7. General remarks on Education in the State of New South Wales.Looking at Education in the State of New South Wales as a whole, it may be said that, in common with England, it has as yet no properly organised system-that is to say, there is no scheme embracing in a comprehensive and connected way all branches of public education. Strictly speaking, the State has no general system, for the various grades of education do not fall as individual elements into any definitely co-ordinated scheme. This feature, common to Australian as to English education, may be said to be the characteristic difference between English and Continental education; and it is one of the most serious defects of the former. In respect of different stages of education, of the scheme of qualification for particular callings, of the relationship between the State and private schools, and of the connection between lower and higher institutions, absence of proper co-ordination makes everything indefinite, uncertain, and unsatisfactory. In Chapters LIV and LV, the mode in which education is co-ordinated in different countries, and thus unified, is referred to, and it will be seen at a glance that countries which have a definitive scheme have great advantages. When in any country having a properly qualified teaching staff, the curriculum of each class of school has by law to conform to at least a definite minimum of education, the transfer from school to school, whether of the same or different grades, can be fixed on definite lines. Thus, the passing through a certain stage, say, in a higher primary school-the examination being held by the primary school itself, would qualify for entrance into the lower secondary school (equivalent in New South Wales to passing, say, from the " Public School" to the "Public High School." Similarly, qualification in the last stage of a higher secondary school could be taken as matriculation. This is, generally speaking, the Continental system, and has great advantages over the English system of the University holding examinations to determine the conditions of entrance. This important matter will be referred to more fully in the later report. In certain professional callings, preliminary qualification has to be assured in several ways. In a country with a real system, it is much easier to say how far this qualification exists, and to prescribe conditions ensuring its thoroughness. [Chap. LIV, sec. 9]. Further, the satisfactory preparation of teachers for different classes of teaching is facilitated when the main lines of their professional occupation are clearly determined, because a primary teacher has to be generally proficient-i.e., possessed of considerable knowledge of many subjects, while a secondary teacher has to be specially proficient-i.e., possessed, in addition to general proficiency, of thorough knowledge of a limited number of subjects. From what has preceded, it can be seen that it is important in the public interest for the State to so shape its educational policy as to bring all educational institutions under such degree of control as will ensure efficiency and full participation in the State system. This, of course, cannot be done instantly and by mere enactment; it is to be brought about only through increase of mutual sympathy and touch between the totality of educational institutions and the State Department. For practical objects, this would have in view the permission for each institution, when thoroughly equipped both as regards material and personnel, to determine the qualifications of its own pupils for the purpose of passing them to a higher grade of education. This may appear a matter too remote for practical concern. It is not really so. If the State Department is to fully justify its title of "Department of Public Instruction," and to forward in the best possible manner the education of the people in all grades of education, it will be necessary to develope a long-sighted policy, aiming at making all public education what it ought to be in the interests of the people. It cannot rest satisfied with the situation from moment to moment. The de die in diem policy will never place us on a footing comparable to that of the countries of Europe, nor one equal to that of America. It is essential that our educational system should be developed with foresight, and should aim, not at merely following in the footsteps of others, but at contributing its own quota to the educational experience of the world. The direct and present bearing of this is, that the policy of the Department of Public Instruction ought now to be shaped, not merely in regard to its own primary, higher primary, and lower secondary schools, and its technical schools— that that is to say, all those schools immediately under its jurisdiction,-but also in regard to coming into liberal relationship and sympathy with all the secondary and higher schools of recognised standing in the State. The efficiency of its administration, therefore, is in a great measure determined by its degree of prescience and its width of outlook, not merely as regards educational developments in different parts of the world, but also in regard to the interrelation of all branches of education in the State. For there ought to be thorough cordiality between all the educational institutions worth taking into consideration, and this can be secured only through liberal and comprehensive views. In order to strengthen its influence, the State system itself, in the various schools under its direct charge, ought to embody an education that must command the respect of educationists and the public-a view the force of which must be obvious to all those who have given the matter real attention. That the policy of the State Department should be so determined is seen when it is realised that, to acquire the influence it ought to exercise over the entire field of education, it is essential that it should commend itself to institutions now independent of the State, which deal especially with secondary and higher education, to which the primary system has perforce to be preparatory. [See Chap. III, sec. 22]. This points out the importance of placing these branches of education, which are immediately under the direction of the State Department, on as sound a footing as possible. The defects of the present system are serious; they concern the scheme of training and educating teachers, which is one of the most fundamental elements. They concern, also, the curriculum and the hygiene of the school. Until these matters are remedied the condition of education in New South Wales must be regarded as very defective. The pædagogical equipment of our schools also is unsatisfactory and insufficient. The organisation requires considerable amendment, but this is mainly a consequence of our having adopted the pupil-teacher system and a certain scheme of inspection. Unfortunately this reacts on the quality of the education given, as will be shewn hereinafter. These matters referred to will now be dealt with-that is to say, the nature of the defects which must be remedied will be pointed out, and the means and scheme of reform outlined. 