THE REORGANISATION OF

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20522, 25 September 1928, Page 7

THE REORGANISATION OF

EDUCATION. TO THE EDITOR. Siß,—The more 1 study your leading article on “ The Reorganisation of Education,” the more am I convinced that you really do not mean all you say. Your suggestion that the majority report of the Primary School Syllabus Revision Committee should be adopted indicates that you do no* realise just what would happen, say, in Dunedin, if the recommendations embodied in the majority report were put into effect, and I make bold to say that, if you will take the trouble to read the fierce criticism levelled at that report by the Technical School authorities, you will see just why you should not advise Dunedin to support one type of post primary school for all children up to 15 years —“ the omnibus school,” as .t has been rather aptly termed. You would b proposing a solution which has been roundly condemned by the ex-Director of Education (Mr Caughley), who said in his evidence before the Syllabus Revision Committtee that he had “ discarded in his mind what is known as the central school, of which Kowhai (Auckland) is a type—it makes two breaks in the school life instead of one.” Strangely enough, the Syllabus Revision Committee refused to embody Mr Caughley’s statement in the majority report. The explanation is' that the statement of the ex-Director of Education, who assisted in the establishment of the Kowhai School, constituted a condemnation of the committee’s recommendations for the cities. The separate, junior high, central school, or whatever you like to call it, which is recommended in the majority report, is condemned by the secondary and technical school authorities in Auckland; it is, in the judgment of Mr Caughley, educationally unsound; it is not the solution advocated in the Hadow Report, and it is not the safest line of advance if the educational opinion of the Scottish people is worth anything. But it is in reply to your disparaging references to Scottish education that I desire to join issue with you. _ You say “ that Scotland does not excel in the provision of practical forms of_ education for adolescents.” I am surprised -hat the leading journal in a Scottish community should make such an extraordinary statement. You quote a 1922-24 report on Scottish education. Why, Sir, restrict your quotations to reports so old? Why not tell your readers someth; ng about the change which has taken place in the Scottish education svistem since 1922? Why not quote from the iccent reports? Then you quote “ The Next Step in National Education,” but you rather significantly refrain from telling your readers of the highly complimentary references to Scottish education made by that committee. Have you based your conclusions on the statistica l information furnished by the unofficial committee responsible for that pronouncement, _ which is tl ; report of a committee under the chairmanship of Viscount Haldane.' H you have done so, I can forgive you for having offered your readers, in 1928. conclusions based on out-of-date information. It may be heresy for a mere layman to offer criticism of the work of the Haldane Committee, but to me it savours of unbusinesslike methods for a committee to issue a report at the end of 1927 based on five year-old statistics. There may be some excuse, but I know of_ none, tor the committee to embody in ate report some references to what New Zealand did in 1923, but I regard it as evidence ot superficial investigation that a committee. which issued its report in London in 1927, should have been content with IJ2--23 statistics, when a journey across the street to Whitehall would have placed the committee in possession of the latest statistical information on the reorganisa tion of the Scottish system of. education. The point I wish to stress is. not the failure of investigating committees to secure the latest information, (and the Primary School Syllabus Revision Committee set up in New Zealand erred in the same way),. but the readiness with which advocates of reorganisation—or should 1 say disorganisation of the New Zealand system of education?— accept conclusions based on inconclusive, incom* plete, and irrelevant evidence. Your references to the Scottish system of education came as a great surprise to me. Do you really mean what you say. You say “ Scotland does no* excel in the provision of practical forms of education for adolescents,” and you insist that tne majority report of the New Zealand Committee aims at practical education. 1 challenge you to quote from the latest reports on Scottish education to prove that “Scotland does not provide practical forms of education for adolescents. If you will peruse the 1926-27 report you will notice that the total average number of pupils enrolled in the advanced divisions of primary schools of Scotland was given as 71,816—an advance of 1846 on the previous year’s number. The numbei of pupils over 14 years of age at the end of the session in primary schools showed an increase of 1028. The new policy, adopted by the Scottish education authorities was based on the conclusion that “ an increase in the number of new enrolments in secondary schools is not necessarily a subject for congratulation; it may wel. be. as already indicated under the head of advanced divisions and repeatedly stated in previous reports ’ —I am quoting now from the 1926-27 report a large proportion of new entrants would have found in the advanced divisions ot primary schools a training better suited both to their natural bent and to the length of time that they are likely to continue at school.” Now, what form ot education is provided for the 71,816 children of the adolescent age who are in the advanced division of the primary schools of Scotland? I can answer you from the latest report. Under the heading Practical Instruction, we find the following: “Appendix VII shows the number of schools in which provision was made for the teaching of various subjects and the number of pupils who took them. A comparison of these figures with those of the two previous years marks in a most satisfactory way the progress made in the development of advanced divisions. The striking advance noted last year in the provision made for the teaching of science is carried further; the subject was taught in 783 primary schools as compared with 751 in 1924-25. and 412 in 1923-4, and the number of pupils who took it was 61,468, as compared with 56.095 and 33,370 in the two previous years respectively. Bench work and the domestic science subjects also show a big increase.” For the information of your readers. I think I should embody in this letter the complete reply to your allegation which is contained in Appendix VTT. on nage 39. of the 1926-27 Report of the Committee of the Council of Education in Scotland, showing the number of primary schools in which practical education was provided and the number of pupils who received instruction in the various subjects:— Subject Primary Schools. No. of schools. No. of fcholars. In Below advanced advanced division, division. Science (approved as an Independent subject) . . 753 60,624 854 Science (approved as subsidiary to a practical subject) . . 212 5,870 400 Drawing . . . , 1054 63,045 Mechanics . . 23 2,015 Dench work . . 1031 39,853 8,684 Navigation and seamanship 73 855 109 Gardening . . 645 3,991 3,037 Agriculture . . 23 301 112 Poultry keeping . . 7 118 37 Cooking . . . . 1453 41,804 10,511 Laundry „ . work . . . . 653 27,784 3,448 Midwifery . . 254 10,523 743 Needlework . . 1090 32,220 Design .... 23 720 60 Dressmaking .. 393 19,010 1,44 , Dairying .... - 8 4 Here you have a statistical reply to your allegation that the Scottish education of the adolescent neglects the practical side. Moreover, the roots of practical education, as you will see, go well down into the primary school. That your readers may know the basis of the reorganisation of post-primary education in Scotland, which has taken place since the statistics quoted by “The Next Step in Education ” were compiled, I quote below the scheme of work set out in Appendix I of the Code of Regulations for Day Schools in Scotland. “ The following is contemplated,” says the new code, “ as the normal organisation of the school: (a) Infant division, providing instruction suitable for children under seven years of age; (b) junior division, providing instruction suitable for children be-

