UNIVERSITY REFORM

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 6970, 9 November 1909, Page 6

UNIVERSITY REFORM

(To tbs Editor " N.Z. Times.”) Sir, —Will you kindly permit me to thank Professor Zedlitz for his appreciation of, anil “ Academically Home Sick ” for his assistance in, my efforts to draw public attention to this question. Professor Zedlitz . has kindly invited me to meet him to bo shown (lie errors of my ways. This invitation I would be most willing to accept. There are one or two points, however, to which I would direct attention. This is essentially a people's question—at least of that part of the people which takes , an interest in the permanent welfare and progress of the democracy. - As Prof. Zedlitz points out, tho democracy that neglects its educational system, especially its University system, must go down in the race for existence. I have long waited for a concrete statement of the obj ections to the present examining system. Professor Laby’s 1 article seemed to me such a statement. 1 Professor Laby is an educational enthusiast fresh from the halls of learning in the Did World. Professor Laby presumably wrote with tho approval of our ! local professoriate. X therefore conclud- ; ed that Professor Laby’s article contained the -worst that could be said against our present system. I examined the professor’s propositions seriatim. I endeavoured to show that they did not apply to New Zealand. The question is of vital importance to ns all. My orthodoxv or heterodoxy is comparatively of little moment. The opinion of the vast bulk of our people is of supreme moment. Professor Zedlitz approved Mr Yon Haast’s suggestion to appoint 1 a Royal Commission to investigate this and other education problems. These Commissions have obvious advantages. They have equally obvious disadvantages. Many who take deep interest in public questions are unwilling or too retiring to give evidence. Commissioners aro supposed to decide on the evidence. Thus there is possibility.of the conclusions being one-sided. This does not apply to discussions in the people’s parliament—the public press. What I think is necessary is that with your indulgence this matter should be publicly disenssed. This is what I hope one of the professors will see bis way to do. On one point Professor Zedlitz has, I think, done me an unwitting wrong. I was speaking of the terms examination. I said that this was for us what

the Cambridge system was for Cambridge. The professor savs I have made a mistake. The Cambridge system is a local system, Qur terms examinations are purely local". Herein lies the similarity referred to by me.—l am, etc., LIBEETAS, ■Wellington, November 6th.