THE SYLLABUS AND STAN' DARD EXAMINATIONS.

Auckland Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 143, 18 June 1887, Page 5

THE SYLLABUS AND STAN' DARD EXAMINATIONS.

City Schools Committee Back Fp

Mr Harrison.

At the meeting of the Board of Education yesterday afternoon, the whole of the correspondence from Mr E. M. C. Harrison (Headmaster of Beresfovd-street school) and Inspector Fidler on the subject of standard examinations at Beresford-street school and the syllabus generally, was brought up for consideration. The following letter from the City Schools Committee was read:—

"Sir,—ln acknowledging with thanks the receipt of-Mr Fidler's reply to Mr Harrison, the. Committee desir-e to remind the Board that they did not send Mr Harrison's report with the object of provoking a controversy between the Inspector andtheheadteacher on the merits of the recent examination of Beresford-streetSchool, but, as their resolution expressed, to ask the attention of the Board to Mr Harrison's statements; and the evidence adduced by him that the syllabus was much too extended for the requirements of primary schools, and although Mr Fidler's reply may be taken inferentially to deny the correctness of Mr Harrison's contention, the Committee consider thafc the Inspector has not treated the subject with that deliberative calmness which might have been expected, but has allowed, himself to be carried into a personal defence of the merits of his mode of examination. The Committee do not propose to go into that question, but they feel constrained to remark that Mr Fidler has nullified the importance which might have attached to his reply, by varying from the original, what he states he reported of this school. The words used in the report he furnished the Committee were ' discipline, order and tone excellent,' while he tells the Board that he reported that ' the discipline was good. ' The marked difference between the qualified nature of the latter expression, and the warm, approbation of the former is surprising, and naturally leads to the conclusion that the statement later on in his reply that he tries to do Mr Harrison justice is written ironically. The Committee do not propose to ask Mr Hai-rison to reply to Mr Fidler, as they are quite satisfied as to the causes of the comparative failure in the pass subjects of this school. These causes, with the co-operation of the Board, they hope to remove. They are convinced that a school of which it is reported that ' the order, discipline and tone are excellent,' is doing.good work on the whole. The Committee would therefore again ask that the question be considered on the broad ground suggested by the resolutions forwarded.—l have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant, W. Gorrte, Chairman of Committee. The Secretary Board of Education."

The Chairman suggested that the entire correspondence should be referred to the Minister of Education for his consideration.

Mr Cooper objected to this. proposal He agreed with Mr Harrison's contention, that the results exacted by the Inspectors were too severe, and that the syllabus was not likely to promote the true interests of education. It would require a child with a phenomenal jmind and an iron constitution to fulfil the requirements of the syllabus. He opposed the Chairman's suggestion to refer the whole matter to the Minister of Education.

Mr Goldie quoted from a report sent in by Mr Worthington in July, 1886, the opinion, "That the existing syllabus, of subjects for elementary schools for Standards I. to IV. inclusive, ■ does not contain more than can be fairly overtaken by pupils in those grades," and "that except in large schools where there is a thoroughly efficient staff of teachers those subjects classed as '. extra' cannot be well taught to Standards V. and VI." Consequently Mr Worthington's views were diametrically opposed to those of Mr Harrison, and where such doctors idsiagreed it was difficult for the Board to decide. He therefore approved the suggestion to refer the whole matter to the Minister of Education.

Mr Upton said that it was quite evident that there was an absence of uniformity about the tests applied by the Inspectors in their examination of schools. It was highly essential that the uniformity of tests now lacking should be obtained, and-he therefore moved, " That the Board suggests to the Inspectors the advisableness of their conferring together, for the purpose of adopting a mode of examination which would have the effeot of, the application of a uniform test of the standard examination, and requests them to .report to the Board the result of. their conference, and further to report upon the suitableness of the syllabus for primary schools." He regretted that the question of the syllabus had been mixed up with that of the examination, of the Beresford-street School.

Mr Lennox considered that Mr Upton's, proposition did not go far enough. It was a cheap means for the Board to relieve itself of an onerous task. He did not, however, approve of the matter being shunted in that way, and he would therefore move, as an amendment, "That Mr Harrison's letters and Inspector Fidler's report be referred to the Training College Visiting Committee with the view of conferring with the Inspectors on the important matters contained- therein."

In the course of some additional remarks, Mr Upton expressed his opinion that the Board was quite at sea in the matter of education. It had not any adequate guidance or help. Mr Carr, while agreeing with both propositions, did not think that Mr Harrison had succeeded in satisfactorily explaining the inferiority of the results of the Beres-ford-street School examination. '

The Chairman challenged Mr Harrison's statement regarding the "inefficiency" of teachers appointed to his school. Mr Can , thought it a shame that Mr Harrison should have made such a charge. Mr Cooper explained it to mean the constant removal of teachers with some experience and their replacement by the raw material. ' •

Mr Lennox then withdrew his amendment, and Mr Upton's resolution was carried.