UNIVERSITY REFORM

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2684, 2 February 1916, Page 6

UNIVERSITY REFORM

Sir,—lt is, I think, unfair, in tho discussion of an academic, question, to , clothe oneself in a "lion j s skin" and thereby impose on the public and' lead to unmerited criticism being passed on one of our educational ..experts. Heading the letter of "Viva Voce" it at first sight appears to have been written by one of two well-known professors. "Viva Voce" claims he is an Oxford man. who has done much examining work for the New Zealand University. He defends the Board of Studies as if he was one of its members. Who are tlioy in Wellington that make such a claim? We have only two' men connected with our University .system that can "fill tlhe bill," and it is plain that the writer is neither of these. No educated Oxford graduate can have penned such a sentence as this: "The Chancellor's expression of regret that the Board of Studies should havo spent time in making recommendations which tho Senate has no power to carry into effect is absurd, besides being open to a strong suspicion of disingenuousriess because the powers of the Senate, as indeed he presently admits, can readily be extended by legislation."

This is not tihe language or style of an educa-ted 1 Oxford graduate. Then there'is the gibe contained in this sentence: "Bearing in mind the pitfalls of consistency and uniformity that ever yawn round the lawyer, tho Philistine and the politician, one is tempted to wonder that our good Chancellor has not rather proposed, in conformity with bis avowed principles, to conduct our Public Service • examinations in the mountains of the moon or in tho Orkney Islands, instead of holding them in Wellington." This blundering and gibing sentence could not have been penned by 0110 who had had tho advantage of the culture of St. Andrew's.

It may also bo pointed out that the Chancellor has never hesitated to claim Lerwick at his birthplace, and Lerwick' is not in the Orkney Islands. "Viva Voce's" knowledge of geography is as limited as his ability to write clear and succinct English sentences.

i The statements of fact and the arguments in the letter are, to use "Viva Voce's" phrase, "nonsensical." To refer again to tilie second sontence in the letter, which I have set out at length as a specimen of "Viva Voce's" culture, the question is, Did the Board of Studies ask the Senate to do what the Senate had jio power to' do? The answer muqt ho that it did. This ir not denied by "Viva. Voce." AVas it then disingenuous to state as a fact what was a fact? "Viva Voce" says so, and his reason is that "the powers of the Senate .... can be readily extended by legislation." The Board of Studies was constituted to make recommendations to the Senate, that the Senate could give effect to, not, recommendations that could not be dealt with till an amending University Ant had been passed. I am afraid that "Viva Voce's" lop:ic is even poorer than his literary style. The Legislature may never enable the Senate to delegate the right, of osnmlnatinn to the teachers. ■ There is one stateiaant of foqfr muds,

namely, that ''the essential part of every examination at Oxford is the oral part." Is this true? Several Oxford graduates say that it is not. In tlie Honours examination the oral part is small and .perfunctory. But' supposing it were true, tlie Chancellor did not deal with oral or written examinations. His point was that the teachers did not examine. Does "Viva Voce" dare assert that the tutor of a student orally examines and passes his student "Viva Voce" says lie has 110 personal experience ot' what any University save Oxford does in examinations. lias "Viva Voce" read the regulation of Oxford quoted ill the Chancellor's address? it says: "No examiner shall examine viva voce any candidate who belongs to any college or hall in which lie is a tutor,' or in which lie has been tutor during tho two years preceding, or who has been his private pupil within the two years preceding." It is not, therefore, from the practice of Oxford that "Viva Voce" can get any support for the teacher examining his pupil. I am almost certain that "Viva Voce" has never been a student in any Oxford College. Is it not then, I repeat-, most unfair that "Viva Voce" should pose in a "lion's skin"? —I am, etc., A STUDENT. [We have omitted the names of tho professors mentioned by our correspondent. So far as wo know they had nothing whatever to- (to with "Viva Voce's" letter, and there is 110 justification for dragging them into the controversy.]