Te Aroha AND Ohinemuri News. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1908. HISTORY IN THE SCHOOLS.

Te Aroha News, Volume XXVII, Issue 43370, 10 September 1908, Page 2

Te Aroha AND Ohinemuri News.

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1908. HISTORY IN THE SCHOOLS.

This above all—to thine own self be true , And it must follow as the night the day Thou canst not then be false to any man Shakespeare.

It is a most unfortunate thing that the “ universal howl ” which arose “ from the whole of the province,” to quote a schoolmaster of many years standing, atrthe adoption of the present history reader for the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Standards, should nol have resulted in the substitution of some better text book. There is general disapproval of this reader, among not only members of the teaching staff, but with only one exception, among inspectors also.

To begin with, it is obviously unsuitable to have the same reader for the three upper Standards. Standards Five and Six might reasonably be expected to be well within mental range of one another, or Standards Four and Five. But to put the whole three Standards upon the same mental diet is on the face of it a grave mistake. The children have gone through their Standards too cursorily if, at the point of leaving the primary school for the secondary, or for work, they are not intellectually ready for a more advanced scheme of historical education than suited them when in the Fourth Standard.

In addition to this the present reader, tlnugh full enough in some ways, is not calculated to give a clear and abiding grasp of important historical outline, nor of the relation of

00© ©vent to another. The matter is very badly arranged, the great events b ing jumbled in among a mass of minor happenings in a way calculated to betray the youthful mind into a false idea of the relative importance of recorded facts. Internal Scottish feuds are treated with a detail which merely serves to nauseate the young mind. As one schoolmaster said to an inspector the other day, “ Why cannot we have something more interesting for the older Standards ? In Standard Three the children have historical stories which delight them. In Standards Four, Five, and Six, the scholars have a book which is calculated to make them feel that they will never open a history again.” What is the good of all that stuff,,’ said one teacher referring to the Scottish feuds, “to a lot of children in school.” We can only ask in reply what good indeed ? If they wanted that they would want it from Sir Walter Scott.

Another very strong objection to the book is that it is inclined to deal prejudicially with the Roman Catholics. This is eminently unfair. When it come to history we want both sides of the story told, and told quite frankly, without any attempt to exaggerate the weakness of one party while not discovering the weakness of their opponents. Better not have any history taught than have it taught in a spirit of partizaDship. But history must be t mght and taught truthfully, for it is a beacon light to guide the historymakers of the future on the right course. John Richard Green, whose record reads as enthrallingly as a romance, tells both sides of the dark story of the persecuting years of England’s history. From him Catholic and Protestant alike may learn to respect and honour those whose religion they would not elect to adopt, and to deplore the errors and crimes of those whom they would have wished, for the sake of the religion they professed, to be able to honour.

Another objection to the present reader is the want of illustration, a very grave want indeed. Not only children but even igrown-ups learn much more readily with the aid of pictures. Might there not here be scope for some of our local artists.

The whole question is one which should receive immediate attention, for the proper teaching of history is more important than almost any other subject our schools deal with. It is directly ethical in its influence, and for that reason conspicuously, ought to be imparted without a taint of prejudice or reservation. If not it may be a potent factor in splitting up our present system of undenominational education.