NOTES ON THE CHANCELLOR'S ADDRESS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1343, 22 January 1912, Page 6

NOTES ON THE CHANCELLOR'S ADDRESS.

(Contributed by a Sub-Committee of the 'University* Reform Association.) The Chancellor's opening address raises iriany. points that ma.y well bo given further consideration by those interested in "University reform. -It-seems a pity tnat dt should suggest rather tho presentation of a criso by a barrister. than a judicial survey of the situation, uibes at tho advocates of reform and their suggestions, not inappropriate in the newspaper- controversies that havo been -waged, seem strangely'out of place in tho official address of tho head of the lijii.veriSity. ... * With regard to-tho report of the. Parliamentary Education • Committee, the Chancellor confines his comments to the indications, which ware given -by tho Reform Association, 'of personnel for tho suggested Royal Commission; but tho Chancellor has laid this report on • the • table." It would be a peat gam if the public could be persuaded to get copies of "this Parliamentary . paper, and study it. A careful roading of Sir Robert Stout's evidence bol'oro the committee would discios® many examples of • the kind of logic'which is displayed, in this section ■of the address: where tho Chancellor likens an external commissioner, engaged for the occasion to'investigate "our University problems" on tho spot, to a • continuously existing system of external examiners. engaged, at a distant; of twelve thousand miles, in. work which..they do not themselves regard as giving them a vital, connection nvith our university. ' ■■ The.Chancellor's.reference to Dr. Alexander Hill is particularly unhappy, m, view of the fact ; that, ,ilf .1901,' and again iii. 1006, Dr. Hill -was one; of a. cmnm'is-; eion of two -on,' Englis h;. university and; ■university'.colleges v(n"6t .including Oxford and Cambridge); that -in 1907 lie was a, member/of which. .report-; el 'on'the I "University'of AVales';.and. tiat, ihe is secretary of'tho ties Co'ngi'ess ,which'is 'to be held,in 1 Lon- : . don .dui-;n'g the present year..' ' .. With regard to' .the omission of past or pi'psfirit professors* or members- of Senate,, from, '.tho' names mentioned,, appreciation of ' their knowledge or' labours is not in question.Tho':Reform Association' considered, 'for reasons which mav. or may not'meet Svith-'gehe'raL-approval,■ that -it would hot be conducive to onaUolutely impartial inquiry to includo in the' commission men who are in any way identified with university affairs in N«w' Zealand. ' In'a long'section'on University atlinin-'" istratioD, ...the' Chancellor' adduces first' the constitution o'P'the; new , Universityffi Bristol, - arid "cohclMes 'that: 'there'.is little''iii' "it helpful -to "the Udiversity: of Now Zealand. •• A' perusal .'of'. chapter: viii: (pp. :109-13) of the "University- Reform" pimphlctwill show that the Kefdrm" Association, while agreeing that our circumstances are different from v those of England, believes 'that the same general principles apply here." A few _ words of explanation may help the public-to compare tho two cases. The Court of tho University of Bristol :is a large body, of sojeh, a kind as wo; would gladly sec constituted in New Zealand, for general control of university affairs. (Vide, pamphlet, pp. 112-3.) Its :;council corresponds 1 roughly to our college councils (as tho University of Bristol is not federal in character, there is iio need for a .body to correspond to our University Senate). Of this council six, i.e., rather more than one-sixth, of tho. ; members are necessarily professors, while other professors may be included among tho eighteen members appointed by ; tho court. AYo hare suggested a representation "'of .tiro •' professors,' -without, full powers, on a council of eight or nine members; and of four professors, with full membership, on a Senate of twenty-eight or thirty-two members. The Senate of tho University of Bristol corresponds, in its membership, to our local professorial boards, but it has "regulation and control of tho curriculum and education," and a varietyof other important powers for lack of which tho professorial bodies in New Zealand . ai-o sadly 'disabled., The truly corresponding body for Now Zealand would bo tho Conjoint Professorial Board suggested on i;. lli of tho pamphlet.' In his reference to the Scottish University, tho has put before the Senate matter which can only bo described as ancient history, in these days of rapid university progress. . He refers to tho commissioners appointed in 185S, and to those who' superseded 'them in 1889, but ho docs not mention that the powers of the latter expired in 1597-—and with; thorn the organised attempt to over-co-ordinato . the universities" of Scotland; for some fifteen years these universities havo been practically independent, under the government of thoir several courts. "Tho Requirements in Scotland," quoted by the Chancellor in his appendix on the B.A. and B.Sc. proposals, having been found after a loug trial to give unsatisfactory edu-. cational results, were some three years ago superseded (in Glasgow and Edinburgh at least) by schemes based on tho ■principle of homogeneous courses: one of these-schemes is summarised at tho. end of the Chancellor's roport. lu his section on the B.A. and B.Sc. Degrees, the Chancellor has made a very serious inaccuracy out of an initial slip in the Auckland reply. A glance at'that' Teply sho\vs that instead of "as to 6, they deal with' tho subjects, which should bo .compulsory or . voluntary," the statement ill the Chancellor's address should .be:, as to 4; they deal with tho several limitations of the selection of subjects iii tho report, • i -There "is a quite uncalled-for gibe at a "confession of inability (on tho part of the Professorial Boards of Canterbury niul Wellington) to express an opinion"— a confession never made and certainly not involved or implied i.i the statement "that -1 and 5 can only be dealt with adequately by a further professorial conference." These boards have learnt by experience that tho expressing of individual opinions is one of tho worst ways of working towards agreement. It is not without interest to note that the Chancellor singles ' out, for favourable comment, that professorial board which differs from the other three, 1 in the matter' of affirming, the decisions of the 1910 Professprial Conference; , Our readers now have an altogether advantageous opportunity of purchasing either ii 'Gentleman's'solid silver' keylesi Hunting lever AVatch, or a. Lady's'.solid gold open-face keyless AVatoh, at absolutely bed-rock price.' Indeed, they are "offepng a .very great bargain. Jlessrs. Xdrmh'n Frank and Co.—people who are clniug'a niojt extensivo business—undertake, in. an advertisement elsewhere in .tlji's issuo, to send a'high quality timepiece to any address in New Zealand, on certain remarkably easy terms, which are clearly set forth in their announcement. So confident are this Proj>rietary that they give substantial value that they.deliberately stats they are willing to receive back any watch, and refund all the money paid, if complete satisfaction is not felt. But, apart "from that, they guarantee their watches for ten years.— Advt.