SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18765, 19 January 1923, Page 2

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

DISCUSSION BY UNIVERSITY SENATE. AUCKLAND’S CLAIMS AGAIN DENTED. The claims of Auckland University College for the establishment of a recognised school of engineering, apart from, the school which is already in existence at Canterbury College, were discussed at some length by the Senate of the New Zealand University yesterday morning. The matter was introduced by the Hon. G. Fowlds (Auckland), who moved the following resolution pursuant to notice given;—“That the senate grant the request of the Auckland University College that the engineering department of the Auckland School of Mines be recognised as a school for the training of students for tho Degree of Bachelor of Engineering, Civil; and that students of (lie school be also permitted to sit for the first and second professional examinations for tho degrees of Bachelor of Engineering, Mechanical, and Bachelor of Engineering, Electrical.” Ihe mover said that this was a similar resolution to one which he had submitted in the last Senate at Auckland. On that occasion a number of members had ex-

pressed the opinion that they were not competent to decide whether the equipment and staffing of the engineering department at the Auckland University College were sufficient for the purpose for which , the senate was asked to make a recommendation, and that had seemed to him to be a reasonable attitude to take up. But it seemed to him that if the resolution then passed—to the effect that the Government should send up a commission of engineers to investigate and report for the information of the Senate—were given effect to. and if that report were satisfactory, the Senate should be prepared to do justice to the work done in the Auckland engineering school. An application for " that commission was sent on to the Government, but the Government either declined ' it.-oc took no action in setting up such a commission. 'I he only thing then to he done was for the Auckland University Council to submit evidence that would convince! the members of the Senate, - and a- report had been obtained from a number of loading engineers in Auckland, including Mr Ashley Hunter, the president of the- New Zealand Society- of Civil Engineers, who had acted as .chairman of (he commission. While it might he objected that all the

members of the commission were Auckland engineers, the college could hardly be expected to bring engineers from other parts of New Zealand to hold such an investigation. The members were all men whose position in the engineering world could not ho called into question, and the thoroughness of their investigation was shown by the report, which they had prepared. The report of the committee was unanimous, and could be summed up by' the following answers to the question, in the order of reference :---Ts the teaching staff adequate?—Yes. at present. Is the cqmpment adequate ?—Yes, at present. Is (lie department competent to provide instructions for iho degree of B.E. (civil) and for tho first two profession.!! examinations in M. and E. engineering?—Yes. Is there

need in Auckland for such a school?— Yes. Continuing, Mr Fowlds said he hoped the '’. crate would now see the wisdom and justice of granting the request of the Auckland Council. • The question involved was not. really the establishment of another school m competition with that in existence at Canterbury College, but that the Senate should comply with the spirit of the statute under which it operated by recognising the work done in Auckland. It was a serious wrong and injustice that students were at present denied a degree in their own university, and the question was whether the Senate was going to perpetuate that injustice Ho had recently noticed in one of the Dunedin newspapers that Auckland was asking for ■the establishment of a Medical School, but he wanted to say, as one who was closely in touch with university affairs in Auckland, that ho knew nothing of such a request. The question would no doubt come 11 P 1,1 time, hut there were a number oi subjects in connection with which special schools could lie duplicated with advan-

tage. For example, Auckland might be given fuller opportunities for agricultural instruction than it possessed at the present time • and that principle also held good

in connection with engineering. - -PVbf6s's6r ' Segar (Auckland), "in seconding the motion, said lie thought the Senate should realise that it was constituted as an examining body, and that, it was not part of its duty to refuse to examine stuclents'from a college who had the necessary knowledge and training required bv Tie statute. The evidence of Mr J. C. Dickinson, tho holder of the New Zealand Travelling Scliolarship showed that ho was of opinion that the Auckland College was competent to tench for the full degree m civil, and for the first two examinations in mechanical and electrical engineering, amd if it was provided with some additional equipment it would be able to provide for the degree course in civil, mechanical, and electrical engineering. In justice to the students of Auckland the Senate should give a favourable note on the motion now before it.

