UNIVERSITY SENATE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15672, 27 January 1913, Page 3 (Supplement)

UNIVERSITY SENATE.

CHANCELLOR'S ADDRESS. j QUESTION OF REFORM. AUCKLAND, January 19. The Chancellor of the University of New Zealand (Sir Robert Stout) delivered his annual address to the Senate yesterday. Tho Chancellor then dealt at length with the report of the professorial Conference hold in oamera in Wellington in November on the subject of alterations in degrees, lie thought it his duty to bring before the Senate certain matters connected with this report. Unlike the report of the previous conference, no account was given of the voting, and it would bo assumed that the delegates wero of one mind. He ihad, however, been informed that such waa not the case. Tho subjects specially remitted by tho Senate wero: (a) courses for B.A. and B.Sc. degrees and essentially connected subjects, and (b), the beet method of giving permanent shape to tho conference. It would be seen that so far. as the subject marked (a) was concerned, tho alterations suggested in the existing statutes were trivial, it was represented by some professors who called themselves " reformers" ■ that the syllabus was archaic. The changes suggested showed that the conference treated that criticism with contempt. The conference recommended that the degree- of bachelor of soience bo abolished. That was a peculiar method o: selecting a course for tho degree. - It was true that the report stated that the conference had to consider in future the creation of a new degree in but, judging from the little said about it, one would infer that it was not to bo a general science degree, but one of a technical character. " Under tho existing system, 1 ' continued the Chancellor, "we have two primary degrees—B.A. and B.Sc. In tho B.A. ciegreo Latin or Greek is compulsory, and in the B.Sc. degree four 6cienco subjects are compulsory—mathematics, physical science, chemistry, and botany, or, in lieu of botany, zoology or geology or physiology. The conference proposed one degree, but it was to bo a bifurcated degree—that is, there would be a B.A. degree proper, with only one science subject, and a B.A. logrco mainly scientific. In fact, the only change was that,' mathematics not being compulsory, tho student might get a B.A. degree for passing such subjects as he would have had to pass in B.So. only. That three, instead of four, sciences were required was a slight chance to get rid o! the ' archaic' nature of the syllabus It had taken two years or more of labour and thought of the reforming professors to discover this wonderful remedy. It was not stated what was to bc-como of the M.Sc. degree. If it was given on the present syllabus, the proposed B.A. syllabus being accented, a student who got the M.Sc. degree would- know lees of science than was required at present. The proposal was really a lowering of the science requirements. The conference had forwarded a proposed amendment of the syllabus , for mathematics—a change it seemed more of names than of substance." He congratulated the conference, however, on the mode in which it set about dealing with tho syllabus in mathematics and the syllabus in honours in chemistry, both questions having been referred to experts on the subject. Two proposals were made for altering the mathematical syllabus .by university teachers in the subjects. Tho professors were divided in opinion. A compromise was afterwards effected, and it was this'compromise which the conference forwarded to the Senate The syllabus in honours in chemistry was altered by two of the chemistry proffers. The course which the senate has followed in tho past of remitting any proposed alteration of the syllabus to teachers of the subject bad been followed by the conference, but the teachers in the subject could communicate direct with the Senate without the aid of the Professorial- Conference. All the talk about professors being better able to deal with subjects which they did not teach than members of tho Senate had thus been proved devoid of any solid basis of fact. Much of the time of the conference seemed to have been spent on tho subject of who were to be tho examiners. The delegates considered that teachers- in each subject must examine in that subject, or rather " responsible university ieachere." r j Were there then university teachers who were not responsible Did the "words mean professors only or were \ lecturers included? If lecturer's were not included then there might be no examiner in Latin from Otago University and no examiner in education from A 7 ictoria College. Would it include assistant professors? Another suggestion was that no questions wero. to be set in any paper' on a subject until they had been submitted to a teacher of tho subject. What did this mean? Suppose a professor objected to a question. Was it co be disallowed? Were students so ill equipped for competition that they could not be questioned on a subject they had studied unless their teachers approved of the question. They might desire to compete in the Indian civil service examinations or in other public examinations—military orcivil. Mu6t tho examiners first submit the questions to the New Zealand professors? Many of our young men would, the chancellor hoped, be found taking a share in the' Government of their country. He supposed that if they stood for popular election, and were asked to deal with political matters 6iich as loans, tariff, taxation, etc., they would be allowed to tell questioners that their questions had not been submitted to the professors. This suggestion about submitting questions to professors must have been made by delegates who had little sense of humour. Examinations were for the purpose of ascertaining •whether the s.udcnts had acquired a knowledge. Subjects were set and books wero named and periods on literature and history were prescribed. Why should an examiner who asked a student of Greek to translato' a passage from a set book, say from "Plato's Apology," have to submit tho passage to a Greek professor? Was tho student's knowledge to be of that slender kind in any subject that he must dread an external examiner? If it was a wrong to a Now Zealand student to put a question to him that his professor bad not seen, what grievous wrong must not the students of Oxford and Cambridge havo undergone during past centurioG? Surely the teachers of these great universities had been just as competent as our " responsible university teacher." According to the resolutions cf tho conference professors wero not only to examine their own students, but they were to bo associated with entrance examinations without necessarily requiring from them the labour of reading the candidates' answers in large 'numbers. If it was right that a teaoher should oxamine his own students it was surely secondary school teachers who should bo associated with tho entrance examination. The principle that was to bo inado applicable to university students was not, however, to be made applicable to secondary school boye and girls. They must, be presumed to bo able to prove their knowledge by answering questions which their teachers had never seen. How a professor could appreciate the work or ability or knowledge of secondary school pupils without reading all the answers given in their papers he could not understand. The wholo trend of the resolutions framed by the conference was to centre all tho power and authority of a university in tho professors. If these" resolutions were adopted tho New Zealand University must-cease to exist-, jnd the four colleges would require to bo constituted as four separate universities. When he thought of the expense already incurred and tho time wasted in so-called reform, ho began to wonder if they would ever be able to grapple with the real questions in higher education that needed attention. No educational system was perfect. Reform had not come from the bureaucrats, and ho doubted if through them progress would come to us and our univcrstiy institutions.

AUCKLAND, January 21. The annual session of the University Senate was continued to-day.

The Senate- discussed various matters alluded to in the report' of the Professorial Conference held in Wellington. The conference had recommended—" That there be one pass degree in arts and science."— Mr Hogben moved and Professor F. D. Brown seconded a motion that the Senate should adopt this recommendation, and practically every member of the Senate took part in the subsequent discussion. The motion was lost by 14 votes to 8.

Mr Gordon moved: "That the Senate deems it desirable that tho Government should Tcoognisc the high standard of qualifications that graduates in mining engineering have to reach before obtaining their degree, and so amend the Mining and Coal Mines Act as to enable such graduates to obtain mine.managers' certificates on the production of certificates from authorised managers that they have been employed in the underground workings of a mine for a period of three years." The chief point in Mr Gordon's suggestion was tho three year instead of the five year period of underground experience. The motion wa3 carried unanimously.

The Senate rejected a motion by Professor Hunter that it be an instruction to any committees that have to nominate

New Zealand examiners to' first report for the approval of the Senate the principle they propose to follow in the selection of examiners.