E.—ll

4

models named should be drawn, but that the children should know the object or model when seen, and describe it. The lessons should be taken as follows: (1.) Sketch from model, copy, or from dictation. (2.) Drawing of same figure at next lesson from memory. (3.) Simple combination of figure or lines used in previous lesson, or arrangement of shapes geometrically, using paper patterns cut from previous forms by the scholars. With reference to the knowledge of object-form, it would be an excellent plan to allow each child a lump of clay (say a cube inch), and ask for a copy of the model before the class. Further, say once a mouth, ask the class to draw some familiar object, it matters not what. No doubt some very funny drawings would be made, but that is not the point—the great gain is in having exercised the mind, the eye, and the hand together. A subject might be given as a study for the month, to be drawn by the class from memory at the end of that time. Blackboard-practice by the scholars should be constantly given. When the blackboard is not in use scholars should be sent to draw thereon the exercise given. The Second Standard work would be a continuation of the First, with circle, ellipse, oval, and reversed curves introduced. All drawing up to Third Standard should be done upon slates. The Third Standard would be a continuation of First and Second, and possibly a course of elementary geometry might be commenced in this standard. Blank drawing-books, without lines, or drawingbook issued by Lyon and Blair, should be used by this class. Ido not approve of the use of freehanddrawing copy-books as at present defined by the department. lam strongly of opinion that the work should be carried on by the aid of the blackboard, using the copy-books as a guide to the teacher only. I find that the books, in many cases, are simply handed out to the class to work upon; and the teacher is satisfied so long as the class is at work. The attention of the teacher is required just as constantly—perhaps more so —in drawing than in other subjects, if good results are to be obtained. The Fourth Standard should deal entirely with plane, solid, and geometrical drawing, and scale - drawing from copy, enlarging and reducing, and from actual measurement of objects and the room —such, for instance, as the floor, door, fireplace, maps, windows, &c. The solid geometry will be of immense advantage to the scholars in dealing with models, and should receive -very- careful attention upon the part of the teachers. The Government plane and solid geometry text-books by David Blair, and " Scale-drawing," published by Lyon and Blair, are suitable books for this standard work. In the Fifth Standard elementary perspective, as applied to model-drawing, would be commended. Wire and solid models would be necessary. The wire model of, say, a cube placed beside a solid cube is a great help, not only to the scholar, but to the teacher, who is able to demonstrate in a very practical manner the reason of lines at the back of the cube appearing smaller than in the front. The children are able to measure the far side of the object with the pencil, and so assure themselves of the difference between the actual facts as learnt in former standards, as compared with its appearance to the eye in the present instance. In model-drawing the principal fault in class-instruction is that insufficient attention is given to the analysis of the actual form of each object drawn. Every object to be drawn should be thoroughly analysed previous to being drawn. Ground-plan and elevation should first be sketched, and the difference between its geometric and perspective appearance fully explained. (See " Text-book on Model-drawing," by David Blair.) Once this is understood, and the actual facts of each object fully dealt with, little difficulty will be experienced in model-drawing. At present too much reliance is placed upon perspective appearance only ; the actual facts are not sufficiently considered. The Sixth Standard work should be principally from models, objects, and casts of simple ornament. In this standard the work should be made as practical as possible consistent with the keeping up the interest of the scholars, and for this purpose the more severe lessons might be alternated with a lesson in light and shade, sketching from buildings, details of architecture or decoration ; and the various sketches exhibited, and criticized by the art-master. The drawing-syllabus of the Wellington District will be issued as an appendix to this report in a few months' time, giving clear and concise views of the nature of instruction suitable for standard work in the primary schools. lam satisfied that, should the teachers give the attention to drawing that is necessary to produce satisfactory results, they would find a very great advantage gained in the fact that the intellectual faculties of the children have been considerably developed, and generally more adapted to receive ordinary education. The time allowed for drawing in the schools should not be less than one and a half hours in the three lower standards, divided into two lessons per w^eek, and two to two and a half hours in the three upper standards. Should the syllabus bo considered too full to permit this time to be devoted to drawing, I would urge that less time be given to formal grammar, history, and geography, as at present taught, especially in the upper boys' standards, where the additional time spent in drawing would be a great advantage and gain to the lads in after-life. About twenty lads, holding the full first-grade certificate in drawing, are given one afternoon's free instruction in the Wellington School of Design, the course of study being continued to an advanced stage. Any boy expressing a desire to draw from engineering or architectural models is permitted to do so, and every possible help given him with a view to practical training. Should a workshop be eventually attached to the School of Design, a. genuine course of technical training, so far as " construction" goes, would then be possible, such " construction " being based on drawings executed by the student. Construction on any other lines is simply manual training, which can be done very much better under apprenticeship. < I have carefully considered the question of what is termed " technical training" in connection with our primary-school system, and I am compelled to say that, even as the term is generally understood, it is impracticable, consistent with devoting the necessary time to the present standard teaching. I have no desire to underrate the value of handiness—and this is the definition of the term " technical training " as it is applied and understood by the greater bulk of the public; but there is nothing