UNIVERSITY SENATE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21543, 15 January 1932, Page 3

UNIVERSITY SENATE

ANNUAL MEETING SECOND DAY’S PROCEEDINGS The annual meeting of the Senate of the University of New Zealand was continued in Allen Hall yesterday. The chancellor (Professor J. Macmillan Brown) presided. TARANAKI SCHOLARSHIPS In accordance with notice previously given, Mr H. F. von Haast moved — “ That the action of the vice-chancellor in deleting from clause II of the Taranaki Scholarships Statute reading— ‘ The scholarship shall be awarded on the results of the entrance examinations of the university, but no scholarship shall be awarded to a candidate unless he obtains credit in the examination and is deemed worthy by the -senate/ the words ‘ and is deemed worthy by the senate' be approved.” Mr von Haast said that his motion arose out of the Court of Appeal proceedings in connection with the Taranaki scholarships. In adding the words, the senate meant scholastically worthy, not morally worthy, and the vice-chancellor came to the conclusion that the words were misleading and shouhi have been struck out. In this connection he would like to add to his motion “ and that such words be struck out from the statute.” Mr T. B. Strong seconded the motion, and asked if the finding of the court meant that scholarships should be awarded to candidates who obtained credit in the examination. If this were the case it meant that the senate could not prescribe the qualification. Mr von Haast pointed out that it was quite open to the senate to raise the credit marks as high as it liked, but it would look undignified on the part of the senate if it appeared to try to get round the judgment of the court by increasing the credit marks. Mr Strong said he could not see that such a procedure would be undignified. If the senate raised the credit mark to, say, 50 per cent, of the aggregate, it would assure that the scholarships were awarded exclusively to those who were qualified to receive them. The motion was carried. ALTERATIONS TO RULES

In accordance with notice of motion, Mr von Haast moved —“ That all words from and including ‘provided’ in clause I of the University National Scholarships Statute, which reads — ‘ University national scholarships, not exceeding 20 in number, shall be awarded annually on the result of the entrance scholarships examination of the University of New Zealand: provided that not more than three of the scholarships may be awarded not on the aggregate of marks but for excellence in one of the following groups of subjects:—Foreign languages; science and mathematics; English, geography, and history/ be deleted.” Mr J. A. Hanan, M.L.C., seconded the motion, which was adopted. Mr von Haast moved — ‘ That the senate refer to the Academic Board the question of either. adding to the periods of English literature for the B.A. degree the period from 1840 onwards, or of rearranging the existing periods so as to incorporate such latter periods and the drawing up of the necessary presenption.” Mr W. J. Morrell seconded the motion, which was carried. A further motion by Mr von Haast - “ That for the definition of the Law of Companies for the degree of master of laws and honours in law be substituted the following:— ‘ The principles of the Law of New Zealand as to registered trading companies, as modified by the statute law of New Zealand ’ ’’—was also brought before the meeting, and the matter was referred to the Council of Legal Education for consideration. ENGLISH EXAMINATION PAPERS “That the Senate refer to the General Committee set up on Wednesday the question of steps necessary to ensuring accuracy in examination papers set in England,” was the text of a resolution moved by Professor Segar. The mover produced examination papers in mathematics, one of which contained a child’s problem and another an absolutely unsoluble problem. They had to decide what should be done in respect of such blunders. Unless something were done about it they would_ find themselves in trouble. l _lt was not likely that the errors he had instanced were the only ones that .had occurred. The motion was carried. ACADEMIC BOARD’S REPORT Professor Segar, chairman of the Academic Board, presented the report of that body, dealing first with the general recommendations of the board. ACADEMIC DRESS. It was recommended that the academic dress for ordinary and honorary doctors should be the same, and, further, that for special occasions doctors should be allowed to substitute a special gown of scarlet silk or cloth for the gown of black silk. It was also suggested that the Senate should provide a set of standard colours for hoods. . The recommendations were adopted. ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS.

