Mr. Hollett In introducing this Report of the Committee
on Education, I wish to state that the Committee consisted of Messrs.
Harrington, Fowler, Spencer, Ryan, Fogwill, Miller, Jones, Smallwood,
Newell and myself. Each and every one of these members gave full attendance
to all sessions of the Committee and gave great aid in bringing it in
so quickly. To mention any particular names might be invidious,
but I am bound to mention the name of Mr. Newell, the secretary whom
we appointed; and Mr. Smallwood and Mr. Harrington, appointed to assimilate
and compile the facts obtained by them and by the whole Committee. I
would also like to pay tribute to Mr. Hanley of the Department of Education
who assisted us very materially in getting together the necessary
data. These remarks also apply to all members of the department. You
have had this report for some considerable time, and whilst in presenting it
I did not read it fully,
I feel sure you have given it sufficient study to debate it without
having it read again. If that be so, then on behalf of the Education
Committee we invite now your criticism, either constructive or
destructive.
Mr. Smallwood It seems to me that the Convention may find in the report two matters for criticism.
One is
the second paragraph which describes the Committee's whole approach to the
subject of its investigation; the other would be the final conclusions
of the Committee, section 11. In section 2 it says:
The Committee decided at the outset that
its approach to the subject of education must
be strictly limited in character. It felt its own
inability to discuss education philosophically, or to approach it professionally.
No member of the Committee felt competent to deal
with education either as an art or as a profession. It was decided at the outset to
restrict
November 1946
NATIONAL CONVENTION
155
our approach to the economic side. What
does education cost the treasury now, and
what has it cost in the past? Is the country
getting adequate results for the money spent?
Could the same results have been got with
less expenditure? Will the same level of expenditure have to be maintained in future,
or
will expenditure be higher or lower than
now? One thing the Committee decided from
the commencement of its approach was its
inability to judge of the the country's
capacity either now or in the future to meet
the costs of education: the members felt that
while as members of the National Convention itself they would have ultimately to
come to that judgement, as members of the
Committee they had neither the general national data, not even the mission, to consider
the wider question of the country's ability to
carry educational services.
As to the final conclusions, that is a horse of
another colour. Dealing with section 2, I have felt
and am sure all members of the Committee felt,
that here, perhaps, was the basis of the criticism
that the Convention might be prepared to offer in
connection with this whole report. If this Convention or the government or the Department
of
Education or other competent authority were to
bring to Newfoundland a man or a number of men
for the purpose of investigating not the cost of
education, the purely economic side, but education itself; if they were prepared to
bring in men
who might be described as professionals — not
teachers or educators, but men who had made a
study of education as such, men who had studied
educational systems, the purpose and the reason;
men who had made a comparison of the different
types and forms and systems of education; and
turn them loose in Newfoundland, giving them
authority and power and a year or two in which
to make a factual and objective study of education as such and of the educational
system as such
in this country; then, having spent about six
months in the different departments, attending
meetings of the Education Council; meetings of
executive officers, the Council of Higher Education; going out to the different schools,
these men
might be able to offer to this Convention an
opinion on the education system which would be
worth having. Our Committee, consisting of two
journalists (Mr. Harrington and myself), a
returned soldier, two retired teachers — I cannot
remember the rest — none of us trained men in
the realm of the administration and philosophy of
education, for that reason decided to admit to
ourselves frankly and to the Convention that
there was a great deal of the subject of which we
knew nothing. We were not trained or equipped
to make that kind of investigation. Then we dug
into the question of what it cost since 1920-21
down to the present time; and for that expenditure
what have we got in the way of education? How
many schools and how many classrooms, how
many teachers? Has the school system from the
plant, the physical standpoint, improved for that
additional expenditure? Then we made a stab at
guessing as to what the education plant would
have to be in the years ahead. The result you will
find in this report. I thought a frank statement of
the spirit in which this report is presented would
be best.
Mr. Dawe If you want any further information ask Dr.
Barnes.
Mr. Butt With regard to (c): "It is apparent that
education has made and is making very real progress in Newfoundland." Is
that based upon the fact that we have been, during the last few years,
spending more money?
Mr. Smallwood ....The answer is, frankly, "Yes". It is
safe to say, with more new schools and classrooms, rebuilt and reconditioned
schools, more equipment, more teachers, more students, a larger
percentage of attendance, a larger proportion of total expenditure going
into it than before, yes, there has been an advancement in
the field of education.