Professor J. R. Scott (Christchurch) said he desired tho Senate to discuss the resolution from the noinf. of view of the profession as a whole. The feeling throughout the profession was absolutely opposed to (ho decentralisation of instruction. What the profession asked for was concentration. The best reply to tho report of the commission of Auckland engineers was the statement made by the members of tho deputation which had waited on the Minister of Education some two years ago, asking that the Government might recognise' Canterbury College as the national school of engineering. and that it might concentrate its efforts in the _waV of subsidies on that institution. This denotation had consisted of practically tho whole of tho members of tho Council of tho New Zealand Society of Civil Engineers, and also tho whole of the members of (he Advisory Board in New Zealand for the Institute of Civil - Engineers. Unless Auckland was prepared to undertake a good deal of the expense necessitated hv tho establishment of the proposed school in that city the money would have to be found by the Government, and how could any Government face the position of doubling the contributions at present devoted to instruction in engineering? Dealing with tho argument used by Mr FowKK that the instruction in Auckland reach# 1 the degree standard. Professor Scort nointed out that the C.E. entrance examination was not of an exceptionally high standard, and in order to attain his A.M.I.C.E. a student had not only (o be nominated and seconded by members of the institute, hut had to have spent, two years in charge of some practical work. Ho thought that at the present time more men were being turned out than the country could absorb, and if one institution was capable of doing that it seemed to be redundant to urge the _ establishment of another one. Briefly, his objection to the proposal was that if the Senate recognised what Auckland was doing Auckland would bo justified in coming to the Government for assistance, and the cause of engineering education would be, weakened by a dissipation of the limited amount of money available.

Dr Anderson opposed the resolution, speaking strongly in favour of concentration on the present school and deprecating the establishment of a separate institution. The Canterbury School of Engineering, he said, was now well established, and they should support ii and make it a national school so that the available Government money might bo concentrated on its development. Instead of spending money in Auckland it would be better to consider the question of providing bursaries to enable students living at a distance from Christchurch and desiring to take up the degree course to attend the Canterbury School of engineering. Professor Thomas (Auckland): I think it is well for us to remember that the University of New Zealand is an examining body. The senate, he proceeded, should be' careful in not. frustrating the natural development of any part of tlie dominion, and Unit, was what it was doing by insisting that there should be a. school of a particular character in one part of the dominion, and one alone. The argument of centralisation hud been used by several of the speakers, and it, seemed to bo very plausible, but at the same time they should lie careful not to overlook (he requirements of other parts of the dominion. In Auckland I hey had perhaps the most progressive part, of the dominion, a large amount of engineering work, and a large number of students who were engaged in learning some part of (heir profession, but who also required training in the theoretical side of the work. Speaking on the question of cost Professor Thomas contended that some ot the best work could lie done with a very modest equipment, and he finally remarked that Auckland afforded much hotter facilities for practical work than those obtainable in Christchurch. The Hon. J A. Ilanau moved ns an amendment: ‘That further discussion of the matter be hold over until (ho next annual meeting of the senate.” 'the Hon. gentleman who tyui proposed this toast, he oon-

tinned amid loud laughter, had rather gc them on toast. Speaking us the represents tivo of tire Government he assured thei that: tho proposal was surrounded by soriou financial difficulties, and ho stated that wit the number of applications lor subsidie and grants already in hand and the othe clamant needs of the primary and seconder schools, there was little prospect of an, assistance from the State in tho meantime Iho primary and secondary schools wore tie basis of the education system of this country and how, he asked, was the Govornrnon to fulfil its obligations to the primary systen if further demands—and demands that wouli he continuous—were to be made by thi Auckland University College. The proposa was no doubt a very desirable one in it way, but it seemed to him that it shouh bo held over in the meantime. Mr Hanai added that it would be a very desirabh thing if the Government could extend men consideration than at present to thosi students who had to come from the north ti undergo their training at Canterbury ant Otago Universities. The amendment lapsed for want of i seconder. ■Professor Hunter (Wellington) supporter the motion. The senate, he said, was goin; to do a very great injustice to a numbei of students in Auckland if it. did not eu dorse the proposal now put forward. It was not a question of money at all, but a question of observing their own statutes a; an examining body. There yore subject; being taught in Auckland for the purpose of a degree of architecture which were not recognised for a degree of engineering. Twelve or 13 years ago Sir James Allen had been asked to investigate this whole matter, but nothing had been dene, and instead of that they still had applications for special schools. It seemed to him that the only way to get money for university purposes was to establish these institutions m a modest way us hud been done in Otago, and when they were an accompbshed fact to go to the Government and demand assistance which could not then be very' well denied. There were certain students being taught engineering in Auckland, and the question was whether that instruction was sufficient. If it was sufficient in the case of architecture then it was also sufficient in the ease of engineering and for that reason he could not vote against: tho motion. Mr J. C. Adams (Canterbury) said the school of architecture was given to Auckland on the assumption that it was ' properly equipped. So far as New Zealand was concerned the geographical position made: matters somewhat difficult, but they must not make too much of that, Tho means of communication now were very much better than they were even a short time ago, and they could not recognise claims which would interfere with students attending the different institutions. Perhaps some students felt that they were debarred to a certain extent by the distance that separated them from established classes. He emphasised tho statement that so far as a duly qualified student was concerned the position might bo provided for by a system of scholarships or bursaries; but they must have a guarantee that those who wished to attend these special classes were qualified to profit by tho instruction given. 'I hey were asked to establish practically a school of engineering in Auckland. It had been stated that there would bo practically no increase in the expense, but they must take that with a grain of salt. It seemed to him that the estimate of tho extra cast was very moderate. Seeing that they had found it necessary in extend their equipment at Canterbury" College at very great cost, he could not b» lieve that they could give a really good course in engineering in Auckland with an increased expenditure of £2500 in addition to the cost of an additional lecturer and demonstrator. Canterbury College was not as well equipped as thev would like, and they would bo pleased to have more money for extensions. He contended that it would be better to have one engineering school properly equipped than two schools that were not properly equipped If they had two institutions in a country with such a small population they would find that the staffs would be cut down and the instruction weakened. He maintained that the dominion was not ready for a second school of engineering any more than it was readv for a second school of medicine. lie did not think the question of population came into tho matter at all. The question was whether the establishment, of a school in another centre would interfere with the efficiency of a school already established and recognised as the natural school of the dominion. They must remember that it was not merely a question of recognition—it was a question of expense. The average annual expenditure'for maintenance at Canterbury College for 1920, 1921, and 1922 was £6382. Mr Caughley (Director of Education) expressed the opinion that it was the function of the senate to deal with a matter such ns this. It was the duty of tho senate to place before the Government reasons why a duplication should not take place. IV lien a proposal was made to institute a new school the Government looked to the senate for expert advice, and he thought it was their duty to put tho matter fully before the Government. The cost was the most vital element in the whole question. There were very pressing needs for expenditure on education, and the Government had to consider them in the order of relative importance. It had been stated that the cost of establishing the new school would be trifling, but sad experience had shown how trifling expenses mounted up. If a new school were established in Auckland

