UNIVERSITY SENATE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3754, 23 February 1926, Page 30

UNIVERSITY SENATE.

OPENING PROCEEDINGS. The annual meeting of the New Zealand University Senate was opened at the Allen Hall oc Wednesday morning. Professor Macmillan Brown, Chancellor ©f the New Zealand University, presided, and there were also present Professor J. Rankine Brown (vice-chancellor), Sir Robert Stout. Hon. J. A. Hainan, Mr De la Mare (Victoria College), Sir Lindo A. Hunter (Victoria College), Sir Lindo Ferguson, the Hon. G. Fowlds (Auckland), Professor Segar (Auckland). Professor Thomas (Auckland), Mr J. Caughley Director of Education (Wellington), Professor Inglis (Otago), Professor Wall (Can‘terbury), Professor Hight (Canterbury), Mr E. D. Acland (Canterbury), Professor G. E. Thompson (Otago). Mr F. H. Bakewell (Victoria College). Mr T. K. Sidey, M.P. (Otago), Mr W. J. Morrell (Otago) and Dr Anderson (Wellington). CHANCELLOR’S ADDRESS. The Chancellor delivered the following address: — “Before beginning my address this year I should like again to express our sense of the loss this Senate and education in general have sustained in the death of the Rev. Dr Cameron during our May session. I should also like to welcome to our ranks Mr Sidey, M.P., who will, I have no doubt, be of value to us not only in our deliberations, but in Parliament, when any question that bears upon our functions as a university comes before it. “But the main thing to which I should like to refer is the report of the University Commission. The commissioners have shown a rational and sane restraint in their report, and have rejected what was pressed upon them by many witnesses as the only panacea, for all the evils, imaginary or real, that were insisted on—the immediate establishment of four universities. They wisely looked up the report of a previous University Commission, and, on the whole, followed its lead, thinking that the country is not populous enough or wealthy enough to bear the enormous expense of quadruplicating the special schools. Like the former commission, they saw that aiming too high and wide would miss the true object of education in a country so far from the old centres of learning, from tho accumulations of wealth and from the great libraries and museums, that spreading the money a new country could afford over too many institutions and aims would impoverish all of them. They realised that the first condition of success with oniversity education in a pioneering land at the utmost distance from the ancient centres of civilisation was to secure staffs of exceptional talent and personality, and that the only way to do this was to offer exceptional attractions in salary and conditions. It showed both courage and wise restraint, in the new commission to dare the charge of unoriginality and to follow in their footsteps. “I was pleased, too, to see the Commis*ion lay its finger on one of the weakest spots in our university life—the poverty *f the college libraries. How can their intellectual life-blood flow strongly if, so for from great libraries, we stint its chief mistenance —books and scientific periodicals? Something must be done to remedy this vital defect. Two thousand pounds a year to each of the colleges for its library would by no means be too much, there are so many departments dying for want of a good supply i and the money must be earmarked so that it shall not be thrown into the melting pot, which is ever on the boil on account of various ill-equipped sections of the work of each college. I would suggest that some method be adopted to prevent the buying of the same book or periodical by more than one college. There should be a committee of their librarians who should let each other know monthly or oftener the various additions to be made to each library, and should arrange for an interchange between them, of books and journals needed by members of the staffs or by research students; whilst the staff of each college should have frequent library meetings to suggest the needs of their various departments. I should like to enter a protest against the idea that the Senate has been the arena of provincial jealousies, especially with regard to the establishment of special schools. I have been close on half a century a member of it, and I am quite sure that they have ever had in their minds (be views that led both commissions to recommend the rigid limitation of special professional schools based on the fear that tfiese expensive additions would Swamp the University finnees of a young country already burdened with the necessity of four waiversity colleges, instead of one. It is only in fho last few years that this cry has been raised of provincial jealousy motivating the Sr rente’s actions. The southern colleges have been first in the field, chiegy because of the two great colonisation schemes in the south were largely inspired by university men. and the colonists resolved that university education ebould be one of the earliest ideals to be realised. Unhampered by the wars that obstructed the progress of the north so Jong, they set aside large endowments for the purpose. And it must not bo forgotten that it was largely from the south the impetus came to extend the benefits of uni versity education. I can testify that the four southern professors on the commission of 1879-80 were eager for such an extension. and were astonishod to find so few of the witnesses in Auckland and Wellington on their side. It is most gratifying that this has passed