Mr. Butt Would it be possible for the Committee to indicate to us on what lines or on what
basis they made that
report? Even a journalist, if he wants to build a house, decides what he
wants and then calls in an architect and says, three bedrooms,
kitchen, bathroom and so on, he says, "This is what I want." Could you tell
us on what basis the Committee came to its conclusions? For instance
page 203 of the official handbook, 1946, reads "Changes in the curricula
during...democratic citizenship and patriotism." If they considered the main lines
on this sort of thing in the report
did they feel unable to deal with a matter of that kind? I am thinking of
our terms of reference: "to consider facts and make recommendations for future forms
of government." What has
156
NATIONAL CONVENTION
November 1946 happened in the last ten years to make us
more fit to govern ourselves than in other years?
Mr. Butt I am not thinking of any one particular thing
in the report. It tells us we spent half a million dollars on those school
buildings; I have no doubt that is necessary. We spent $15,000
additional in the training of teachers. Is that a proper proportion? I do
not know. If you have a good teacher you have a good school; and that
does not mean it should be a good building. During the period, while
spending extra amounts of money, have we increased the grading and
standard of our teachers?
Mr. Hollett The point is one which we did consider, but we did not go into the various points
you mention. We took it
for granted that the Convention knew what is being done along the
lines of health and nutrition in schools. We came to the conclusion that
education has made very real progress That is something about which it is
very difficult to bring in facts. As for patriotism, that is instilled
into children before they read or write. We are not saying it is like we
should see it, but we realise that education is something which cannot
be controlled by the thought of any one particularindividual. Education is
something which grows by the instinct and ability, both financially
and morally, of the people. We will not therefore give our personal views of
the term. I don't know if that answers the question.
Mr. Butt I don't want to be misunderstood, but I know
the people in the education department very well. I believe very strongly
that we have made real progress. I feel also that these people are
doing a remarkably good job, and I am impressed with their
sincerity. That is a correct statement; but the point I want to know is, are
there main lines that you could have considered? For instance
teachers' grades, how far have you gone with that? I am not interested in
particular examples, I am thinking of the main lines that you were
taking.
Mr. Smallwood I believe it was Mr. Butt who recently
was telling me of a situation in connection with road building. I
think he cited an illustration of how an amateur can be fooled
very easily by an engineer. Two estimates are made of the cost of
building a road, one is small and the other a much larger amount. The
amateur, not
being equipped with technical knowledge, is easily fooled, and I think
Mr. Butt's illustration was that $40,000 went down the drain before ever
a sod was turned because of the estimates. It appears that amongst
engineers around the world the whole job is done by estimates. Well now,
apply that to this matter of education. I have no doubt that there are
men in the world today who could walk into the Department of Education and
say, "What's your total grant for education?" "What's the total of
your administrative cost?" "What is the total amount of your grant for
teachers' salaries?" "What is your total amount for this, that, and the
other, in percentages?" And the minute they hear those percentages they
compare them with a dozen or maybe 20 countries around
the world, and, if they are trained they know if these are correct
percentages or not.... I would think that, after having spent some years
in the department, Mr. Butt would have a general familiarity with that
kind of thing, but I don't think the Education Committee felt competent to
approach the matter in that regard. There may be a dozen men in this
Convention today who can blow holes in this report, and I know there are
many men outside the Convention who can riddle it properly, and
outside the country there are educators and professional educationalists who
would make it look like monkey work. Unfortunately we have
not got that kind of training. We could only look at it as amateurs,
ordinary Newfoundlanders, in the light of how many school
buildings, how many rooms, the cost of upkeep and the probable future cost,
etc.
These matters touch me closely. I feel very
prejudiced on it. I have a deep suspicion of any
attempt on the part of any country or government
to use the schools for propaganda. Hitler did that,
and I don't want to see it done in this country. The
government should foot the bills and then hands
off. Least of all do I want our education system
to be used for matters of propaganda, except
maybe in the matter of health, and in that the
Junior Red Cross is doing a very good job. Let us
have confidence that our children are being
brought up clean-minded and open-minded.
