- 3-
ground that had failed.
It seemed to the Committee, in
the circumstances, essential that the Report should contain a full statement of what the engineering Faculty was
attempting to do and to set out, with comments and in
detail, the criticisms which had been levelled at the
Faculty. Paragraph 42 of the heport, insists that a
University course whether it be in mechanical engineering or
in any other course "must connote not only a certain
standard of attainment but also a certain view-point and
range of vision and that nothing but harm and prejudice to
the University's status on the one hand and confusion of
functions and standards in the Colony's educational system
on the other, can result from any attempt to reduce the
University's teaching of engineering to the level of such a
course of training as could be properly handled in a
technical school."
7.
The Sub-Committee of the
The above statement is quoted because, while it
is of first importance to know what a University Faculty
should do, it is of alost equal importance to know what
it should not attempt to do.
Senate remark that vernacular industrial education lies
entirely outside the province of the University and express
surprise that the University as a whole and the Faculty of
Engineering in particular bulk so largely in the Committee's
Report. But apart from the general considerations put
forward in the previous paragraph of this letter the Sub-
Committee appear to have forgotten that in 1927 (see
paragraph 36 of the Report) the Senate actually accepted
the view that "instead of taking Chinese of the middle and
upper classes and trying to turn them into practical
mechanical
い