8. General in regard to Reform.-In order to clearly shew what, according to the view of one of the Commissioners (G. H. Knibbs), is required to make our system of primary education satisfactory, it will be necessary to summarise what the body of the report has to say on the following subjects, viz. :— (III) The System of Education. (IV) The Curriculum in Schools. (VI) The School Buildings and Hygiene. (VII) Scheme of Reform. (VIII) General matters not included in the above. These will be dealt with in the divisions indicated by the Roman figures above. Then the conclusions and recommendations of one of the Commissioners (G. H. Knibbs) will be outlined, viz., in Division IX. In the concluding remarks, Division X, some reference is made to the attitude of senior officers of the Public Instruction Department to the pupil-teacher question. In Division XI, and those following, the views and recommendations of the other Commissioner (J. W. Turner) appear. III. 1. Introduction.-All authorities on education recognise that it must be systematic; and, therefore, at no stage, and in no type of education (primary or other), is it to be regarded as merely embracing a series of subjects of instruction, but rather as education through subjects of instruction-that is to say, the matter of instruction must be so organised and treated as to be educative. [Chap. III, secs. 9-14]. The difference between instruction and education, however inconspicuous to persons who have not thoroughly studied the subject of education, is fully recognised by every educationist as fundamental. It may even be said that not to perceive this distinction would be to betray failure to realise in what education really consists. The In Chapter III its inner nature is briefly outlined, and it is there shewn that what educationists aim at developing is human character, the cultivation of the body and mind being really ancillary and secondary thereto [Chap. III, secs. 3, 5]. fundamental purpose in education is to give that special direction to the will or character which shall ensure the mental and physical powers being thoroughly developed and normally applied. The second and subordinate purpose is to call into exercise the power of independent thinking, and to supply information which shall be at once cultural and useful. There are few better ways of judging the essential character of an educational system than by taking cognizance of what is regarded as necessary in the education and professional training of the members of its teaching-staff, through whose personalities the system is to be realised. Suppose, for example, that stress is laid upon the moral purpose of education, upon the thoroughness of knowledge in the subjects to be communicated, upon the necessity of realism in teaching, upon the importance of teaching with a wide outlook, then, obviously, the preparation required of the teacher will reflect this, and his education will be in accordance with such a demand. If, on the contrary, the idea of education be that it is concerned merely with imparting a few elementary subjects of instruction, then quite a different régime is to be expected; lower qualifications will be demanded, and training will be regarded as of less importance. The fact is, that the system approved by an educational administration stands revealed in the provision it makes for the education of its teachers, for nothing so fully explains its conception of that subject. A second element by means of which an educational system may be judged is its curriculum, or rather the evidence which that affords of co-ordination of the various subjects included therein. That reveals the theory of education adopted, rather however indirectly than directly, and must be taken with the general personality and education of the teachers and with the character of the professional preparation for their work. Where comments upon the mode in which a curriculum is to be developed exist, these are much more serviceable as an indication of the educational method than the curriculum itself. For this reason, when translating the curricula of other countries, comments of the character indicated have always been included. Throughout, European programmes reveal the thoroughness with which educational method is developed. 2. Defects in the New South Wales' System of Education.-There are two points of view from which a system can be judged, viz. :— (i) The perfection of the mechanism of its administration. As a means to the end, the first is, of course, important, but does not here call for special consideration, and sufficient reference has been made to the matter in the previous division (II). The 1 Not necessarily by every teacher. Educationist is used to denote one who has systematically studied the theory and ractice of education from the higher standpoint. The second is the all-important and difficult matter, the former being relatively simple, inasmuch as it involves mainly mechanical elements. Those which demand immediate and serious attention directly concern the realisation of the objects of education. They are (a) Higher education of teachers, especially in regard to the significance of education. (b) Better instruction in the individual subjects which they will be called upon to teach. (c) Considerable change in the curricula of schools. (d) Improvement of the educational equipment of schools. (e) More thorough attention to school-hygiene, both as regards buildings, furniture, and the condition of children while in school. (f) Special education for abnormal children. These several matters will be now referred to. 3. Educational theory.-Any system of education whatever, in so far as it is deliberately organised, is the expression of some theory of education, and such theory must necessarily deal with three questions, viz. :— Why education is undertaken. (ii) What to teach, so as to teach educatively. It is by the answer given to these questions that the system of education is really determined. It is, moreover, obvious that, in order to secure the intelligent co-operation of a teaching-staff in the realisation of the system, the outlook upon such questions must be commensurate in breadth with the system itself. In Europe, during their training, teachers are made conversant with the general theory of education and with the special system adopted, so that their whole work may be done in the light of an intelligent understanding thereof. Thus, in dealing with individual subjects of instruction, teachers so prepared do not rest content with the mere methodology of teaching. They must recognise its place in the general scheme, and what constitutes its educational value. True teaching can never be reduced to a merely