They have a right to form their own opinions as
they face life. Let's equip them to think, and in
collaboration with the other agencies, churches,
etc., let us train them morally and in matters of
character. That's a wholly professional topic
November 1946
NATIONAL CONVENTION
157
which I don't feel competent to discuss.
Mr. Newell ....I wonder if all the members have had the
time to actually read this report. Obviously Mr. Butt has, or at
least he read the beginning and the end, and perhaps I am a little late in
bringing this point up, but from the turn that the discussion
immediately took I am led to wonder if perhaps it would not be wise if
perhaps we should find out how familiar the Convention is with the
text as a whole. I hope this is not impertinent, but I would
really like to know if all the members have had a chance to read this before
we continue with the discussion.
Mr. Newell If any members have not studied the report
they might say so. I just wondered.
Mr. Chairman Mr. Newell, I put it to the Convention that if there were any objections they should
be brought forward.
I did not hear your objection then. I don't know if there are any
others. It can be read if the Convention so desires it.
Mr. Miller I think we ought to proceed with the
discussion on the report, and, since I am on my feet, I think I will give
Mr. Butt a material example of patriotism taught in the schools
during the war. Unlike Mr. Smallwood, who looks on any form of
patriotism with some suspicion, I think it is a clean example, and perhaps
the only reason why we did not include it was that it was obvious that
every Newfoundlander should know about it. That was the selling of war
savings stamps in our schools, where our children came and looked for
a dime, and the next day for another dime, and eventually they got the price
of a war savings certificate. I believe these children knew the
purpose of these certificates, I believe that was a clean way of teaching
patriotism. It certainly worked, and it was countrywide, and as it was
perfectly obvious and we did not mention it; but it is a typical example.
Mr. Butt Excuse me for getting up again. I am not trying to
be like Hitler. I am not interested in those political items, but cite them
as examples. While I am on my feet, Mr. Smallwood, not $40,000 went down
the drain, but $40,000 could have gone down the drain if the estimate happened to
be one third out. There you are.
Mr. Jackman I would like to have education defined and to
know when is a man educated.
Mr. Ballam There is one point Mr. Butt brought out. He
mentioned that the money spent on teacher training was $15,000, whilst that
for building schools was $500,000. I think what Mr. Butt meant was, is
there enough being spent for teacher training, is it in proportion? And if
not do you consider making recommendations for more expenditures in
that respect?
Mr. Butt I know that I am correct. The $15,000 is not
even the correct figure, but I do want to put the same question that you
did. I want to find out if the Committee considered the main lines as
distinct from the purely professional aspect of the situation...
Mr. Hollett I don't think any member has any right to
get up as often on any point. Regarding teacher training, during the
sessions of the Committee we did have Mr. Frecker, Secretary for
Education, before us on several occasions, and although we have not
embodied his talks in this report we secured enough information from him
to make us believe that the Department of Education is very
much alive to this matter of education, and are now making plans for summer
schools in the Memorial College and all over the island; so they have
taken steps to raise the standard of our teachers. That is a very difficult
problem, as Mr. Frecker pointed out. Along these lines I am quite sure
that the average standard of teachers in the years to come is going to be
very much ahead of what it is at present. We have to remember that we
have I think it is over 2,000 teachers all over the island, some of them
with only 12 or 14 scholars, and it is not to be expected that the state
could spend thousands of dollars to send a teacher to each small
settlement. But they are endeavouring to raise the standard of all
teachers insofar as the money allows. Mr. Frecker left no doubt in our
minds that that is one of the great problems which we will have to face, and
they are facing it manfully. I cannot give you any particular facts on
it....
Mr. Newell This report is, in some ways, the beginning
of our reports. It is the first brought in, and we may be justified in
saying that we did not know exactly what the Convention expects, and
those bringing in reports after this will have the advantage of seeing this
one torn to pieces and will know better what to expect. I think the Committee will
agree that we did not feel it was our
158
NATIONAL CONVENTION
November 1946 job to bring in a report which would answer
every possible question that could be asked about education in
Newfoundland. In going back to the question of what we were sent here for, I
think we were to examine and inquire into the financial and economic
condition of this island. In view of this we felt that we had to inquire
mostly into the amount that was being spent on education. We have that
in black and white. We have certain supplementary facts that will come out
during debate, but I don't see that it was our business to discuss the
philosophy of education. Everybody has ideas on this, and we could probably
have gone on at great length discussing such things. I have
supplementary information here which may answer the question of the member
for St. John's West. For the year ending June 30, 1944, there were the
following teachers in the following grades:
*
Mr. Smallwood What's the total of graded and ungraded
male and female teachers?
