E.—lb

9

A few remarks on the results set forth in the foregoing tables will not be out of place. Taking Table A first, and comparing the numbers in the column for the year just ended with those in the column for the preceding year, I find (1) an increase of 544 pupils on the rolls on the days of examination, and of 313 presented in standards ; (2) that the number of pupils absent is comparatively higher; (3) that, though the number of pupils examined is so much higher, the number excepted is 26 lower, and the number failed has decreased by no fewer than 225; (4) that the number passed has increased by 483 ; and (5) that there is an advance of 7 per cent, in the standard passes. Turning then to Table B, and comparing it with the similar table of 1889, I find a marked improvement in the percentage of passes in each standard, more especially in Standard V. and Standard VI. Thus, the passes are higher in Standard I. by T5 per cent., in Standard II. by 4-8 per cent., in Standard III. by 10-7 per cent., in Standard IV. by 9'5 per cent., in Standard V. by 14-6 per cent., and in Standard VI. by 12T per cent. In my last report I pointed out that the percentages of passes in Standard IV., Standard V., and Standard VI. were particularly low; so it is only natural, but none the less pleasing, that they should be found higher this year. Also, I ventured the opinion that, under the present regulations, in the majority of small schools these upper standards would show really good work in only every second year; and 1888 was their good year. I trust that when the returns of 1891 are made up such opinion will be found incorrect. Standard IV., as is generally the case in this district, has the lowest percentage of passes, and for this weak arithmetic is largely responsible. This standard shows also the highest percentage of absentees. I am glad to see the number of exceptions has decreased. The first year in which exceptions were recognised was 1885, and for the purpose of comparison I give the percentages of passes on the number examined in the six standards, omitting exceptions, for the past six years: 1885, 67-9; 1886, 70-2; 1887, 72-9; 1888, 77-4; 1889, 74-5; 1890, 81-5. With regard to the average ages of pupils in standards, I may state that I cannot place much reliance on them, for whenever I had time to compare the ages of the same pupils on the schedules of 1889 and those of 1890 I frequently found differences of either considerably more or considerably less than twelve months. The average age in Standard I. is far too high, and more children might well have been ready for presentation in this class. Standard III. shows the highest number of presentations—98 more than Standard I., and 37 more than Standard II.; so the number presented in all standards expressed as a percentage of the number on the rolls is rather low —61"9. Again, with regard to these average ages it is worthy of remark that they are frequently lower in the very small schools under one teacher than in the large schools in town, as witness those for Standard I. in the following: Sanson (166), 10 years 2 months; Foxton (242), 10 years 1 month ; Peilding (338), 9 years 10 months; Terrace End (269), 9 years 7 months; Palmerston (542), 9 years 5 months; Halcombe (148), 9 years 5 months; Bull's (176), 9 years 5 months; Fitzherbert (22), 7 years 10 months ; Hunterville (61), 8 years 5 months; Paraekaretu (39), 8 years 6 months; South Makirikiri (31), 8 years 6 months; Goat Valley (27), 8 years 7 months; Birmingham (43), 8 years 8 months. The numbers in brackets represent the numbers on the school rolls on the days of examination. The last six schools had each only one teacher. Such statistics as these give rise to the following questions : Are as many children in the large schools selected from the preparatory classes for presentation in Standard I. as might reasonably be expected, after taking into consideration the minute classification of such children, the number of years already spent by them in school, and the number of teachers employed in instructing them? Are the results of the teaching of the children in these preparatory classes and Standard I. found in the subsequent standards as sound and lasting as they should be ? Are the large classes in a town school, taught by subordinate teachers, any better off than the small classes in a country school where each pupil gets a share, however small, of the time and attention of one very capable master or mistress ? Before leaving Table B, I should like to point out one very glaring feature—the large decrease in the numbers in standards above Standard III. Thus, the number in Standard IV. is 71 percent, of the number in Standard III., the number in Standard V. is only 49 per cent, of the number in Standard IV., and the number in Standard VI., is only 43 per cent, of the number in Standard V. The 404 pupils in Standard V. were distributed over no fewer than 70 schools, and the 174 pupils in Standard VI. over 45 schools. The following table (Table D) shows for each standard the percentage of pupils that passed in each of the pass-subjects. Also, the total percentages in each subject for all classes taken together are shown for 1889 and for 1890, so that progress may be gauged. The making of the final calculations in this table gave me much pleasure, for in every percentage except that for spelling in Standard V. I found an advance. The full table (of which Table D is a summary) showing the results in each school can be seen in the office. It covers a very bulky sheet, and the keeping of it involved a great deal of time and many additions and calculations. As, however, such a table clearly shows with what success each pass-subject is taught at each school, I consider it should be kept.

'2—E. IB.