88

[M. S.. NEWMAN.

E.—l2.

garten have the right understanding of their work. This is a very big question, because many people undertake the teaching of kindergartens who are not properly trained for the work. The responsibility ought to rest, and can only rest, with those who have control of them. Nothing has done more harm, not only in the kindergarten in Auckland but in other places, than to have falsely called kindergartens. In Victoria a free kindergarten association was established, and a kindergarten was also established in connection with the training college, and the free kindergarten finally gave up its functions to the Government, because they found that the work could be done better by the Government authorities. The problem is not the only one we have. In every country where they have had kindergartens the fact that kindergartens falsely so called have been established has not only exercised a bad influence, but has given a false impression of the kindergarten. Another reason is that the kindergarten forms the link between the home and school life. We all know that the life of the child at the school has hitherto been separated from the life of the child at home. Also, the kindergarten has a great influence on the home. It tends to create higher standards and make the parents feel their responsibility more. Some people say it takes the responsibility from the parents by taking the children away at an earlier age, but in practice that is not so. The influence of the kindergarten is just in the other direction. The parents find the children can be trained in different ways, and they find that it makes a great difference to them. Now, the children of the towns have kindergartens, but they have them as a charity, and I think they should have them as their right, and not as a charity. I might say I asked the head of the kindergarten in Auckland what she thought about it — whether she thought it would be better —and she said decidedly it would be very much better to work in an organized way under the Government. Again, people always talk about the expense of things. Training colleges are already equipped to train kindergarteners, and should easily do the work, so that there need be no trouble in that way. Another matter I would like to bring forward is about schools for children whose development is not normal. Of course, this does not refer to children whose development is such that they will never be able to take part in social life. Proper schools are provided for them. The schools I mean are those for children whose development is such that if they were attended to they could do some work and become somewhat socially efficient. In every large school there are many children of this type. Besides retarding the progress of other children they themselves must be very much discouraged : they must lose hope, and also self-respect. Again, children of this type are very often so pitied that they are spoilt. People do not expect them to put forth any effort or to do anything for themselves, so really while they are perhaps especially cared for they are made less efficient than they might be, and what has been done in kindness to them really hinders their advancement. Many teachers have these children in their schools, and they feel sure that if special schools were established with the object of helping these children to a better development, and perhaps drafting them into the ordinary schools later on, they could give them special training to make them efficient. Of course, a school like that would have to be very carefully named, because if this were not done it might constitute a reproach later on to these children. The teacher, of course, would have to be specially trained in special courses of study. Emphasis would be laid on manual arts. In speaking of this I am thinking of something like the open-air schools they have in London. Of course, the cost would be considerable, but the money would be well spent, and it would be spent in forming instead of reforming. At present we know very little of what happens to these children after they leave the school, but we know from what they are like when they leave school that they must become members of society that hinder instead of helping progress. Perhaps the most important thing I have to speak about is the training of girls in domestic work. I need not labour the question as to the necessity for this. I heard somebody say that it was almost impossible to overestimate the difference it would make in the efficiency of a nation if its women were trained in the scientific principles that underlie the daily tasks of the house. There was a theory that young girls should be given a good general education, and that common-sense would teach them the rest; but this has been wholly disproved. We forget sometimes in thinking of the girls' education that the schools were really established for boys only in the beginning. Girls were not admitted very much, and then when it was realized that girls had to be educated they were sent to the schools whose curriculum had been established for boys. That is a broad statement, and practically what was done. Many efforts have been made to readjust boys' education to suit new social adjustments, but very little has been done to help the girls. The first effort to grapple with this problem was made through the kindergarten schools established for training girls. If we say the girls are to be trained, the question arises for us, does part of the training belong to the primary school. I think it does. All life,, but especially domestic life, demands resource in meeting situations and dealing with problems, and you cannot learn this in a three-months continuation course—in a short laundry course or cooking course. It must be a habit of life and the result of training. If you watch a class at work in any school—say, Standard 111 or Standard II —you will see that at the end of the day very little has been done to help the children in this direction. They have had plenty of training in docility and obedience in carrying out the teacher's will and wishes, but there has been no initiative to meet and solve problems. It is quite a common thing for teachers to say that the best-trained children are the monitors, and many teachers I know try to have as many children as possible in their class monitors, so as to give them the benefit of this kind of.training. Then, a less demand was made on girls formerly than now by school life. Now girls are obliged to go to school and do a great deal of work, and they have very little chance of learning anything at home, so their home training gives them very little of this work. Another thing is that the girl's estimate of this work will be that of her "school. In other branches of science, such as engineering,-efforts were made to give these branches in the Universities such an honour that degrees could be conferred, and it is in the same sense that I refer to the girls' work at school—they should be given a sense of the dignity of housework. It should be considered