MATRICULATION EXAMINATION.

Otago Witness, Issue 3755, 2 March 1926, Page 5

MATRICULATION EXAMINATION.

AN AVERAGE REQUIRED. A DIFFERENT STANDARD SET. As far as marks are concerned, the matriculation examination has now been placed on an entirely different footing by the New Zealand University Senate. The outstanding feature is that an average of not less than 45 per cent, of the aggregate marks in five subjects is necessary for a pass. In submitting the report of tho Entrance Examinations Committee on Wednesday, tho convener (Professor Wall) said that the committee nad considered the system recommended by the Board of Studies, which stipulated that in order to pass a candidate must get (a) 45 per cent, of the aggregate marks in five subjects; (b) at least 40 per cent, in English .and in each of three other subjects; (c) at least 30 per cent, in the remaining subject. Professor Wall said that the committee had decided that the system adopted be in the form agreed upon by the Senate in 1925, not as amended by the Beard of Studies, but that candidates who had obtained partial passes be allowed until December 1928 to complete (instead of December 1927). He said that h# would move this clause as convenor, though personally he was strongly opposed to it. Under this new system any candidate who attained 230 marks as an aggregate would pass, provided he had 40 per cent, in English aiM not less than 30 per cent, in other subjects. The candidate had to obtain not less than 45 per cent, of the aggregate marks in five subjects. He argued that any student with matriculation who came to his classes would have 40 per cent., but other professors could get students with only 30 per cent, passes. Then, again, a student might matriculate, and yet fail miserably in two subjects, getting percentages of 70, 60, 40, 30, and 30, or 60, GO, 50, 30. 30. Or else he might get through with 70, 70, and three dead failures in 30. He would move it pro forma. ' Mr Morrel said that he would second the recommendation, but by no means pro forma. Professor Wall, he said, was laying too much stress on individual cases. It was possible that a candidate might have to take one subject in which he was somewhat weak, but 30 was not after all such a miserable percentage, and that candidate would have shown greater average strength than that now required by the matriculation examination. Professor Hunter said that the new' system would raise the standard. At present the standard was far too low. They would all admit sible now to pass with an aggregate of 200 marks—4o in each subject. It was a great mistake to approach the problem of examination merely from one subject. Should a candidate be debarred from entering the university merely because he was weak in the one subject? He was satisfied that under the present conditions it was wrong for the Senate to cut out people who showed special aptitude, but who were weak m one line. Mr Morrell: “Hear, hear.” Professor Hunter quoted marks-where a candidate had shown briliance in all subjects but French, in which he had failed, and these he compared with the marks of a student who had just scraped through in everything. “If the examiner sets a reasonable paper,” he concluded, “and marks it reasonably, it is fair to expect a candidate to get 50 per cent. The motion was carried, there being no dissentients.