N.Z. UNIVERSITY AND ITS METHODS.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 13737, 19 May 1910, Page 8

N.Z. UNIVERSITY AND ITS METHODS.

« No. 1. THE DIVORCE OF EXAMINING FROM TEACHING. (.CONXiaHUTEP.) [The .ollowinsr article, thc first cf a f,cric", is published at'the rnqiic«r of tho writers, in order to afford thorn an opportunity of ventdatini? their vie v.-.* on j matU-r of puu-.i-i!_]iort_n_o. "We do n::t, ho-vr/cr, bold ourBrives rc_i*>r_tib'.« for tbe views eiprcsscd.] Past dweussions have* made it obvious that there.- aro two views current m New Zealand on the place, nature, and in fortaii'-o of examinations in education generally, but more particularly in the University. On the one hand, there >in> those who hold to the present system, under which the teachers • -j.Toiossor.s and lecturers —are -.uppo.-c-d to prepare the students to stand a test conducted by men in England who are appointed for five-year periods by tli.* donate. It is true that this scheme has not 1k?oh carried out in its entirety, liccauso iv cert'iin branches. e.g., mcdi<me and practical science, it lead.- to n.anifest nbsurditiir.s. Hut these exceptions are considered rather a weakness, for the ideal ._«t up by the University is an absolute divorce of examining: trom

teaching. On the other hand there are those •n ho con._dor that the present system, outlined ab'ivo, is wholly pernicious; tha", ;t has retarded and increasingly retards true university education, and is thus depriving the Dominion of one of its most potent instruments or &uect-*- —the higher efficient training ot it_ members. The supporters of this -lieu- do not say that examining is useless, but they do hold that examination divorceel from teaching can have uo other than bad results. Thus the isMie being clour cut and the spirit, animating both parties pure, we can but bring forward evidence on both sides —if such there be- -and allow the public to judge w'-e-ther there be need for the overhauling e>f our university system and methods by a competent tribunal. There is one source of evidence open to all-evidence collected from experts at great expense, and yet available for us ire* of charge!—-the report of the Fink Commission on the Melbourne University.

The New Zealand University' glories in being an examining body, and yet here are appended one or two extracts from the Commission's finding on this question ot examinations.

'"The -iibj.-t ot examinations ir, probably the most important, of all subjects connected iritli education. A hart -.vstem re-acta upon the teaching. Bad examination and bad teiching seem to be inseparably connected . . We aro satisfied that teaching and examination, --•far as itiiiversities are concerned, are bound up together, but the teaching ■is the more important. If there be a co-examiu.r, he, of course, should br* in touch, through tho professor, with tho actual teaching work done.'* *'Dr. Barrett'.- evidenco on this subject is representative of the best opinions. It is difficult to make the examination a satisfactory test of a general knowledge. It is generally a test of a sort .of ability which may "not have any relationship, to tho business of lifo afterwauls. and may represent a great deal of wasted effort. Something can be done by making them more practical.' . Ho would increase this element, which practically involves tho greater responsibility in tho professor determining whether a man can proceed in his course. He thinks that if there were more practical and oral examinations tho 'cramming system' would be eliminated to a very great extent. . . . The real position, ]>r, Barrett stuns up, is that a teacher should be a man of aufficient judgment to be able to'say whether the students chould pass or not; and we agreo with these views."

= The report then proceeds to outline the' German £y-tem, under which the student works with the professor, and, after a cert'iin couruo of instruction, receives hi. diploma not for an cxamiJiation passed, but for work done and training undergone, i.e., his d.greo is indicative of efficiency. Tho report then says: —

