The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1917. POST-PRIMARY SCHOOL CONTROL.

Taranaki Daily News, 28 November 1917, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1917. POST-PRIMARY SCHOOL CONTROL.

The question of the management and control of the technical and high schools occupied considerable attention at the meeting of the Taranaki Education Board yesterday. The matter arose out of the question of the control of the proposed technical high school at Stratford, which the board desired should be under its control, instead of under that of a board of managers, but the committee to whom the subject was referred came to the conclusion that as Stra'. ord was not the only likely to be interested in the matter, it was desirable to consider it from a Dominion point of view, and in this they acted with commendable wisdom. At the root of this control question is the very important principle of unity, and the committee made out a strong case in support of that principle, by enunciating that: "It would seem reasonable to suppose that if the control of all the different branches of education in an education district were under the control of one authority, there would be better correlation of the work, and less liability for the schools in one locality to overlap each other's work, whereas, if each board of management is independent, there is a tendency to attempt all classes of work in each school, thus, to some extent at any rate, preventing the efficient working which would be sure to be obtained if all the pupils who have obviously taken up the wrong line of study, may be placed in their proper situation. Probably there would always be a certain amount of duplicating of work, but it should he reduced to a minimum."

It is obvious that if our educational system is to be successful, there must be thorough co-ordination, economical administration, the elimination of overlapping, and, as far as possible, a continuity of policy based on the requirements from time to time governing the situation. The multiplication of controlling bodies is always an.evil, but in' educational matters becomes more harmful than in any other State activity. Now that technical and higher education has become a necessity, and not a luxury, the need for systematic control forces itself upon the attention of all enlightened educationalists, and it is only by jettisoning thfe expedients of the past that a satisfactory policy for the future ■can be laid on sure foundations. Leaving out of the question the statutory high school boards, the educational work of the country has been entrusted to the boards of education, and without in any way suggesting that the members of the boards are more fitted to carry on postprimary work than would boards of managers in various localities, it is clear that the education boards are the proper authorities to carry out the work. They have the necessary machinery and staff; hey control primary education and technical schools, and it is their business to carry on the work of continuing the education of children after they leave the primary schools, except where high school boards supply the next step on tho educational ladder. It is a moot question whether it i« good policy or

otherwise to continue the system of separate high school boards, but that is a matter which can be left for the future to ihcide. The dovetailing of the primary into the manual, technical and district high school systems is a policy that should certainly be national. There should be no rivalry between technical and secondary schools, and no overlapping. The only factor of importance in favor of local boards of managers is the financial question of raising funds for carrying on the work, but this should be equally well carried out by the public spirit of the people, where necessary. Much of the discussion on this matter yesterday turned upon the question of the constitution of the Education Board, it being considered that the time had arrived for an alteration, on the ground that as at present constituted the boards represented only one section of parents—those having children at the primary schools. The committee proposed that two members be appointed by the Government, six to bi elected by the school committees (or by the direct vote of the people), one by the university senate, and two by the parents of pupils attending secondary schools, technical high schools and technical schools. Eventually the report was referred back, on the ground that the nominative representation was not acceptable to the majority of the board. This relic of conservative times has been rightly condemned; it is undemocratic and decidedly unpopular, while it jars against the general principles of good government. It is quite reasonable and just that the parents of technical pUpils should be represented, for the greater the interest that can be enthused in technical work, the better for the future of the Dominion. One of the convincing reasons for securing unity of control is that the whole educational system should be treated as one, so that children should find their proper vocation in life, find be suitably prepared therefor, without the irrecoverable waßte of time and energy in going through a course of unsuitable studies. The board is to be congratulated on, tackling this question from a Dominion point of view, and its insistence on the elimination of the objectional nominative system should add strength to its good work.