IS SPECIALIST TRAINING ENOUGH?

New Zealand Listener, Volume 20, Issue 506, 4 March 1949, Page 6

IS SPECIALIST TRAINING ENOUGH?

Questions to University Graduates

at the annual meeting of the University Senate the Chancellor (Sir David Smith) suggested that the University might not be giving a liberal enough education to the professional men and women it trains technically, and asked what steps, if any, should be taken to correct the position. The professional people chiefly concerned seemed to us to be lawyers, doctors, architects, and engineers; and we therefore sent these questions to two or three in each group: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Do you agree in general with the Chancellor? It you do agree can you see any solution? Would you yourself have had the time and energy for wider studies when you were at the University? * If the University did do more for you than equip you as a specialist, have you since found that helpful in your profession as well as satisfying to you personally? Would you agree that a liberally educated specialist is more ‘efficient than the man whose education has been technical only? Do you know many in your profession who have educated themselves in these broader ways since they left the University? We added that it was not our wish to restrict them to those six questions if they felt. that they could speak more usefully outside them. We now print some answers.

A Laawyer (who wishes to remain anonymous) HE Editor of -The Listener says that the Chancellor of the University has expressed the opinion that the University is not providing a liberal enough education for specialists: and invites me to express my opinion; thereby politely assuming that I have one; and still more politely inferring that I am justified in forming an opinion on the topic; and even that it will be one worth communicating to ‘other people. Such courtesy is disarming. My justification, valid or not, for venturing to form an opinion on the topic is this: That I am myself a member of the University; that I know, or think I know, what a specialist is (a person who knows more and more about less and less); that I appreciate the value of the specialist, in his place, and am sorry for him, and the narrower his groove the sorrier I am; that I happen myself to have a profession, one which touches on virtually every human activity, so that varied knowledge never comes amiss, and must often be acquired and applied, and which covers so large a field. of its own that rarely, if ever, can one man become fully expert in every part of it; that I am myself by way of being a specialist, but mainly in a negative sense — there are certain recondite branches of my profession of which I know next to nothing, and about which I refuse to learn more; and that I have studied that small but informing book called The Specialist. In the first place, I think the Honourable, learned, and gallant Chancellor, whom I must assume to have been correctly reported, ought to know, and I glad to have this chance of telling him, that it is not the function of the University to provide any education at all. That is the function of the colleges. The University provides neither libraries nor teachers, nor even a series of those correspondence courses by which people are led to imagine that they can achieve education. The function of .the University"is, by its system of examination of candidates prepared by the colleges or (in some cases) under exemption from college lectures, to say whether they have conveyed to its examiners an impression of possessing sufficient knowledge on conventional lines of certain prescribed topics to deserve admission to one of its degrees, and if so to admit them accordingly. \ Next, I boggle at the term "education," which here and frequently seems to be no more than a pretentious way of saying "schooling." To begin with, it is made to cover the entirely different concepts of inculcation and rational learning. "King John was a bad king." "Edward the First was a good king." "Twelve twelves are a hundred and forty-four, and don’t you dare contradict your teacher." That is inculcation. A person who cannot give a reason for the faith that is in him cannot be called

educated. When the matriculated student works again over the material he ingested as a child, it is presented in a more rational form, perhaps like what follows. "After examining the secondary source-material (and leaving the primary source-material alone, for fear of becoming a specialist), and after) pondering the conclusions already reached by other students, in particular the most esteemed /historical writers, you will probably reach the conclusion that King John, though the greatest military leader that had arisen in England after the conquest, had morals that were slightly below the standard of his age, and that, as results show, either his sense of practical politics was at fault, or the plutocratic and ecclesiastical forces ranged against him were too much for him and his helpless commons." "If therefore the quantity ‘twelve’ be multiplied by itself, in the sense we have agreed to give to the term ‘multiplication,’ and if the product be expressed by positional notation, using the denary scale, it will be represented by the digits ‘144’ arranged in that order." Besides this, there is a big difference between education in the sense which is closest to the etymology of the word- the acquisition of wisdom, knowledge of the art of living, culture, or (to borrow Sir Alfred Zimmern’s definition) "the transmission and interpretation of life" -on the one. hand, and technical training, at however advanced a stage, on the other hand. People who, blaming the paucity of the English vocabulary, fail to observe this distinction are guilty of debasement of language, and of blunting the edge of words, the tools of thought. "Schooling," whether of men or of horses, is a wide enough term to cover inculcation, training, instruction, education, and perhaps more; "education" should be reserved for the more particular meaning. Some misunderstanding and much shadow-sparring would thus be saved. That the colleges of the University should provide technical instruction, and the University confer on successful students degrees that are no more than glorified tradesmen’s certificates,

