PUPIL TEACHERS' MUSICAL EXAMINATION.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 186, 7 August 1900, Page 2

PUPIL TEACHERS' MUSICAL EXAMINATION.

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—l understand that the thiru year pupil teachers were advised to study the first, second and third steps in Curwen's Standard Course, and be prepared to answer questions on the lessons given in that part of the text book. I find that all the teachers have carefully studied the work recommended, and I believe that they have all had special coaching by teachers who know the subject well. Therefore, I contend that if those teachers had the benefit of an examination of the stipulated limitations (the first, second and third steps of the Standard Course), the result would have been or a much more favourable character. The teachers would have had the satisfaction of knowing that the examination was a fair one and the 18 unsuccessful young men and women would have been spared the pain and mortification caused by the great wrong that has been done them in failing, owing to the paper going far beyond the legitimate scope of the examination. Mr Innes has written a long lptter in the "Star," and near tne end of his letter I notice he says: "And now a word as to the 'high standard of music' required from the third year S teacher. The time test submitted was about the same length as for candidate^ and contained only one threequarter pulse and one P"!"-^"^?1 the reßt being on a par with the candidates' test. The tune test extended to about four measures, and contained such simple leaps as a n^o*l^* m}™l third a fourth, and a fifth. The tune test submitted to the English Standard 5 child previously mentioned as any ono can see, is very much, more ajmo""I hope I have said enough to convince any one, even 'A Parent," that the standard of the examination in this subject 1b very low indeed." In reply, I beg to say that if the above was all that was required of- the third year pupil teacners at their examination, it would, have been a very simple examination, indeed, I woutd like to point out that this is really what Mr Innes would have the public bllieve, as he says, "In conclusion. I hope I have said enough to convince any one even "A Parent," that the standaK examination in this subject is very fow indeed." I cannot understand how Mr Innes hopes to convince any one that he has dealt fairly with the pupil teachers when he has only mentioned a mere fraction of the examination in question, and leaves us entirely in the dark as to the remainder. I have before me the examination paper. : It is entitled, "Music: End of Third Tear;" time allowed one hour and a half. The paper contains six questions. As it was understood that the examination was to be confined to the Ist, 2nd, and 3rd steps or the standard course,, we would naturally expect that two questions would be taken ■{w^fcßi*qißrW£^^ step contains 56 questions with their answers, which the pupil teachers were supposed to have learnt, Mr Innes gives none of the questions in the first step; substituted are two questions of his own, which are more difficult. Question No. 3 could only be answered by a pupil who knows something of the staff notation, and the pupil teachers are not supposed to know anything about the staff notation except in pitching their tunes from the scale ofC. Questions 4, 5, and 6 are all taken from the 4th step. Why does Mr Innes Ignore the 59 questions in the 2nd step, also the 123 questions in the 3rd and substitute three questions from the 4th step which go far beyond tho real requirements of this examination? As a member of Grafton District School Committee, I consider I am only doing my duty to our pupil teachers in showing how unfairly they have been dealt with in their musical examination, and I hope the Board of Education will reconsider the whole matter and do something to relieve those hardworking young teachers, who have done so well in all their other subjects from the unfortunate position: in which they have been placed througn no fault of their own.—l am, etc.,

JOHN McDOUGALL, Teacher of Music.

(To the Editor.)

Blr,—Mr Innes, In last Friday's "Star," gives an elaborate and exhaustive explanation of the oral test in music, but he completely Ignores the written test. Now, those of us who did not expect to get many marks for singing hoped to get the necessary 20 per cerat. for written work. I for one carefully studied the work prescribed In the syllabus, and was greatly surprised and. bewildered to find that most of the paper was like so much Dutch to me. On looking round the room I soon discovered by the expression on every face that the paper had created a universal feeling of astonishment and despair. It was almost ludicrous to see us all sitting bolt upright startag fixedly at that miserable paper. Since the examination I have tried to work out the paper with, the aid of the prescribed book. But -I find that the first question, relating to chromatic Intervals; the fourth, to write minor mode phrases in the corresponding major mode phrases; the fifth to' Introduce the subject of transition for the first time to a class; and the sixth relating to bridge tones, are not introduced until the fourth, step. Now the syllabus states plainly: "Music—Curwen's Standard Course, First, Second, and Third Steps, except those parts relating to voice-training." What chance have we of passing an examination in music wheat two-thirds of the questions set are-qulte outside our work? I<alr Play".-mentions an instance of" a pupil teacher failing In two marks for music After obtaining 65 per cent, in other subjects, and after parsing E. My case Is siml lar, except that r failed to four marks inftead of two On behalf of those who failed I thank Mr Innes for his kindly expressed sympathy, but must add that we would rather forego his sympathy and have our

THIRD YEAR,