TE AROHA DISPUTE.

Waikato Times, Volume 120, Issue 19984, 7 September 1936, Page 2

TE AROHA DISPUTE.

VIEWS OF TEACHERS. COMMITTEE CRITICISED. (Times Representative.) TE AROHA, Sunday. “It is sheer nonsense." "1 never heard or such a thing." " The committee don't Know what they aro talking about." With comments suen as tihese a number of teachers, headmasters, and others connected with the teaching profession expressed their views upon tne contention or the Te Aroha school committee that young teachers equipped with modern naming methods were prevented from putting such methods into practice by "long term” teachers and headmasters. •• In Bhe llrst place," said one teacher when interviewed. “It Is difficult to know precisely what the committee means by that peculiar phrase ‘ long term teachers.’ One supposes that by this they really mean old or elderly teachers. IT so It Is quite wrong to suggest that such old teachers frown upon the modern methods. On the contrary they arc only too pleased to give any young teacher a chance to put new methods into practice since any better results attained by a young teacher with Us or her class would naturally add to the aggregate credit of the school as a whole and be to the head's advantage as well as the teacher’s. The Acid Teat. •• Over a long period of years I have seen these new methods frequently introduced. They have invariably been judged solely by the one acid test—results. IT rhe results were there, then the new method was continued, though naturally ir the results were lacking, the method was stopped." others Interviewed substantially corroborated these sentiments, being unanimous In their opinions that far t'rotn condemning new methods headmasters welcomed them. “ The committee,” said another. “ seem to quite overlook the Tact that there are such people as Inspectors, who usually know a good deal more about the efficacy or educational methods than the average school committeeman. A headmaster Is not a law unto hlmseir and the matter or seeing that the best teaching methods are practised can be safely loft In the hands of the Inspectors.” Referring to the Te Aroha committee’s objection to tihe new head’s short remaining period of service yet another teacher states: “I really can’t see that the committee have anything to gain by their action. «upose their present opposition is successful and they get a man appointed with say another 15 years to run Instead of 15 months. Do they realise that artor 12 months whoever takes the position Is a, | f >er J ect liberty to transfer to another Tin* grading of Te Aroha School is such that no man can take charge there who has not at least Troni 30 to 35 years’ service to his credit. It is useless to look for 'young' men possessing this period of service. Service means experience and when all is said and done it ts experience that counts In the teaching profession for It is only by long experience that the value of method can be proved."