MATRICULATION AND ACCREDITING

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 139, 16 June 1930, Page 8

MATRICULATION AND ACCREDITING

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—lt is both amusing and astounding to find that some of our educational experts can discuss this matriculation versus accrediting controversy with no real conception o£ the difficulties confronting us in this connection. Unless our proposed accrediting system means the institution of a higher leaving certificate (such.as that obtained by "examination" in the Ola Country) which will be accepted by the University of New Zealand (and by British Universities generally) as a satisfactory equivalent of an accredited entrance or matriculation examination, it (the proposed accrediting system) is predestined to ignominious failure! The general public are not likely to support an accrediting system that will not be accepted beyond New Zealand (as well a3 within New Zealand) as an equivalent of the usual university matriculation. Arej the legal or the medical authorities going! to accept an "accrediting" "testamur' from a headmaster and an itinerant inspector of schools as the equivalent of the usual matriculation? Such a is not likely to be accepted in New Zealand, and I am of opinion that there is not the remotest chance of its being accepted beyond New Zealand. Let the Department of Education set to work to institute a sound type of higher leaving certificate that can be accepted by our own university, and by other iiniversities, as the equivalent of an accredited University entrance test, and the problem of "accrefliting" is solved (but not till then). It will be time enough for the officers of the Department of Education to fling brickbats at the heads o£ the University Senate and. its examiners when they (the officers referred to) can reassure the people o£ this Dominion to the extent of convincing them that their learned and resourceful Department has actually established, a satisfactory substitute for the ("by their way of it) "discredited" matriculation. Let us get something positive and constructive, not mere anti-examination and anti-matricula-tion cackle, from our experts! One of our "experts" would discredit the matriculation examination on the ground that in one year 32 per cent, of the candidates (from a certain school) parsed, while, a year or two later, 55 per cent, (from the same school) passed. Surely this is just what might be expected. Since 68 per cent, failed in the first year referred to, the majority of the 6S per cent, would come up fOT examination again with a year's additional "preparation."—l am, ° °" COMMON-SENSE.