PROFICIENCY EXAMINATIONS.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XII, Issue 239, 21 September 1922, Page 5

PROFICIENCY EXAMINATIONS.

ATTEMPT TO BELITTLE. ’ Concerning the 1921 proficiency exin primary schools, the chairman, Mr. G. F. Roach, stated to the 11.8. Iklucation Board to-day:— In connection with the report of the Minister of Education for the past year 1 think i should draw the attention of the board particularly to die remarks made regarding the results ot tile proficiency examination. 1 quute irom the report as follows:—“A matter of serious consiueralion arising out of the results is the wide difference in the figures of the various districts, which, in the case of tne proficiency certificates ranged irom 59.2 ' per cent, in Nelson to 82.2 |jer cent. oi Hawke’s Bay. It is difficult to believe that the efficiency oi the school work varies between one district and another to the extent ot 23 per cent., so that part, at least, ot the difference must be considered due to the variation in the standard set up by die inspectors. The Department's endeavour is to make this standard as uniform as possible, and inspectors are urged to use their best efforts in the same direction. Hie iact that m some districts there are lairiy uniiorm results year alter .year in spite of changes in the inspectorate goes to show that differences in the standard set by inspectors may not be the only factor in Lite case, which is also more or less confirmed by the lact that the district with the highest record of passes in 1921, although under the same inspectorate n few years ago, produced the poorest results. In this district the higher records are attributed to a genuine improvement in the efficiency oi the schools. The matter is a serious one from the ppint ot view that it tiie examination results do not accurately indicate the relative efficiency of the pupils in the various districts, pupils below the average standard are being awarded free secondary education in some districts, while pupils in other districts above the average are being denied this privilege.” The chairman continued: The above can only be taken as an attempt to belittle the very great increase in efficiency which has been effected in this district in the past few years and Lo which 1 have already drawn the attention of the board on two or three occasions. The Department seems to think that it is impossible to obtain such a percentage without lowering the standard, and overlooks the rea* questions which have, in my opinion, contributed to bring about these results. It has to be remembered that since the time referred to by the Minister, when the results were poor in tqis district, six years have elapsed. The schools during that period have had the benefit of three inspectors instead of two, as previously and three organising teachers part of the time, and two such teachers latterly. Further, many uncertificated teachers have been replaced by trained teachers, other uncertificated teachers have become more efficient, as a result, in a large measure, of the board’s training classes. Surely the Department expects an adequate return for the expenditure thus involved. If the average results had remained poor, then the Department would have had serious cause for complaint. The last sentence quoted above might imply that there has been a lowering of the standard of proficiency in this distret; but that is not the case, as is evidenced by the reports I have obtained from the principals of secondary schools in Hawke’s Bay. The principals’ report indicate that if anything there has been an improvement in the-standard of efficiency attained by the pupils entering on their High School courses at the beginning of this year.