EDUCATION BOARD

Otago Witness, Issue 2057, 27 July 1893, Page 5

EDUCATION BOARD

The meeting of the Education Board on Thurs day was attended by Mr D. B'orrie (chairman), the Hon. J. Maogregor, M.L.G>, Dr Stenhouse, Messrs* M. Fraer, J. J. Ramsay, J. Green, A. M'Kerrow, andH. Clark. - " " EESIGNATIONS. The following resignations were accepted :— Isabella Mason, bead teacher, Blackstone; Alice J. Forsyth, he%d teacher, Maruimato; Jane M. Dow, fifth assistant, Normal School ; Minnie J. Uric, seventh assistant, Albany street. THE SYLLABUS. The Palmerston District High School Committee, replying to the board's circular, for- > warded the following resolution t— That the committee endorse the resolution of the board as a whole.- With regard to clause 6, the committee agree with the board as to the time devoted to grammar, but not as regards arithmetic, and fully agree with the board that the advisability of doing-away with the individual pass examinations to all below the Fourth Standard would be worthy of a trial. Mr W. A. Stout, secretary to the Dunedin .and Suburban Schools' Conference, sent the following resolution :— " That this conference is of opinion that an undue proportion of the pupils' time is at present devoted to arithmetic ,'and the technicalities of grammar, and that the inspectors be requested to make their examinations in these subjects as simple < and elementary as is consistent with a fair interpretation of the standard." The Kaikorai Committee wrote approving of the board's resolution referred to. The following ' communication from the Secretary to the Department was read :— ■ I have the honour by direction of the Minister for Education to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 23rd June, ana to say, that he is in full accord with the view expressed in the first of the two resolutions you nave communicated (that the inspectors should make their examinations in arithmetic and the technicalities of grammar as simple and elementary as 'is ''consistent with a fair interpretation of the standard), which, indeed, is in harmony with the purpose of the' standard regulations. Wjth respect to the second resolution (recommending_,the abolition of individual s pasß examinations except in' the higher standards), for obvious reasons it will be necessary to bestow very careful consideration on the proposal before comii g to a conclusion.

The Hon. J. MacgheulOb did nob think the members of the board' realised folly the importance of the question at issue. The resolutions of the board meant the subversal of the whole system of examinations, and -it struck him as an exceedingly hopeful sign that the committees should have taken up the matter so enthusiastically, for their approval would strengthen the hands of the board in the improvement which the majority desired to see. The present system of past examinations was a blot which could not be magnified, and it was only by the publio bringing pressure to bear on the department that this smudge could be removed.- 1 He moved that the committeeg which had endorsed the action of the board be thanked. Mr Gbeen seconded the motion, which was carried. It was subsequently resolved, on the motion of the Hon. J. MaCobegob, seconded by Dr Stenhouse— "That, a deputation from the board he appointed to wait upon the Minister afc.;the first opportunity for the purpose of urging upon him the importance ef the resolution of the board suggesting the abolition of

