PUPILS’ OPINIONS.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVII, Issue 199, 23 July 1937, Page 2

PUPILS’ OPINIONS.

QUALIFICATION OF TEACHERS

AMERICAN QUESTIONNAIRE

Per Press Association

WELLINGTON. July 22. If feachers and pupils the world over, or at least those in Englishspeaking countries, are the same, then New Zealand teachers at Wellington to-dav saw themselves as their pupils see them. The media were 10,000 American students speaking through the mouth of Dr. F. W. Hart. Professor of Education at the University of California, in a Now Education Fellowship Conference address. Ten thousand high school seniors in various centres in the United States were asked to give opinions on three classes of teachers—the one they liked best (teacher A), the teacher they liked least (teacher Z) and the best teacher they ever had (teacher H).

Eighty per cent, of the students reported that the teacher they liked best was also iheir best teacher, that is, the one who taught them most effectively. Half of one per cent, only stated that the teacher they liked least of all taught them most effectively. thus leaving about 20 per cent, of the students who singled out the third teacher as the one teacher they considered better than either “A"’ or “Z.” •

Pro r essor Hart analysed all the renlies into 43 classes. Heading the list was the helofu'ness of the teacher 1o the pupil. In the rating for teachers made out by the authorises, the first place was given to discipline. With the authorities a “pleasing voice” was fourth, but with students it ranked only thirty-sixth. Good looks and attractiveness were rated thirtvthird lu- students. “Pep” was well down. The cbeerfulnses of the teacher ranked second, friendliness —“one of us” —ranked third; interested in pupils fourth ; discin’ine came sixth; impartiality seventh; “not cross, crahbv, grouchy, nagging or sarcastic” eighth. Tt was when the students came to deal with the teachers they liked least —“Z” teachers—that they rose to greai heiglps. said Professor Hart. “I have been waiting for this opportunity all the days of my life,” wrote one student.

Of teacher “H.” most of lhe examples read by Professor Fart gave the impression that the teacher was' above all efficient in work, even - if lacking some of the graces of teacher “A.”

A gratifying thing, said Professor Hart, was that very one of the reasons for a teacher being liked by pupils was within the grasp of that teacher. All that was needed was for a teacher to review his own case in the light, of these opinions of students and see just where he was up and where ho was down.