THE MODERN VIRUS

Evening Star, Issue 21746, 14 June 1934, Page 13

THE MODERN VIRUS

“GET KNOWLEDGE QUICK" PROFESSOR ON UNIVERSITY IDEALS AND FREEDOM [Special to the ‘ Star.’J AUCKLAND, June 13. “It is not true to describe the modern university ns n machine for turning nonentities into mediocrities,’’ said Professor W. A. Sewell, professor of English at Auckland University College, in an address given to the Auckland Crcditmen’s Club. “ Very often,’’ he continued, “ it is a largo athletic ground where certain buildings are attached for the provision of feeble bodies. Popular education is something that we can never go back on, but we must not be blind to the evils we have incurred through it. The university is in danger of becoming a distributer of certificates, where once it was a safeguard of exact scholarship and vigorous scientific method. Some times it is undecided whether its function is to be, a finishing school for young ladies from the suburbs, or a training ground for school teachers. I want young ladies from the suburbs and budding school teachers to have the chance of university education, buf i do not think that university education should be moulded by _ their demands. To some extent this is what has happened. “ The Victorian era was poisoned by the 1 get rich quick ’ virus. The modern era. was poisoned by the ‘ get knowledge quick’ virus. We wanted to learn something about Greek civilisation without taking -the trouble to learn Greek. We wanted to learn something about the history of art without taking the trouble to look at pictures. ’This poison had warped much of our university teaching, and we should take a stand against it.” Referring to freedom of speech, Professor Sewell said; “ Every self-respect-ing university teacher claims every shred of freedom permitted by the law to his fellow-citizens. He claims more —he claims that if his freedom to express his views is specially infringed, his value as a teacher is thereby damaged, and his self-respect as an independent thinker is destroyed. The argument is often put forward that, since the Government makes a larger contribution towards the upkeep o) the university, it should have some say in the control of the constituent colleges, and should have the right in the Inst resort to demand the dismissal oi teachers whose expressed views might be inconvenient to it. If the Government had sucli a right, university teachers must learn to be toadies, and every professor would be a Vicar of Bray. The logical corollary of Government control of university education is the ‘ spoils ’ system, and a General Election would be as vital to a professor as it is to a politician. “ That is not a fantastic exaggeration,”, concluded the Professor. “Once the principle of Government interference is allowed, the whole case for freedom is given away.”