Manawatu Herald. THURSDAY, SEPT. 20, 1917. “THE CHILD IS THE SCHOOL."

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 1732, 20 September 1917, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. THURSDAY, SEPT. 20, 1917. “THE CHILD IS THE SCHOOL."

MR. J. CAUGHLEY, assistant director of Education, in an address on (lie above subject to Avomqn teachers at Wellington this week, said that if it avos asserted that the schools Avere for the children Unit would he a truism, but many oilier considerations (mine into play. It must not he forgotten that (lie teacher, the inspectors, (he education hoard, and Hie Department would have jo take into con,Adoration Avhat the question meant. Proceeding, ho said that even in the earlier days, just avliou mere clothing was a consideration, people Avere working to an end, but Avith the progress of time they came to be dominated by the institutional, and the personal Avas likely to be forgotten. Even in Parliament the original object Avas lost sight of, and it now seemed, at times, to lie a ground for personal ambitions, conflicts, and faction. It might, indeed, he said, be coneeiveable to think that some State or country might he in such condition that no legislation should be necessary for a period; that the machinery would carry it on. Air Caughley Avent on to cite cases in Avhich institutions and officers frequently dominated the real interests they Avere intended to serve. To got doAvn to the school. On the curriculum they should think of the matter of Avhat was to be incorporated in the teaching to be given to the children in each stage. If the teachers —and he remembered not so long ago Avhen he avus one-—ex-amined themselves closely and were

not too indulgent they must admit that it was often a case of “my” work, “my” prospects, “ray” etc. This was all very well in its place, but perhaps they ought to bp thinking of the development of the child’s mind. These things would tend to show that the child was the school and not altogether the school for the child. Mr Caughley dealt with the routine of school work, and pointed out the difficulties of the children. He said that sometimes, after a test, a teacher might be inclined to think of a failure as the result of their work. Would they really be worried because “Tom” or “Mary” was not able to do some certain work, or was it that the product of that work would not be creditable to them (the teachers)? In one or two respects it might lie that there should be a change in the attitude of the teachers, if they were going to have the full benefit of the present-day curriculum. With some such difference he felt that there would be a better understanding and a better result between teacher and children. Mr Caughley referred to the advantages to be reaped by having “lots of play and games” and the benefit of teachers taking part therein themselves. He also dealt with the question of “keeping in” and several other matters of routine school Work. He advocated the closer study of the principles of education, for the more close and keen watch over the interests of the child. The attitude of a teacher was one they should follow, even if it caused some of them to alter their methods. Such was indeed the keynote of all true educational work.