UNIVERSITY DEGREES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 18951, 24 February 1925, Page 11

UNIVERSITY DEGREES.

INTERNAL EXAMINATIONELABORATI ON OF SYSTEM. DECISIONS OF SENATE. POINT OF PRINCiPLE RAISED. [BY TELEUItAPir..—OWN CORRESPONDENT. J WELLINGTON. Monday. The annual meeting of tho Senate of the New Zealand University was continued at Parliament Buildings to-day, the chancellor, Dr. Macmillan Brown, presiding. The question of internal or external examiners and tho method of examination to be adopted for pass 15. A. and B.Sc. degrees, was discussed at length on the presentation of a report of the recess committee on tho existing system. The committee, which was appointed at the last annual meeting to consider an improved scheme of pass degree examinations in arts and science subjects, consisted of the vice-chancellor, Professor Hunter, Mr. P. 11. Bake well, Mr. W. J. Morreli, and Dr. Anderson (convener). Committee's Report, • It reported as follows: " That tho Senate be reconmmendcd (1) to adopt t he sub-joined scheme of ox am in ation in lieu of that now in existence. In each subject, there shall be two examiners holding office for two years in succession. Tho rotation shall, as far as possible, be, arranged so that the second year of office of one, examiner coincides with the first year of office of the, other, so as to secure continuity of standard. The examiner who is in his second year of office shall act as chairman of tho Board of Examiners. "(2) The examiners in each subject shall be professors of the subject or lecturers in charge of the subject unless for special reasons it shall be deemed advisable to appoint. as one, of the examiners a suitable person who is not a professor or lecturer in the subject. "(3) The examination papers shall bo set by the, examiners after consultation with the professors or lecturers in charge of the subjects. Method of Examining. "(4) Each of the examiners shall examine all the, answers to one paper. When tho scripts are examined for the. first time code numbers shall be used. The supervisors shall send the scripts from the various centres to the university office, which shall then send the scripts of each paper arranged in order to the examiner. "(5) After the examiners have marked their scripts, the scripts, together with the mark sheet or sheets, shall be returned to the University office, which shall forward to each of the professors or lecturers the portion of the mark sheet which concerns him, together with a key to the code numbers. '''(6) Each professor or lecturer shall then have the right to apply to the university office for such scripts of his students as he may desire to see and shall then forward to the university office such criticisms or further evidence on the candidates as he thinks fit. Such evidence may include a report upon the year's work of the student, and in all subjects in which a certificate of practical work is required the teacher shall include u report upon the candidate's practical work. "(7) The examiners shall thoroughly investigate all doubtful and disputed cases and may meet for this purpose, if necessary. Such investigations shall inciuda the" review of both scripts by each examiner, Only after such an investigation shall the final pass list be drawn up. "(8) No candidate shall be passed except with the concurrence of both examiners. "(9) The examiners shall be paid a fee for examining on a definite scale, it being understood that the total cost of the st ggested system, inclusive of the cost of the necessary meeting and consultation', shall not exceed the cost of the present system of examination." Practical Work. (10) To amend the statutes B.A. and B.Sc. pass, so as to require that, in subjects where practical work is prescribed the teacher shall, forward to the senate a report setting out the merits of the practical work of each- candidate. In moving the adoption of the report of the committee. Dr. W. Anderson said that each item of the report had received the fullest possible consideration, and the report, as it stood, represented the mature consideration of those members of the recess committee who were most intimately acquainted with the working of the colleges and received also £he unanimous support of tho other members of the committee. The chief alteration in the amended proposals was in reference to the work of the interna! examiners. It was quite clear, he said, that the principle of appointing external examiners within New Zealand or within easy reach of New Zealand had failed. There was ample reason for thinking that thero was not a sufficient staff of men to bo found within the limits of tho Dominion who were of sufficient eminence and sufficiently free from objection on various grounds to provide sufficient examiners in the laige number of subjects that had to bo dealt with. It appeared to the speaker that the proper course under tho circumstances was to trust the professors and iecrtiters themselves, Thero might be some difference, of opinion in regard to I,lie proposed payment of the examining r rofessors and lecturers for this work. In the opinion of the speaker they should be paid in the ordinary way, as were external examiners. The examination work was outside the professor's ordinary duties. Professor Segar seconded the motion for tho adoption of the report. Strong Opposition. Sir Robert Stout strongly opposed tho motion, remarking that he had always opposed the change. He maintained that the proposal was illegal. The powers which the Senate had were the powers given to it by the University Act. He maintained also that the system of allowing teachers to examine was wrong. It had been assorted by Dr. Anderson that a person who was fit to be a teacher was fit to be an examiner. If that was so then tho expense of all the inspectors and examination officers in connection with our Education Department and system might be saved. Sir Robert Stout asserted that there was no such system as was proposed in existence in any other university in the world. It was proposed that, the professors should be paid for tho work of examination. He presumed that in regard to that clause the professors would abstain from voting. Proceeding, Sir Robert Stout expressed the opinion that the adoption of such a proposal as was now made with respect to internal examiners would be lowering to the university, and was introducing a system that was not known anywhere else in the world. It was said that the examinations could be conducted as well here as in England, and it. was contended that , the only persons here tit. to examine ,v ore the professors. He concluded by asserting that the principle of the proposal of the committee was wrong, and he hoped the Senate would not adopt a proposal which would lower the status of the New Zealand University, and would be of no benefit whatever to the community. In Existence in England. Professor Wall said that what was now proposed was what existed in England, for instance, in tho case of the Leeds and Sheffield Universities, and also in respect to other universities. In fact, what, was now suggested was precisely the system in vogue practically in all universities within the Empire. Sir Robert,' Stout: Not in one of them. Professor Wall contended that the new proposals would be an improvement on the existing system.

