TEACHERS’ EXAMINATION FEES

Evening Star, Issue 14512, 2 November 1910, Page 5

TEACHERS’ EXAMINATION FEES

THE REV. P. B. FRASER AND THE MINISTER. Tho Rev. P. B. Fraser calls attention to the fact that his original statement was that “ nearly ” £4,000 was taken in examination fees by the Education Department, and the correctness of his assertion is homo out by tho fact that in the recentlyissued departmental report it is acknowledged that tho examination fees received by the department last financial year amounted to £3,683. A large part of this examination work was formerly done by tho boards, but now the Civil Service and the “ matric.” examinations embrace what was formerly the boards’ pupil teachers’ examinations, which cost the latter nothing wider the boards. Mr Fraser proceeds to give details of tho charges levied on a pupil teacher going through his graduate course. in three years these mounted up to £l4l 9s 6d. He specially attacks the charges of half a guinea for a license to teach, and votes it “ particularly unjustifiable and exorbitant.” Formerly the department granted a provisional certificate to students who had passed all their examinations before reaching tho age of twenty-one. Cases of individual hardship are cited by Mr Fraser. A'pupil teacher pays £5 12s fid for coaching fees and £2 2s for matriculation, or £7 14s fid, outof a munificent salary of £4O. A probationer, with the magnificent salary of £25, pays £7 16s for coaching and £2 2s for matriculation —total of £9 18s for one year. The denied that pupil teachers had examination fees io pay. Mr Fraser calls into court a head master in Otago who testifies:—“ When tho inspectors were here I spoke to them about the injustice of pupil teachers having to pay entrance fees for their pupil teacher examinations. I take it that tho Civil Service and the matriculation examinations are the Board’s examination for the pupil teacher. Now, I do not think it is fair to a pupil teacher that he should have to pay to sit for an examination he is instructed to sit for according to the regulations. In the olden days the pupil teachers were examined yearly by the inspectors, and had to pay no fees. I think it presses heavily on a pupil teacher to pay £1 and £2 2s for the Civil Service and matriculation examinations.”

A country teacher who paid over £6 for examination fees unites :—“ The regulation that £1 must be paid for every time one sits bears hardly on the student who requires only one or two subjects to complete hie certificate, and tho practical demand for a pass in almost all D subjects is costing some of our back-block teachers a good deal. I know one .fellow who has been up for examination three or four times. He may be a duffer, but I think it is only want of cash for tuition that keeps him back. If the examination were reasonably divided, even if credit could not be given for each subject completed, it would be a relief, and where the South ‘ivonsington examination costs only 5s a subject, I think our examinations might bo also ss, which was the charge up to a few years ago.” By this year’s Education Report it appears that the department received no less than £3,633 for examination fees, and spent £5,647 on examinations, of which £2,563 was spent in November, 1909, in degree examinations (teachers’ C) and £3.054 in December, 1909, on matriculation, junior scholarships, etc. Thus in one year no less than £10,807 was spent for examination tests, on which tact Air Fraser makes this pertinent comment : “ it will be found, I believe, that a very large proportion of this sum is paid to persons already in receipt of large salaries for public education. I venture to say that a return of the details of the persons to whom these £IO,OOO are paid would be interesting.”