the system of individual examinations and the necessity for altering the system." LIVINGSTONE. Mr Joseph Neale wrote :— You will remember my writing to the board a short time ago in reference to the teacher of Livingstone School refusing to teach my child in the Seventh Standard. Since my last communication to the board my daughter Pleasauce has passed the Sixth Standard, and Mr Gloss has been teaching her in the Seventh. Mra Neale simply requested Mr Gloss to instruct her as the board directed. The board will be able to judge by the tone of Mr Gloss's letter in what spirit that instruction has been given. Will the board kindly inform me whether I can obtain any further instruction for my daughter at Livingstone School ? The following letter from Mr J. G. Closs, the teacher, to Mr Neale was also read .— As you are aware, your daughter Fleasance is now over 15 years of age. Your note to me of October 31, 1892, demanded for her all the instruction that the law allows. Your demand has been fully complied with, and, indeed, I have considerably exceeded it. If you desire further instruction for her at the Livingstone Primary School you will oblige by obtaining the sanction of the proper authority, and handing it to me in writing. After some discussion, MtFeaee moved— v That Mr Neale's letter be received, and that he be informed that the committee is the proper authority for him to communicate with in the matter, in accordance with olause 83 of the Education Act." Mr M'Kerrow seconded the motion. The Hon. J. Macgbegob moved as an amendment—" That the board communicate jrith the committee and forward to them the correspondence, with an intimation that in the opinion of the board the teacher should have brought the matter before the committee and requested the committee to instruct him as to whether he was not to teach children over IS years of age." Mr Ramsay seconded the amendment, which was carried on the casting vote of the Chairman. I The voting being : For— The Chairman, Messrs Macgregor, Green, and Ramsay; against— Dr Stenhouse, Messrs Fraer, M'Kerrow, and Clark. It was further resolved— " That Mr Neale be informed that the board has communicated with the committee, and that the secretary be instructed to forward to him a copy of the board's resolution." ASSISTANCE FOB THE INSPECTORS. The Chaibman stated that before the board rose on the previous day the question of assistance to the inspectors had cropped np. The work of inspection had been begun so much later this year than usual that there was no hope of getting finished before the end of the year, unless assistance was granted to the inspectors, and under the circumstances he bad authorised Mr Richardson to assist them till the meeting of the board. A motion had been proposed on the subject; on the previous day, and had been seconded, and the board would resume the discussion at the point at which they had left it. The motion proposed by Mr Fraer was :— " That the action of the chairman referring, to assistance to inspectors in allowing Mr Richard- . son's services to be utilised be approved of, and that under the circumstances of the examinations having commenced so late, these services be continued till the work of the year is finished." • Mr Gbeen suggested that the motion should .be divided into two parts, and submitted as a ! point of order that the chairman' had a right himself to- divide it • Mr Clabk did not - think so. - Mr Gbeen asked' also, -whether the latter part j>f the motion did not in effect rescind a, resolution passed by the 'board which was in .operation.. . . >!. . After some discussion, - The Chairman said he would himself prefer that the motion foe divided, because he felt- that any member who could, not swallow the whole of the motion would be compelled to censure if tbift motion were not divided, The Hon. J. Mac(gbeoiob submitted that the motion was out of order' altogether, t as it was virtually an attempt by a side wind to resoind a resolution passed by the board, on the motion of Mr Ramsay,, two months ago, whioh read : "That for the future the board expects' the inspectors .to overtake all' really indispensable work without the help of an assistant." He had, he' said, no desire to vote against the first part of Mr Fraer's motion j tout he would do, so without hesitation unless consent were given to divide the motion. If that consent were refused, he would ask for a decision on his point of order. . : The Chairman ruled that the motion was in ■order. • • • • The Hon. J. Macgbegob regretted that the suggestion that the motion should be divided had hot been accepted, because it compelled him to vote against the whole motion when it would have given him pleasure, if the' motion had been divided, to vote for the first part, approving of the chairman's action, because" under the circumstances, when the inspectors made representations to him • that assistance would be necessary, it was perhaps impossible for him to adopt any course other than that which he had taken. With regard to the other part of the motion, Mr Richardson's position had for some years past been entirely an anomalous one. k The members had been unaware that Mr Richardson . held the position, and they were unable to put their finger on the appointment of Mr Richardson as assistant-inspector. Mr Riohardson, nominally, was a relieving teacher, but for nine or 10 years past he had been engaged in the work of assist? ing the inspectors. There was no doubt that, when they passed their resolution on the subject two months ago, the intention of the/board was that" Mr Richardson should not in future acb •as assistant-inspector, and how it •> could be contended that Mr Fraer's motion was not inconsistent with that resolution' it beat him even to guess. Since then the board had resolved to dispense 'with the annual examinations in certain schools, except from the Fourth Standard upwards^ unless the Minister directed thattthe regulations must be complied with, and 'that was at present the only expression of the will of I the board oh the subject. His objection to the latter part' of- the motion was a general one, that the outlay upon the inspection was out of all proportion to the value of the work done. Mr Clabk ; Who is to blame ? Not the inspectors, but the system. The Hon. J. Macgbegob must express the opinion that the inspectors had made their work too slavish, but he admitted that the whole system of examinations was rotten, and his principal objection to appointing Mr Richardson as assistant - inspector was with a view to bringing the country face to faoe with the enormous cost that was entailed by the present system of examinations. 'He suggested that the board should recommend to the -Minister the removal of the examinations' anomaly from the system and ask him to repeal that absurdity in the first of the standard regulations. > Mr Ramsay- said he held very much the same opinion as Mr Macgregor on this question. He was prepared to •say from personal experience of the »ystem of inspection- that it was bad, and that the board " did not get results from it equivalents to what they paid. He had made a 'calculation of the cost of inspection, and found that ft cost

