COST OF THE UNIVERSITY

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7140, 30 May 1910, Page 8

COST OF THE UNIVERSITY

(By Prof. T. 11. Laby.) There arc many ways of judging tho value of a University to a community, but most of them are not intelligible to the ordinary reader. After forty years' existence New Zealand University has created such ideals here that the community—even th 3 University’s own garduatc.s—arc generally unable to full}' appreciate the ideas and spirit of a true University. How is one to convince such an audionce that the University requires their attention I" The argument of cash value, though urijatisfacrory, is the only effective one available. THE YEARLY COST.

I give below a tentative statement of tho University *y income and capital ccst : tile figures for the former can bo ascertained with rough accuracy, fo v the latter only the roughest approximation can bo made, as no official statement of capital amounts exists. The following table has been checked by -Air Skinner, of Victoria College:

Thus Now* Zealand spends <£60,000 per year, or fourteen pence per head of the population each year on her University. How that compares with, other similar newly settled States will ho seen below:

73 o ns ° *5 S ° “ p. T 3 'SJ a S 8 £ c a w £ „ g" »OT *g O I| | | f I 5 3 o o I -g | Soils § t, s« * * £ ,S H |ss s o * {h J°. q o £ *2 >-3 O o S o f* £* « Pt “1 N => t O ■< CM S 3 B ;: : | o i « : o * : « ; ■“ -a ; § •, s a I°. i 8 | :.2 : -a p : S • s-• s . '-g -g g| d gS 5 n g y s *2 <2 S , is «,• t3g|g 89 -S ob fc SS ■2 £ VALUE OBTAINED FOB THE OUTLAY.

It might appear at first sight that after all New Zealand is liberal in its University expenditure: and such is strictly true. But the point is not what we spend, hut what wo obtain for the expenditure. The following analysis will cive some idea of what value we get tor our outlay. While Arts and Science are taught at all four University, Colleges,Law, Mining, Engineering, Dentistry, and Medicine are taught practically wholly in inly one centre, and so, presumably, as cheaply as if they were ad taught in a central University. But that is not truo of Arts and Science, for which wo keep up four buildings, four libraries and laboratories, four staffs of teachers, . etc. Thus there is no quadruplication in the first group below:— SPECIALISATION OUTLAY. University Scholarships • jf.Boo College Scholarships 1.657 Medical School (Otago) • • J. 637 Dental School (Otago) 1.245 Mining School (Otago) .. ...... ••••• •• • J»9IS Engineering School (Christchurch) .. 6.938 Law (Wellington) say 2,000 Mining (Auckland) say 2 > QQO , 23.200 Arts and Science, etc., quadrupled outlay 36 ’ 8Q ° Total 60 ’ 000 Now, this last £37,000 is spent iu teaching some 600 to 700 Arts and Science students distributed over four centres; it is highly probable that it docs.not obtain as efficient teaching as i£IS,OCO spent in one central institution. Thus compared with the centralised Universities in California and Toronto wo are only obtaining .£38,000, or ninepeuee per head worth of education for .£60,000 expenditure. In. other words, if the people of New Zealand dote main© to continue their four University Colleges and very expensive external examination. thov must be prepared to spend about .fiiOO.OOO to obtain the same effieicncv of teaching as would he obtained by spending £60.000 on one central v institution. (Personally, I think the Colleges should remain, but the external examination be discontinued). It. is Impossible to have decentralisation and efficiency at a low cost in University work. It is noteworthy that:

■ (1) Tlie University examining—mere testing of knowledge—costs (£6800) nearly as much as the teaching. (£7200) at Auckland University College, which specialises in mining. The only well-paid servant of the University is the English examiner. (2) The Medical School costs yearly X3G3T—I understand it is not worth more —it had eighty-two students in 1908. (3) The Engineering School spends £69-10 yearly for thirty-two students. Engineering "is one of the few Subjects taught well. (4) £33,000 is spent on 720 students in the South Island University Colleges, which specialise on subjects expensive to teach: £17,000 on the North. Island

colleges, with 770 students attending lectures.

In this article I have endeavoured to show that we obtain yearly about ninepcnco per head worth of University <ducation, while 'Ontario, Canada, spends fifteen, pence, California seventeen pence. In a later article I shall show that in the ytate of New -South I ewe £ome readers an apology for such an r-xtiemoly utiiitaiian argument ch is mod here, but other arguments arc unintelligible u> many. TIIK EXAiIINIKG SYfJTEH. VIEWS Or A GRADUATE. (To the Editor ‘N.Z. Times."; Sir,—V/ith iDucli that has appeared in agrecmenl. UucC *.\r:Uc:i on the yubjeco or exurninaiionb i Y;ouici wiiimgiy nave taken uo pari, in the present touivuversy. ihu ;uuc.i'.j eonuun so much taut iCC'..u,e3 mvesiiiauoa ! tAey uou.u Jiot lua.vc :u a • puolic meo::«g—mar l venture vo crate ; your iuuuigoacc lor a apace. Jicdorc ucalmg m aelaii with the protfSsor’.s conienuons i wouui ernphusi.-so seme iiiiportant point:;. I aminutiouj and av.arti The irue ; muciioii oi a m..sciaity -a to encourage a love or learning lor learning’s sake, me stuny ot ociente, iiteralure ami j/lniosuphi’, uccuuae these expand and dovcioi) the mind and me valuable to the individual because thereby hfi is able to live a lullcr and nobler life and mayhap make the world a little better and brighter fox* Ins leas fortunate Examinations and degrees arc the university's compromise with commercialism. The degree is a commercial asset, and is valuable only on this account. Did modern life, with its competition, not demand some test lor intellectuality, degrees would, to a great extent, ceaae'lo be prized. To the student whoso interest is in nature and in the elucidation of nature’s laws v/hut is this bauble of a degree? Does it tho better lit him to unravel nature’s tangled skein or to impart uu3 knowledge to his fellows? I do not object to* universities granting degrees, it is a, necessity forced upon them by modern life, but their place in the educational system must be placed no higher and no lower than this. Our object must be to grant degrees which will be of tho greatest commercial value to the holders, at the same time taking care that our system does not prejudice local touching. \vhat, then, is our system of awarding degrees? U r c have, speaking generally, two sets of examinations: (I) The terms examinations, conducted by the professors who have been teaching during the year; and (2) the degree examinations conducted by examiners in Britain. Tims our degrees have the hall mark of our local professoriate and the imprimatur of the British universities. Will Professor Hunter tell me that a degree so obtained has not a higher commercial value than a local one?

