Slow Progress in Bringing Literacy to P-NG

[?]stralia in Islands [?]ation Battle

Although Australia has governed Papua for 70 years, and New Guinea for 35 years; and although Australia has been making gifts of up to <£lo millions per annum to assist administration, it is a fact that very slow progress has been made in the spread of literacy in the Dual Territory.

iROBABLY, there is no more difficult task than this in the whole field of education. The ijority of the 1 1 million natives P-NG are among the most .mitive in the Pacific Islands. A ge number of them are not even nder control”. They speak at st 500 different languages, rhere is no common language ;ept Pidgin English—which is a item of communication used in *ee or four parts of the world, d regarded as indispensable in ilti-languaged New Guinea, but despised by academicians.

Since World War 11, these facts ve been accepted by the Aus lian Administration in Parma d New Guinea; » Although Australia has under :en to raise the New Guineans’ ng standards as quickly as >sible, there can be little real )gress until the bulk of the Lives acquire some small measure literacy. ► There can be no measurable ount of literacy unless there is widespread system of village mary schools. ► There can be no effective age schools unless there are

available a supply of trained teachers,, and a medium through which their instruction may be given.

The first steps, then, in intro ducing a Territory-wide system of education should be the training of teachers in accordance with a clear-cut plan—which plan must include provision for a medium (Simple English, or Pidgin English, or the use of certain root languages, like Motu or Tolai) through which instruction may be given.

Those steps, in turn, call for a staff of persons to train the teachers, and suitable establish ments wherein that training may be imparted, under suitable con ditions. rN years have passed since the Australian Administration was re-established in Papua and New Guinea. According to our calculations, Australia within that period has given P-NG at least £5O millions wherewith to build up public services, including health and education. But any growth in native literacy is no more marked than it was before the war

and—what is more disturbing—it is not easy to see any growth in the Administration’s machinery for shaping and introducing a system of primary education.

There probably is need for at least 5,000 native teachers for village schools—the number reduced,

of course, according to the degree (generally unknown) in which acceptable Mission native schools are functioning.

The facilities which exist to-day in qualified staff and buildings wherewith to train teachers, would not take care of 500 trainees, let alone 5,000.

There is need —for several reasons —for a clear-cut understanding with the Mission bodies as to the future respective roles of Admini stration and Mission schools in Territory education.

The Minister and some high Administration officials have tried to get closer to the Missions in the education field; but their efforts have been distinguished more bji fumbling than by understanding Some critics say that this is the result of Ministerial timidity, plus Mission arrogance.

There does not seem to be, in the whole Commonwealth Parlia ment, one person capable ol dragging out the facts and demand ing an inquiry into the causes ol this unsatisfactory situation.

Naive Statement by Minister

PRODDED by a question in the Commonwealth Parliament or October 10, Australian Terri tories Minister Hasluck presented s summarised defence of his educa tion system and policy in Papua and New Guinea.

The questioner wanted to know if the Minister approved a state ment, attributed by the newspapers to Education Director W. C. Groves; that “many natives were receiving a secondary education in Australia which had no relation to their life in the Territory; that natives were asked to study French and Greek: although English was a foreign language to them; that they shoulc be brought home immediately anc either given vocational training oi put into jobs”.

The Minister said he suspecteo the accuracy of newspaper report!; generally; and in any event the Director would be unlikely to criticise the system, because the Director himself was responsible fon the choice of students, schools ano subjects.

The Minister went on to say tha P-NG boys and girls were being thus brought to Australia because there were no secondary education facilities in the Territory and “it i: contrary to our thinking . . . thaj we should deny them the chance to have secondary education, ii they are ready for it”.

He argued that the practice woulo serve a very useful purpose, because; it would “feed back into the- Territory and the Territory’!' services and education system” ? number of indigenous persons who. had acquired a higher standard ox education.

He said that primary education in the Territory is not universal! and a long way from the Govern-i

lent’s “target”; and “without a Dundly-based system of primary ducation, there is no foundation n which to build a system of ;condary education”.