£10 17s 9d for each school. If they now appointed an assistant for the rest of the year they were contravening the resolution they had already passed, and they were also going a long way towards upholding the system of inspection. He could not support the resolution for these reasons. , , . Dr Stenhouse said he ought to be a proud man that day.— (Cries of "So you are," and laughter.) When he first came to the board not a member found a single flaw in our education system, and he must attribute the change in the opinion of members of the board to his advanced opinions.— (Laughter.) He was very glad to find that such a revolution in sentiment had taken place, in the board, and he hoped that it would take place outside of the walls of the room in which they were met, and make itself felt in Wellington. As regarded the motion, circumstances had changed since they passed the motion two months ago. He did not see how they could ask the inspectors to do work in four and a-half months'that they used to. do in six. When the chairman asked him if the services of Mr » Richardson should be .retained as assistant-inspector until that meeting, he replied: "Certainly, if "necessary"; and he thought the board ought Jo recognise' the necessity under which the*chairman felt he was labouring when he adopted the course he did. The Hon. J. Macgregob wished it to be understood that it was not because of any objection to Mr Richardson that he and other members of the board were taking the present action. He believed Mr Richardson was perfectly competent to do the work of inspection." Mr Gbeen expressed his very deep regret that the motion was moved as a whole, because he should have had much pleasure in supporting the former part of ib, but he had the strongest possible objection to the latter part of it. His reason for objecting to the latter part of the motion was this : that ib Carried on the services of an assistant-inspector. He remembered that the board resolved a short time ago not to appoint another inspector, and yet within three months after passing tbatr resolution,'" which had never been rescinded, they had appointed another inspector. If they were going to act like that it was time they had some written rules to guide them in the discharge of their business. The appointment of a fourth inspeotor was an entire setting aside of a deliberate resolution of the board. Mr Richardson was a great deal more a relieving inspector than a relieving' teacher. Mr Fraer:\No. , . „ Mr Green said he had not a shadow of a doubt that the hoard's records would prove what he said. The time Mr Richardson was engaged as a relieving teacher did not equal the time he was engaged 'in the inspection of schools.' ' ■ i x i Mr M'Keeeow quite agreed with what Dr Stenhouse had said. Every member of the board endorsed the former part of the motion J but if the necessity arose to endorse the chairman's action, there was no reason why they should not do so. , . The Chairman said he' should not take it as a vote of censure from those who voted against the motion. If members of the board had been in' his position, they would probably have taken the same steps that he had done. On reading the Minister's reply to their resolution he could take no .other meaning out of it than that the Minister did not approve of their suggestion, and that, he expected the work to go on in the usual .way; He was sorry that Mr Richardson's name had been introduced into the discussion. It did not follow because of what had been done, that Mr 1 Richardson would be the man to do the -work all through. He understood that, /Mr . Richardson had hitherto been engaged in assisting inspectors • forthree ,or ' four'- months, in the year,' and the assistance that' he had been giving was not inspecting work at all. He (the chairman) had a document before him in which the inspectors themselves explained the nature of the assistance that Mr Richardson gave. They said 'that he superintended the work where' there was more than one room in a school. His services were not required where there was only one room. - His being, engaged meant that a Bchool with two. rooms could be inspected in one day, otherwise it would take two days. With reference to what Mr Macgregor had said, he (the chairman) thought that his speech had been made in the wrong place. If Mr Maogregor had made the speech he had made, at the board in Wellington and got the act altered he would have done good ; but there was no use carping about the law at that table. ■• They were, there to carry out the law as it was, and until the law wa&.altered in Wellington they must abide by the regulations. In the meantime the inspectors were only carrying, out the regulations and were not exceeding ' then). He thought it was conceded on all' hands -that if the inspectors were to carry out their work as required by the regulations it was quite impossible for them to do so this- year without assistance. He therefore was going to support the motion that the inspectors^ should -get assistance for the balance of this' year at any rate/: After the resolution was passed he got a statement, from the inspectors. He had a feeling that the whole facts of the case had not been 1 put before the board, and he took steps to send a copy of the inspectors' statement to each member of, the board with the view of having the matter reopened. Mr Feaer remarked that he had simply moved in the matter' owing to the exceptional circumstances which existed. 1 Mr. Ramsay explained that he had no feeling against Mr Richardson ; on the contrary, they were personal friends. The amendment was lost by four votes to< three—Messrs Macgregpr, Green, and Ramsay forming the minority — and the motion was then put and carried. > , '■ REGULATIONS REGARDING DRAWING. With reference to the board's resolution repressing that it was its opinion that the standara regulations on the subject of drawing, required to be modified and altered, The following memorandum from the secretary of the department was read:— "The Minister for Education has considered the resolutions communicated to him through your memorandum of 9th June. He is not prepared at present to take any further action, .as he desires to try the effect of the last concession." The memorandum was received. THE SCHOOL EXAMINATIONS. The reply of the Education department to. the board's resolution to dispense with the annual examinations in schools whioh had been seriously affected by the outbreak of measles, was read as follows :-- The Chairman Otago Education Board,- Dunedin. If the object is to avoid a high percentage of failures, could you not instruct the to dismiss all children below Fourth Standard class o# the day of examination? Bui, is it worth while to talie such exceptional measures to avoid the high percentage? Would not all concerned accept the explanation that it was due to broken attendance, attributable to epidemic ? The Order-in-Couneil would have to be amended to authorise the non-presentation of children. I send this by order of Minister for Education. (Signed) W, J. Habens, Wellington, June 16. Dr Stenhqush. thought the chief reason whioh actuated the board in coming to' their resolution wag that the health of the obildren.

