page break

We apologise for thinking

Towards the end of September, two fifth and eight seventh formers of Scots College formed the (unofficial) Student Committee for Improvement. Their motive being to try to make something of their repressive environment.

Shortly after, a petition was presented to the headmaster, Mr J.F. McFarlane, on behalf of sixty - eight parents, students, staff and old boys which asked that the rules regarding the compulsory wearing of caps for senior pupils be relaxed. Those present were informed it would probably be four months before the Board of Governors would make a decision.

Two days later, a later from the Student Committee for Improvement was posted to the Board and copies distributed to the students to let them know exactly what was happening. The Committee, unable to achieve any positive action through the headmaster, thus endeavoured to inform the Board of the...

"general feeling of acute dissatisfaction which is either suppressed by the college administration or the boys' own lethargy. The needlessly conservative attitude of the Board has hampered any attempts to improve this situation. Scots has been established for 53 years and those years have not been justified with sufficient progressive achievement and ideas. Scots has the potential to be a good school."

Immediately following this letter, the Committee members were individually summoned to the headmaster's office. They were asked to write an apology to the Board Stunned by the fervent barrage of hypocritical critcism and yes-manism from students and staff, they agreed.

The next day the two prefects involved lost their badges and the Board demanded each Committee member read the following apology before the entire school (personal apologies were prohibited):

I apologise to the school, in that we ignored the normal channels of communication through the Headmaster and distributed a letter that was derogatory to the School and those who serve it.

The option given, if any member of the Committee refused to conform with the demand, was immediate suspension, and, if he still refused, though no time period was stipulated, his name would be "struck from the roll."

Seven members agreed to read the apology, while the other three refused, they however, succumbed the next day.

In retrospect over the months of February to August, something of which Mr J.F. McFarlane should be reminded and the Board of Governors informed, is that two Committee members had used the "normal channels of communication through the Headmaster" on six separate occasions. The result of these communications invariably proved to be total unproductivity and thus total frustration. Not forgetting that in two instances students were ordered from the headmaster's office.

Since this (typically) abortive attempt to "control" students, three Committee members have left Scots College. Their deciding factor being the attitudes indicated by The Authorities, most clearly in these recent events.

As for the Student Committee for Improvement, the desired effect has been achieved. It has been smashed.

Yes "Scots is moving into the seventies" (so official mass publication informs the pupils and old boys).

"No meetings are to be held without the prior approval of the First Assistant," (1984 here we come) and Mr J.F. McFarlane and the Board "are not happy with the way the university is being run at the moment". They "don't want any university influences infecting the School".

jonathan harcourt,

Ex-member Student Committee for Improvement

Ex-prefect, ex-student Scots College.