SCHOOL. COMMITTEES AND THEIR DUTIES.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5559, 22 January 1879, Page 3

SCHOOL. COMMITTEES AND THEIR DUTIES.

TO THI EDITOR OF Ilia NEW .ZEALAND TIMM. Sib, —I pass orer the intellectual disquisition which forms the preface to “ Another Wellington Teacher’s” second letter in jour columns. It is a thing not to be touched. He still speaks of “ class " as > simple quantity, which could not be resolved into its constituent parts ments ; (2) ‘professional skill and experience. Bearing in mind this distinction, made and recorded on the document, between the degree of the certificate as determined by examination and the division of the certificate as deter'2ft&d by experience and professional skill, also being mindful of the fact that no certificates are issued without ability to teach being tested or proved, I have no hesitation in one and all of the five questions put to z£u in the negative. I must remind “Another Wellington Teacher” that he sot off with an attempt to show that the system of the Wellington Board with regard to the classification of teachers was inferior to that of the Education Department. He has now shifted his ground, and would imply, without argument, that the Wellington Board has not duly recognised ability as a school manager as distinguished from educational attainments. My former reply again contradicts him, for the Board has, during the past five years, on the one hand insisted on a sufficient educational test, and on the other, attached due value to professional ability and experience.—l am, &c., Robert Lee. January 21, 13/9. TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sib, —The letter of your corespondent “Alpha,” which appeared in this morning’s issue, is a very sensible one, and on most of the points which he brings under discussion I agree with him entirely. But there is one point in that letter to which I cannot “ pin my faith.” 1 refer to the suggestion to pay the teachers through the local committees. On this point I hold very decided views—views, indeed, directly adverse, ns already indicated, to those propounded by “ Alpha.” The writer grounds his remarks on this subject upon the fact that the Secretary of the Board withheld the salary of a teacher, and he shows, to his own satiation at least, that a committee would not have done so. The Secretary might have acted harshly in the case referred to; but I know little or nothing of the merits of the case. It is just possible that that officer thought he was justified in so doing. - He may have erred in judgment, or on the legal points at issue, but it dees not appear that he was animated by any other desire than to protect the interests of the public, which was in itself a laudable one.

But to return. It appears to have entirely escaped Alpha’s notice that circumstances might arise wherein a committee might be tempted to do precisely the same thing. Hence I fail to see what protection to the teacher would result from the adoption of tho course proposed. Committees are like other bodies, and are just as likely to do an unjust act as a Board of Education or its secretary. In my opinion there are weighty reasons why the salaries of teachers should not be handed over to committees. For example, to make the committee of a school the paymaster of the teachers would be to snake the teachers to all intents and purposes the servants of the committee. This, I think, would be a mil take.

The position of the teacher showing good conduct, and while he performs his duties efficiently, should be entirely independent of the committee. He should be altogether independent of local influences —“No man can serve two masters,” But if tho local committee becomes his paymaster he will have tho Central Department, the Board, and the committee, and between so many stools his position would be a precarious one indeed. Moreover, whatever may be said in favor of committees in towns aud large communities, there are many localities where it is almost impossible to get good committees. These committees are composed for th» most part of men who, however well-meaning they may he, are unable to enter into the feelings and requirements of a gentleman, I have known instances of this. I am far from despising committees ; they are useful bodies, and it is to tho interest of all parties that the committee and the teacher should work amicably together ; hut the result of my experience is that the committee and the master should meet as equals, and not in the relation of master and servant.—l am, &c., Beta. [As this correspondence has now occupied our open columns for some time we hope to ke excused if we decline to publish any further communications on the subject,—Ed. N. Z. Times.] ________________