Mr. Newell I will give you those figures a little
later.
Mr. Job Sometime ago when the Chadwick-
Jones report
[1] was being considered, I think Mr.
Miller made the suggestion that when any report came up we might perhaps
consider the findings of the Chadwick-Jones report in con junction
with the new report. Mr. Newell adequately stated that the report
was based mainly upon giving the information as to the financial
standard of the education business. I noticed in looking into these figures
here a rather interesting comparison. In the Chadwick-Jones report the
subsidies, grants, etc, for 1935-36 are given as $696,000; in your report,
the total education grant is given as $956,000, a difference of nearly
$300,000, and the same applies to 1941 and 1942 where the Chadwick-Jones
figures are
$1,094,000 and your figures are $1,532,000. The Chadwick-Jones
estimate for 1946 and 1947 is $2,350,000, yours is $3,538,000. The figures
are so very far apart that I thought I would like to draw your
attention to it, because there is obviously some mistake
somewhere.
Mr. Smallwood That matter did come up before. When the
report of the Education Committee went before the Steering
Committee, before being presented to this house, the Steering
Committee noted these apparent discrepancies to which Mr. Job has just
referred and returned the report to the Education Committee, pointing
them out. The Education Committee, in good humour and without rancour,
looked at the figures and were quite content that its own figures were
accurate. It had gone to great pains to make them accurate and was rather
suspicious of any difference in the Chadwick-Jones report. Being quite
confident of our figures, we felt that it was the Chadwick-Jones figures
that were wrong. We found that they deal with two entirely different
amounts. Our figures include the same things as the Chadwick-Jones report,
but they include other things as well... Our figures include everything. You may
take it that the figures in this report are
quite accurate. They may not be compared because the two tables
deal with different matters.
Mr. Newell The figures for the graded and ungraded teachers are: graded teachers 1,788, ungraded
teachers
326. All grades from third up to university grade are lumped together in
graded teachers. That would give about 20% roughly of ungraded
teachers. That was at June 30, l944. I think the situation was about as bad
then as it has been for some time, due to the difficulty of getting teachers in
many parts of the country, and the chairmen
of school boards not being able to
November 1946
NATIONAL CONVENTION
159 be too particular.
Mr. Butt I believe that education is making real
progress in Newfoundland and that our educators are doing an excellent job,
but I feel that the Convention should be made conversant with the main
lines, such as the grading of teachers, etc.
Mr. Newell Since the report has been tabled the Convention
has been busy with other matters and I wonder how any delegates have studied
the report.
Mr. Job Mr. Chairman, without doubt there is a marked
difference between the estimate of salaries and your estimate of the total
education grant of $3,538,500. There is a difference of about $1
million, and I think this should be cleared up.
Mr. Smallwood For the present year ending March 31,
1947, we got our information from the department within the past three
weeks, and if there is any difference in the figures, as referred to
by Mr. Job, why should anybody worry? That is a matter for Chadwick-Jones to
worry about. After all, the Education Committee is comprised of
average Newfoundlanders, and not of men thoroughly versed in the issue. With
regard to state control of schools I feel that the pupils would be
subjected to propaganda. I do, however, agree that children should be helped
to think for themselves and to develop character, but I would not
advocate state interference with the system.
Mr. Hollett This subject of education is a real problem.
During its sessions the Education Committee was addressed by the
secretary of the department and he gave sufficient information to the
Committee to make us believe that the government was definitely interested in
the training of teachers and that it had taken steps in this
respect. I feel sure that the standing of the average teacher of the
future will show a decided improvement over the past and present.
While on this point I would like to remind delegates that the government
could not be expected to spend thousands of dollars towards the training of
teachers for very small settlements.
Mr. Newell The Education Committee did not feel it was
obligated to examine all aspects and give all minute details, as the terms
of reference pertained to an examination of Newfoundland's economic
and financial condition. In view of this the Committee decided to find out
the cost of education and other matters along general lines
in connection therewith...
Mr. Crosbie I agree with Mr. Newell that the primary
job of the Convention is to collect financial and economic facts.
