UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXII, Issue 19345, 26 June 1925, Page 10

UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

ROYAL COMMISSION OPENS (Per Press Association.) WELINGTON, June 24. The Royal Commission on university education —Sir Harry R. Reichcl (chairman) and Mr F. Tait (director of Education, Victoria) —opened at Parliament Buildings to-day. Giving evidence as Vice-Chancellor, Professor Rankinc Brown outlined the constitution and working of the University M of New Zealand Board of Studies, General and District Courts of Convocation, Senate, etc., and also dealt with questions of university finance, scholarships and so forth. Exception, he stated, had been taken to a number (ten out of 24) of the acting professors on the Senate, but he defended this large proportion so long as the Senate had full and unrestricted powrnr to deal with academic questions. He strongly opposed the representation of special interests, such as agriculture, on the Senate, as calculated to impair the efiiiciency of that body, and he pointed out that special interests had power to make representations to the Senate by deputation or otherwise, and their representations would always receive duo consideration. He agreed that there should be sound business men on the Senate, but held that these should be selected Because of their interest in and competency to deal with university questions, not because they happened to represent some special trade or profession. Referring to a complaint that the matriculation exam seriously interfered with the teaching and organisation of secondary schools, he contended that the schools and public of New Zealand were mainly to blame for any such detrimental results. It was a university entrance examination, and, as such, no fault could be found with cither its subjects or standard, but it had come to be regarded as a school-leaving exam., and it might be that a large number of young people were being educated along lines for which thty were mentally stunted in consequence, but the university could not be blamed for that. This improper use of the examination was the real reason why last year the very large number of 4435 candidates sat, and only 2003 gained a full pass, w 7 hile 497 entrants for the accountants’ preliminary examination brought the total sitting for the December examinations up to about 5000. He did not know whether any other university had to deal with so bloated an examination in so short a time as six weeks, and that results were got out so quickly reflected credit on the organisation of the University ofiice. MINISTER’S REPLY TO SIR ROBERT STOUT WELLINGTON, June 24. Regarding the ’Varsity Commission, the Minister of Education, Sir James Parr, said to-day:—Sir Robert Stput in answer to an invitation that I causcd to be sent to him some time ago to favour the Royal Commission with his views replied to me in the terms reproduced in his statement published. I felt it my duty to reply and to place the case for the commission in what I conceived to be the proper light. My reply, I th:„k. deals with most of the points that Sir Robert Stout attempts to make in his attack upon the commission. ’ ’ Asked whether he had anything further to say, the Minister of Education said: Sir Robert Stout seems completely satisfied with things as they are in the university. I regret I cannot altogether share this satisfaction. Further, I venture the opinion that 80 per cent of the people engaged in both the administration and teaching sides of the university consider with me that there is more than ample justification for a thorough overhaul by competent experts from outside, swayed by no local or sectional bias. I am afraid, therefore, that Sir Robert Stout in his attitude of hostility is not supported by any large body of university opinion. Sir Robert Stout says the commission is a futile proceeding. The result we shall get from the commission will, I am sure, prove the Ex-Chancellor wrong. I regret the commission should be met on its arrival this morning with the publication of Sir Robert Stout’s hostile manifesto, but I believe the eminent scholars and administrators who compose the commission can be assured that Sir Robert Stout’s view is entirely a minority one. Lastly, this attempt to create, through the press on the morning of their arrival in New Zealand and before the commission had even begun their labour, an atmosphere prejudicial to the commission is neither fair nor courteous. COMMISSION WELCOMED BY SIR JAMES PARR (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, June 25. The sitting of the Royal Commission on University Education continued toThe commission was warmly welcomed by Sir C. J. Parr, Minister of Education. The Government, he said, had set them up as a Royal Commission in the opinion that their task was one of considerable importance to this country. The Government had acted under some pressure in the matter of the Commission. Most of the governing bodies of the colleges had passed strong urging on the Government the desirability of a Commission to inquire into various matters which had been the subject, of keen controversy for years in the Dominion. Sir Harry Reichcl, in thanking the Minister, staid that they felt deeply the great importance of the work entrusted to them. Already the Commission had seen enough to show that the inquiry would be valuable. They saw great possibilities before them. Mr Levi, chairman of the Victoria College Council, gave evidence the university performed all the functions of a university save examination for and the conferring of degrees. The senate assembly published a syllabus, the preparation of which w'as highly technical and was carried out by the Senate prior to 1914, when ,a Board of Studies of 20 members was constituted part of the University by Statute for all practical purposes. Really important work assigned to the University was delegated to this body, which was also a collection of experts on many subjects, with the result that as each member was !an expert only in his own subject, recommendations were not from the whole board, but from tw r o or three experts in each subject. Publication of the syllabus by an external body tended to cramp the teacher, especially in some subjects. Separate universities would be advantageous because of the increased prestige. of the college itself and the (greater likelihood of benefactions.