DISCIPLINE OF TEACHERS

Hokitika Guardian, 25 November 1927, Page 4

DISCIPLINE OF TEACHERS

IVRLLIXGTOX, X,,/. si. Comment on the Education Department’s explanation of the “fining” clause in the Education Act Amendment Bill was made to-day by Air 11. A. Parkinson, serretai'y of tbe New Zealand Education Institute. Points as they occur in the Department’s statement (Were rel'err-eU Ho as follow :—•

“Represental ions made by several education hoard.”—Two of the most important, hoards have definitely repudiated tho clause, and another is known not to have been concerned in it.

“The only penalty an employing heard can inflict on a teacher is dismissal.”— By no means. Tho expressed censure of a board is a thing that no teacher worthy of tbe name would incur willingly or regard lightly. If that is not a. stiflh lent cheek on “offences of a. minor character.” these cease to lie of a miner character, and the proper punishment is dismissal. The grading system affords a much hotter means of discipline. It affects the teacher's prospects of promotion r.nd may affect his salary to some extent. "The teachers say that the proposed tine would he a slur on the character of t'y* teachers as a. whole, and that the punishment provided for public

servants would lie an iiidiouiiy il indicted on a te''c’*er.”—Teachers have not referred to the I'ullie Service in this connection. They have said, and they repeat, that the character ol their own service has not deserved this slur, 'll never less deserved it than

“They should not I" aide villi impunity to ignore the lawful instrue--I;iLions of their bead teachers or employing hoards.”—Certainly. they should not. Dismissal is the proper treatment for those who arc guilty of tlie conduct described. Paltry monetary fines are no remedy, nor will tlie spirit and tone of tlie teaching service he raised by this proposal to inflict them.