into the greatest enthusiasm. By 1879 the Otago University, the first to start, had made the beginnings of a medical school and a mining school, and Canterbury hod set. aside endowments for a school of agriculture, 'llie engineering ichool in Canterbury was a slow evolution, made slower by the discovery that it was one erf the most, expensive of professional schools to equip. It was this samo knowledge that made the Senate hesitate to recognise a socond, and prefer to suggest a school of architecture in Auckland\ in■t.ead. Besides, many felt that it belonged to that class of special school which did not Ikeod to be attached to any special city, •nd that by far the lees expensive alternative would bo to bring the promising scholars to it, by means of bursaries initead of taking it to the scholars of every large city. And if, as the commission suggests, there were mado a “clear delimitation of funotion in engineering education between tho university and tho technical •©bools,” it would soon appear that there w«a no need of more than one university

school of engineering. In a similar way, if the opportunities for clinical work for the medical >tudents were recognised in the cities with largo hospitals. it would be a great advantage to the central medical school, as well as to the students, and the demand for duplication of that institution would become less urgent. The fundamental question in university education is finance, as in all other spheres. To forget this is to invite failure. It is this that has made the question of a school or schools of agriculture so ditfi cult to deal with. That which lias been working >n Canterbury for about 40 years has boen hampered by lack of funds; it has been unable to draw talent from the country by the establishment of bursaries; it has instead made the annual fee ex tromely low, 90 low in fact that it loses heavily on every student; it has also had to employ the students in the manual labour of the farms, and thus curtailed the time for their studies. The result is that it rarely sends out scientific farmers who could pursue research, and the number of univer sity graduates it turns out is small. To make it a true university institution, it needs more money to inoreaso the staff and to offer scholarships in order to attract talent to the studv of agriculture in a scientific v;ay. Yet there is laid the first foundation of one in Wellington and one in Auckland in the establishment of a chair in each college. The report points out the unwisdom of having two thus in an embryonic condition. But there is an impasse; neither endowment can be legally changed to the other college. It was a somewhat similar circumstance that drove the members from the south to vote for the recognition of two schools of forestry; they could not ignore the fact that the Adams bequest to Canterbury College could not be attached to another centre and that it would be discouraging generosity to leave it unrecog nised. This impasse means that both efforts at a school of agriculture will have to remain undeveloped, unless the Government steps in with a large endowment for each, a step that would tend to narrow and impoverish all the other functions of the university. And yet is must be said that there is no one of its functions so vital to the material prosperity of this country. There is a vast field for research in all the branches, if we are to come through the future competition for the markets of the world unscathed. And in all the climatic and soil zones there should be experimental farms on which the results of research should be tested and farmers should continue their education One of the best forms that gifts and bequests for the advance of agriculture could take would be research scholarships such as one I tried to found last, year. I regret to sav that in the University Amendment Act of 1914, section 3, the University hs been left out. of the university institutions that were to receive a subsidy for voluntary contribu tions to ;t. I consulted the Education Department before I agreed to give £.7000 to found a post-graduate research scholarship in agriculture, and was assured that it would carry the usual subsidy; in fact I gave it on the condition that it would have the subsidy. I am sure that the University has been omitted from the clause by an oversight, and I propose that the sum should lie at interest until this oversight is amended In encouraging gifts and bequests to the affiliated institutions it was surely not meant to discourage gifts to the institution to which they are affiliated. I have heard it assumed that local or provincial patriotism is much stronger than patriotism to the country as a whole. It would be a pity if that were true, especially as regards agriculture. “I am pleased to see that the Commission recommends a higher standard for the degrees, and as a consequence a higher standard for entrance. I have always been of the opinion that the matriculation examination should be divided into a higher and a lower, and I am pleased to see that they recommend wliat practically conies to this. Not that we have anthing to be ashamed of in the results of our previous standards; our young graduates who have gone abroad have stood the test well in competition with those of other universities. “It is matter for congratulation that one of our graduates, Sir Ernest Rutherford, lias by his eminence in the scientific world, attained the distinguished position of president. of the Royal Society. Nor have our graduates failed to add