I also believe we got the estimate of the expenditure on education far too
low. The majority of professional teachers received less than $3,000
in 1944, and I notice in the report also that two teachers received less
than $300 salary. If they had to pay board they were in debt. Further
on I notice that 31 get from $300 to $400; 196 from $500 to $600; 285 from
$600 to $699; 232 from $700 to $799; 202 from $800 to $900; 446 from
$1,000 to $2,000 and 20 over $2,000 upwards. I think this offers little
encouragement to people to become professional teachers, and I think
the Committee should recommend an increase in the salaries. We are not
concerned with what has been paid in the past. We must look to the future,
and it is ridiculous for anyone to think that a teacher could be expected to exist
properly on $500 a year.
Mr. Hollett I agree with Mr. Crosbie. I know one male
teacher, aged 23 or 24, who is paid $55 a month salary and who pays $50 a
month board, except that at Christmas-time he draws $150 augmentation.
I also know of a female teacher who is paid $50 a month salary and pays
$42.50 a month board. She too gets the augmentation grant.
Mr. Burry Mr. Chairman, I feel sure we all agree with
what Mr. Crosbie has said with regard to the small salaries paid school
teachers. The same laxity applies to the training of our teachers.
Twenty percent of our teachers are ungraded and yet Mr. Hollett wondered if
the government was justified in spending money for the training of
teachers in smaller schools. I come from a district where we have quite a
number of small schools and need teachers, and I say that the government
would be amply justified. There is no reason in the world why small
communities should be deprived of the services of trained teachers, because perhaps
it is from those schools that will be sent
representatives to this house in later years. Good trained teachers is the
important thing, I think. What Mr. Smallwood has said I back it up, we
have to have a larger percentage spent on the training of teachers for all
of our schools both in the city and in Labrador.
Mr. Jackman According to the figures now put forward by
the Education Committee in regard to
160
NATIONAL CONVENTION
November 1946 teachers' salaries, the only thing I can
say is this: is the government paying scab wages for one of the most
important professions in the country? After all, teachers start off when
they first leave home to go to school; and schoolteachers should be
considered among the most important professional people we have. I
beg to make a motion that this Convention go on record and recommend to the Commission
of Government that they raise the
basic wages for teachers, even if we have to bring the higher-ups down.
Mr. Smallwood has mentioned that it is possible when we get plenty of
goods on the market again, prices will come down. Even if that does happen,
still the teachers are not getting a decent living wage, and by asking
for an increase on the basic rate, that will give them a little further
increase when the buying power of the dollar increases. I beg that the
Education Committee recommend to the Commission of Government an increase in
the basic rate of pay for the teachers.
Mr. Chairman You are making this as an additional recommendation of the report?
Mr. Chairman The motion is, "That the committee of the whole make a recommendation to the Education
Committee to
recommend to the Commission of Government that the basic wages of a
teacher he raised." Does anybody wish to speak to that motion?
Mr. Reddy I wish to support Mr. Jackman. I also agree
that teachers' salaries are very low and I think we should make a
recommendation for further increase in their salaries.
Mr. Higgins Whilst I agree with Mr. Jackman, I am
afraid the matter does not come into our terms. Maybe Professor Wheare would
give us an idea of his views on that.
Mr. Northcott We should give credit where credit is
due, and the Commission of Government deserves credit for the increase in
grants.... They have been generous in building many schools throughout
the island, and it has made the teachers much happier. The new schools are
better equipped and we have been able to get better
results and we have been waiting for this for a long time.
Mr. Jones As a member of the Education Committee, and having taught well over 30 years in
the schools of this
country, I support the report now before the Convention for public
discussion.
I know there are many people thinking and saying that $3.5 million is
a lot of money to be spending on education in this country, and are
wondering if we are getting adequate returns for such a large sum. I
think every cent of this money is well spent. Up to ten or 15 years ago many
of our outport schools were scarcely fit to herd cattle in, and in
such buildings we compelled our children to spend five or six hours a day.
These schools, if you can call them such, were poorly lighted, poorly
ventilated, poorly furnished, and inadequately staffed. No wonder
the Department of Public Health and Welfare in its investigations
found such a large percentage of our school children's eyesight defective,
brought about chiefly by eye strain. Many of these schools contained
long benches, in which five or six children sat with no support to their
backs, and with chests cupped in in order to reach the desk which was
either too high or too low, and in this posture they generally sat through
the period. Is it any wonder that we have such a high percentage of TB in this country?