has an obvious historical explanation, but is none the less regrettable. It leads people to expect that the graduates in these faculties have been the objects of education in the stricter sense. Nowadays, and in New Zealand, that does not follow. This however is not quite the question. To judge from the university prescriptions for examination in what is called "Arts," which fix the syllabuses of work in the colleges, it would seem that a liberal enough education is available for people who want it, whether they intend to be specialists or not. A student can there find courses after completing which he may fairly claim to have acquired the rudiments of a liberal education; if he becomes a Master of Arts, rather more than the rudiments. There is however a rider to this deliverance. Education (in the sense I prefer) is a collegiate or communal process. For anybody who has interested himself in the matter it will be sufficient to cite, without: quoting, Newman’s University Sketches, " Zimmern’s addresses and essays, and Gibbon’s aphorism about the two educations. I presuppose therefore that the graduate has been a full-time student, and for preference an inmate of one of the residential sub-colleges-Knox, Selwyn, College House, Rolleston, or another. If Weir is still, as it used to be, mainly a boarding-house for ‘night-students, I do not include it. Going solitary to lectures, and spending no time in discussing with other students "the east and west, the devil and the sunrise," does not produce a university man. Those whom the University itself regards as its specialists are presumably those on whom it confers the degree of doctor. Here, as the piper to whose tune the colleges must dance, the University has the matter completely in its own hands. It is therefore worth-while to notice that for only one doctorate, that of ‘literature, the recipient of which must be a Master of Arts, is ‘non-technical attainment a pre-requisite. f The question might be worth more consideration if it were given a wider

cast, and posed not of the specialist but of the professional. Here the trouble seems to be not that the colleges do not offer a liberal enough education, but rather that entrants upon most professional careers do not take the offer. Law may be an exception: probably most of those legal practitioners to whom Counsellor Pleydell would allow the name of lawyer have taken a course in arts before the course in law. The lists show however that very few graduates in engineering, medicine, agricultural science, forestry science, and other technical subjects have a degree in arts behind them. As long. as the University is prepared to give them aeademic status for attainments that are in the main solely technical, there is little inducement, except a genuine love of learning, to lead them in the paths of education (properly so called). One must not be too sweeping. Here and there real education happens to be a necessay part of a professional’s equipment. Nobody would wish his boys to be in charge of a schoolmaster who was not an educated man. Professional journalists must be educated; though more often than not their education is not academically acquired. On the other hand, the journalistic specialist-com-mercial editor, sporting reporter, or Our Military Correspondent -need not be educated at all: it is sufficient if he knows his specialty. The facts prompt the question, Should the professions be limited to university men? Vox populi, vox dei, gives a more authoritative answer than mine could be. As far as one can judge, whatever the grounds may be on which patients, clients, customers, select and prefer their dentists, medical advisers, legal advisers, architects, or forestal experts, academic culture is not one of them. Finally: You may lead a horse to water, but you cannot make ‘him drink. Then why try? The thirst for the Pierian spring is apparently not very general. If in this respect it be found that the specialists resemble mofe the camel than the fish, that is their affair. The Bible’s opinion of them is also mine: "Without these a city. can be inhabited... They shall not be sought for in public counsel, nor sit high in the congregation: they shall not sit on the judges’ seat, nor understand the sentence of judgment: they cannot declare justice and judgment; and they shall not be found where parables are spoken. But they will maintain the state of the world, and all their desire is in the work of their craft." If an orthodontist, or a patent lawyer, or a refrigerating engi-neer-to name kinds of specialists that come first to mind-has no more culture outside his specialty than a member of his profession who does not specialise, or even no‘more culture than enables him to spell and add up and mispronounce "creme de menthe," he may be, and I think he is, none the worse as a specialist for all that. Such an ordering of one’s life would not satisfy my own private ideas about the art of living;

