UNIVERSITY REFORMS.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXX, Issue 13101, 14 June 1913, Page 4

UNIVERSITY REFORMS.

SUGGESTED BY CHANCELLOR

(Per Press Association.)

CHRISTCHURCH, last night. It -was rumored m the city to-day that the students of Canterbury College would decline to hear Sir Robert Stoxit's address at the capping ceremony this afternoon, the reason suggested for the demonstration being Sir Robert Stout's alleged hostility to Canterbury College as manifested iv the selection of. Rhodes scholars. The capping ceremony ill the earlier stages was rowdy.

Sir Robert Stout was interrupted continually, and eventually the students rose and left the hall, and Sir Robert Stout was able to proceed with his address.

The Chancellor dealt at some length with the proposed University reforms, and, after contrasting the constitution of the New Zealand University with those m Europe, he' said they could start consideration of the question of reform with three propositions that he did not think could be assailed : (1) The New Zealand University is- a State institution: (2) The State has a right to see that it is properly managed and that the moneys of the State given to it are properly utilised. (3) It is the duty of the State to see ,that the widest possible use is made of its State institution, and that neither fear nor favor influence its management. He contended that the State had the right to set up a Royal Commission to examine the University, and, continuing, he said : "The question will be then, if the State has the right' to know the kind of student tliat is being turned out, how often is this inquiry to be made? Ought not the State to know yearly the work done ? If not, why not, and if yearly, how can it know save by external examination?

"The demand, therefore, for the Royal Commission admits the, right of the State to know how its highest educational institution is being governed, and what kind of knowledge students possess. The State makes such inquirie. c concerning its primary and secondary education. There is a right of inspection m all schools, and the matriculation scholarship and other entrance examinations and junior Civil Service examinations are all external examinations, and some guide to the State as to the management of the primary and secondary schools.

If, then, it is the right and the duty of the State to know that persons getting, degrees have knowledge, can the State accept the report of teachers? If the State ought to do so m the case of the University, why. should it not do so m the case of primary and secondary schools? Inspectors must be done away with, and is there need of even a central Education Department? Further, is not a secondary**, school teacher as worthy of trust as a professor, and should not his certificate 7 ,be sufficient for entrance into they JJniversity ? Hitherto it has not been considered that any slur • was cast on. primary school teachers because the Education sent inspectors to report on their schools and on their teaching. ' It is a system usually adopted m all countries where there is State aid to education. The public secondary schools are also all open to inspection. lam not aware that the •profesfsorsi have recommended that a certificate of any teacher of a secondary or primary school should be sufficient admittance to the University. The eminent professors we have had m New Zealand who have borne the heat and burden of the day m founding our University system, not only have not complained of external examinations, but they were members. of the Senate who established th<j system. I need only mention the names of Cook, Sale,- Shand, MflcGregor/&nd the two Browns amongst others." - - ;