UNIVERSITY ENTRANCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20595, 20 June 1930, Page 10

UNIVERSITY ENTRANCE.

Certain things in the report of Mr.

Caradus, a secondary school inspector, on the fate of matriculation candidates. strengthen rather than diminish the prevalent hesitation to substitute a system of accrediting by schools on an approved list. This report, which is claimed to be a scientific treatment of the question, discloses a considerable disparity between the opinions of examiners and those of school principals. Such a finding, which is no matter for surprise, is borne out by the details as to the grouping by principals of candidates according to their undoubted fitness, their reasonable chances, their poor chances, or their certainty to fail. These figures reveal rather striking facts indicative of the varying standards adopted by those said to be in a position to know the possibilities of their pupils. Either some principals are overgenerous in their estimates of these possibilities or they send their pupils to the test without any discriininat-

me; care at all. How otherwise could

they succeed in getting only 20 per cent, of passes when other principals get every candidate through 1 In the words of Mr. Caradus. some

recommendations "would have to be very carefully scrutinised," and it is apparent that principals failing to satisfy the investigator of the soundness of their judgment, as to candidates' chances at an examination, are not to be trusted to any greater extent in their recommendation for accrediting. The total figures for last year arc made the basis of comment by Mr. Caradus: taking the schools considered, 2975 candidates sat, and 50.3 per cent passed ; however, he says, owing to tho diverse methods of principals in selecting candidates, it would have been unsafe to accredit more than 600 or 700 of these candidates. This means that quite, half of those successful would have failed to enter the university had accrediting been in vogue. This may be a reflection on the judgment of the examiners of last

year, but it is far from giving support to the argument that accrediting would remove risk of injustice. The investigation, though described as producing one of the most valuable reports on the question so far.

docs not advance the case for accrediting. Tt merely increases the certainty that trouble would be met in putting the idea into practice.