Page 2 Advertisements Column 7

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 16, 19 January 1921, Page 2

The Board of Studies has again dealtwith the conduct of examinations. This also was not remitted to' them by tho statute that created the Board of Studies. Their' duty^ is to make recommendations as to the appointment of examiners, etc. What"'is , now proposed isa revival of tho Remand that the teachers should bo;! the examiners. The,proposal deals with cmly^the conduct of,-examinations of the 'Pass Grade.' The/matriculation exami T nation,and the examination for "scholar-' ships and- higher degrees \than' bachelor, are . to' be left appareiitlyV as they are. The board proposes—(l) In each, such subject-a special board of examiners consisting of the'responsible teachers of the subject together- with an assessor. (2) Papers, to be set by the assessor after consultation with, the teachers "in each college. (3) Papers at each centre to be marked-by the teacher at that; centre, and.all the papers to be also marked by the asssssor. (4) In doubtful case 3, opportunity to bs given for the assessor to meet the teachers concerned. In cases of disagreement between the teacher and the assessor concerned the special board of examiners shall decide. (5) The asses.sor to be paid for bis services; the tea-chers to be invited to do this work without payment '(6) The results as a whole to be dealt<with by the chairman Of the Wellington committee ,of the senate, together with the chairman-of each professorial board. "AN UNSATISFACTORY SfSTEM."- ---" It appears to me that this would 1)3 a very; unsatisfactory system. , First, the assessor has no real status in the examination. It is true that.the assessor is to set the paper, and apparently he may set what paper he pleases, so'long as he hes consulted the teachers. Suppose he'rets a paper that none of- th« teachers approves of. What would happen . Then the papers are to be marked, and if I he, assessor, disagrees wivh the .'.narking of the teachers, the speci-il board of examiners, which 'consists of the four piofessors and the assessors, is to decide. That seems, to be the proposal, but the sixth paragraph provides that.the results as a whole are to be dealt with' by the chairman of the Wellington committee of the senate together with the chairman of each professorial ,bo£*d. - What doesthis mean? , •'".,-' ' ". Apparently the chairman of the Wellington committee ajid the four chairmen of the professorial boards are to' be an appellate, tribunal. The-senate is to be ignored, and . its function to finally. decide on the students who pass the ~examinations is to be delegated to a- new body. At present the chairmen of the professorial boards are ' four professors whose subjects are as follow: —Modern languages, mathematics; mental and moral philosophy. Suppose the'decision of the English assessor is not accepted: will the decision 6f the four chairmen and the chairman of the Wellington com-' mittee be' acceptable ? It might happen that the majority of the members of this final appellate tribunal might not be much acquainted with the subject in which it had to decide. I do not think that the senate can possibly agree to the suggestion. ' ' "It is satisfactory -*to notice that the ground for appointing professors as examiners, which was urged in previous years, has apparently been abandoned. It was formerly said that the only competent person to examine students was the teacher. Now we are to have a board consisting of five persons, four of whom have not been teachers of some ■students examined, and the chairman of the Wellington committee senate,' jWho may never have been a University teacher, to deal finally with "pass" examinations. If, however, 'the Board of Studies has known -or does know of persons resident in New. Zealand, not engaged in teaching utiiv'tisity^ students, who are competent a.nd suitable to act as examiners—even at the pass stage of our degrees—how comes it' that up "to ths present no recommendations of such persons as examiners -have ever been made by the board? Considering the number and ability,of settlers who hold University degrees obtained in our own University and in the universities of the United Kingdom, of America and elsewhere, it might have been expected that some of them would have been recommended by- the board." PH.D. NOT WANTED. \ The Chancelor commented adversely also on the board's proposal to create a new degree—Doctor of Philosophy—