page 10

Academics live it up...

Every so often, in between junkets to overseas conferences, the Universities of New Zealand get together. This year the New Zealand Universities Conference was held in Auckland. Four student representatives were invited to discuss matters of little importance with the Vice Chancellors, Chancellors, Pro-Chancellors and academic heavies of New Zealand

The Conference got underway with a dynamic speech from that sometime Minister of Education, Mr P.A. Amos. In 15 minutes he promised the world then qualified his promises in ten different ways. Phil's speech was a non event and thus suited the tone of the Conference.

The first topic of discussion at the Conference was the 'Selection and Admission of Students'. Topics discussed were entrance qualifications, exclusion of students, and extra-mural students The major point of significance of the day's proceedings, besides the evening's cocktail party, was a motion passed calling for only one certificate to be granted in the sixth form and for that certificate to be entirely internally assessed by the school with suitable moderation procedures between schools. The Conference felt that moderation procedures, that ensured there was not variation in standards of those passing in the sixth form from school to school, were necessary or else students would have to be tested by employers or the universities to make sure they had the ability to succeed. In the universities this would mean that students would effectively be tested for entry in the first year if there were no moderation procedures adopted.

This small note of interest should not allow our report to detract from the main point of the day's proceedings, the cocktail party put on by Auckland's Association of University Teachers.

The second day of the Conference dealt with 'Cooperation between New Zealand Universities', and 'Graduate Employment'. One particular motion dealing with co-operation called for NZUSA and AUT to act as occasional forums for the exchange of ideas and information. The NZUSA representatives pointed out that the universities held all the information, and if that information was remotely useful it was confidential. This means that Students' Association's representatives on University Committees cannot pass on any information they receive in private some delegates found this 'disturbing' but none of the heavies commented in public.

Although the topic of discussion was Co-operation between New Zealand Universities, Professor Brosnahan, an observer from the University of the South Pacific, spoke on ways that New Zealand could aid the USP. There is considerable debate in the USP between the expatriate New Zealand senior staff who control the university, and the students and staff association over what forms New Zealand aid should take. In view of this debate NZUSA had written to the Conference organiser asking him to invite representatives of the USP Staff Association. The request was turned down on the grounds that the topic of discussion was New Zealand Universities and that who attended was an internal affair of each university. As Brosnahan himself had raised the subject of the USP. NZUSA delegates decided to raise it again on the final day

The final paper was on difficulties that graduates face in finding employment. The paper concluded that, apart from a slight over supply of science graduates, there was no oversupply of graduates for the job market. According to this paper, there are considerable areas of employment where graduates could be employed that still have yet to be penetrated by those with degrees If the economy slides into the chaos of a depression next year, the irrelevance of this paper will be fully appreciated.

After the days proceedings at the Conference concluded, the real point of the Conference was again reached, a cocktail party for delegates and their wives, and a buffet dinner. Copious bottles of wine, spirits and beer were consumed. Delegates and their wives ploughed through scallops in wine sauce, curried prawns, oysters in the shell, steak, and many other delights. Although NZUSA delegates left early, we have it on good authority that the feasting and drinking on the backs of the New Zealand taxpayer continued into the early hours of the morning.

The final day of the Conference saw some rather seedy looking delegated assemble to discuss carious motions five of them put by NZUSA. The first of NZUSA's motions recommended that the practice of excluding first year students who had failed all their units be ended. Canterbury's Vice Chancellor, Neville Phillips spoke against the motion saying that it was not the place of this Conference to tell the universities to do anything. NZUSA delegates pointed out to Neville that the Conference had in 1969 recommended the introduction of this practice, and Canterbury had been one of the universities that followed the Conference request. The motion was put: Ayes, 4 (NZUSA representatives), Noes, the rest.

The second motion called for investigation into the use of assessment and moderation procedures in universities and secondary schools NZUSA pointed out in speaking to this motion that pass rates fluctuated wildly from year to year in the same subject, and from university to university in the same subject. If there were no moderation procedures in the university, then why were they needed in secondary schools? No-one doubts that a degree represents a common minimum level of achievement.

Neville Phillips (whom some have called Nasty Nev) tried to amend the motion so that it asked the Universities to do nothing. However, after the UGC had opposed the amendment it was put and lost, and the NZUSA motion carried.

The matter of confidentiality was also raised again in a motion calling for the universities to review the amount of information they hold confidential. After NZUSA had spoken to the motion, there were no further speakers and the motion was put. Such was the unexpected volume of support received from the floor for the motion that D.W. Bain from Lincoln ruled the motion carried without asking for the Noes. A few grunts of displeasure from the heavies table saw Bain recognise his mistake and the motion reput, and lost.

NZUSA's final motions called for the Vice Chancellor's Committee to enable the other view of New Zealand aid to the USP to be directly heard in New Zealand. The Chairman, D.W. Bain, ruled our motions were out of order as the topic of discussion was New Zealand cooperation. In spite of protests that Brosnahan had raised the subject and not been ruled out of order, D.W. Bain confirmed his ruling.

The Conference closed on that note. D.W. Bain was overheard to mutter to Mr D. (call me Dave) Pullar, "We got away with it" as delegates left the Conference chambers.

With the conference over, delegates could then proceed to the main point of the three days once again. Lunch, there were curried prawns, scallops in wine sauce, a good drop of stout, and as much grog as you could put away before you left.