SCHOOL AGE.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18366, 27 April 1925, Page 16

SCHOOL AGE.

SHOULD .IT BE RAISED TO SIXTEEN ? THE MINISTER NON-COMMITTAL. In the issue of "The Press" for March 31st was set out what was described as a "recommendation" concerning the raising of the school-leav-ing age to 16, which had been signed by a majority of Christchurch educationists and others interested in education, who attended the conference with Mr Frank Tate, Director of Education, Victoria, held in Christchurch on March 6th and 7th. The full list of the signatories was given, and it includes such -well-known names as Dr. Charles Chilton, Mr J. E. Strachan, Mr G. Lancaster, Mr H. D. Acland, Miss Gibson (headmistress of the Girls' High School), and Mr W. Machin, the president of the Chamber of Commerce (who added after his signature: "I think the above [i.e., the recommendation] should carry with it a subsidy to needy parents"). Mr H. "Worrall, secretary of the General Labourers' Union, who attended the conference as representing the Canterbury Trades and Labour Council, forwarded copies of the recommendation, or expression of opinion, to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Education. The Prime Minister replied that he had forwarded the communication to Sir James Parr. The Minister of Education, under date the 23rd inst., has now replied in the following terms: — "I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 18th ultimo, enclosing expression of opinion concerning the raising of the school age to 16, signed by a number of Christchurch residents. "I have to point out that this petition, or resolution, formed no part of the proceedings of the conference referred to, and quite a wrong impression has been given owing to the statement that this resolution was passed during the conference opened by myself. No resolution of any kind was carried at the conference, which was not a public one, and I am very much surprised to find that the expression of opinion, signed by the ladies and gentlemen referred to, has been published as if it were part of the proceedings of the conference. I hope you will take immediate steps to correct the wrong impression thus given. "With regard to the question itself, I have to state that very serious consideration would have to be given to a proposal to make attendance at school compulsory up to the age of 16. The matter will, however, be considered from all points of view before any definite action is taken."

Mr Worrall stated to a reporter on Friday that he agreed with the Minister's statement that at the educational conference in March last, opened by the Minister, no resolution was discussed, or passed. The signed statement was the result of an informal discussion that took place after the closo of the conference, and was the private opinion of the signatories on the question of raising the school age. The discussion arose put of the evidence he (Mr Worrall) gave before that conference on the following lines: (1) The action of the Arbitration Court in lowering the commencing age of apprentices to fourteen years. (2) The Judge's statement that as the leaving age from school was fourteen years he felt compelled to lower the commencing age of apprentices to 14 years, so as to prevent so many boys drifting into "blind alley" occupations. Whilst he was in accord with the' higher standard of education, 1 it was in the interests of tho boys themselves that this step should be taken until the education authorities raised the compulsory age of attendance. (3) Also, that the Co.urt was recognising technical education in various trades by increasing wages to apprentices who had passed certain technical and theoretical examinations. Mr Worrall added that if tho idea had got abroad that the recommendation, or opinion, a copy of which had been sent to tho Minister, was a - resolution passed at the conference, that idea was not correct. - As he had stated, it was the private opinion of etycli o£ those who had signed the statement. His reply to the Minister would be on the lines indicated in these remarks.