SENATE DIVIDED.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1344, 23 January 1912, Page 4

SENATE DIVIDED.

UNIVERSITY REFORM SHELVED. EXTERNAL EXAMINERS. VERSUS LOCAL TALENT. llio fundamental question in the reform of the New Zealand University system—the abolition of tho external examiners was the subject of an interesting and animated debate at the Univer- , Mtj Senate yesterday afternoon, when | Mr - Alien, 11.1'. (Otaso University j Council), moved to the effect that some I ol the University's examiners should in i future bo appointed within New Zea- ; land. | fyeakrng t 0 his motion, Mr. Allen snid tliat the day must come wlien the eianimations of the University would be conducted by examiners resident in New Zealand, and the proposal he submitted lor the consideration of the Senate was, ni effect, a .step in (hat direction. The cllacenicnt of the external examiners could only, lie thought, be accomplished gradually, year by year. None of the arguments which kul been advanced against this reform seemed to him to be unanswerable. Arguments Against. It had been arguted, for example, that the abolition of the external examiner would tend to lower the standard of the New Zealand degrees, lie failed to see where lay the strength of thai argument. That might have lield years ago, when the country was passing through its pioneering stage of development, but it had quite lost its effect at this late day. A great mass of evidence had been brought before the Parliamentary Education Committee 011 the subject—evidence in support of reform—but an appeal to- that evidence was not necessary. Their own experience, lie thought, was sufficient. Capital had been niade of the fact Hint many of the medical students at the Otago University went Home for their examinations. This was true, but the fact remained that tho standard of examinations in the Otago University was as high, if not higher, tluin that of outside universities, and many of those students who went to England did so because they had failed in their first, and second, and filial examinations at the Otago University. They wrtit abroad to search for an easier testing ground. He knew of 110 pother argument which could, with any apparent effect, lie rais-. cd against a system of local examiners except the 011 c that there was 110 one in New Zealand competent to examine. "I slmll leave that to the committee which is to appoint the examinees," said tho speaker. "If none conipetcr.it enough can be found in New Zealand, then by all means go elsewhere, but if competent examiners can be found here, well and good. Take the subject of jurisprudence—l cannot for the life of me understand why we should not be able to find a competent examiner for that subject in our own country. I know of one—tlie Solicitor-General (Professor Salniond). Again, take constitutional history "These two subjects are taken as one," observed tlie Chancellor (Sir Robert Stout). "Very well," said Jlr. Allen. "Again I say that we can find a competent examiner in New Zealand. Botany? There are men here perfectly competent. Civil engineering? That might be difficult to provide for." "External to the Colleges"? However, he contended, they should make a beginning, and appoint some, at all events. "External to the college?" queried I'ro--1 fessor J. Macmillau Brown (Canterbury). "Whether in or, out of the college is ' immaterial," replied Sir. Allen. ; "We must know tafore we vote," re- ' marked Professor llacmillan Brown. ' "At any rate," conceded Mr. Allen, "1 1 should be quite satisfied if they are ex- ' ternal to the colleges." Continuing, Jlr. Allen urged that the time had at least ' arrived when tho University ought to ' make an effort to stan/1 by its own rc- ' sources. At present 110 inducement was offered to New Zealand University men to , keep up their efficiency' in their own J special work. Inducement should bo ' offered. H.e did not propose to reviow f the evils of the present system. There were many—they had had instances at) the morning sitting of the Senate. Mis- [ takes had arisen—serious mistakes—which could easily have been rectified under I a svstem of local ■ examiners. But with their examiners thousands of miles away their difficulties were infinitely great. [ He felt convinced, from his own observa- ' tion, that there had been, cases whero " the award of scholarships had been ' wrongly made. Tlie examiners should know the candidates. The system was antiquated, and it was timo they were rid of it. The voting in favour of reform in this direction had steadily increased. A Proviso of Exclusion. Mr. Geo. Hogl>en (Inspector-General of Schools) seconded the motion, which, ho " said, meant simply what it expressed. J "Does it involve the appointment of j, examiners from the college teachers?" ho was asked. Mr. Hogben contended that the ques--1 tion could be considered apart from that, " but the Chancellor and Mr. Von Haast 1 dissented. , Professor J. Macmillan Brown moved a I proviso:— : "Provided that they arc ipt enpaged in teaching in tho colony the 0 subject they are to examine" 0 "That will remove all possible misI) conception," said the mover. "It would be ridiculous for the Senate to leave this most important question for the decision of the committee entrusted with the f appointments. "If I am a member of e that committee, I want to know what my . instructions are," he said. Mr. liogben declared that there would be" 110 suggestion of appointing an ex- ; aminer from the teaching stalls of tho , colleges, but Profes?or Macmillan Brown S adhered to lite proviso. Dr I'ilchett (Wellington) held strongly the e view that the teachers should not exj amine He felt with Mr. Allen that tho "J abolition of tho external examiner was , inevitable, ultimately, but lie did not ■' think that the reform should be hastened 5 at the risk of appointing incompetent examiners in New- Zealand. Mr L. Cohen (Wellington) agreed. In- " stead of vague groping after something e indefinite we should endeavour, he said, II "to inspire our students with the ambi--11 y on to raise the standard of their do--1 wee work to the highest possible level.' Tho Chancellor (Sir Hobert Stout) - moved to add a further proviso: r "... if suitable examiners could v be obtained in every case." e 1 Intolerable Suspicion, 1 Professor J. ftankine Brown (Wellington) remarked that lie would vote against 0 Mr Mien's motion, although that, he dep sired' to make clear, did not. imply any n association with the opponents of the „ principle of the motion. He took the „ stand that the issue mu.st be decided as between the cxbernal examiners and a board of examiners in New Zealand. He 1 desired to have tho examiners appointed 1 in New Zealand, but lie would not sup- • port any proposal" which dissociated tilie 1 teacher from the function of examiner. 1 Where else in New Zealand were they to , limi competent examiners if not in their > own colleges? The present syptem was an■l t.iqiiaiod and barbarous, lie utterly fa.il- . p:1 to understand the fecHng which was I behind all this hostility to the principle of co-ordinating the teaching and examining functions. As a lecturer under Professor " Ramsay, in tlie University of Glasgow, he ■ had been entrusted with a minor share 1 of the responsibility of e.vnnining can- ; didates fur degrees. Vet., a.s Professor of i Classics at Victoria College he encountered the suggestion that, lie was not to bo trusted with the responsibility of examining in New Zealand. This suspicion of ' tlie protocol's was intolerable. Several voices dissented. "Behind this opposition is a feeling of suspicion that we cannot be trusted," declared Professor Brown, with emphasis. The proposition now before the Senate 1 was not a step forward. The Vice-Chancellor (Sir Charles Nowcn) suggested that the regard of the Senate for the prestige of the university might be carried to extremes. Hence the opposition. Dr.' M'Dowell (Auckland) said lie was against the motion for ninny of the reasons stated by Professor .1. R. Brown. The reform of the examination system had to come, he argued, but it had not nearly arrived, so far as the New Zealand professors were concerned. In New ~Zoaland tkero wcra presented tlie elements

