Matriculation.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18309, 17 February 1925, Page 6

Matriculation.

The elaborate,attack on matriculation which we published yesterday was interesting but not quite convincing. As an indication that the examination was last year rather curiously conducted it was conclusive; as an assault on the examination itself it leave's everything very much as it was. Mr Eenner makes it clear enough that the examiners in French require a good deal more than the secondary schools supply, and the examiners in history and geography a good deal less. He shows that there aro some anomalies in the teaching, or in the examining, of English, and that it is generally much safer to lean on mathematics • and science than on dead or living languages. But this does not prove that the "matriculation examin"ation dominates our whole educational "system," or if it did that the domination would necessarily, be fin evil. If so large a percentage of candidates fail in some subjects, , and so many just «crapc through, the indication is that

[ matriculation does not "dominate," but that teachers allow themselves a good deal of liberty in their year's work. In any case, it is far from certain that the evils for which matriculation is held responsible are greater than those that would follow a universal, but chaotic, accrediting system. "Wc know that it is no longer a conviction of its cultural usefulness that keeps matriculation in its present place in the system, but the fact, rather, that the Senate is subject to the demands of lawyers, doctors and engineers. On the Senate itself there seems to be a majority for accrediting, though it is an impotent majority, as long as an examination must be taken by those seeking to enter on legal, medical, accountancy or engineering studies. "We may even go so far as to say that the indications point quite clearly to the adoption of accrediting sooner or later. But in the meantime we have' matriculation, and it serves no useful purpose to speak of it as an almost unqualified evil. It at least ties down some thousands of young people each year to a sustained course of study that would not be followed with such diligence if there were no matriculation, and in many eases would not bo' followed to its completion at all. Whatever faults it may have, we do not think anyone would suggest that the prescription for matriculation is hopelessly bad. We are convinced, on the contrary, that nine out of ten teachers would agree that it give's a direction to the average pupil's studies which is .generally of life-long benefit. And as time goes on there will, we feel certain, bo loss enthusiasm for the modern doctrine of diversity. Diversity of programmes would usually in practice mean diversity of standards, and some far from pleasant problems for the University Senate. It usually, in fact, means local and parochial jealousies—a much more dangerous domination than that charged against matriculation.

A few dayfi ago we published in our news columns an interesting analysis of the public's reading as revealed by returns supplied by the librarian of the Canterbury Public Library. Stocktaking has recently been completed in the Public Lending Library in Melbourne, and it is interesting to compare the results disclosed there with those which we recorded. It is surprising, for instance, to discover that last year 74,467 more books were issued in ChristchUrch than in Melbourne, the respective totals being 197,613 and 123,146. If wo accept the library standard of one book a fortnight, there must have been about 7900 readers in Christcliurch, with a population of approximately 115,000, and only 5000 out of Melbourne's three-quarter of a million inhabitants. But it would be wrong to interpret this as a true comparison of the public reading of the two cities, since lyithift the area of Greater Melbourne there are half-a-dozen big cities, and dozens of townsships, many of them with their own libraries. The big booksellers in Melbourne altio maintain lending departments, and the Athenaeum has a large list of subscribers.

It is, of course) impossible to arrive at an exact comparison between the two cities, and the nearest approach to accuracy is to accept the estimate of the "Argus," which considers it a fair allowance in these circumstances to raiße tho proportion of public readers in Melbourne from 1 in 150 to 1 in 100. Btit even if we generously conceded as much again to Melbourne it would still be a long way behind Christchurch, where the ratio is about one reader to every 15 of the population. There is a curious difference, too, in the character of the readers of the two public libaries, if we may judge by a comparison of their respective issues of fiction. In Christchureh the proportion was 154,175 books out of a total, issue of 197,613, or about 78 per cent.; in Melbourne, 45,547 out of 123,146, or 37 per cent. The explanation of this remarkable disparity is not, as one might rashly conclude, that lightminded Christchureh reads best sellers and serious-minded. Melbourne more improving ' works. Tho "Argus" sayß: "One would hardly exaggerate if one said that 95 per cent, of the lending library books read in Melbourne are fiction. That is because the ordinary .lending library caters for women and girls, and they read nothing but fiction. The Public Lending Library is really a men's library, and'the novels which are there are mostly those that have become literature." !

Carrying its analysis further, the Melbourne daily, supposing that nothing was known about the city except what the recOrd of its Public Lending Library disclosed, embarks on an archae-. ologist's estimate of the character of the people. It concludes that they were not religions, cared very little for abstract thought—were, indeed, "not a thinking, people," but "decidedly a practical and realist people—art, science, and polities having each a decided hold over their minds. That they were fond of culture and equally fond of improving themselves in their daily hobbies and occupations; that, above all, they were fond of the knowledge of the world, of finding out what men had been and done, and of enjoying the imaginative representation of life. One could hardly say that such a people were a strong people."

The absence of data such as the "Argus" had to work on excuses tis from any obligation to assess the character of Christchureh's citizens in this Way. But it is worth noting that in both cities history and biography together easily form the largest class of books xead after fiction, and that local readers are apparently more interested in" the "isms" of sociology and less interested in "literature" than their cousins in Melbourne. But then our library does not specially encourage the public to read pure literature. Perhaps this is because it is so busy trying to keep pace with the flood of new books .which last year, in Britain aloj&e, numbered 12,706—mgstly fiction, with an increase in books of travel and

erploration, and a decrease in history, both probably after effects of the war. And if we feel inclined at times to deprecate the taste revealed by such facts as these, we should remember that public libraries arc recent developments.