On behalf of the board Professor Segar urged that the names of examiners should not be printed on examination papers or in the calendar. Mr Gilray suggested that if the names were not printed on papers examiners might be tempted to entertain less responsibility for the accuracy and character of the paper. . . Mr Bakewell said that in view of mistakes and errors that had occurred in papers lately, it was necessary that the names should be printed. Mr Hanan asked what justification there was for changing a system that had been in operation for years. Why hide the name of the man responsible for the paper? . Professor Hunter: The justification for the change is to be found in the decision of the Senate that papers must be approved by the Board of Moderators. It is quite possible that a paper, by the time it reaches the examination room, after passing the Board of Moderators, may not be recognisable > as the paper originally set by the examiner. If the examiner’s name had to be printed, why not the names of the members of the Board of Moderators also? Mr Wild said that he could not see why the motion should be carried, but he thought an amendment deleting the words “ or in the calendar ” would meet the position. The name of the examiner could then be ascertained without any difficulty by anyone interested. Mr Morrell protested that even if the Board of Moderators changed an examination paper, the examiner’s approval would, he should think, be necessary, thus making the paper still bis. Dr Newlands stressed the value to candidates of knowing the special likes, dislikes and idiosyncracies of examiners. Secondary school teachers at least should know the identity of the examiner. The information had been of great assistance to hundreds of candidates in the past. Mr Bakewell deprecated such a view of the subject. The amendment and the motion were both rejected. Ph.D. DEGREE. The recommendation of the board that the Ph.D. degree be not reinstituted was adopted without discussion. It was also agreed that the principle of the recommendation of scripts should be approved. THESES FOR DOCTORATES. The Senate was asked to.approve of the payment of a fee of £2 2s to examiners making the preliminary examination for doctorates. Professor Segar stated that this examination was the equivalent of keeping terms, and it was thought that some fee was necessary. The suggestion was adopted. AEGROTAT PASSES. The following recommendations were adopted without discussion: — That the Senate extend the principle of the aegrotat pass to the degrees in agriculture and forestry. That the Law Advisory Council and teachers of the other courses in the University be asked to advise the Senate whether they wish their courses to be brought under those regulations. That the privilege implied in the aegrotat pass be extended to a candidate who has for'some approved reason other than

illness been prevented from sitting for one or more papers of his University examination, in the same cases and with the same safeguards as those set out in the aegrotat regulations. ATKINSON PRIZE. The Senate agreed to the recommendation that in respect of the Atkinson prize no second award should be made. The board reported having considered this matter and having agreed that the suggestion should be disapproved. POST-GRADUATE SCHOLARSHIPS. The recommendations of the board in respect of the award of. the post-graduate scholarships were submitted as follows by Professor Segar:— That in order to ensure that all relevant information is brought to the notice of the Selection Committee, the following proposals be adopted:— (a) That application forms, together with full record relating to stage 111 and honours of the subject concerned, of all candidates be sent to the examiners in each subject. (b) That examiners be requested to deal -with all the scholarship theses before markinc the scripts of those who arc not applicants for scholarships. (c) That in each subject the examiners should arrange the candidates in order of merit, reporting upon the worthiness of at least as many candidates as there are scholarships to be awarded. , . (d) That the meeting of examiners at Home be discontinued. (e) That the Senate be recommended to make only provisional awards of the post-graduate science scholarships until the award of the 1851 scholarship has been made. The recommendations were adopted. HONORARY DEGREES. The board recommended an amendment to the Statute respecting honorary degrees by the addition of a clause requiring that all nominations for honorary degrees should originate in the Academic Board. Professor Hunter said it was desirable that some nominating agency should be fixed. At present it was considered that a personal application was sufficient. As an amendment. Professor Hunter moved that nominations should originate in either the senate or the Academic Board. Mr Wild said he would oppose relegating nomination to the Academic Board. The final decision should rest with the senate. In his view of the matter, honorary degrees should not be awarded to holders of ordinary academic degrees, but rather to distinguished men of science, and of literature, whose early opportunities of securing an ordinary degree were few, but who by ability and energy have risen late in life to a position of eminence in their special sphere. There were many such men in New Zealand to-day, although he did not feel disposed to mention them at the moment. He was afraid that the Academic Board, if entrusted with the nominations, would not take a broad enough view of the claims of non-academic persons deserving of special attention. Professor Hunter’s amendment was carried. ■ CONDUCT OF EXAMINATIONS. The regulations governing the conduct of University examinations were amended by the addition of the following provisions in respect of candidates being taken ill: 4 At all University examinations for the subjects of the 8.A., B.Sc., B.H.Sc., M.A., M.Sc., M.H.Sc., B.Agr.Sc., M.Agr.Sc., and B.For.Sc., a candidate that_ has been prevented by illness from for one or more of the papers may, with the approval of the chancellor, be granted an aegrotat pass, subject to the following con; ditions: — t (a) That the candidate’s responsible teachers in the subject or subjects of the papers missed certify that his work therein during the session was well above the minimum pass standard, and that had he been able to sit he would in their opinion undoubtedly have secured a pass on those papers. (b) That the award of an aegrotat pass be recommended by the chairman of the Professorial Board of the candidate’s college. (c) That the quality of any work actually completed in the examination shall be taken into account. (d) That the fact of his inability to’ sit through illness be established by the certificate of a medical man approved by the University and/or other testimony to the satisfaction of the chancellor. ! (e) That such illness shall have been reported to the chief supervisor or other; responsible official at the earliest possible opportunity.