but no doubt a specialist has to make many sacrifices; and gods forbid that I should judge my brethren. Post-finally:: Am I educated? That is a question I am not called upon to answer. Architect (Nancy Northcrott, B.Arch.) Before answering these questions, there are one or two assumptions which I should like to state by way of definition. Assumption 1: That our present education system in New Zealand does not give a liberal enough education. , Assumption 2: That the person who has received a liberal education will be considered a well educated person, and, as such, of value to the community. _ Assumption 3: That a well educated man, no matter what his particular work or interest, shall have made some study of History, English Literature, the Classics, and what I would call Nature Study: that is a study of the natural environment and Man’s relationship to it. Question 1: Yes, though I do not believe that the blame for the lack of a liberal education can be laid wholly at the door of the University. Question 2: There are solutions, though we cannot expect to accomplish any of them quickly or easily, As suggestions for improving the situation I put forward the following ideas: (a) A more liberal education during the pre-university years of qa student’s life. In other words, in the schools. There is too great a tendency to specialise too soon. Specialist training should never begin before the university or post-school period. It is possible that if students received a thorough and liberal education during their school years, the University need not be quite so fearful of the results of its more specialist or technical approach. (b) A more careful selection of stus dents who are to go on to the University. This need in no way cut across the rightly accepted ideal of giving to everyone as good an education as possible. What I feel we have failed to realise in the past is that not everyone needs or is receptive to the same type of education. The university has, a very special part to play in the educational life of the community. Only those capable of fulfilling and extending this function should be in attendance at a university. (c) Residental Colleges. The association of students, taking different courses of study, within one residential college, provides a liberal education in itself. The diversity of interests, the tolerance towards another’s point of view, the clash of minds and the ability to take an intelligent part in any conversation which might develop are of inestimable value in the education process. So long as we concentrate on the "night school" university, so long shall we deny to our students this type of liberal education. © Question 3: This is not always a question of wider studies in the sense of more subjects in the curriculum. Much depends upon the emphasis given to certain subjects within the course, or to the slant given to a particular subject. In some cases extraneous subjects may have to be introduced. Much, however, might be done by tying up serious study with some of the voluntary students’ organisations which exist to-day. Use might well be made of such societies as Music Clubs, Dramatic and Debating Societies and so on. Had some such use been made of these organisa-

tions, I am sure I would have had both time and energy for wider studies while at the Univefsity. As it was I, in line with many students, took part voluntarily in the activities of some of these societies. Question 4: Because I took the course of the Degree of Bachelor of Architecture I believe that I can say that the University gave me more than a specialist’s training. This would not necessarily follow for all courses of university study.

The reasons for my wider training I give as follows: (a) As a Bachelor of Architecture degree student I was forced to attend full time at the University. This was, in sOme measure, a substitute, though a very poor one, for the type of life to be had in a residential college. Because of my full-time attendance I had opportunities for meeting and working with other students. (b) I voluntarily took part in some student activities outside the School

of Architecture As a result of this I know that I have benefited both in my profession and personally. Even so I do not believe that I came to the end of my school and university life as a well educated person. There are very big gaps in my knowledge which I still find a drawback. Question 5: Yes, very definitely. Everyone’s work must at some time impinge upon another’s. In these circumstances the well educated person is better equipped to deal with the situation than is the man who has had nothing but a téchnical training. More important, however, is the ability to see things Whole. There has been a tendency towards fragmentation and specialisation in all fields of technical knowledge over the past century. Because of this we are apt to concentrate too much on Part, till that Part becomes, seemingly, greater and more important than the Whole. This leads to a lack of balance in judgment and even to false tenets and_ evil practices. The person with a liberal and broad education behind him is less apt to fall into this error. He is, therefore, more reliable, efficient and of greater value to the community. Question 6: No. My experience is, that once a person leaves University, the exigencies of establishing themselves in their work leave them little opportunity for a broader education, It can of course be done, but usually only by those of great determination and good physical health. Man of Science (H. J. Finlay, D.Sc., F.RS. N.Z.) (1, and 2.) In my day, at least, most students who took a Science or Arts degree did not become specialists for some years. During that time they had a considerable variety of subjects available, and could gain a fairly liberal preliminary education. Conditions now, however, I believe are different, but I do not know them well enough to make suggestions.

