APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS.

Hokitika Guardian, 23 May 1922, Page 4

APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS.

COMMITTEE’S DEMAND FOR FINAL CHOICE. EDUCATION HOARD ACTION. CHRISTCHURCH, May 20. There has been much dissatisfaction of late* among school committees iegarding the regulation of the Department of Education, '.which compels them, when tilling n teaching vacancy, to appoint the candidate highest on the grading list. The committees wish that the names of till candidates who are nearly equal on the list should be forwarded to them, and that they should he allowed to make the final selection. The Canterbury Education Board yesterday passed a resolution, introduced hy Mr T. Hughes, to write to the Department and to the Minister of Education urging that the desired alterations in uie regulations be made. Mr T. Hughes moved that a letter he sent by the Board to the Education Department. Speaking to his motion, he said that he did not believe that the present system of appointing teachers was in the host interests of education. Ire read the memorandum of March 28th from the Director of Education (Mr .1. Caughloy), which stated:

•’•He appointment of teachers. \\ ith reference to the above, I have to state that, even if friction is caused between the Board and the committees through the dissatisfaction of the latter with the present system ol appointment. that would not indicate that the system is no better than the one previously in existence. ’I he claim by a committee to select a teacher even from among the best of the applicants would infer that the committee was in a better position than tile inspectors to judge which was the host teacher Further, except in special < ircuinstanres which arc provided for under the present Act, a Dominion system of promotion can be secured only by giving the position to the teacher highest on the grading list. It is noted that the Board expresses the opinion that the present system of appointing teachers is detrimental to the best interests of education. The Department would he glad to receive the Board s reasons for this opinion.”

Mr Hughes then read the letter to be sent to the Secretary of tlm Education Department. It runs as follows: ••In reply to your memorandum of March 28th, with reference to the appointment of teachers, the Canterbury Education Board respectfully begs to submit the following statement for your consideration:—The Board desires to reiterate the statement of fact that the 'present system of appointment is giving dissatisfaction to the committees in this district. While admitting that the former system of making nppointnuts. was not faultless this Board’s experience is that the existing mechanical and automatic system olteti luils to secure the best and most suitable teacher for positions, the special needs of which vary so widely, since in general practice appointments arc rigidly as. signed to the teacher graded highest on the list of applicants. “With regard to the contention that the cl.dm hv a committee to select a teacher from among the host ol the suitable applicants would infer that the committee was in a ladter position than the Inspectors to judge which was the best teacher; with no desire to discount either the ability or earnestness of idle inspectors the Board would submit that from their local knowledge and the care for all round wcllarc of their cwn children, five or nine local men could he trusted to select the best teachers for their special need from among two or three who, by their position on the graded list, are all suitable and practically equal as to professional qualifications. '“The last paragraph of your memorandum asks for the hoard’s reasons for the statement that the present principle of appointing teachers is detrimental to the best interests of education. The board would respectfully submit, that any teacher, by long and efficient service, in the course ol time gradually must attain a high grade in the service. In the course of time, too, such teacher’s physical energy, alertness ami power of initiative must decline to a more or less extent. Certainly as a general rule this happens before the age of retirement nrrives. A position which demands vigorous mental and physical powers as well as professional qualifications of the highest order, heroines vacant. Though the candidate referred to above mav he without serious disability exeepl such as Nature imposes, yet he cannot be passed over, and under the Department’s system he must receive the appointment The hoard cannot, agree that such appointments are in the best interests ol education.

"Under a rigid system in which the highest graded teacher receives the appointment, this Imiiiil Ims consider Mile misgivings, as to whether the licsL and fittest teacher for a specific task always nets the position. In the board's opinion it is beyond human skill to assess ‘personality’- (lie main dynamic force in ediieiitim- within a limit of one or two marks. Therefore, although the present method of appointment is in the interests of some teachers, it is not necessarily in the interests of the children. This criticism is not dictated in any spirit of hostility to the system, or in a spirit of carping criticism ; indeed, the board recognises the great value of the grading system as a guide to the merits of teachers. Such a scheme is an absolute necessity, as is the teachers’ register ill Britain, but tlie board again respectfully asks special circumstances should be permitted, and that, whenever possible, within the limits of a few marks, the board may allow committees a selection from at least two or three suitable candidates who, from their position in the graded scheme and in the inspectors’ and board’s opinion, are best suited to local conditions.”

Mr Banks seconded the motion, and said that every school committee in Canterbury was interested in the matter and every committee was kicking against the system and the Department’s regulation. Further, the board was getting the blame. Air Armitage suggested that a clause lie added to the motion requesting that a copy of the letter be sent to the Ministr (Hon. C. J. Farr). It seemed to him that the longer a teacher served and the older and feebler be became, the higher position could be obtained.

Mr J. Jamieson said that the Minister was the head of tlie Department,

and the letter should be sent to him to avoid its being shelved *•' Wellington.

The motion was carried with Mr Armitage’s addition, and the chairman thanked Air Hughes for the care and interest lie had taken in the matter. The secretary said that with regard to the appointment of teachers the board maintained that under the proviso of sub-section 7 of section 16 ol the Education Act, 11)11, it bad discretionary power, subject to the concurrence of the senior inspector, to forward to a school committee the names ol not more than three candidates, even if there was a slight difference in regard to the grading of candidates.

It was decided that if the board’s solicitor concurred in this interpretation, a paragraph to that effect would be added to tlie board’s letter to the Department.