NO DISTINCTION

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 337, 24 April 1928, Page 14

NO DISTINCTION

COURT By a substantial martin , land District Court of o Auc k. tion at the Auckland Univer.i.?*?*j lose last evening decided against -° 1I crimination in the merit of ~ Stsand “outside” degrees. insid*-* i A proposal to differentiate bet*,*. ihe degrees granted to students I ins lectures and those given m£*• i mural stuuents was discusW® 1 * i vetoed. mscussed ip, r - • A. Gray, who presided that, rightly or wrongly the ** man placed a higher value on thTV' gree obtained by unaided studv tk. that Obtained by a student attended full courses of lecture, 0 Mr. -A K. Turner, who moved to Provo the principle of d,scrinii£> 11 degrees, said if it were art,??* that any substantial advantage, o ?'*' to be had from attendance at lie,*** some distinction must logiraitT? made, lie was aware that eouA * portunity should be given to all **• that not all could attend university £? tures. However, a university had ' reconcile this democratic ideal ~V" it could with the obvious duty - keeping up the standard of it. a? greet,. * Pelt was suggested by Mr VV A m. tie that the university in Hs ptS? 1 ' state—lacking funds and with r,L c: bursaries—was scarcely justifiS** discriminating against students * 6 for any valid reason, were unabl. * attend lectures. k

rhe Kev. Dr. H. Kanston opposed ttdistinction. but favoured a nrcL' by the University Commission university should require some reason for exempting a student *2: attendance at ectures, and thst^ shou.d make a real effort to guidTL help his studies. He moved ,« 4 amendment, that in the opinion of .2 meeting the solution of the was on the lines suggested by Tv University Commission. s This was asreed to by 3.’ vote.