REPORT OF THE CHIEF INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 9832, 29 May 1895, Page 5

REPORT OF THE CHIEF INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS.

Tee report of Chief Inspector Petrie for the year 1894 on the schools under the control of the Auckland Board of Education was brought up for consideration at a special meeting* of the Board held yesterday, at which Mr. K. Udy, chairman, presided. Mr. Petrie was also present.

On the suggestion of the Chairman, the report, printed copies of which had been in the hands of the members and the public for some time, was taken as read. He further suggested that members should draw attention to such items as struck them, and said he himself had marked several clauses. He drew attention to tho portiou of the table referring to Standard IV., pointing out that in this standard nearly a third of all the pupils had failed.

_ Mr, Lore said it was on account of the jump between standards 111. and IV., the ascent not being gradual. Many pupilswhopassed from standard 111. did not pass in standard IV. in the first year, although they did in the following year, but the Chief Inspector would no doubt make an explanation.

_ The Chief Inspector made an explanation, with regard to tho additional proportion of pupils who had passed, and his remarks that tho improvement was more apparent than real. He said that the examinations were not so rigid, and pupils in I. and 11. standards were now examined by teachers who, of course, would, from their knowledge of the pupils be able to observe merit which could not be seen by an inspector going into the school. As to the failures in Standard IV. it was always a characteristic that there wore more failures in the IVth standard than in any other, Mr. LAMBS said, on the whole it was a very unsatisfactory report, not an to the method in which it. was drawn up, but in regard to results. They certainly had no reasons to be proud of the educational progress of the district. The report was a most valuable one, and some steps should be taken to give effect to its recommendations.

Mr. Petrik quoted iseveral instances in which the staff of teachers was quite inadequate for teaching the lower standards and primer classes. The organisation of the infant classes was, he said, not suitable as a rule. The rooms were large, but they were filled with furniture, and there were no class rooms to which pupils could be sent for noisy classes. This had come more prominently under his notice since the report was written, but owing in most cases to the structure of the buildings it would be impossible to make classrooms.

Mr. Muir said the report was a lengthy one, but it was not to his mind sufficiently explicit. Ho found that 48, or one-eighth of all their shools, had not been examined, although there was a cost of £15 15s per day for examination. To his mind the report was a catalogue of censure, but an honest and truthful report for all that, and if they comparod it with former reports of inspectors they would notice a marked difference. Mr. Muir then proceeded to criticise the report and compare it with former reports, which were favourable. The reports were entirely antagonistic, and if the Board believed the Chief Inspector's reports they must have been at sea in the past. He approved of tho Chief Inspector's report, but in some respects it was in his opinion too critical. He suggested that the Chief Inspector be asked to report to the Board (1) the causes which in his opinion have led to the present very unsatisfactory state of the Board's schools ; (2) what steps he has taken, or proposes to take, to remedy matters; (3) in how many instances he has found his first examination or inspection to agree with his predecessor's last.

Canon Bates regretted that the question «f previous reports should be brought in, and that attacks should be made.

Mr. Mutß denied that any attack had been made.

Canon Bates said it was not a right thing to ask Mr. Petrie to compare his reports with others. He had reported and pointed out remedies, and it was for the Board to act on the advice which he gave, and let the past go. Mr. LAMBE contended that Mr. Petrie should point out a remedy. Mr. Woodward said he had pointed out a remedy, and if he had dono nothing more than his recommendation as to reading he would have earned all his compensation and done immense benefit to the cause of education. The Chairman held that Mr. Muir's criticism was uufair, for he had only picked out bits without comparing them with other portions of the report. In nearly every instance Mr. Petrie had qualified his remarks, and he as one of the Board accepted the responsibility. It was the duty of the Board to remedy the defects complained of, not to throw the blame on others. The principal object in view in obtaining a chief inspector was to have uniformity, not as stated by Mr. Muir, because ot the state of the schools.

Mr. Woodward proposed a hearty vote of thanks to Mr. Petrie for his very able report. Mr. Luke seconded the motion, and it was carried, and the meetiug then terminated.