He concluded; “The major need i education in the Territory is for niversal primary education; and e still are so far from achieving lat goal that we cannot forecast large-scale development o f ‘condary education”. So, pre imably, the system of transporting fleeted natives from P-NG to ueensland secondary schools is to a on.

Editorial Comment

The Minister’s statements (which re taken from Hansard) appear ngularly naive and ill-informed.

Protests against the transporta on of P-NG native youths and rls to Australia are not concerned articularly with the desirableness ? secondary education, but with the ►cial consequences of the contacts ley make in Australia.

Generally, in Australia, they are itisfactory students, and their Jhaviour is admirable. But, in ustralia, they are trained in a way life which, in nine cases out of n, they cannot continue in New uinea.

In Papua and New Guinea, there ■e two worlds —that of the iropean, and that of the native, t present, there is no half-way arid, for the accommodation of ie native trained to live as a iropean.

If native students were trained secondary education within the irritory itself, and in accordance ith a system designed for the irritory, a half-way stage wherein ey would enjoy better living andards would be evolved, and the al dangers of the present system mid be avoided.

It is surprising to know that a Dvernment which is annually aking P-NG a free gift of at ast £lO millions, argues that at is stage it is not practicable to ovide the Territory with a condary education system. In 2W of the need for more native achers, secondary education cilities in P-NG are most icessary.

Relations Between

Education Dept, and

Missions

N outstanding weakness of the L education system in P-NG is the failure since 1945 of the inberra-Port Morseby Admini 'ation to effectively integrate the avernment’s policy and system of imary education with the educa >n systems introduced and opera i by the various Christian issions.

The Missions introduced a con lerable measure of village primary ucation, generations before the

e^eral A Snom^h^ S fnr CC6 H ted any

K i mSSrfow J education.

ipalnns und f erst^ dably ’ tb f y are

nr?v?lptp«i °nnrt . and

chanees aI J y a view to and the

Pdfirntfnn Mission

UC fr nf a £ lteS with an overcontrol by the t , , But the Administration, probably wishing to get on with its education policy, and to train selected natives as village school teachers, and to streamline the whole system ?/ primary education, has found lt ?6lf in some degree in conflict with the Directors of at least some of the Missions.

There have been conferences

between Administration and Missions. Little has been said about them. It appears that the Administration is anxious to avoid any public sign of conflict—some of these Missions are capable of raising a distressing howl!

But enough has been learned of the nature of the talks, in the past year of two, to indicate that certain Directors of Missions have displayed an amount of arrogance and aggressiveness which bodes ill for any worthwhile plan of co-ordina tion on future education activities in the Territory, Of course, the Missions have a case. For every 10 schools run by Administration, the Missions have at least 270; for every 500 pupils

(Continued on page 105)

Administration schools, the ssion schools have 10,000. The ministration quite properly :ognises this Mission work by inting the Missions anything up £lOO,OOO per annum for ex iditure on education alone, rhe Missions are quite sure that ;y are entitled to all that, and ire.

ND it is at this point that the . Administration comes up against the greatest disability the Christian Mission system of ication in Papua and New inea. rhere are now no less than 37 ferent Missions operating in pua and New Guinea. The age schools they provide and >port are divided among about or eight major Mission controls, i a large number (no one seems know how many) minor Mission itrols.

Commentators are not concerned h the religious side. It is a nifest absurdity, nevertheless, it a primitive people like the New ineans should be presented with many interpretations of the spels.

But we all are concerned with the primary education systems pro vided by the Missions. They vary widely each of the major Missions, in the last 50 years, has developed what it considers the most effective methods of instruct ing the village children. None is prepared to abandon methods which have been conscientiously and often painfully evolved.

It is becoming apparent that, in the field of P-NG primary educa tion, what is (or should be* the irresistible force (the determination of the Australian Administration authority to deal with the problem of introducing primary education to the children of 11 million people, who speak 500 separate languages) has come up against the immovable object (the refusal of the Mission to surrender their 2,700 village schools to the effective co-ordinative control of the Administration).