One objection urged by the "reformers’' is that the present system divorces teaching and examining. Now, no New Zealand student can obtain a degree, can even Bit for a degree, without the authority of our local teachers. Is this divorce? Ask your average undergrad, if his professor takes any part in blocking his pathway to a degree.

After this long introduction, I would like to follow Professor Hunter in further detail. First, he reiterates the oft-refuted fallacy of the “divorce." Then ho reintroduces us to the Fink Commission ou the Melbourne University. Melbourne is a city with half a million inhabitants; Wellington is a city with less than 80,000. To conclude that, because a certain system is applicable to Melbourne, therefore the same system is applicable to New Zealand is surely a paradeigma that might make our old friend Aristotle tremble. I say that the conditions in Melbourne, in the United States, and in Germany arc essentially different from those here, and that no valid conclusions can bo reached by such analogies. Those countries can attract men that we cannot retain, and in saying this 1 do not wish to belittle our professors or the great work they are doing in our midst. Then the present system tends to make a coach of the teacher. “The professor is not intended to be other than a person who diligently and carefully prepares his students for an examination” he tells us. This is fundamentally wrong, and misconceives the true function of a university under any examining system. The true teacher is he who endeavours to inculcate in others a love of his subject, and to give his hearers an intelligent detailed survey of the science he teaches. If at the end of the year the student bo unable to pass the decree examination, this is no concern of the intelligent and industrious teacher. In so far as ho prepares Ms students for examinations he fails in his duty to the university and the State. The professor then' draws a harrowing picture of the effect of the present system on the student. It makes him cram. I have myself been a student, and have sat at Professor Hunter’s feet, and I can say without fear of contradiction that there Is more cram, in Us worst form, for the terms examinations/ than for the degree examinations. One knows and studies the predilections. the peculiarities and the weaknesses (if ho has any) of the lecturer to whom he has listened daily for months, and one knows that the teacher will have given his students his best, and that mortal man cannot examine outside this. The English examiner, on the other hand, the student does hot know at all, or only through his books (if he has -written any). Then the professor tells us that the present system decreases the Initiative of student and teacher. If a man allows himself to become a coach, initiative is lost. I claim that the university professor should never permit himself to become a coach, he has a far higher and nobler mission.

Then -we come to a most astounding statement: . . in some cases, practical examinations in science Have demanded no practical •work.” There are examinar tions held in New Zealand. Now it must be remembered that in all practical science work for degrees the local professor is the final arbiter. I cannot believe that the cases referred to were university examinations, but if they were, we should hesitate before awarding degrees locally. Then the present 'system, presumably the examining system, prevents change of syllabus to suit modern requirements—surely a case of post hoc ergo propter hoo. The syllabus can be changed without altering the examining system. In some mysterious way the present system lowers the status of the teacher. I would like the terra “status” defined. If status mean the reverence and respect that a student has for a good teacher, no examining system in the world can alter this. It seems to me that the whole matter may be summed up in the following question. Could Professor Hunter the better expound and explain, and could I the bettor assimilate the mysteries of the Aristotelian and Socratian philosophies or the turns of tho first figure if he instead of being able to prevent my having a degree could award me the degree?

In concluding: I contend:— (1) The true function of a university is not examining but teaching in its widest and best sense. (2) Degrees are essential because we live in an age in which the struggle for existence is waged with little mercy and degrees are valuable in this struggle. (3) As degrees are thus awarded for commercial purposes we should make them as valuable as possible, (4) Degrees are awarded after two sets of examinations—(a) held by the teacher; ’(b) by an outsider, an authority in his subject. (5) Degrees thus possess a commercial value they would not have if awarded locally. (6) The present system . does not 1 prejudice local teaching.—l am, etc.. ' LIBERTAS. Wellington, May 28th, 1910.

THE UNIVERSITY AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGES OF NEW ZEALAND. ! INCOME FOR 1928. From XJniv. Auckland. Vie. Col. Total. Government , 4,800 6.070 7.560 2,620 2,000 23.C60 Private foundation .... 70 180 135 8 ■ Provincial endowment.. 950 600 50 9.543 7.800 18.850 Fees 5,900 1,7301 1,953 3,620 4.120 17,500 Total income 11.700 8,480 9,700 15.830 14,900 60.550 EXPENDITURE, 1908. Salaries . 4,770* 5,193 6,320 11,570 11,970 39.820 • Administration and Maintenance 2.000 1,620 2,500 3.860 3,553 13.340 j Scholarships 3,830 215 990 400 50 5,490 \ Library ■ 160 330 50 40 633 > Total expenditure .... 10,610 7,180 9.990 15,830 15,620 59,290 •Examiner’s fees. tFees for 1909.