honour and influ ence to our university within the borders of our own land. I have to congratulate Mr P. J. Rolleston on the success with which he has followed in the footsteps of his distinguished father in attaining the position of Minister of the Crown; nor will we, I think, be stepping beyond our sphere as the head of the education system of the country if we express the hope that if our present Minister of Education become our representative In England, Mr Rolleston should step into the position he vacates. I asked the Rhodes Trust delegate, Dr Rendall, when he mot the committee, how onr scholars stood In comparison with those from other countries. He could not tell at the moment; but his secretary sent me a note comparing the honours taken by the scholars at Oxford, and I may say that our scholars stood well above all the rest. I pressed this home upon him when I met him in Honolulu, and argued that the trustees should get more ore from so good a mine. The result was that early in November a cable came from the secretary of the trust saying that New Zealand should have a second scholarship. “Of course, all or most of the honours and advanced classes should he held by day, and it should be an essential for every degree that the candidate take advanced work in some part of his course. It has always been a defect of our honours that they do not, as in the old universities, demand the whole time of the student in every year. But by means of training for the senior scholarships a close approach is made to the custom of the universities in Britain, and the results in the number of talented graduates sent abroad show that there was not much wrong with our system. Yet the system has been patched and mended as time went on, and new occasions or demands arose; and the reult was A NUMBER OF ANOMALIES, especially in the government of the Universtly system. A board of studies had been added as a second chamber without any attempt to revise the constitution of the Senate, and (he unconstitutional position came about that a large number were members of both bodeis and had the opportunity, if they wished, of revising in the Senate the decisions the Board of Studies had come to Hnd the recommendations of the Commission of 1879-80 been put into force and the staffs been made professors of the universtly, the anomaly would have become more glaring, and some attempt

made to remedy it. The new Commission adopts the recommendation, and advises that it be put into force. It saw that if the staffs became professors of the university they must belong to only one of the bodies at its head, the academic body, and should not In* admitted in full force to the other body, and that that body must have same say in the appointment to the professoriate. The objection to this latter proposal is that it divides the responsibility : yet it is the logical outcome of making the staffs professors of the University. That there should be some permanent head or principal of the University has long b“en the idea of many members of the Senate, he is needed to make the connection between the two bodies, and to keep an eye constantly on the working of the examination system an dthe relationships between the University and the University colleges. It would qeed a man of tact and busnesis capacity as well a one who is learned and broadminded. I have been trying to piece together and show the logic of the Commissioner's report without covering every uggestion. It is for you to decide how far the various proposals of the report should be adopted. “This report was written and printed before the meeting of the representatives of Auckland and Victoria University Colleges. And no one is more delighted than I am to find the result of that meeting a solution of the impasse and an agreement to have one agricultural teaching institution of university standard in the North Island. But I hope that the Government will help this one institution financially and equip it as liberally as if there had been two institutions of the sort in the North Island. Too long has it delayed to prepare the fundamental industry of the country to meet the evil day of falling prices. Nothin" but scientific teaching and long, unwearied scientific research will save it when that time comes.” COMMITTEES SET UP. On the motion of Professor Rankine Brown, Mr Morrell, Professor Segar, Professor Hight, and the mover were appointed a Business Committee, and the Senate then adjourned for half an hour to enable it to arrange tV vrious committees. GENERAL. The Hon. Dr W. E. Collins was appointed treasurer, the vice-chancellor to act in his absence. Professor Segar was re-elected the Senate’s representative on the Auckland Grammar School and Mr Bakewell to represent the Senate on the Council of Education. The Hon. G. Fowlds desired to move an expression of appreciation for the impartiality shown by Professor Hunter while he watched the proceedings of the University Commission on behalf of the Senate The motion was carried unanimously. UNIVERSITY COMMISSION’S REPORT. The Chancellor, Sir Lindo Ferguson, Professor Rankine Brown, Professor Hunter, Professor Hight, Professor Segar, Dr Anderson, Mr Caughley, Mr Morrell, the Hon. G. Fowlds, and Mr Acland were adopted a special committee to consider and report this session on the recommendations and proposals contained in the report cf the recent University Commission. EXAMINATION PAPERS. Professor Rankine Brown moved—“ That the examination papers of candidates vho 6it at the four centres be