tween the ages of seven and nine; (c) senior division, providing instruction suitable for children between the ages of nine and 13; (d) advanced division, providing instruction suitable for scholars over 12 years of age.” And here is the syllabus issued by the Scottish education authorities for advanced division: — APPENDIX I. The schedules that follow are Intended as suggestions to assist education authorities in framing courses for advanced divisions. The first and principal aim must bo the continuance and development of general education on the moral and physical, no less than on the intellectual side. It is, therefore, essential that every course should provide for training In morals and citizenship, for music and for physical exercises. Intellectual training can be best secured through a proper discipline in a selected number of the branches specified below. The main instruments here will be the English subjects. together with mathematics and science, and, as a rule, drawing. These should accordingly be studied throughout, the amount of detail varying with the length of the course. General provision of this kind having been made for all, educational authorities may reasonably proceed to take account of local conditions and of the needs and aptitudes of individual scholars, to such an extent as the circumstances of each school may require and its resources permit. The point at which any specialisation that may be attempted is begun will depend partly on the length of the course and partly on the nature of the special subject to be studied. Normally, the longer the course and the more definitely vocational the subject, the later will be the period to which specialisation is deferred. In one year’s courses, however, if such work is to be fruitful, it will probably be advisable to arrange that it should be prominent from the outset. Every course will thus consist of an appropriate combination of subjects and will have a character of its own. The character may be allowed to colour the treatment of the individual subjects Included In the course. Mathematics and science, for instance, may mean one thing for boys in a seaboard school and quite another for girls in one of the large cities. Similarly, if a foreign language is attempted, the treati ment of it may vary according to the broad purpose of the course, and may often with profit be wholly or mainly directed towards the acquisition of a reading knowledge of the language and some acquaintance with the institutions of the country concerned. First Schedule—Three Years’ Course. For pupils who will remain for three years in an advanced division, graduated courses of instruction should Include the following:— 1. English, History, and Geography. 2. Mathematics and Science. 3. Drawing. 4. One or more of the following—(a) Practical subjects, e.g.— Technical Drawing, Benchwork, Mechanics: Navigation, Seamanship; Gardening, Agriculture, Dairying ; Needlework, Design, Dressmaking ; . • Cookery, Laundrywork, Housewifery. (b) Commercial subjects. (c) A Foreign Language. (d) Any other approved subject.

Second Schedule—Two Years’ Course. A. For pupils who are likely to remain loss than three, but not less than two. years In an advanced division, graduated courses of instruction should include the following:— 1. English, History, and Geography. 2. Mathematics (or, for girls, Arithmetic) and Science. 3. One or more of the following:— (a) Drawing. (b) Practical subjects, e.g.— Technical Drawing, Benchwork: Navigation ; Gardening; Needlework (especially Mending, Darning, and Cutting out). Dressmaking ; Cookery and Laundrywork. (c) Commercial Subjects (a beginning). (d) A Foreign Language. B. For pupils who are not likely to remain more than a year in an advanced division, the courses should provide instruction in the subjects enumerated in A. under Heads 1 and 2. with one or two

subjects chosen from 3 (a) and 3 (b). If you will show me in what manner the scheme of work now being carried out with such marked success in the advanced divisions of the primary schools of Scotland is less practical than the enriched syllabus advocated by the Primary School Syllabus Revision Committee of New Zealand you will then be able to justify your criticism of the Scottish system. In reply to you, I make the bit? claim that there are more pupils of the adolescent age taking these practical courses in the advanced division of the primary schools of Scotland than there are adolescents in all the primary, post-primary, district high, secondary, and technical schools ot New Zealand. Of the new organisation, we are told: "Both teacher and pupil worked under the new conditions with fresh vigour and awakened interest," and " the hopeful view is fully justified by the accounts of a complete year's working now presented in general reports of his Majestv's chief inspectors." (See report 1925-26). The Primary School Syllabus Revision Committee did not bother to make investigations outeide the Hadow report, which is offered to the. English Board of Education as a solution of - a problem which does not exist in New Zealand. The committee, although invited to assist the Minister to enrich the syllabus of the upper standards of the primary school (without additional expenditure), replied by submitting recommendations involving a capital expenditure of approxi : mately £BOO,OOO, additional salaries ot £50,000 per annum, and extra incidental allowance and transport costs running into something like £60,000 a year. For the cities, the committee in the majority _ rewort recommended a type of school which, having been tried out in Auckland tor some years, had been declared by the Director of Education, who was largely responsible for its creation, to be educationally unsound, notwithstanding the fact that the school cost nearly £50,000 to establish, and was provided with a start costing nearly £IO,OOO per annum to handle 827 pupils.—l am, etc., A. E. Lawrence, Chairman of the Lay Members of the Syllabus Revision Committee who submitted the Minority Report. Timaru, September 19.