I am sure we all agree and are pleased to know
that the Department of Education is taking steps to remedy this evil as
quickly as possible with the grants at its disposal. I said that the
schools were understaffed. I will give you an example from my own
experience. I once taught, or tried to teach, in a school with over
100 pupils enrolled with no assistance. I was not only supposed to teach the
lower grades, but expected to prepare primary, preliminary, intermediate and associate
grades as well. Is it any wonder, Mr.
Chairman, that I am standing here today after going through such an ordeal
for three years? I am glad to say that these conditions do not exist
at the present time, thanks to increased educational grants. It has been
said that all our government departments are overstaffed, be that as
it may. In my experience with the Department of Education, I am sure this
does not apply. Every person employed there is giving faithful service
for the salary which he or she receives. In reference to teachers,
it has been often said that they have a good job, only having to work for
five hours a day. I say it is a noble job, trying to mould the minds
and characters of boys and girls, in order to fit them to take their place
in the community in which they live. It is a noble work, and
teachers should be better paid for the work they are trying to perform. But
if a person thinks a
November 1946
NATIONAL CONVENTION
161 teacher's work is finished when he dismisses his
pupils, he is very much at sea; he often has to work up to late hours of the
night; he has the next day's lessons to prepare, assignments to correct
and many other things to do which only a teacher can know. Owing to
the shortage of teachers, which had been brought about chiefly by enlisting in the
different forces, and others taking more
remunerative work, the department finds itself compelled to accept boys or
girls from the high schools who had passed grade XI, admit them to
summer school for four or five weeks, and in September place them in charge
of a school. This is not as it should be, but the department finds it
imperative, as experienced teachers are not available. Supervisors
are therefore scattered through the districts in order to help these young
and inexperienced teachers in their work....
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I think that
money spent on education is money well spent,
because the better a community is educated the
better it can manage its own affairs, and this
applies to the government of a country as well.
Mr. Chairman With regard to your motion, Mr. J ackman, I
have discussed it with Professor Wheare and we feel we cannot pass a motion
making a recommendation to the government; but you can make a
recommendation to the Education Committee as to the possibility of
approaching the appropriate authorities to the basic wages of teachers
being raised. You cannot go straight to the Education Committee and ask
them to make a recommendation to the government; you can ask
that an amendment be put in the report condemning the low wages of teachers.
In those circumstances I am afraid I cannot accept your motion as it is
now.
Mr. Higgins I suggest that probably Mr. Jackman might draft up something tomorrow.
Mr. Jackman That would be better; it will give me more
time.
Mr. Vardy I must congratulate those responsible for such able reports on education and forestry.
I shall defer any
comment on the latter until the appropriate time. I do not profess to be
an authority to speak on education from a theological or academic
standpoint; but rather as one who is anxious to learn.
I am happy to find that at least someone on the
Committee has entertained many of the hopes
and thoughts for the immediate further extension
of the Memorial University as I have myself. This
splendid college has served a useful purpose to a
point; but after 21 years as a junior college, that
is, a college giving the first two years of arts and
science, (three years for engineering), students
who desire further education must go abroad to
Canada or the USA and spend about two years to
complete their studies for a degree in arts and
science. Canadian colleges and universities have
a very high regard for the quality of the work done
by our students. This is good proof that the college has so far justified its existence
as a junior
college. It is likely now that after 21 years of
existence the college has probably reached the
limit of its possibilities as a junior college. The
next step should be the development to a degree-
giving college. This appears an appropriate time,
as the present college was a memorial to those
who served, and more particularly those who
died, in the cause of freedom during the great war,
19l4-l918. What more fitting memorial could
there be to those who died during the second great
war than the inaugurating of a degree-conferring
college? Newfoundland is probably the only
dominion which cannot boast of such an institution of higher learning. For reasons
of prestige,
therefore, this step is highly desirable.
The benefits from the present college have
been felt throughout the whole island, since the
students come from every part of Newfoundland,
and after their studies return for the most part to
their towns and villages. With degree status the
college could considerably augment its contribution in raising the general standard
or level of
education in this country. It is likely that over a
period of ten years the enrollment would rise
considerably. At present the normal enrollment
would appear to be about 380. With degree status
the enrollment would soon rise to an average each
year of about 450 to 500.