forwarded by the supervisors direct to the examiners.” He said that the system of sending the papers to Wellington, where thev were arranged, and then sent back to the examiners, was not necessary, and caused considerable delay. Mr Bakewell seconded the motion, which was carried. SECOND DAY. The moeting was continued o n Thursday. The Chancellor (Professor Maxmillan Brown) presided. A POINT OF ORDER. Mr Bakewell (Victoria College) moved as follows that the Senate appoint Suva as a centre for matriculation and accountancy preliminary examinations. The mover was proceeding to refer to the extreme disadvantages- under which Fiji laboured in regard to these examinations, when Professor Ranhire Brown rose to a point of order. He said the correspondence in regard to this matter had been referred to on the previous day to the Arts a-nd Commerce Committee. Mr Bakewell said his object in bringing up the matter was that he hoped it would get more intelligent treatment from the Senate as a whole than it would get from the committee it had been sent to.— (Laughter.) He did not think any great principle was involved. A Member: What is really the point of order? The Chancellor: That the matter has already been referred to a committee. Mr Bakewell: It is a pity I was not informed about this vesterday. How does the Senate know that the correspondence which has been referred to the committee deals with the matter of my motion? Professor Ranhire Brown remarked that he was really in favour of Mr Bakewell’s motion. Professor Hicht said that Mr Bakewell had been to Fiji. He suggested that Mr Bakewell might be added to the Arts and L immerce Committee, a..d he would thus lie able to deliberate on the matter when the correspondence was dealt with. Mr Bakewell did not agree with a suggestion that the motion only should be referred to the committee. His idea was to get things done.—(Laughter.) Does this mean that this motion of mine is killed? asked P\ Bakewell. 'The chairman led tho volley of “No's” which answered this query, and addod, “It’s very much alive.” Professor Hunter: Another point of order. Did not Mr Bakewell give notice yesterday, and should that fact not give liis motion priority as against referring the matter to the committee, as had also been done on the provious day. Bv this the discussion seemed to he moro or less one of disorder than of points of order. Professor Hight then formally movod that Professor Bakewell be added to the Arts and Commerce Committee. Ho now understood that the motion was out of order. The Chairman s That is so. Professor Hunter: How can you rule the notice of motion out of order when you accepted it yesterday?

The Chairman held that under the cir cumsiances it was out of order. The motion to add Mr Bakewell to the committee was then put and carried. A HARDY ANNUAL Sir Robert Stout gave notice to move as follows“ That the conferring of degrees at a public eeting be not followed and chat that part of Chapter 1 of the University statutes, headed 'Conferring of Degrees.’ made provision that the meeting at which degrees are conferred be private, no one being allowed to be present other than members of the Senate and those entitled to degrees.” MACMILLAN BROWN PRIZE. Professor Wall moved: “That the regulation for the Macmillan Brown prize be amended in respect of the maximum length of the composition, and of the age of candidates, and that this proposal be referred to the Arts and Commerce Commerce Committee.” thirlmiday. The Senate continued its sitting on Friday The Chancellor (Professor Macmillan Brown) presided. A letter was received from the ViceChancellor of the University of London asking the Senate to appoint a representative to an Anglo-American Conference of Professors and Teachers of History, to be held in the week commencing on July 12. The letter was referred to the Arts and Commerce Committee. ARTS AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE. The first report of the Arts and Commerce Committee recommended :—'l hat steps be taken to secure the opinions of Professorial Board on the proposal to abolish the degree of Ph.D., in time for their consideration by the Senate at its May meeting; that the examiners in philosophy, pass grade, be paid fees for the setting of two papers (logic and ethics) at the last examination; that the proviso in Section V., B.Com. Statute Calendar, be deleted in accordance with the. decision of the Senate, as expressed in tho new B.Com Statute, since the deletion is consequential upon the new definition of the Law of Contracts (Mercantile Law), as a single subject; that the Statute “The Degree of Bachelor of Arts” be amended. Every course for the degree Beohelor of Arts .shall consist of nine units, a un;. being defined as one year’s work in a subject. There shall be normally in each subject a first-year course, a second-year course, and a third-year course, hut a second-year course in a subject can only be taken after the subject has been passed as a one-year course, and a third-vear course after the subject has been passed as a second-year course. Each course in a subject counts as one unit. Professor Hight explained that the new course would require a student to take at least five subjects, of which at least one must he studied for three years.