UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

Hokitika Guardian, 3 July 1925, Page 4

UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

COMMISSION AT AUCKLAND. AUCKLAND. June 3fi. Giving evidence before tlie -University Cominission. Professor Algie said that facilities for uuversity education in New Zealand generally were adequate anal the fees could not be described as heavy. Scholarships and bursaries were very liberal indeed, but they operated in favour of the city -tiideut. The facilities were not perfect in respect to country students, hut the financial problem appeared to he too groat. Sir 11. Reichel : The present system is breaking down with its own weight f Professor Algie: Yes. its own weight is i,ea lulling crushing. Centralisation must inevitably lead to delay. My e;perience as chairman of the Board of

•Studies is that ail increase in the stab' of the central office would not ol itsel.l overcome the present dilfirultios. There was duplication of work hy ill? Senate and the Board of St tidies, he added, because the Senate reserved the right to discuss in detail what the hoard recommended. He favoured ilia division of the present New Zealand University into four separate universities, partly heeause ot the deadlock that had arisen, anal because it was inevitable in regaral to the (|Uest!a>ii o! professional schools. 3he Senate ;appoara'd to have no fixed policy on tiii~ question. lie iavoureal a change in the examination system, and luial a

confident expectation that the now svstem iutroilua ed by llm Senate waillhl work well, lie oppos'd aa-i-redil mg aundemocratic, anil not equally iair to all. If the University tub-tiluteal a aliscreticiiary process ter inqiartia! examinations be would, however. h?

in iavour of allowing much weight to the voice of the secondary schools. Professor 11. AY. Sugar saiil that < I'I'ecls in the working ol the present organisation were largelv due to the federal system. The system of night (■lasses was an objectionable feature. He supported the establishment ol four separate Universities. It would I,(‘ a mistake fur o.U'h l iiivorsitv to t‘iidimvour to e>taUlisli scliool ol its own in ettcli branch of professsionul education. It would have to he seen how the inaalvisahle multiplication oT schools was to hi' prevenU'il without, ttttuecessairly restricl i tig treedom m ilevi'h'pineut. Eiiiitncitil support shmil l l:c on a more generous scale. Government grants sha.uld he oti a papuhatiott basis or dependent on the tium. I,ers ni' suialeiits at the adlh'ga’. I ’e thought that the caJh'ge seemed iik|v t a ilcvehip ' u t he ami' lines as ila- piovinci.il Uniy.'T'ities id I'.tightml. J. A. C. Alin in. for the Industrial Association, tirga'd a 10-et 1 relation hel »eetl indie !rie.s and I'niversity training hv hating direct i'('|ara'si’iitatiaui of lnaltistl ies a n the Senate. * he I uivert.ilv •J'otihl nroduce highiy sU'iled industrialists. S. K. Lamia, director of the Auckland School ol Engineering, rclerred lo the amonahois positions whercliy AtmkI: i, l a I students were prevented I fa,in presenting iheiuselvi's i'or the tlegre" examinal ion. Am-klatiil had alevt'loped an illii'icat scliool with very little help from the Government. G. J. Park, representing the Tech-

nicsil School TcacheiV Association. was against accrediting. The best Technical Jlii£h School pupils should be encouraged to enter the Tniversity. Provision in v them should be made by r arnnuonji tne system ol entry and bv increasing tlie number of diploma courses.