Correspondence.

Thames Star, Volume XXXX, Issue 10409, 9 September 1903, Page 1

Correspondence.

TECHNICAL EDUCATION AT THE HIGH SCHOOL.

To the Editor.

iS'lr, —I was astonished at the 'bosh' contained in the report, of the head linastor to the ■Hijrh School Board- The idea of telling: the Board that the acme of technical' education consists <n ■teaching! geometry and. arithmetic: witih a, ocrapass arad a. rule- I didn't know that geometry over W-as taught j without ft riiJe and conifp-aiss, and' be i that matter I dlon't. know if it wotfld iiMittor nnicli' if it wasn't taught at al' But it seems very inidiaulous to me to paint this out, ivrndi then to go on ainii explain to tliei Board how Mr George, the Director of Terthnioal Instruction in Auckland, had pointed out to him the fallacy of boliertn.g tbat bookkeep ing 1 -could be any use to abM-rei) at his school. A good many people are of the sinm-a apinion about these pupils, they are stuffed ■svitli a lot of useless nooiisense, and! when they are turned- out of the scihool, the majority of them a-re of little use to tlißrnselves ami less use to anybody else. It* n pity the Goreraors don't wake up and see that it is tiimo to shake up this musty old school, 'and: .make it so that parents 'aim hare confidence i>n sending their children there. The two or three years, which is often that a parent can afford to k<. ie,p las child at a secondary school, should be the beet investment he ca,n, miake for that; child's future, and I say that the Boaaxll should! see that- it is so, and that it should not be allowed io vemialn: like it is now, so much valuable time absolutely lost for all practical purposes.—l aim, etc., PARENT■Runnies* S^ptem'bej' 8.