__ At present a student could - nresent six subjects, each of which was studied for one year only. giving six units of work, or he might present five subjects, one of which was studied for three vears, vin? seven units of work, or he might »-><sPnt f 0 * 1r subjects, two of which were studied for three years, giving eight units of work. Th« nro . script’on also limited to three the number of science units which might, be taken by a cand'date for tho degree. Mr Onuo-hTov expressed the opinion that English should bo a compulsory subject He also pointed out that certain snbWts could be discarded after one year’s study. Professor Wall pointed out that if cer tain subjects were not discarded nt various stapes the number of single units would be so great that no one would be able to get through the course. The usual practice was to reduce the number of examination subjects nt successive examinations. Professor Hight said the changes proposed would bring the course more into line with the recommendations of the University commission. Professor Hunter said they should decide when the new provisions would come into force and what arrangements wore to be made for the change over from the old to the new. After a lengthy discussion on tho details the report was adopted. ARCHITECTURE. The first report of the Science. Engineering, Architecture, Agriculture, and Forestry Committee recommended that the following regulations bo adopted in place of the existing regulations for the degree of Bachelor of Science in architecture:— Candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Science in architecture shall be matriculated students of the University of New* Zealand, must keep terms in the subjects of the first four years of the course ns required by the statute “Terms and Lectures,” and pass the University examinations prescribed. Every candidate for the degree must produce proof that, during his course, he has been engaged for at least 12 months in practical work in an architect's office approved by the professor in charge of the school. A~ student in architecture shall be exempt from examination in any subject or subjects in which he has already passed, provided that in nil cases the scope and standard for these examinations is not lower than that prescribed for the degree of Beohelor of Science in architecture. Candidates for the degree of B.Sc. in architecture under the old regulations shall receive credit for subjects in which they have already passed provided that they apply not later than March 31. 1027. No candidate hall be permitted to sit for any degree examination unless he produces a certificate, signed by the professor in charge of the rK’ognised School of Architecture, that he has satisfactorily completed the studio work for the year The studio work consisting of a study of (a) the elements of architectural form, (b) the elements of architectural construction comprise the preparations of drawings ofr subjects set by the recognised School of Architecture of the University of New Zealand. both in architectural design and in architectural constriction—architectural design ranging from a study of tho orders of architecture in the first examination to the solving of large architectural projects in fourth examination, and in architectural construction ranging from simple elements of architectural form In the first examination to the preparation of fully detailed working constructional drawings in the fourth examination. A candidate shall not Ik* permitted to take tho second or succeeding examinations until die has passed all the subjects- of the preceding examinations except upon the special recommendation of the professorial board of liis college. A candidate shall, at the end of his fourth year, present himself for oral examination upon tho whole subjorf matter of the course. If ho fails In this oral

I examination, but passes in nil the subjects of the fourth examination, he shall present himself for oral re-examination a year later when lie takes his fifth examination. Professor Thomas explained briefly what had led up to the framing of the new regulations A report which had been to the Senate dated that the old regulations were so entirely unsuitable that very few students would take the course. The new regulations would enable them to turn cut architects after they had gone satisfactorily through the course. The architects had been consulted and were quite satisfied with the new scheme. They suggested that it should be brought into operation at once. Professor Inglis referred to the fact that it would not be possible for a student to take his first year anywhere except at tho School of Architecture in Auckland. That had been dealt with at a meeting of architects in Dunedin, and according to the newspaper reports they intended to make representations to the Senate asking that provision be made to enable the first year to be taken in any centre. Professor Knight felt that if the degree course were to be of a type that was desirable it was essential that tho students should be under his direction from year to year. That could not be done if a student were in any other centre. The Hon. G. Fowlds said lie understood that the Institute of Architects did not want any fundamental alteration in the first year. The fifth year could lie taken in the centre where a student lived. Dr Anderson moved as an amendment: “That the proposed prescription for the degree in architecture lx* referred back to the committee for further consideration with a view, in especial, of arranging the first year’s course so as to permit this course to be taken at any of the university colleges.” Professor Segar said the proposed regulations were the deliberate choice of the professor of architecture and the whole profession. Although