(3.) The ordinary Science course of, say, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, and Geology of course took ‘most of my time and energy, but we were still able to fit in special short request courses in Zoology, Music Appreciation, etc., and attend various student -societies, where the considerable discussion presumably added to one’s liberal education. How much one simply absorbs facts at Uni‘versity, and how much one is mentally equipped then to think those facts over

in proportion and make wise deductions is a_ latge’ question; probably little of the latter is done till later in life. : (4.) Although I mostly had to equip myself as a specialist, all of the courses taken helped to that end, and have provided or influenced many interests that have little to do with my actual specialism. All these interests I have found helpful professionally as well as satisfying. (5.) Yes. The liberally educated specialist is likely to

Nave a more resiient and tolerant mind, more quickly adaptable to sudden emergencies. (6.) It is taken for granted that the education of a scientist-especially a research scientist-is a continuous process, It has always been my feeling that a university "is merely a starting point for stimulation of the mind, and that any depth, broadness, or liberalness of knowledge comes mostly after one’s university life is over. It seems to me more important to live vividly and interestingly the one life we have than to be a_ technical specialist; and the ability to do this may depend more on one’s mental reaction to whatever education one got, rather than on the availability of the most liberal education possible. Medical Research Worker (Muriel Bell, M.D.) Yes, I agree in general that a’ specialist should know more than his mere specialty. For example, no scientist can impart what he knows if he is unable to express himself lucidly in his own. language; he will be imperfectly understood either by his students, or by those who read his published work. Again, the biologist who knows all about the marriage of insects but is puerile in his knowledge of the fundamentals of the psychology and physiology of human marriage is not going to confer happiness on his own home unit. But I regard it as unfair to lay all blame for these shortcomings entirely on the University. It is desirable that good foundations should already have been laid in the pre-university stage. Then, too, it is absurd to think that only through university classes can a liberal education be obtained. At best, a university course is a mere introduction to learning. It introduces us to the method of continuing to learn from books or journals; it teaches us to discriminate between the true and the false of that which is written. But even if we claim to have been students for the whole

of our lives, there will always be the feeling that we know so little of the total sum of knowledge, even in our own special subject. Those with a literary turn of mind may be appalled at the defects that may exist in a scientist’s knowledge of the realms of literature, but it is also open to the scientist to be appalled at the mediaeval ideas that many "cultured" people have regarding their own bodies. There are limits to what can be ramrhed into the brain of a student in a few short years. After all, he should be left with a brain that he can subsequently use, rather than that there should be justification for accusing the university of being a place where they pith your brain. If university courses are prolonged, it generally means that marriage is postponed, and hence the relationship between intellectuality and infertility; for early marriage is more likely to be attended by fertility, as well as by a natural attitude to the upbringing of children. Though it often happens that a liberally educated specialist is more efficient than is one who has been educatéd in only a technical ‘sense, it is more to be ascribed to the initial difference in the liberally educated man’s capabilities. And I hold that it is more ‘important that the less well-endowed specialist should put his specialty first, particularly if it is concerned with a subject that holds for others the difference between life and death, Better that the obstetrician should know all about managing a labour than that he should be able to quote Virgil while mismanaging it. net Yes, I know many who have educated themselves in these broader ways since they left the University. I also know a few who have educated themselves in a broad way without going to the University. Engineer (A. Buckingham, B.E.) _ 1. I cannot agree with the Chancellor, much as I sympathise with his argument. I do not think the general public would at this stage accept such a drastic change in university education, and do not think the university should be saddled with such a big responsibility. (First of all we might well resolve the problems resulting fron? the introduction of the "Core Course" into the post-primary schools.) Aspirants to the technical professions (and others too) should certainly receive the broadest possible liberal education before entering the university. 3. No. By the time the university is reached the race is on, and with the tendency to lengthen all specialist courses to six years the economic factor precludes further extension of studies, But the university influence remains and will induce all but the severely technical to broaden their studies in later years. 4. Certainly it has been beneficialnot so much in a narrow professional sense as in broader’ administrative duties, i.e., in dealings with persons rather than with things. 5. Not more efficient in the special field of his training, but much more so outside that narrowing field. 6. Yes. Many professional engineers from personal inclination, knowing the value of a liberal education, have broadened their studies after leaving the university. Most graduates are then still in their early twenties and /their zest for. knowledge is far from satisfied.