TEACHING AGRICULTURE

Taranaki Daily News, 9 April 1927, Page 15

TEACHING AGRICULTURE

COUNTRY’S GROWING NEEDS FEWER INSTRUCTORS PROPOSED PROTEST MADE BY FARMERS' UNION The fact that an agricultural instructor in Central Taranaki had received notice of transfer to the North Auckland district and was not to be replaced was the subject of a strong protest to-day .by the North Taranaki provincial executive of the Farmers’ Union, before whom it had been brought by Mr. J. Simpson, of Inglewood. After discussion, the following motion proposed by Mr. 6. J. Harris, was carried unanimously:— “Having been informed that one of the agricultural instructors has been instructed to go elsewhere, the meeting is most emphatically of the opinion that the proposal to reduce the number of instructors under the Taranaki Education Board is wrong in principle, is false economy and must eventually prove costly to primary production in New Zealand; further, that the proposal to reduce instructors in Taranaki will result in the stagnation of the progressive instruction in agriculture these have built up.” Another resolution, moved by Mr. B. White, and seconded by Mr. Harris, arose out of a recent address to the executive by the senior inspector of schools (Mr. N. R. McKenzie). It was as follows: “That this meeting regards with alarm the small proportion of high school students who are taking a course of agricultural instruction. As agriculture is of primary importance in the prosperity of the country the meeting considers our State education is not producing the class of citizen to meet the needs of the Dominion.” DISPROPORTION OF STUDENTS. It w-as clearly pointed out when the inspector addressed the meeting last month that there was a disproportion of agricultural students in the high schools, said Mr. White. The system was not really producing enough people for the primary industries. Mr. McKenzie had said it was necessary agriculture should be made a compulsory subject. Mr. Polson had told them that the towns and town industries were gathering too many and the country too few. They had reached the stage when their boys must be forced to follow agricultural pursuits. The high school system was not fulfilling what was expected of it.

Mr. Simpson considered the sole trouble was financial. If there were a better sysof finance for those going on the land more interest would be taken in it. He knew dozens of young fellows who had been dissuaded from going on the land because they were aware of what their parents had gone through. Mr. Hicks objected to Mr. White’s remarks that the time had arrived for “forcing” boys on the land. That was not done and would not work. They had to be led. There was such a thing as tariff revision, and until some better system was evolved things would not be satisfactory.

Mr. Vickers said that for many years the Farmers’ Union had been pressing for a system of agricultural instruction in primary schools, to be followed by a secondary course of practical methods on instructional farms, and also the establishment of a laboratory for scientific research into some of. the problems which confronted farmers in New Zealand. Unfortunately little of practical value had been done by the Government in this connection. The country was now committed to the establishment of an agricultural college at huge cost, which, however good it might sound theoretically, would, he feared, be of little practical value to the country. WHY NOT A FLOCK HOUSE? He drew attention to the splendid results that had been obtained at Flock House in training immigrant children, and if such results could be obtained with English children why not have similar farms for the training of their own boys and girls ? (Hear, hear!) The country’was spending nearly four millions annually on education, and rightly so, but the question arose: “Are we getting results?” If education meant fitting children to fill a future occupation in life by rational training, then he feared the answer must be in the negative. Referring to the proposal to reduce the agricultural instructors in this district, Mr. Harris said the department held it was a matter of economy, but the farmers contended that the Government was starting at the wrong end. Agricultural instruction was more necessary than ever and the work in this district would be starved if a man wer e taken away. The union should give its support in whatever protest was made by the Education Board. Mr. J. Paulger (Tikorangi), who seconded Mr. Harris’ motion, said he had been supervising on one of the school committees regarding the agricultural work and he could say that the instructors were very capable men and were doing excellently. He had been previously connected with a school in North Auckland and there they had not seen an instructor for years, but that was no reason why Taranaki Should lose one. RESOLUTION WOULD DO GOOD. Mr. B. White considered the resolution would do good. It might only b e a temporary arrangement—a matter of relief. The chairman: It is permanent. “The instructors have done much to stimulate interest in boys sufficient to make them go on with agriculture,” said Mr. H. E. Blyde. He knew that in the Lepperton district tremendous good had been done in stimulating interest. Mr. White pointed out that itinerant instructors were necessary because the average teacher could not take the subject of agriculture. Mr. Vickers: If we now recede from the position we have attained in regard to agricultural education we shall have to start all over again. They had to go on building the superstructure, he added. It was decided to forward copies of the resolution to the Ministers of Agriculture and Education and to the branches of the union.