisphere. On looking up the work it would he found that it was such .as they would be required to .know when passing the sixth standard. The curriculum was ten years behind the age, and he hoped to see a lot of the rubbish cut out. In lieu he would like to see a foreign language and English classics put in. Mr Blair objected to the remark about the curriculum being the most antiquated in the Southern Hemisphere. He understood the department had in view the revision of the curriculum for pupil teachers. Mr HabeDS being away just now he was unable to state definitely when it would be effected. .H e therefore did not eee the necessity of appointing a Committee. The Rev J. Paterson thought the great aim should be to teach the pupil teachers subjects which would be of value afterward in the schools. Dr Newman was inclined to vote for a change of subjects. He thought they should be changed from time to time to make them more attractive. Mr Lee said a curriculum was drawn up by himself in 1875, and was in force until 1880. In 1881, a cry was raised that it was too heavy, and the syllabus was altered to its present form. They were really going back 10 years. The Rev J. Paterson also remembered the cry, but he could not say he quite agreed with it.

Mr Buchanan said if he thought the Government were going to alter the curriculum at an early date, he weuld strongly object to a Committee being appointed. Otherwise he would vote for a Committee.

Mr Blair said he agreed with Mr Young that something should be done, but he objected to the language employed. He thought the scheme was faulty, but that was quite a different thing to saying that it was antiquated. The names of Messrs Blair, Beetham, Young, Dr Newman, and the Rev J. Paterson were submitted as the Committee, and the motion was then put aod carried.