OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8364, 26 February 1913, Page 6

OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

Now that the educational experts—the inspectors —have concluded their annual deliberations the time seems opportune to review, shortly, the results produced by the very large expenditure the people of this Dominion so ungrudgingly incur in this direction. W© are first met with the learned opening address delivered by the Inspector-General, Mr Hogben. It reads well, and, on the minds of the uninitiated, will doubtless produce an impression that the education system of New Zealand is in the - hands of those actuated, by very high, if impracticable, ideals. To the expert and experienced teacher—the one who has to grapple hour by hour with the problems of education—the address is on a par with the many fads and socalled reforms which the authorities in recent years, have introduced for “ show ” purposes. The fact is that the primary syllabus is overburdened with an extraordinary number of subjects—many of them useless as far as the child’s after life is concerned. The greater part of the address is so much “ thin air,” and resembles the opening address of a candidate for Parliament, who, some years ago, descanted poetically on “ the beauties of Liberalism,” and never touched upon any on© of the economic problems affecting the public mind. Mr Hogben said, “It is impossible to separate education from life.” Whoever tried or suggested such a separation ? For the last twenty years every earnest teacher in New Zealand has been trying to synchronise education and life, but each has been hampered by the impossible and “fancy” requirements of a syllabus drawn up by those who know little or nothing of the difficulties in the everyday work of a school. Was it not a Wellington inspector who, at a conference, suggested that it would be a good thing if every inspector in New Zealand were required, occasionally, to spend six months in the management and teaching of a country school? Again Mr Hogben: “ On© of our worst faults hitherto as educators is that in our false zeal to make what we regard as substantial progress, we have tried to anticipate, so to speak, in the child the more matured product of adult manhood.” On what shoulders does the blame pest? On those of an impossible syllabus. Through the overcrowding of that syllabus with faddist ideas we have lost, to a largo extent, the substance in an attempt to grasp the shadow. What is the good of ringing the changes on cant terms like “naturalism” and “ idealism ” 1 Our education system was formulated for a definite purpose—to place every child in the community in the position of becoming an intelligent citizen—tljat each might step out into the world with sufficient knowledge to accept life’s duties. Has that purpose been achieved? Any one acquainted with the conditions of education to-day knows full well that the children of the Fourth Standard twenty years ago were better equipped for life’s battle than the children of the Sixth Standard to-day. The complaint of colleges and technical schools is that children with proficiency certificates, entering the secondary stage, are illfitted to take up the specialised subjects required for a “Vocational Course.’’ It is not too much to ask from a Sixth Standard pupil that English, writing, and arithmetic should be good. Any secondary school teacher will vouch for the fact that free place pupils are deficient in all three subjects, and that fully half the first year is taken up in reaching a stage where pupils can appreciate an advanced course —in short, it takes six months to make Sixth Standard children proficient in Sixth Standard work —facility in English composition, decent, writing, and a good knowledge of arithmetic. Why is this so? Because the primary syllabus is so overcrowded with .useless subjects that teachers find it impossible to give a solid grounding in the three R’s—the prime necessity in a democratic system of education. Three years ago Mr Hogben lamented the fact that so many pupils in the Wellington Technical School were taking up the Commercial Course. Why do they do so? For the very simple reason, which Mr Hogben does not seem to recognise, that Wellington is a commercial centre, and that a very large proportion of our boys and girls must take up commercial work. The commercial masters in our colleges and technical schools, and business men in need of office assistants have, for years, been dinning into the ears of the public the fact that boys and girls with Sixth Standard passes are unable to write • the simplest of business letters intelligently, or to perform accurately the simplest of calculations. It is a matter of every day discussion among secondary school teachers that children leave the primary school a year too early. To profit by the secondary course, the old Seventh Standard should be revived, and thus give primary teachers an opportunity of putting that polish on their pupils which is so painfully lacking to-day. Something was expected from the much advertised Education Commission. Sad to say, “the mountain brought forth a mouse.” Evidence was not forthcoming from those who are most intimately acquainted with the deficiencies of our school system, and who, day-in and day-out, are grumbling at the uselessness of much of the work they are called upon to do. Let our Inspector-General and others in high educational authority come down from the skies —make the three R’s the basis of primary work, and thus fit our children, who are compelled at an early age to take up some occupation that will help the home, for that work which is essential for every calling in life.