might be affected, not the fear of poor results at the examinations. The Hon. J. Macgbegob concurred with this this statement, and said tho : head of the department had adopted a theory that was entirely erroneous as to the-'cause of the board's action. It seemed to him tbatthe proper oourse fofthe ■ chairman to have taken would have been to have enlightened the head of the department as to the real reason which actuated the board in coming to their conclusion. The board's resolution was to dispense with the examinations unless the Minister directed to the contrary, and the speaker asked anyone reading the telegram to say whether it contained a direction to the contrary. It was the very opposite, because it suggested a method by which the board's views might be carried . out without amending the Order-in-Council, and he submitted that if the -examinations were being prosecuted this year as. jn "previous years ib was in direct contravention of the resolution of the. board,- ', -He moved — " That representation be made to the Minister that owing to the measles epidemic the annual examinations are much later than usual, and that the board is of opinion 'that regulation 1, requiring every school to be examined every year, should not be insisted upon this year, '* and that the Minister be requested to state what would be the effect if some schools were not examined." > ' ■*' ,'' , Dr Stenhouse seconded the motion. , Mr Clabk said that, to any, common 'sense mind like his own it must be perf eotly evident that. the Minister said the work mußt go on. It would cause a great, deal of 'feeling in the country if some schools were examined v and others were not, and the returns showed that the examinations were going to be as successful " this year as formerly. . '„ -^- ' » Mr Ramsay said the question was the state of the children's health, and if it was necessary. • last meeting to pass the resolution that had been referred to it was equally necessary to pass .a similar one now. - \ Mr Fbaeb maintained that the schools should never have been closed for the measles. He thought the closing of the sohpols had been the means of spreading the epidemic. Dr Stenhouse differed from this view, and said it was absolutely necessary to close the schools. There would have .been many more deaths from measles in 1 Dunedin if the schools had not been closed. • „ s Mr Gbeen, in supporting the motion, re•marked that under the present' system 'of averages there was every inducement to committees; to teachers, and to the\board itself to 'close the schools. „ , The Chaibman said he had nob come across a parent yet who did not think that the inspection, ought to be gone on with, and Jbhat* it would be a great hardship if it were not' gone on withy ' >' ;' The motion was lost on the casting vote of the chairman, the voting being— For : Dr Stenhouse, Messrs Macgregor, JJreen, and Ramsay ; against: the Chairman, Messrs Clark, Fraer, and M'Kerrow. . " ', i /' , '■. ' MISCELLANEOUS. ' The Secretary to the department forwarded a circular stating that the boards were' unani- - mous in approving of the proposed conference of inspectors, whioh would be held in Wellington Jn the last week of January or the first' in February. > / Mr John Rakiraki was appointed: school commissioner for the Reomoana district, Fort^ ■Molyneuxi '■' , : , - Accounts amounting to £5736 8s lid were passed for payment. „ . * % '' ~ '{' ' Consideration of Dr Stenhouse's notice -of motion to the effeot that chess should be taught in the public schools was .deferred for.a month.' " '"' ' v * J-NQUESTSr*/, •* ' , - ' ,Vj ' An inqueßt^uohing -.the; death, of Timbti Karetai, a' Maori native, held at ; Otago Heads' on"" Friday morning 'before .Me B:<G. Allen (the-- Mayor, of ' Port; Chalmers);', acting . coroner,. and a jury of six, of whom Pilot Milne was foreman.— Dr Hendry deposed that on;the 20th inst. he was called upon to attend deceased, who had fallen' from a cliff at the Heads and sustained severe injuries; 'Witness fqond upon examination^ that deceased had/ sustained a • fraoture of- the right collar bone, broken two ribs, and had received a 'severe scalp wound over the left' ear.' -Witness 'had duly treated deceased, ' who was also suffering . from liver complaint.— Mrs. Maaka, the sister, and Joseph -Kafatea,the son "of 'the deceased; , who were with him on 'July' 20, ; Jwhenvthe^ accident' occurred, stated that his foot' slipped, afl'd'he fell -a- distance of some 70ft .front the cliff on "which they were standing, striking the rocks in his fall.— The jury*, returned 'a verdict l that deceased had accidentally, met his death from the effects* of falling" "over a cliff at Taiaroa Heads. . , - An inquest was held on Friday afternoon at Bastings's Hotel, before Mr Coroner Carew and a jury of six, on the body of Amy Martin, aged , 6 mpnths,;,who died on Thursday morning. The evidence went to show that on Sunday last ~ 'the child had caught a r colcf^ 'The Mother; who lives in Castle street, . administered a ' half teaspoonful of Irish moss daily, but on Thursday morning the infant died.' Dr Stenhouse, 'who was called' in after' death, said that the child had died of bronchitis. A veifdiot to this effect was returned, ■ 'Diphtheria of ' a very malignant type is . troubling.the settlers in the extreme south of HaWke'sßay. „, ..