of inter-college jealousies, qncslio]iS i of scholarship <is well ns those of examination, a feeling id' diffidence ill putting'forward one's own students, and so 011. I'roie-sor J'. I'. Blown (Auckland) said he would support Ihe motion, as he .supported it la-", year, if it was not limited, lie felt quite' certain that: only persons engaged in teaching were iit to examine. Personallv, he was not afraid of intercollege rivalries and jealousies. Mr. Jl. i". von llu.'im! declared that there was no hall-way house between extenuil examiners and a l»iard of New Zealand examiners. In (he 'alter case he could net see where (he examiners were In come from. The motion was merely toying with the subject. The Chancellor's Remarks, The Chancellor (Sir 11-obert Stout) do> elared that' he had always been in favour of the idea of examiners 111 V-w Zealand, and if Professor Macmillan Brown's amendments were inserted, ho would support the motion. The way would be clear f'.r such reform if tho professors in Xew Zealand had a superannuation scheme which would enablo them to retire at a certain age, and perhaps devote themselves to examination work. He certainly thought that tho professors should have such' a scheme. He felt sure that examiners appointed from the teaching staffs of the affiliated colleges would not be successful. ''Wo know how professors Speak of other professors, even in their oun colleges," 110 said. Proceeding, the.Chancellor said that in the University of Wales, the charter expressly gave tho control of the degrees to tho external examiner. He also referred to the ScotcJi system, and the methods in vogue ut Oxford t and Cambridge. There was no indignity ill having one's work tested by _an outside critic. AVliy did they have inspectors of schools? Nobody desired to cast a slur 011 the professors'in this matter. They had had professors in New Zealand for 4.9 years now. WJiy, at this late date, was this question introduced? ne believed that the time would arrive, but the university must hasten slowly. ' Mr. Allen Replies. Mr. Jas. Allen then replied briefly. He declared that if the Senate did not realise the position and take a step towards reforming the examination system, pub- ; lie opinion would make it. Professor Macmillan Brown's ameudiuent was from the enemv's side, and lie hoped the Senate' would not adopt it. "I am opposed to all deceit," observed Professor Macmillan Brown. 'There's 110 deceit," said Mr. Allen, with a smile. | Question Shelved. The questions were then put to tho vote- The Chancellor's proviso was accepted by Air. Alien, and on a division, Professor Macmillan Brown's amendment was adopted. On the motion, which then read to tho effect that some of the examiners should in future be appointed in- New Zealand, subject to the provisos that suitable men were obtainable, and that those appointed shall not at the time be engaged in New Zealand in teaching the subject they aro to examine in, the Senate divided, the voting being 11 for and 11 against. In accordance with the rules of tho Senate, which provide that the casting vote' of the Chair must be given against the question, the Chancellor, on his casting vote, negatived the motion, so leaving the ground clear for a discussion do novo at a future date.