TEACHERS AND GRADING.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18673, 30 September 1922, Page 11

TEACHERS AND GRADING.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—A paragraph iii the local column of to-day’s Daily Times contains some comments with reference to the Otago Educational Institute and grading of teachers. Will you permit me to point out that the statement as it reads is liable to suggest to its readers an erroneous assumption on more than one point? First, the institute did discuss the graded list fit its June meeting, when a good deal of criticism was heard. Secondly, the institute at the tail end of the session, when the attendance had thinned out, passed a resolution of noconfidence in the present graded list. There is no warrant, however, for the statement that the institute contended that Otago teachers had been placed at a disadvantage “because the inspectors here had set up a higher standard than did their colleagues in the other provinces.” This contention may be true or it may not. My point is that the institute cannot be fairly credited with the grounding of its criticism on such a bald and inadequate basis as quoted. It may be said, however, that underlying the largo amount of dissatisfaction on the part of many teachers (only a small part of which was expressed by or through the institute) there was, and still is, almost unanimity in the belief that ‘‘want of uniformity of appraisement” in the various educational districts is responsible for much weakness in the scheme. Certainly, there are other grounds on which the scheme has been adversely criticised, prominent among them being the basic principle of grading, by which the subtle personal, mental, and spiritual qualities that combine to make for efficiency or otherwise in the teacher are mathematically expressed against his name, for weal or for woe. My next comment is made in reference to the statement further on in the paragraph referred to, where it is stated (hat “protests were made to the authorities, and subsequently some of the teachers had their marks raised by the Appeal Board.” I think it is perhaps necessary to point out .(hat the Appeal Court hears (he individual appeal and adjudicates on the merits of the case. No protest from (he institute to the authorities can affect (he findings of the court, although such general proteste may impress the Minister and the Director of Education and so bring homo to the authorities the scope, definition, and nature of (be dissatisfaction that exists. Finally, it is true that some teachers have gone to other districts, Otago teachers have done so in past years, and will continue to do so. No doubt the restricted scope for promotion in Otago in certain grades makes it. inevitable that many teachers must seek their promotion elsewhere, and the dominion graded list necessarily opens the door to the wider field. It will 1m interesting in the near future, too, to note, as many of the highest positions in Otago become vacant through retirements, how many, of them—or. shall 1 say. how few of them?—will bo filled by Otago teachers. A little study of (he graded list will give some indication of probabilities.—T am, etc., J. Ironside, President O.E.T. September 29.