It would not be the intention to attempt training for medicine, engineering or other
professional training which would be very costly with
our limited means; but to provide courses in
liberal arts and science leading to the B.A. and
B.Sc. One immediate benefit would be better
qualified teachers throughout Newfoundland.
You will find Newfoundlanders in key positions
in almost every corner of the inhabitated globe;
but they were mostly trained and educated in
other countries. If this can be done with our
162
NATIONAL CONVENTION
November 1946
material outside, it can be done here, and it would
be only reasonable to expect that some of these
men would stay here. We are a producing
country, both in material and brains equal to the
best; but in this respect we must become more
national-minded and export more of the finished
product in order for our country to derive any real
benefit from our natural wealth.
Touching briefly on the question of teachers'
salaries, I do feel the lower grade teachers are still
underpaid and there is little inducement for
anyone to take up the profession unless they see
their way clear to qualify for the higher scale. In
the matter of assisting in the building and equipping of new schools, I would say
the department
has done a good job and the value of this policy
will best be proved over a period of years....
Mr. MacDonald ....Education, to my mind, is one of the
more, if not the most important subjects in our study of the
future well-being of our country. An educated people tends towards a
prosperous and happy future, an uneducated people the very opposite. We
have in the past been woefully lacking in this very important matter. Progress has
been made in the past few years undoubtedly;
but much more needs to be done. The question has been asked in this report:
"Is the country getting adequate results for the money spent? Could the
same results have been got with less expenditure?" The Committee has answered
these questions in a general way by stating they consider the department
had done a good job under the circumstances. They probably have, but my
answer to the question, considering it from a financial and social point of
view, is that the same result can be obtained from a smaller expenditure
and that better results could be obtained from the same
expenditure. I don't mean by this that teachers are overpaid; they are very
much underpaid. Teaching, as a profession, is probably the lowest paid,
for what we expect from them, of any class in the country.
Our set-up in the matter of education is wrong,
and here I probably enter upon a very controversial subject. The system of denominational
education which we have is antiquated and
should be changed to a public school system, as
in all progressive countries in the world today.In
discussing this question I shall endeavour to approach it from a purely financial
and social
aspect. The theological arguments I shall leave to
more learned minds. I speak as an outport man,
where the effect of the present system is probably
more pronounced than in the city of St. John's,
where large schools can be provided to carry out
the provisions of this system. Financially, the
present system is uneconomical, in that there is
too much overlapping both of money and effort,
and socially it tends to instill and keep alive that
spirit of intolerance which has been a drag on our
country from time immemorial, and which we
could very well do without.
To illustrate what I am saying, my own town
of Botwood might be very well used in this
connection. Some two or three years ago, when
compulsory education was put into effect, it was
found that our schools would not accommodate
all the children. The population was at that time
about 2,700. We had five schools divided among
three denominations; one, the largest having
three schools, and the other two having one each.
All these school buildings, except one, were in a
bad state of repair and, with the exception of two,
had no sanitary facilities. An effort was made to
get an amalgamated school. A committee was
formed to carry out the idea, which would have
meant that one central school with a primary
school on each end, or three schools in all, would
have been sufficient to take care of the pupils, and
give them a higher standard of education. The
whole district of Botwood was canvassed, and it
was found that the great majority of the people
were in favour of such a school. We contacted the
education department, and where did we get? Just
nowhere. We even had a visit from the Commissioner of Education of the day, who advised
us
that an act had been passed enabling an amalgamated school to be started, providing
that the
various school boards would agree. What chance
do you think we had, when the members of the
school boards are recommended by the different
ecclesiastical authorities, some of which were
opposed to the idea? The final result to all this
was that four new schools were built which, with
the original two remaining, total six. Since then
one more has been added, making seven in all. Is
that economy? Does it tend to raise the standard
of education as much as could be obtained by an
amalgamated or public school? It has been said
that the public or amalgamated school system is
not workable. All we have to do to answer that
question is to point to Grand Falls, Corner Brook,
November 1946
NATIONAL CONVENTION
163
Millertown, Badger, Buchans and compare their
results in examinations with other places.
