SCHOOL SYLLABUS

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 234, 27 June 1919, Page 8

SCHOOL SYLLABUS

| " PROPOSED REVISION ; , VIEWS OF EDUCATION P\ ;';.;:;'/ COUNCIL ; ;■".; 'A discussion on the primary school 6yllabus took place nt yesterday's sitting '■■ of Council'of Education. • Mr.,T.M. Wells moved: "That copies of the revised syllabus be- supplied to ; . the senior' inspectors and to the Teachers !, , Institute for consideration, and there-. ; . after a conference be held, between : V representatives of the Department, in- .' • Bpectors, and the Educational Institute ■before it is finally issued." ■: Air. K. M'Callum, M.P., seconded the j' . motion. - ' Dr. .TV. J. Anderson, chairman, said the '•- function,of the primary school was not " to provide any specialised instruction for [ 'agricultural or for any other particular ; form of education. It was not industrial I by any means, and it was no reproach ■■ to the primary schools, if the children i . who passed out with a sixth standard ;, certificate know very little about arith- ■ luetic as applied to agriculture. It would i be a reproach, however, if they had to j ' face problems and had.no general enpac- "'.. ity to tackle them. The function of the S primary school was to provide a general ;.'. ' education which' would enablo a boy to I adapt/ himself to special work in the !' most profitable' way. "He thought the !• Department ought to be allowed to go so j ' far at least us to undertake the.revision • of the syllabus itself, a« the work was j in the; nature of- simplification. It was I not necessary iii considering the revision j. of the syllabus for the Department to j take everybody into its confidence. He ; vaiiled to do something directly, in one. i- form or another, and he was not in faI vour of the motion. A revision of "the i syllabus in the form of ( amplification arid j simplification might .receive a consider- ! able amount of criticism, but he was j prepared "to bear his share of the criti- [ cisra. • i Professor Macllillan Brown said it was | several years since a revision of the syli labus was first promised. His impression ! . was that the Department would be less j worried 'if it were to take into its conni sels men like the senior inspector? and ! some of the offieiais of the New Zealand ' Educational Institute—those to whom the revision would apply. "I think Dr. Anj elerson would find an easier billet instead I of a harder billet if he took these oxi pertsinto his counsels," remarked Pro- ! i'essor Brown. ; " Dr. Anderson replied that there was i nothing particularly wrong with the sylj labus as it stood. It was a good syllabus. | and was quite sufficient for all the purposes of the schools if it were in the j hands of men and women who knew I. their busines. No great change was eonj . templnted in tbe syllabus, and for that ; Tenson he thought the Department might i h?ve 'been allowed to do the work itself \ without having to consult anybody. i ' The motion was carried.