it would not bo content with less equipment than Canterbury College had. The report of the commission showed that the equipment was inadequate, even at present. The handicaps that were suffered by students in Auckland wore suffered by students in Wellington and other places. He did not think the report could be regarded as a convincing one, and he did not think they should., try to anticipate by.. About 50 years the establishment of a setiond engineering school while in other directions there were very urgent needs which the department was unable to meet. In view of the conditions surrounding primary education this matter could easily stand over till more money was available.

Professor Dettmann said he intended to vote for the motion simply as a matter of justice. Ho considered that a great deal of the discussion had been irrelevant to the subject. It was hard enough' for the engineering students to got to the Auckland University College without expecting them to go further afield. The impression to be gained by reading the report of the commission was that the experts who framed it were capable engineers, who were satisfied that the Auckland College engineering department was worthy of becoming an engineering school. There was a strong desire in Auckland for such a school. Ho

thought it was tho function of the senate to decide the question apart from the future cost of the school to the country. He thought they must recognise that Auckland had given instruction of the requisite standard. Tho alternative seemed to.be to destroy the school altogether. They were not attempting to get a school on ns high a footing as that at Canterbury College. It was not a question of establishing a new school, Auckland had a school already, and without any further expense could continue to do the work up to the standard required. He could not see any reason for refusing to recognise that school. Tho Chancellor said it seemed to him that there were two or three distinct questions to bo considered. Before the senate recognised the school it should see that the school was efficient. Was there any evidence before them that the school was efficient? The report was simply an ox parte statement, and there was no evidence to show that the school was efficient. No evidence had been taken, and all they had was a report by civil engineers, none of whom was a university man. Surely that was not sufficient to go upon. In the second place (hoy were asked (o recognise the school because if they did not it would injure some people, who would not bo able to practice their profession. So far as the i profession was concerned in New Zealand one did not need a university degree. It scooted to him that they should adjourn tho matter until the next session.

In the course of bis reply the Hon. Mr Fowlds said there was n movement at Home condemning the. large amount spent on the equipment of engineering classes, the contention being that the universities should deal with the theoretical side, while the practical work should bo learnt, in the workshops. In Auckland they could supply practical (raining in the workshops to a larger number of students than could be trained m

Canterbury. The tuition now provided in Auckland’ was regarded by the senate as satisfactory in connection with an application for n degree in architecture but notin engineering. He hoped the senate would, not be guided bv such an illogical position. He submitted that the report convoyed to the senate real evidence on which it could come to a decision to recognise (ho school. In view of the evidence submitted regarding the efficiency of the school and its equipment they wore entitled to a verdict in their favour. An injustice to a large number of Auckland students could bo removed while they conformed with the spirit of these institutions. The people of Auckland were in real earnest about this matter They did not ask that, (he Government should bear any extra expense; in fact, they did not need it, The denying of the claims

of about 100 students to the right of examination after they had undergone a course of training was an injustice which, ho hoped, would not be continued. On being put to the meeting the motion was lost, eight votes being cast in favour of it and 16 against it.