The present system does not give teachers a
chance to accomplish what they would wish. A
teacher with four or five grades to teach cannot
hope to attain the same result as with one grade,
and the children cannot hope to attain that degree
of knowledge which is their right. The teachers
in these seven schools number 18. The largest of
these school has six rooms, three others have
three rooms each, the other three schools one
room each, making a total 18 rooms — 18. Can
you imagine anything more wasteful or uneconomical when a central school of say ten
or
twelve rooms, and two schools for primary
grades, would suffice? I might say that three of
these school are situated within a radius of about
200 yards.
In conclusion, it is my opinion that the present
system is not only wasteful and uneconomical,
but seriously retards the education of our young
people who do not get the chance to which they
are entitled, and to whom we look forward, at
some time, to carry on the public affairs of this
country. It also restricts the efforts of that underpaid, self-sacrificing body, the
teachers of this
country, to reach the goal they have set for themselves, the education of our young
people. They
are doing a good job but would be eager and
willing to do even a better one, without the
present restrictions now placed upon them.
Mr. Higgins Usually I am in accord with my friend Mr.
MacDonald on those matters, but frankly I can't agree with the statement, or
his suggestions of a new school system such as he has outlined. As far
as this country is concerned the system of education that we have meets with
the approval of the people, and unless you have the approval of the
people as a whole no system of education is going to be successful, because
apparently it has worked out very well. Whilst it does not make any
difference what comments we make here, nevertheless we should express our
thoughts, and I would like to say that in my opinion our system of
education is entirely satisfactory, and should not be changed.
Mr. Keough I would like to go on record as concurring
completely with the statement made by Mr. Higgins.
Mr. Burry I would like to say a few words on that
matter — as a member of the National Con
vention, not as a
member of the profession that has much to do with the spending of this money
and is part of the denominational system. It is true, as Mr. Higgins
said, it is the choice of the people and it should remain as such. I agree
with him there, but I agree also with Mr. MacDonald that it is a
wasteful system, not giving us the best possible advantage of the money
spent, and I wonder if we could not as a country perhaps do a little
better under our denominational system. There seems to be a tendency at the
present time to greater divisions. Our school system in a little
community seemed to be working very well, and then certain denominational
interests stepped in and opened another school, which results in a
very wasteful system. I would like to be able to arrange it so as to avoid
that happening, to preserve that arrangement rather than to split it
up again. That seems to be a thing to consider. I regret that sometimes you
will find in some small communities a fairly good system operating
under our denominational system, and then, for reasons that you all know,
the split is made and the system is very inefficient. That does not apply
to our work in Labrador, where I am chiefly interested, because our
work there is going very very smoothly under the denominational system,
but I am afraid perhaps in the future it may suffer because of it. I
will have no more to say about this at the present time, but I would like to
say that in Labrador and the northern part of Newfoundland the work of
education is efficiently enhanced by the interest the Grenfell Mission
people have had in the schools and the education of the people in the
north. The amalgamated school in St. Anthony is a great success
and is making a great contribution to that community. Perhaps you do
not know just what is being done in Labrador by these people, and has been
done for some years. There were three boarding schools in Labrador,
one at Mary's River, one at Cartwright and one at North West River. Two of
these are still existing, one at Cartwright under Dr. and Mrs.
Forsyth and one at North West River under Mrs. Paddon and
her son. The one at North West River is now being converted into a nondenominational
school. We have three teachers there, and we
have plans made for the community to set up a $15,000 building with a four
room school. It will be under the board of education, but I am glad to
say that the Grenfell Mission
164
NATIONAL CONVENTION
November 1946 people will carry on their boarding school.
They take the children from the isolated villages and families around
the coast and bring them into North West River and Cartwright, board them,
feed them and clothe them for $40 a year, $4 a month, and now at North
West River they will be sending them to the amalgamated school, and we
are hoping that boarding school will increase. That means that from the lone
villages and families along the coast the Children have the advantage
of getting their education, and being
fed and clothed for the year, and under the denominational system the
Anglican Church and the one I represent put teachers in the bigger
villages along the coast, which gives us a fairly good system of education.
The interest that the Grenfell Mission has had in the north has
facilitated the matter of education to a great extent, and it
seems to function fairly well at the present time.
[The committee rose and reported progress and
the Convention adjourned]
