ECONOMIES IN EDUCATION

Hokitika Guardian, 16 October 1931, Page 2

ECONOMIES IN EDUCATION

TEACHERS’, VIEWPOINT. QUESTION FOR THE MINISTER. CHRISTCHURCH, October 15. “The Axe im- the Primary - Schools” was the subject of an address by Mr FT. F. Penlington, vice-president of the New Zealand Educational Institute, to the School Committees Association last evening. Mr Pcnlmgton attended at the invitation of the Association.

Mr Penlington said that these were times when education was dragged to the front. Cinderella had been brought from her cinders in the kitchen and asked why she had been such an expensive and extravagant girl. the more the matter was discussed, the better, for there were many misconceptions regarding education that continually required soothing. Education had been denounced as non-productive. .He described in what manner education was not non-productive. Another' misconception, he said, was that anyone could set himself as an authority, a critic, and a good, sound adviser—but that was not singular to education. MORE CHILDREN. Since 1914 there had been an increase of 30 per cent, in the number of pupils, and they could not cater for that increase without expenditure, and very considerable expenditure. There had been additional and extended services—dental, medical, and so- on. Were these to be abolished ? If so, money would be saved, but at what a cost he could not say. There was a large and increasing number of small schools in the country, and these small schools were very expensive. unduly expensive. But what were they going to do? Country children had to he educated. Teachers now had to possess higher qualifications, and increased salaries Imd attracted teachers to the country. The education provided in country schools non was more efficient than it was ten or t wen tv years ago. In comparing the cost of services now with the cost of 1914, the change in urice levels had to he home in mind. Every service had increased in cost. “CHILDREN MUST SUFFER.” Where was the .economy axe to he applied further? An old pupil of his had expressed the opinion that the primary schools should not he touched, because of the great .value and importance of the teaching given in them. If he (the speaker) were asked where economies could be effected he hardly knew where they could be effected. Already economies bad been made totalling £350,000. If further .economies were made the children must suffer. If subsidies l were withdrawn, could they say that the schools would not

suffer? They could increase the size of classes to 70, 80, or 90, but they would increase also the number of breakdowns from nervous causes, and efficiency would be impaired. The school age could be raised from five years to six years, but opinions differed regarding the wisdom of doing so. The Institute. would never abandon ns campaign for the reduction of the size of classes. It was suggested that all free places should be cut out, and if one wanted secondary education for one’s children they should pay for it. He spoke for no on ( > hut himself when he said that he believed that a tremendous amount of money had been wasted by sending to secondary schools pupils not fitted for -that kind of edu-

cation. The system, and not the child. ! was wrong. There should be schools i . . and classes of instruction to which such pupils reasonably could bo sent. But, if they cut out all secondary and technical education, and training, and dismissed all the teachers, they would barely save a. million ; hut he did not know if anyone seriously considered doijfg that. Many people talked in round terms when speaking of economies in education—“cut it down a million,” “cut it down by half.” They could, if they liked, make such economies, but the country would suffer. Economies’ could be effected in administration but the total cost of general administration was £40.000. and if it was out by one-lmlf only £20,000 would he saved, and that would not satisfy those who wanted a million saved. They were not going to stampede the present Minister for Education into any very radical economy, He was going to look into things, and not until he had given them most careful consideration was lie going to applv the economy axe any further. He did not think it would be an .axe, but a pruning knife. (Applause), j Miss Finlayson. president of the Institute, said that it would be disastrous if reforms that those interested in education had striven for years were nullified, or reduced in, efficiency hv a short-sighted poljcv of economy. The children should be the last to suffer from any principle of economy. Instead of economising in education in present circumstances, tliev should spend a million more, provided that it was properly spent in the right direction. A RESOLUTION. After a short discussion, in which the remarks of the visiting speakers were supported, it was resolved: That the Canterbury School Committees’ Association urges the Coalition Government to maintain those features of the primary school system that are necessary for the education of the children. Acknowledging a vote of thanks, Mr Penlington said that he met teachers all over the country, and he could say that if it were necessary in order to protect the interests of the children, most of the teachers would vote for a further reduction of salaries.