The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, MARCH 31, 1926. PRIMARY SCHOOL PROTEST

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 31 March 1926, Page 8

The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, MARCH 31, 1926. PRIMARY SCHOOL PROTEST

No olmnsy wriggliug 1 on tlie puli, of ilit' retiring- Minister of Education will enable him to escape the castigation at ill© bauds of the primary school tyaacbers for his miserable attempt to discredit the splendid work being done in the- primary schools of New Zealand. The teachers, of course', know Sir .lames I'uit, and no surprise will be felt, that be, should attempt to justify bis unjustifiable and uncalled for criticism by throwing out a smoke: screen of reckless assertions. It has become the practice' of Sir .Tames Parr 1o sneer at. his critics, and with glib tongue claim that, his policy is endorsed by the highest educational authorities in the Englishspeaking world. But it ihe primary system is so hopelessly out of touch with modern oducaiional progress, who is to blame ? The. Minister and bis Departmental heads are. solely responsible tor the lack of co-ordination which exists between tire primary and secondary schools. Moreover, if The scheme of work in the primary schools; is so completely out of date, why not overhaul the course of work and not insult the teachers who are hampered by the scheme of work imposed upon them by the ■ Minister and bis Departmental beads? Sir Janies I’arr raised the ire of the primary schoolJoaehors by saying that, in a certain Junior High School lie could not. recognise the children of tire, old fifth and sixth standards. or course the Minister was merely romancing, and the Waitaki sub-branch of the New Zealand Educational Institute "lms taken the Mini sicr 100 seriously. I bat is Sir James Parr’s way! Novel thclesHv the indignant teachers, who, by the way, are supported in .South Canterbury, were able to show the characteristic recklessness of the Minis-; tors ill-considered remarks. Surely Sir -lames Parr does not need to lie reminded that the highest graded teachers in the primary schools take the fifth and sixth standards, while it is fin l invariable practice, for the lcnst-oixporionced members. of secondary school staffs to handle Ihe lower forms. The protestingteacheis, however, have completely exposed the hollowpess of the Minister’s utterance. Here is (lie resolution passed by the teachers of Oamaru : “That this nicetingof the Teachers’ instituto tnlvc.s -strong exception to the rcmnrks credited to the Minister oi Jhdueation during hi s recent visit to the Oamaru Junior High School. The Junior High School is .still in the experimental stage, and in view of the lact that halt the pupils of the, Junior High School have Jett the primary schools loss than two months ago and that the remainder have been less than twelve months under the new .system the Minister's remarks must be regarded as iH-considered and can only he interpreted as conveying mi-rullrrl-tor and undeserved slur upon the primary school system. 3 ’

Half f.liei pupils Jiave' Leelt in flie school a few months, and the. remainder less than a year! In vitnv of these fads could any Ministerial statement be more extravagant:-' The fact of the matter is the Minister has been so busily engaged patting himself on the. hack, that he has let. liis tongue run away with dignity and discretion. As Mr C. T. Asdiman, late principal of Normal School, and. formerly president of the'New Zealand Educational Institute, said at a recent conference: “When money is available there would be tremendous leeway to be made up to recover the normal needs of the. primary .schools ; hence, what, is aimed at. in all -lunini High School schemes could he achieved at the upper end of the primary school, as part of the primary school system.” Moreover, if was Mr Wells who said, in his. report; to (be. Minister: “bolero- experimenting with junior higdi schools the course of studies and (he correlation of that, course with the work of ihe elementary school hdow, and with the high school or technical school above., should be. carefully .considered and airanged.” Has the Minister billowed the advice Mr Wells gave in I DM;' In IDNi the. Minister confessed that, lie must have a new syllabus. Presumably since lie declares that in ID2O the work of the fifth and sixth standards is so deplorably had that lie cannot recognise the old pupils alter a few mouths in another school, he .must have ignored the Wells’ report, as far as it K lab's to the co-ordination ol (hr ~; k of the demon furv school with that, of the high school or technical school. Whilst we sympathise with the primary school teachers, in their protests, "T suggest that Sir .James Parr's opinion of their work now counts for little; his successor will probably sei' things with a lit,lie less, prejudice. Nevertheless, we make, bold to say that, if th'ere, is one place, in fhe Dominion's educational system, where Ihe work is well-done m the face, of gloat, difticiilties, ihi' primary schools can show a. record unequalled by any other branch of the system, hi this connection, it is inferestR'tV I! 1 note that Professor lemiant, one, of New Zealand's .Pi o lessors of Education, has, given it as his opinion “that on the whole fhe primary school stand aids \ and VI work is good and within fhe limitations, imposed by I lie syllabus, etc., could hardly be improved on.” The limitations which Professor 'leniiaiif suggests are hampering I ho primary schools are, imposed, if should bo point:'. I out, not by the tcnoheis, but l:y ihe Minister and his Departmental heads.