Weighs

How Hokitika's Rainfall Weighs Upon Fijian Youth Absurdities of System Under Which N. Zealand Supervises Colony's Exams

'THIS article was contributed by an irate Fiji parent. It was sent in order that it might amuse “PIM ” readers —and it certainly is amusing.

But the writer sent, also, a set of the examination papers, and the latter bear out the points of the following criticism.

Surely, the time is come for some kind of reform. The Fiji-New Zealand education arrangement has been in operation for some years, and no doubt served a useful purpose. But Fiji now has a definite life of its own —it has no more connection with Neio Zealand, culturally or politically, than it has with Australia or Canada —and it is absurd that young Fiji- Europeans should be tied up in this way to the Socialistic Dominion.

The political implications of one set of questions quoted below are plain. The NZ Socialists may use the NZ education system to influence the minds of NZ children, if New Zea landers generally permit it. But why should Fiji children be submitted to the same cunning design?

If Fiji, as Britain’s most important Crown Colony, cannot run its own examination system, it should go for assistance to some other British tropical country, rather than to isolated and class-conscious New Zealand.

IT was not until I perused the papers set for “School Certificate Examina tion, 1947,” that I fully realised how completely our Fiji Education Depart ment is dominated by New Zealand.

As far as the Mathematics, Chemistry, Geometry & Trigonometry, and English papers were concerned, the standard ap pears good. As I could not answer many of the questions, perhaps I could go fur ther and say that the standard is high.

The two papers which intrigued me most were those in respect to history and geography. In my school days history questions were along the lines of “What was the date of the Battle of Hastings”: or “How many wives had Henry Eighth:” or “How did Bloody Mary get her name;” but the history paper before me was on very different lines.

It was more like a General Knowledge Quiz.

For instance: Section C No. 5 (b) read, “Very briefly, compare Sir William Beveridge’s plan for social reform in Britain with our own social security scheme.”

The candidate, if he took the words “our own” literally, could not answer any thing other than briefly—he or she would merely have to write: “No comparison nossible. because we have no such scheme in Fiji.”

Section D, No. 14 reads: “Show how the establishment and development of the dairy industry in New Zealand has been helped by land legislation, the application of science, and organisation for manufac turing and marketing.”

If the word “Fiji” were substituted for the words “New Zealand,” I am sure Government, particularly the Agricultural Department, would glean some useful and instructive ideas.

IN the same Section question No. 15 reads: ‘Choose any County, or Borough, or City Council, or Town Board, and explain its organisation and work. What are the democratic principles involved in local government?”

In answering this question, a candidate could really spread himself. We have a Town Board, we also have Road Boards, and what is more useful, but in shorter supply, floor-boards. A child would find it difficult, however, to deal eloquently with the latter part of question No. 15, since the democratic principles involved in local government were dished in Fiji when the candidate was in napkins.

Section D. question No. 16 absolutely appealed to me. It reads “Describe and account for, first, the ties which in the past have bound New Zealand closely to

Britain; and, second, the changes which, since about 1930, have taken place in New Zealand’s relationships with Britain. Do you think the ties have been weakened or strengthened by these changes?

For the benefit of candidates in Fiji, I would have substituted the word “Fiji” for Britain, and let the pupils give full play to their imaginations. They could have enlarged for instance, on the ar rangement made with New Zealand to have all fruit purchased f.o.b. Suva, the idea being to give the people of NZ cheaper fruit.

LEAVING the History paper, we turn to the Geography questions. The candidate is supplied with an aerial photograph of part of New Zealand, and he is required to answer five questions about it. They are as follows:

(a) Is the photo taken looking eastward or westward? (b) How has the land in the foreground been built? (c) What was the native vegetation on the hills in the background? (d) What kind of farming do you think is being carried on in the foreground? (e) To what use are the hills in the background being put? (f) What is the use of the trees grow ing in the foreground? Why are there none across the river-bed?

As I am not a Government official or an employee of the CSR Company, it is extremely unlikely that my children will have an opportunity of viewing the won derful farming areas of New Zealand— at least, not at my expense. They will have to fight for their livelihood “on the beaches, in the houses, on the streets, and in the hills” (thank you, Mr. Churchill) in Fiji.

Why could not the Education Depart ment of Fiji substitute an aerial photo graph of parts of Fiji, showing, for in stance, banana plantations on the Waini buka River overgrown with mile-a minute, or neglected coconut plantations on Vanua Levu. or barren hillsides, with the question “Why does this look like that?”

Or perhaps a photo of stringy, scrub cattle standing against overgrown graz ing lands, and ask the question “what is the result of this?” The answer could be very brief to this latter nicture: “Beefless Days!”

To add variety to the questions, what about a photo of the Nausori and Nadi Aerodromes, and the candidate asked to compare the relative merits of these two places? I have no doubt that “out of the mouths of babes,” and as a result of their clear, unbaised minds, a good deal of useful and constructive criticism would become available for the Air Conference, which is sitting, or should be sitting—

probably in British Guiana and so de cide this contentious question.

IN this same Geography paper, Section C, No. 9 (b) gives a table of average monthly rainfall in inches in four New Zealand places, and the candidate is asked to explain, briefly, the effect of the rainfall on the native vegetation of Napier and Hokitika.

I have never heard of Hokitika, neither have my children. We do not know how to pronounce it, either, since New Zea land, unlike Fiji, dops not alter the spel ling of its native names, to make them more easily pronounceable by nit-wit visitors.

Why could not the question have taken the form of a comparison of the rain fall in Suva with, say, Lautoka, during the wet (or rainy) season? rpHE papers in this Examination were X obviously set for New Zealand chil dren attending schools in New Zea land, and marked in New Zealand. There is no mention of Fiji or territories under its control, for the benefit of candidates educated in Fiji.