THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, MAY 4, 1929. EDUCATION AND INDUSTRY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20708, 4 May 1929, Page 12

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, MAY 4, 1929. EDUCATION AND INDUSTRY.

What is an industry? Is education an industry? These questions have been Die subject of deep cogitation on the part of the High Court of the Commonwealth, with the result that the judges could not ail agree concerning them. The Federated State . School Teachers’ Association of Australia had desired to know where it stood in relation to the placing of claims before the Commonwealth Arbitration Court, and the question, became one of interpretation of the Constitution, of .the Commonwealth. The idea that it should bo necessary to call upon a high judicial tribunal to determine ’whether teaching is an industry or not may appear rather amusing. ,Tlie generally accepted view- of an industry does not associate it with the class-room. The school is expected to be a centre of industry, it is true, but , that is another story altogether. The famous Mr Squeers has not been classified so far among great captains of industry, nor has Miss Pinkerton’s Academy been identified as an industrial institution. We do not think of industry as an educational business, though it has its apprentices. We think of it as an arena of manual and mechanical activity, of the. exchange of so much work for so much pay, and as tbs ground upon which capital and labour meet for their mutual benefit. The products of industry we regard as concrete, measurable things—motor cars, furniture, loaves, fishes, and what not. We do not speak of the teaching industry, but rather of the teaching profession and of education as a science. Were teaching to be declared an industry there is no telling where wo should stop. The university would presumably have the status of a factory. There are the legal, medical, and clerical professions. Were teachers to come under the wing of the Arbitration Court, why not clergymen and. curates? The ways of the i law are •devious and profound,, and frequently serve as a corrective to unenlightened minds. But the law, with its refinings, docs sometimes full foul of commonsense. The ■Commonwealth High Court, however, by the .decision of four judges to one, has managed to reach the decision that teaching is not an industry. There is no immediate need, therefore, for the layman to revise his outlook.

Some interesting points were made in the judicial pronouncement. Economists go far in their inclusion in the word “.industry” of processes such as are concerned with the administrative services of officials and the skilled professional advice of lawyers and doctors. But the economic view, in the opinion of the majority of the judges of the Federal High Court, is too wide. They have pointed out that the educational activities of the State bear no resemblance whatever to an ordinary trade, business, or industry; that they are not connected with the production and distribution of wealth; and represent no co-opera-tion . of capital and labour in any relevant sense. And they have held

that, if the carrying on of a system" of State, education' is not within - the sphere of industrialism, those who eontine their efforts, to that activity cannot be engaged in an industry. That seems fairly obvious. Mr Justice Isaacs dissented, however, from the view of his colleagues. He seems to have an interpretation of industry which would leave no field of human activity uncovered; “The true position of industry in relation to the actively operative trade,” he declared, “is really not doubtful. Education, cultural and vocational, is now, and is daily becoming, as ratich the artisan’s capital and fool as the employer’s banking credit and insurance policy are part of his means to carry on business.” It is clear that the position has its subtleties, economic as well as legal. But, when all is said, it is satisfactory to think that we need not yet regard teaching as an industry, and are not yet called upon to-view its results as the - effect of the co-opera-tion of capital and labour, or assess the productiveness of the schools in terms of industrial output—so much knowledge, worth so much, driven into the-heads of so many scholars. in so many hours, and so forth. Between the results of industry, so-called, and the results of education there is a difference. The manufacture of commodities and the provision of useful services are not exactly on - the same basis as the imparting of knowledge and the moulding of our citizens. Then, what of the educational ideal? Is it not the glory of our compulsory State educational system that it costs so many millions a year and nobody quite knows what we-are getting in return? upon those lines is industry conducted.