they would like the students to take the first year in an centre they did not want the course al tered. What they apparently wanted was that the lectures could be given in the centre in the first year. He thought it would be absurd to refer the matter back 1 1 the committee. Professor Inglis said Dr Anderson’s motion should have come up under the clause dealing with studio work. That studio work must be done in the school of architecture, and it was too late to make any alteration in regard to the first year, even if it met the wishes of the architects, which it did not. The Hon. Mr Fowlds said he hoped the Senate would not take the course suggested by Dr Anderson. The scheme had been delayed for a year now and there should be no further delay. The architects were definitely of the opinion that the course should not be altered. The essence was taking studio work year by year and that could be taken only in Auckland. The Chancellor ruled the motion out of order, but said it could be brought up when the adoption of the report as a whole was moved. Professor Thomas stated that the total fees for the examinations would be 23gns. The engineering fees were 21gns for the four-year examinations. If a student in architecture had to be re-examined he would be charged an additional fee. FOURTH DAY. The sittings were continued on Saturday morning. The Chancellor (Professor J. M’Millan Brown) occupied the chair. The discussion on the report from the Science, Engineering, Architecture, Agriculture, and Forestry Committee was continued. Professor Thomas (convener of the committee) explained the conditions under which the examinations in architecture were to be conducted. It was the scheme of the New Zealand Architects’ Institute, the details being a matter for the institute. The Senate conducted the examinations for the institute. Professor Thomas moved the following clause relating to architecture: —“The examination in each subject shall be conducted by the teacher of that subject at the recognised school of architecture, and one or more external examiners selected from the panel submitted to the university by the N.Z.1.A.” Sir Robert Stout said he would like to move an addition to the clause. Mr G. Fowlds (to the chairman): He has already spoken. Can you take au amendment from him ..ow? The Chancellor: He said before that he was going to move an amendment. Mr Fowdds: No, he did not. Sir Robert Stout said he had not moved before because he did not under stand what the clause really meant. He would move that the words “ and the examiners must agree before a candidate is passed ” be added at the end of the clause. The Hon. J. A. Ilanan seconded the amendment. Professor Hunter saw no objection to the amendment, because unless the examiners agreed the candidate could not be passed. Thro was no reason why it should not be put in. The amendment was adopted. A proposal that a board of thrci moderators should be appointed each yea by the* Senate from a panel submitted foi that purpose by the Institute of Arch: tects, the duty of the board to be t< confer with the examiners upon the examination papers, was defeated. A recommendation that the regulationfor architecture be brought into force fo> 1920 was approved. Tho committee recommended that it wanot at present desirable that vocation;., work done in technical schools should Inrecognised as part of n degreo course. Professor Thomas said it was held that technical schools should not bo rocognisou as affiliated to the university. The Senate should be very careful in tho matter oi affiliated bodies. A recommendation by the committee that the question of instituting a senior scholarship in applied mathematics or nr • plied physics be referred to the Finance Committee for favourable consideration wns adopted. Professor Inglis moved per forma-—“Tlint a further note ho added to clauso four of the statutes prowling that, with the ap proval of tho chancellor, on the recoin mendation of the professor of architecture a student may take the first year cours-* and keep terms in any one of tho foui colleges whero proper provision has I:<*»* made for instruction in studio work and in the subjects of the first year.”

Professor Wall seconded the motion. Ho thought some of the difficulties regarding the sending of students to other centres for a period of years could be best met in this way. Dr Anderson moved as an amendment: <<r L'hat the proposed prescription for the degree of architecture be referred beck to the committee for further consideration, especially with a view to assaying a first year’s courne so as to permit this to be taken at any of the university colleges.” This was seconded by Mr Sidey. Professor Hunter said they should either adopt the proposals or send them back for revision. He did not agree with the proposal that the professor of architecture in Auckland should make himself responsible to the Senate for deciding whether the tuition in other colleges was adequate. He thought the problem of finance would have to be met by a system of bursaries. Mr de la Mare said he did not agree with the proposal to allow first year courses to Be taken away from the university con cerned. Such a system would be entirely inadequate. Dr Anderson’s amendment was lost on the voices. Dr Inglis’s amendment was also lost on the voices. When the last vote was taken the Chancellor said: The amendment is lost. The noes have it. Sir Robert Stout: The ayes have it. On a count it was found that the amendment had been lost by 12 votes to five.