E.—7A,

34

University schools of education not yet satisfactorily organized.

The evidence showed clearly that the position of the Professors of Education in relation to the national scheme of training teachers is unsatisfactory. It is unfortunate that Chairs of Education were established, and professors appointed, without a clear definition of the relationship which should exist between the professor and the local training college. So far as we could judge, any connections he may have made with the college, or any facilities which he may have secured for entrance to the practice schools, are dependent upon the good will of the college authorities, and at any time he may be deprived of them. We were impressed by the fact that representatives of the Education Boards, the authority governing the colleges and employing the students trained therein, were by no means hospitable to the idea that directive power over the training system should be given to the professor. This attitude is, perhaps, natural, for the Boards are concerned with the supply of a sufficient number of practical teachers efficient for the jobs awaiting them in the primary schools, and it is by no means certain in the present state of pre-college education, that university classes afford the most suitable training for the great majority of training-college students. The training colleges can in a two-years' course provide for such students a very efficient preparation for the work of a primary teacher, " based upon subjectmethod rather than upon philosophic theory," and, moreover, they can give the young students such an insight into the content and significance of the course of study for elementary schools, and such practical guidance in problems of organization, that they are able to do effective work from the time they leave the training college. Members of Education Boards and of the staffs of the training colleges expressed the opinion that there was a danger lest the sound, practical preparation, now the rule, should be lost in the endeavour to bring all teachers under the influence of one whose main concern appeared to them to be educational theory studied along the lines of its historical development and philosophy. We are, however, convinced that the practice of combining in one person the positions of Professor of Education and Principal of the Teachers' College followed in Australia is the most suitable form of organization for New Zealand. As Principal, the professor should be assisted by senior officers taking charge of sections of the college-work —e.g., Vice-Principal (primary), Vice-Principal (secondary), VicePrincipal (infant-school), Vice-Principal (rural school). Such an organization, associated with a longer period of training for selected teachers than the New Zealand regulations now provide, would allow many necessary variations of training to be secured and would produce for the employing authority the types of trained teachers the service requires. We offer no opinion as to the method by which the change we advocate is to be brought about. It is regrettable that professors were, apparently, appointed before a full scheme of training was thought out. It is, of course, conceivable that a man may be appointed to a University Chair in Education by the governing body of a university because he gives proof of the possession of a scholarly knowledge of the philosophy of education, and yet he may be quite unsuitable to direct the practical affairs of a training college. This latter qualification cannot be overlooked by the authorities who employ teachers, since they must be assured of the worth of the training of the young teachers whom they are to employ. It is this consideration which justifies the Australian practice of making all appointments to senior positions in the university department of teacher training on the recommendation of a joint committee representing the University and the Education Department. The position calls for close co-operation between the university and education authorities. The common practice in Great Britain is to have two kinds of training colleges —the older type of residential training college, generally unconnected with a university and offering only a two-years course, and the University Day Training College, offering a four-years course for both primary and secondary teachers. In New Zealand each of the four training colleges is in close proximity to the local university college, and the practice of sending students to the University for instruction is general. During the present year 564 student teachers were attending university classes. Naturally, therefore, conditions are favourable for the organization of teacher-training by full co-operation between the university and the training

Training courses of short duration advooated.

The Professor of Education should also be Principal of the Training College.

Close co-operation between university and training colleges essential.