1.—14 a.

12

[g. hogben.

126. Three months at the training college ? —-There is no reason why it should not be at the training college. No great harm would be done if one in twenty or one in twelve had to be sent away. 127. Would you consider it wise to modify this subsection 2 in that direction, or do you think this is a sufficient inducement ?—" Such conditions as to probation "is included here. 128. But this is more than Matriculation ; this is one year at the university or else a junior Scholarship Examination ?—I would not make it so as to keep out any pupil-teachers who had qualified. 129. Assuming that the pupil-teachers who were eligible to come in did not fill all the vacancies, would you modify this in order to get the vacancies filled ? —Yes, I would be quite willing to bring it down to the Matriculation. 130. Assuming that there were several pupil-teachers available, would you still suggest that boys should come in under clause 2 as you have got it, to the exclusion of certain pupil-teachers ? —No. 131. You say you must bring in all the pupil-teachers ? —All that qualify, yes, I think so. I think the colony is committed to training them. 132. Can you suggest any other method than this for getting towards your ideal of gradually doing away with the pupil-teacher system ?—I think the pupil-teacher regulations, if they are adopted, will make the first bridge. 133. That is one of the objects ?—Yes. It is as near as you can go within the present law. 134. I understand you to be very strong in your opinion and advice that gradually we should do away with the pupil-teacher system and train our teachers direct from the secondary schools or universities ?—Yes. 135. Mr. Hardy.] How much do you think the proposed change would cost —to do away with pupil-teachers, practically ?—I should not like to give an estimate at the moment. I did make an estimate, but I do not recollect what the amount was. 136. Mr. Fowlds.] Would it be £10,000 a year ?—More than that, I think, because you would have to put the substitutes down as junior teachers, and then you would have to raise the salaries of all the teachers above them. You could not leave half a dozen juniors all at the same salary. You could not put in all assistants at £80 instead of pupil-teachers. 137. Mr. Hardy.] Would you take a boy or a girl, and after examinations, train him or her in a two-years course ? —Not less than a two-years course. 138. And after that you would send them out as assistant teachers ? —Yes ; after they had passed a period of probation in the training colleges. They would have had practice in teaching while they were in the training colleges. 139. Do you not think it would enormously increase the cost ?—Not what I should call " enormously." 140. Had you that in your mind when you were raising, as you did a year or two ago, the pupilteachers' salaries —that you wanted to bring up the expense of the pupil-teachers so that the increased cost in doing away with them would not be felt much % —No. When I suggested an increase in pupilteachers' remuneration I should not have thought it right to have any ulterior motive. I proposed the increase in pupil-teachers' salaries that was included in the Teachers' Salaries Act because I thought they were the minimum that ought to be paid in order to compete with other callings. I thought they were low enough. As a matter of fact they are not high enough now. 141. You know that you increased the salaries, and the reason why you increased them was because you thought the pupil-teachers were not getting enough, and whether you continued the pupil-teacher system or not you thought it only fair that they should get what was sufficient remuneration for the work ?—I should have given them more, but we were limited for teachers' salaries and Boards' expenses to £4 a head. We could not increase the salaries beyond a certain amount. 142. You cannot tell us from memory how much it would increase the cost if pupil-teachers were done away with ?—lt would not take me very long to estimate it, but I am not prepared to say at the present moment what the cost would be. 143. The Chairman.] We will ask Mr. Hogben for a return showing that ? —Of course it would depend also on the increases given to the other teachers. It would depend on the amendments that were consequential in the Teachers' Salaries Act. 144. Would an amendment of the Act be required to do away with the pupil-teacher system ? — Yes ; although, legally, it could be done now. Any Board that liked could get rid of all its pupil-teachers immediately—an even number, at all events. Though it could be legally done now, Ido not think a Board would venture to put at the bottom of any school a whole number of assistants at £80 a year, with no promotions for some of them for years. There is promotion in the case of pupil-teachers. 145. Mr. Hardy.] In addition to that a Board must make a provision for future teachers, filling up places vacated through women getting married and men going out of the calling I—The1 —The training colleges would supply these. You would have to keep the numbers up either by means of the training college or by pupil-teachers. We are not quite ready yet to make the change. I was hoping that we were working towards it gradually, and, if nothing else had been done, I should myself have advised the Minister. 146. To what do you attribute the scarcity of teachers just now ? —The scarcity of male and female teachers together is not so great this year as it was two years ago. 147. To what do you attribute that ? —ln my evidence before the Commission I said there would be a shortage of teachers for two or three years after the passing of the Act. 148. You think that difficulty might fairly be overcome now ? —No, it will be gradually overcome. 149. It is being gradually overcome ? —Yes. 150. There will not be the same shortage later on that there has been since the Act came into operation ?—lt will gradually diminish, in fact it is diminishing quite fast enough. We do not want to go to the other extreme. It takes about one hundred and sixty teachers a year to supply the deficiency in the colony.