I.—8

28

Inspectors are of little or no weight—in this district of no weight at all—in determining expenditure. The sources of extravagance are chiefly in regard to buildings (see observations under that head); but also the amounts expended in school furniture and apparatus, the allowances to Committees, and such items as are due to irregular and imperfect organization of teachers. Again, if the Inspectors were placed under the central department, and the districts partly rearranged, probably two or three fewer Inspectors would be required. Something also could be saved by having uniform examinations for pupil-teachers, conducted by Inspectors, the same set of papers being used in all parts of the colony. This would have another advantage—the uniformity of attainments in pupil-teachers of the same nominal standing in all parts of the colony; and the centralisation of the Inspectorate would have a like effect on the character of the standard examinations, and on the amount of work expended in drawing up questions for those examinations. At present, about one-twelfth of the time of each Inspector is taken up in making questions or sets of examination-cards. (3.) Incidental Expenses. —Side by side with the abolition of Boards I should be inclined to say that there should be an extension of the areas controlled by School Committees, so that each Committee should have the control of six or ten schools. This might be effected gradually by forming no new districts (unless under exceptional circumstances), and by offering inducements for amalgamation of existing Committees —for instance, a rating-power for all Committees representing six to ten schools. I would do away with all control by the Committees which gives them power to interfere with the teaching or other internal arrangements of the schools, and would confine their duties to the care of buildings, to such supervision of the conduct of teachers as can be exercised only by residents in a district; and, in case of rating-powers being granted, to the necessary steps connected with the carrying-out of those powers. The allowances under the head of incidental expenses might be reduced by one-third, or even abolished altogether, and the deficiency met by a small local rate imposed by School Committees. (4.) Teachers' Salaries. —The expenditure might be reduced by rearrangement of staffs, giving in many instances larger classes to each teacher; and also by the employment of female teachers —to a greater extent than prevails at present—in single-handed schools. Female teachers of higher qualifications can be secured at lower salaries than are paid to masters in those schools (at all events in this district). No extensive reductions of teachers' salaries is advisable, for the supply of capable teachers is not equal to the demand, and nothing could be more injurious to education than such a lowering of salaries as would affect the quality of the teaching-power. The benefits derived from normal schools as at present existing in the colony are somewhat problematical. The literary part of the work might very well be done with existing facilities afforded at the four university colleges, and the remaining or technical portions of the work would perhaps be better looked after if intending teachers were placed as probationers under selected headmasters. The cost of this would be scarcely more than nominal. (5.) Scholarship Allowances. —The scholarship allowances made under the vote for primary education might very well be abolished, and the secondary schools might be required to provide open scholarships for pupils from primary schools out of the funds at their disposal, (6.) Buildings. —Under the item, "Buildings, Sites, Plans, &c," there is placed a sum of £65,007 14s. 6d. (I have quoted the figures in E.-l, 1887, as that is the only return I have at hand). The increased number in average attendance for the year 1886 was 3,103; so that the average cost of new buildings required for this increase was £21 per child. Judging from the way in which the portion allotted was spent in this district, I should say that £35,000 to £40,000 would have been a very liberal allowance indeed. The sources of extravagance are : (a) That schools of too costly a character have been built, (b) unnecessary schools have been built, (c) masters' houses have been erected where there was no necessity for anything of the kind. I would venture to suggest that in each case of the erection of a new school a local contribution (raised by a rate) might reasonably be expected to the extent of one-third or one-fourth of the total cost; with a proviso that the buildings should be of such a character as would suffice for the probable requirements of the district for some time to come. Otherwise, dummy schools of small value might be set up, and then the Government might be expected to find money for their extension shortly afterwards. Extensions should not be subject to the condition of a local contribution, as there would often on that account be a strong local opposition to a much-needed enlargement of school premises. A report should be required from the Inspector of the district upon every claim for enlargement of schools. A larger contribution might be asked towards new buildings in cases where the number of children fell below a specified minimum—say twenty-five —and, in addition to this share of the initial cost, an annual contribution towards the cost of maintenance equal in amount to the capitation allowance upon the number of children required to make up the said minimum. In many outlying districts a subsidy might be paid for a coach to carry children to the nearest existing school, at a cost far less than that of the erection and maintenance of a new school. I would mention one change, not directly connected with any one of the items in Table N already referred to, but rather with the first section of your circular. The age of leaving school might without any great injustice be reduced to fourteen, and Standard VII. abolished altogether. This would be better than abolishing Scandard VI. Sharp children would be encouraged to go on to the Sixth Standard, which they could easily pass before they were fourteen. On the other hand, if a child is not clever enough to pass Standard VI. by that age, I hardly think the State would gain much by allowing him to remain at school until he was able to pass. The saving under this head (as under section 1) would not be very great. 4. I believe that the syllabus admits of considerable improvement; but with all respect I venture humbly to suggest that the details of such improvement could be best settled by the Governor in Council after a conference of Inspectors had been held under the direction, of the