Untitled

White Ribbon, Volume 22, Issue 263, 18 May 1917, Page 12

(To the Editor.) Mao am,—ln recent numbers of the “White kibblin' reference has been made to the report on the education of >;irls adopted by the Council of Education and endorsed by the N.Z. Women Teachers’ Association at its annual meeting. May 1, as one of your readers, and as representing a large body of women teachers, g.ve your members something of our point of view? The criticism against the report is, 1 believe, largely the result of misconception of the far ts. The days when girls had to “do nothing but wait for some man to come along and provide the house for them to keep ’ are past, and—we sincerely hope—never to return. (iirls are being trained—and rightly so—to become capable wageearners, but while we remember that they must be able to maintain their independence, we must not forget that the great majority of them will eventually marry, and that the home life of the nation will depend on them It is true that differentiation in the education of girls is stressed in the report, but that is because it is realised that such a policy is in the interests, firstly, of the girls themselves, and secondly, of the nation. The aim of education should be to fit boys and girls for the duties oi mature life, and a system can only be successful in so far as that aim is assured. It has long been the custoirr to consider mainly, in planning educational systems, the needs of boys. Is it not time that more serious thought was given to the educational needs of the mothers of the coming race? No amount of argument will alter the fact that the girls in our schools will become the mothers of the nation —that into their hands will come the work of rearing and training the next generation. 1 am one of those who believe that no other task that falls to the lot of frail humanity equals this one in importance and in far reaching results. Is the present system providing girls with the best equipment for undertaking this task? We think there is room for improvement, and that the report points the direction in which improvements may he made. Shall we send girls away from our schools ill-equipped to face these responsibilities, that will most surely devolve upon them, or shall we give them a helping hand, as far as we may, in preparing them for these duties ? There is nothing revolutionary in the report, and one would expect that the proposal to widen the home aspect of a girl’s education, and to place around her during the years of adolescence the influence of a capable woman teacher, would have received

nothing but approbation from women who are interested in the national welfare. For this is but one phase of education, not the whole. „ No one proposes to rob girls of a sound education in a literary sense, nor to prevent them from qualifying for any trade or profess on the\ may wish’ fo follow. Hut we are deeply concerned with the home life of the nation, for we know how much depends upon it, and if we arc to be loyal to our womanhood, we cannot disregard it. There may be a few people who would forget ih.it hoys and girls have not all the same duties to perform. Such look askance at any ideas of “sex differentiation in education,” but I think there are very few indeed who would recommend that in all our schools there be no differentiat on; that hoys and girls alike be taught needlework, laundry, cookery, woodwork, and every other subject contained in the primary school syllabus. The great human wastage that is now going on makes it more than ever necessary that the comm# race shall he fit and virile, and we must use every means in our power to that end. The education of both boys and girls is a matter of the deepest moment. In considering that of the girls, there are three aspects to be noted: < i) I’hr citizen aspect. (j) The home aspect. ( ?) The wage-earning aspect. Our women must be trained to be good citizens, good mothers, and tapable workers. A system that weaves these three strands into a harmonious whole is what we are striving after, and if the aim is an exalted one, we have good authority for saying that “Who aims at the sky shoots higher far than he who means a tree.” The Dominion Conference of Women Teachers, representing various Associations from Auckland to Invercargill, met in Wellington recently and passed, with only one dissentient, the following motion: —“That this Conference of delegates from the Women Teachers’ Associations heartily approves of the principles embodied in the report of the Council of Education on the education of girls, and trusts that the Minister of Education will put these principles into operation as soon as possible.” I would therefore ask that your readers, and the W.C.T.U. generally, will consider carefully the underlying principles of the report of the Council of Education on the education of girls. The experienced women teachers at the Conference were all agreed as to the wisdom of the proposals, and threy spoke with considerable practical knowledge. I know, too, that the women members of the Council of Education did their share of committee work in framing this report with a deep sense of responsibility and I feel that an Association of Women workers having for its motto, “For God, and Home, and Humanity,” cannot but give sympa-

thetic attention to such a report as this. I append a copy jf the report, and hope i 4 mav be pardoned for taking up so much of your space. Th;mking f \‘ou in anticipation, I an., etc.*, EMILY A. CHAPLAIN, President N.Z. Women leathers’ Association (also member Council of Education).