Sir Robert Stout quoted from the Cambridge University calender in support ot his contention. There was no such thing, he added, as a professor examining his own students. There was no such thing as a pupil getting a degree by an examination by his own piofessor. He defied members of the Senate to point out- in any book where such a thing was allowed. Professor Hight offered some criticism of the proposed system, but said he felt inclined on the whole to support it. Mr. W. J. Morroll also criticised some of the recommendations of the committee. Ho regarded the proposal as an experiment, but an experiment which was likely to give more satisfactory results than the system which had been in operation for the last three or four years. In his opinion, however, the scheme was one which should be rejected as tending to the passing of unfit candidates or as introducing elements of partiality. Professor Hunter expressed surprise at Sir Robert Stout raising the, point as to payment for the work of examination in view of the fact that it already existed in connection with the Otago 'University. Professor Thomas maintained that examiners should be teachers of the subject. Thope examiners who had not been teachers often showed great want of discrimination in the choice of questions. It was quite clear that the best examiners were those who had solid knowledge of the subject, and who also knew exactly what was to be expected from the university students. In England there was a large field from which to make the choice of examiners, whereas in New Zealand the choice was limited. The only suitable choice was from among the professors in the colleges. There was only one solution—an easy solution—and that was the constitution of four universities. Professor Algie said he would support the new scheme, which was a compromise. The old scheme had been on trial, and had not proved satisfactory. Hon. J. A. Hanan opposed the proposal, and held that there should be outside supervision of the examination of university students for degrees. Professor Rankine Brown maintained that it was almost the universal practice of universities to put their examinations in the hands of their professors. Sir Robert Stout: No. Professor Rankine Brown: It may be, that the. professor is associated with: an external examiner, but the professor plays an essential part in the examination. In some universities of very good repute indeed the examinations were entirely conducted by the professors. Sir Robert Stout: Where? Professor Rankine Brown: Sydney. Sir Robert Stout said there was quite a large number of external examiners in the case, of the Sydney University. Dr. Cameron supported the committee's proposal, and the chancellor, Dr. Macmillan Brown, opposed it. The clauses of the report were then put to the vote, and - were carried by 18 votes to 4. The clause relating to payment of the examiners was carried by 9 votes to 2, the professors abstaining from voting.