'. ' .ii the United States great strides havo been made in the better universities, and, although the formal arrangements may not be exactly on the German line, the principles are identical, as in tho Scottish; universities, to which wo hate referred. It is the teaching that is emphasised, and not a mere formal examination, and the great extension., in post-graduate work, and tho fa*', tliat many of the •uniyeisities aro able to insist upon a degreo in Arts as the preliminary requisite to professional courses, may be referred to as -howins. the increase in tho standard. External examiners are quite unknown, nor is tho necessity for them recognised. - Tho authority, of tho professors ia such that thc governing body in praetico delegate the whole responbibihty of academic wor). to them in the college department, as distinct from the "post-graduate side at univer--itiea like Harvard, Yale. Columbia, Cornell, and others. The examinations of young men entering the College during tho three years might bo called terminal examinations,, and hot special examinations for a degree. If the student has worked intelligently during his college course his de_reo will follow as a matter of course on the.examinations which he has been passing through during his Stay at the college, and-most of the .engineers have qualified a. college student!* before they enter special technical schools or technical departments of universities, such as Cornell." , Competent individual opinion on this point should also be- of interest to us. Professor Reinson, President gf JohnHopkins University, writes: — "In the early days of our work, we wero rather inclined to call in examiners , from other universities, but the plan did not work satisfactorily, and I believe our teachers* are now unanimously opposed to it; not because they fear the scrutiny of others, but because tho examiners- wore frequently extremely unfair. The examiner was sometimes too lenient, but generally quite tlie opposite. We do not depend upon examinations for. information in regard to our caudidatcs. Wo hnow them well when they appear before us, and so far as I am concerned, I attach very little importanco to the process. I c:in foretell the result with absolute certainty, except in a few cases in which the candidate does not do " his best. °.' vll, f?'. Perhaps, to temporary physical disability. In my opinion, an examination is a very- poor method of finding out what a young mau knows. and certainly it is still less adapted to findin_; out" what ho can do. Wo hero do not attach much importance to tho ability of the candidate to repeat certain words or to ai-swer certain questions. We form an opinion of him by daily.contact through a long course, and that opinion is worth ; a great deal more than oue based upon ■any ordinary examination." Professor Richards, Harvard University, is even more emphatic: "Undersraduat- work is tested at least twice yearly by a series of written examinations, set and read and marked by the instructors themselves Outside interference would hot be tolerated."

And Dr. Henry Bottingcr, member of ' the Prussian Parliament and chief of 'one of the largest and most successful German manufactories, says:— " .hat the final and degrew examination .-; to be held by the res-pective. teachers of tbe students is absolutely necessary, .not only iv the interest o*f absolute froedbm of tuition, but just as much of ' the student himself. The teacher forms in the course of his lee-

-tire's, and especially in the laboratory work, by his close and daily connection with the student, a much more precise •hi- accurate opinion of the student and hLs work, and also knows his strong and weak points better and more exactly than a stranger who sees the student for the first time, and perhaps lays the /.tress of the examination on a subject which has not been so detailedly lectured unon by the teacher himself. There you'd therefore he a direct injustice in such a .system towareis the student.'

.\fter careful consideration of the evidence tendered to expert educationists of world-wide standing, the report sums this matter up thus : — "It will be seen that the idea of examination without teaching is unthinkable in the university world. This not only relates to the Science course, but to Arte and Philosophy. The University of London, which was primarily responsible for the worst form of' examination-teaching as a divorce from teaching, has now been reconstructed with the view of developing its teaching powers. Its constitution represents an attempt to .to up no hss than twenty-four -•filiated institutions scattered over the n*etro|>o!is, six of which comprise Theology, ten Medicine, and the remaining" eight relate to Arts, Science, and Engineering, all institutions of varying status and teaching power, .w that it is difficult to fix a period when tru< university methods may come into being. The whole movement towards the "reconstruction of this university, the result of two important commis-,-ions in the direction of having a university in tin: real sense of the name, as opposed to a mere examining body, and "the whole weight of authority on thc part of the witnesses of eminence ii; the worlds of science and learning, emphasise the considerations that we have already referred to." The New" Zealand University copied the old LondOu system. We thus seem to h:i«.-_ been guideel by a low ideal of university work and training, and now, wlv.i even tho people whose attitude misled us have seen the gross error of their ways, we appear to lack the courage or good sense to rectify our blunder. If, in face of the weighty evidence tendered to the Melbourne Commission, our Senate maintains, as it did in January last, that the system of ••external" examiners must continue, if is surely time that those Senators who hold this view should adduce some arguments in support thereof. With your permission, I shall show;, in a future issue, some of the pernicious results and influences of the present system on our teaching methods and ideals.