OCR Text |
Show EDUCATORS 0150155 P10Wli! Vievs Are Varied on Recommendations Rec-ommendations Made by Code Commission. NO DEFINITE ACTION House Committee on Educa-tion Educa-tion Will Consider Opinions Opin-ions in Reporting. The house committee on education ast night heard voiced at the Hotel l'tah the opinions for and against bill 73, introduced by Representative Alma Greenwood, who presided over the nieet-irr'at nieet-irr'at tended by representatives of the mcational interests of the state. .The r bill embodies the recommendations of the code commission, provision for the appointment of which was made at the last session of the legislature. No formal action was taken, nor were any resolutions presented, but at the close of the meeting Representative Greenwood expressed the appreciation ur the committee of the views given, offered to hold further hearings at any convenient time and assured those present pres-ent that the committee would fully consider con-sider the points brought out in its recommendations rec-ommendations to the house. Tho bill is aimed to codify and generally gen-erally revise the laws relating to public pub-lic education, the state board ofteduca-tion, ofteduca-tion, the superintendent of public instruction in-struction and like matters. It is proposed pro-posed to create a board of eight members mem-bers to be appointed by the governor to replace the five boards now controlling control-ling the various state educational institutions. in-stitutions. This board would also have supervision over elementary and secondary secon-dary education. Had Worked Out Well. At the opening of the session Dr. E. G. Gowans, state superintendent of public pub-lic instruction, outlined the purpose of the bill. Dr. E. G. Peterson, president of the T'tah Agricultural college, stated that the present system had worked out well, and made for harmony and co-operation between the people and the agricultural college, lie said that the large boards were representative of the various sections sec-tions of the state and were a source of inspiration and strength to the institutions insti-tutions of higher learning. He favored the healthy rivalry now existing between be-tween tho state institutions. -Professor "William G. Roylance of the JFaiversity of Utah favored centraliza-tion centraliza-tion to seeure the best possible results. He stated that Utah had several very . fine parts of an educational system which should be welded together. He Jd that education is a progressive Bcu'nce and that changes must be made to meet changing conditions. His argument argu-ment was that the new code would bring together the common schools, and the two higher institutions. He stated that the University of Utah was not close enough to the common schools, because of the failure to make the entrance en-trance requirements reach those coming up. Jio urged co-ordination by bringing all elements of the school system under one head for discussion and action. Extension work in the state, he said, was being duplicated. Views Are Varied. Professor .T. C. Griffin of Hooper objected to the plait as taking away from the people direct touch with the superintendent, now possible through general elections. He also objected to the naming by the board of text books i for five years as unconstitutional. Professor C. H. Skidmore of Granite! school district argued for the bill as log-! icnL unselfish and as providing for better bet-ter ' articulation of the school system. Professor Harris of the Agricultural college made a plea for the retention of leeway by the higher educational insti tutions in running their affairs to se- cure the best results. ! Professor George N. Child, superintendent superin-tendent of grammar grades, iSalt Lake high schools, favored the proposed code as being economii, efficient and eliminating elimin-ating friction. He declared that there would not of necessity be any loss of local pride in the support of the higher institutions. Forme State Senator Herschel Bullen cited the experience of other western states, and quoted letters from individual individ-ual professors against the consolidation plan. Superintendent Horace Curamings of the Mormon church schools opposed the plan as being autocratic. He stated that it placed too much power in the hands of the commissioner of education. He also pointed out the danger that the concentration of powers and responsibility respon-sibility might lead to the necessity of employing a superintendent from outside out-side the state. He stated that the people peo-ple wanted the power to elect the superintendent super-intendent of their school system. |