mechanical process, and relies therefore not merely on the intellectual knowledge of a teacher, but also on his sympathy and power to inspire. This is true, not only in regard to teaching addressed to the intellectual faculties, but still more in regard to that which more immediately aims at the building up of character. Some knowledge of the history of education is rightly regarded as essential to the proper understanding of the present position of educational theory, and as some defence against an ignorant and ill-advised introduction of exploded ideas. It has, however, a very much higher function, viz., that of revealing the magnitude of the task of raising educational theory and practice to its present position. Such knowledge is disciplinary. The great educationists of history have been men of conspicuous devotion; hence the record of their labours is a source of inspiration to every person who by character is suitable as a teacher, and is capable of sustaining him in a higher degree of effort than is possible where he views his work only from a purely professional standpoint. In the curricula of the training colleges of this State, the general theory of education is not adequately taught. A certain amount of methodology is included, but is not founded upon a psychological basis. This absence of systematic treatment of the theory of education, the absence of the teaching of pædagogic psychology, with its important bearing upon methodology, are the strongest possible evidence that the educational system of our State is undeveloped. In this connection it ought, however, be said that teachers are advised to read certain books on education. [Chap. XXVIII, sec. 7]. Such text-books as Gladman's "School Method," Bain's Education as a Science," Faldwin's "Elementary Psychology and Education," are prescribed for study, at a stage, however, when teachers have been engaged in their professional work for many years. In Europe, such important preparatory work precedes the undertakir g of teaching, and this is an essential difference in the view as to what constitutes suitable preparation. 4 4. The Pupil-teacher System.-The most serious defect in the educational system of New South Wales is the employment, as teachers, of young people of immature education, of immature physical and moral development, utterly without experience in teaching, and therefore without professional knowledge of its scope and significance. Until recently they could be taken at 14 years of age, a limit which, it was suggested at the Departmental Conference of January, 1902, should be merely changed to 15. [Under regulations coming into force in 1904 the age will be 16]. A conception of what is involved in education, which both advocates and defends, or even which tolerates, the employment of such persons as teachers, is in collision with that of the whole of Europe and America. With few exceptions, and these men of little eminence, it is admitted in the United Kingdom that economy, and not efficiency, is the justification for the employment of such persons, and their employment is deplored by educationists of high standing as injurious to the interests of British education. [Chap. XXXI, sec. 1). It is quite impossible in a country employing untrained and poorly educated persons as teachers to make popular education comparable to that of the countries where teachers are required to be previously well educated and trained, and if the State should decide to adhere to the practice of employing pupil-teachers, it should be with the full knowledge that in so doing it is clecting to maintain a system of education decidedly inferior to the systems of Europe and America, and one that cannot possibly produce satisfactory results. In considering, therefore, any proposal to retain the pupil-teacher system, with its-to the minds of the Commissioners-educationally injurious consequences, it is important to bear in mind that the effect of these in any system is cumulative. In contrasting education under a pupil-teacher system with education under a system demanding previous training, it should be recollected that the inferior system tends to provide inferior material from which to draw the teaching staff. For under the better system pupils at a given age will, on the whole, be better than the pupils educated under an inferior educational system. Hence a lad is actually better qualified in countries that do not permit him to embark on teaching without training than he is in countries with a pupil-teacher system. And since the adverse judgment of other countries as to this system is based on their experience with better educated children, with those educated under our system it would be still more adverse. The removal of aspirants to a teaching staff from systematic education at so early an age as 14 or 15', and the endeavour to make good their educational limitations, by private reading, by instruction to be had from a more or less exhausted primary teacher, by the year spent in the training-school, etc., cannot be viewed with complacency if it be desired to make our education comparable to that of other countries. Let it be borne in mind, also, that, inadequate as it is, the training-school experience is that of only a relatively small number. Thus the whole case is even less favourable than above implied. In regard to the outlook of a teaching staff, a matter of no small importance, it may be said that under the best of circumstances, teachers, as a consequence of their daily association with children-that is, with those who cannot meet them on a level of equal intelligence and information, and cannot subject their opinions to criticism, as would an adult-need a corrective, viz., one which will tend to broaden the view, and give a more normal outlook upon the totality of things. There can be no doubt whatever that the professional employment of children as members of the teaching-staff, places that staff under such limitations as must, in their influence upon the spirit of the community, be regarded as detrimental; for under any régime that tended to leave teachers generally restricted in outlook, their power of educating-i.c., of developing children's characters and minds-must be correspondingly defective. The training-system of New South Wales-that is, the teaching of pupilteachers by primary school-teachers, coupled with a year spent at the trainingcollege by some (not all) of the teachers-cannot be considered as an alternative to the European method-i.e., as an alternative in any way comparable therewith. The difference is radical, and has been set out in full in Chapter XXVIII, where the two methods are contrasted. [See especially sec. 4]. It should be borne in mind that, in respect of the thoroughness in his education, the Continental teacher has conspicuous advantages as compared with teachers taught under the departmental system of this State. During his career in the 'Or even 16. |