EXAMINER'S COMMENTS.

Kai Tiaki : the journal of the nurses of New Zealand, Volume XI, Issue 3, 1 July 1918, Page 124

EXAMINER'S COMMENTS.

Either my paper was an exceptionally easy one or the batch of nurses presented was a particularly good one. I only fail two (Nos. 4 and 46) and neither of them failed badly. I have spent much time and thought as to whether I should give first place to No. 38 or No. 53 and have at last decided to give them an equal number of marks. Both of their papers are excellent ones and yet are very dis-similar. No. 53 writes a model paper ; short concise, no padding, and never goes beyond the question. No. 38, upon the other hand, is too verbose and writes much unnecessary matter. Neither of them made any serious mistake, either of commission or omission. No. 38 wrote twice as much as No. 53 did. No. 38 did not arrange her papers in their proper order (this was also done by some others), and because of this I am not sure that I should not have given a few extra marks to No. 53 for her brief answers and for her having arranged her answers in their required order. It is very irritating to an examiner to find that, after going over No. 1 question, No. 3 follows, and he therefore gives no marks for No. 2 question. Personally, when going over the papers I always read the answers to No. 1 question in all of the papers before proceeding to No. 2. Should No. 3 question be answered after No. 1 the examiner naturally gives no marks for No. 2, and it is quite possible that he will not detect his mistake later. In my opinion many nurses fail in their examinations not from want of knowledge, but because they have not been taught how to answer questions. Given two nurses of equal ability and knowledge, one has been instructed how to answer an examination paper, and the other has not, the former will usually make ten per cent, more marks than the latter. A teacher who wishes his pupils to pass well, will set them frequent papers and after correcting these, criticise each in writing and return the corrected papers with the criticism to each nurse. Nurses I have found to be greatly helped by per-

using a paper written by the teacher answering his own questions. A few such papers show a nurse how a question should be answered. When a question is asked upon any subject, many nurses instead of answering the question as put, proceed to write an essay about the condition nam ed and in such cases often write so much that they forget to give an actual answer to the question. For instance, with regard to eclampsia, some half-dozen candidates wrote so much unnecessary matter that they foxgot to mention the fact that convulsions is a symptom. Some of them described all sorts of theories about its pathology, etc., but gave no hint that fits are one of its symptoms. When will nurses understand that a long paper does not necessarily get more marks than a short one, also that they should confine their answer to the question as put. No. 53 was one of the shortest of the papers, and yet she succeeded in obtaining the highest marks. She answered one question in a dozen lines of foolscap, and obtained nineteen marks out of a possible twenty. Another nurse wrote nearly three pages, and only received fourteen marks. Upon the whole, however, the papers showed more than average merit.

The following are the results of the examination of the pupils in the six State Maternity Hospitals and the Institutions recognised as training schools : — Name Training School. Passed first (equal). — Coates, Monica Grace ") St. Helens Hospital, ( Christchurch Sugden, Alberta M. (R.N.) C McHardy Maternity ) Home, Napier lu The following obtained 75 per cent, or over : — V Kidd, Sophia St. Helens, Wellington Taylor, Emily May (R.N.) St. Helens, Wellington Williams, Hazel Owen (R.N.) St. Helens,| Wellington Macdonald, Edith May St. Helens, Wellington Carter, Ella Elizabeth St. Helens, Wellington Hoban, Catherine E. M. St. Helens, Christchurch Biddle, Mrs. Cathleen St. Helens, Christchurch Baxter, Sarah Ivy St. Helens, Christchurch Byers, Emmeline St. Helens, Christchurch Miles, Lucy (R.N.) St. Helens, Christchurch Henderson, Maude A. St. Helens, Christchurch Hight, Elsie Louisa St. Helens, Christchurch Cox, Ruby Henrietta Female Refuge, Ch 'church Munn, Mrs. Ida Ellen St. Helens, Auckland Cochrane, Mary Ellen St. Helens, Auckland Bolton, Margaret A. (R.N.) St. Helens, Auckland Cavanagh, Catherine St. Helens, Auckland Irwin, Mrs. Adeline Mary St. Helens, Auckland

Bartio, Mrs. Janet Townley St. i Helens, Gisborne Forsdick, Minnie Townley St. Helens, Gisborne Cunnington, Alfreda Townley St. Helens, Gisborne. Rhinesmith, Agnes To wr ley St . Helens, Gisborne McWilliam, Muriel (R.N.) McHardy Maternity Home, Napier Hagenson, Annie Elizabeth St. Helens, Dunedin Lloyd, Ettie St.* Helens, Auckland Ongley, Monica St. Helens, Wellington The remaining nurses were also successful : — Glentworth, Mary (R.N.) St. Helens, Wellington Mitchell, Ada St. Helens, Wellington Elliott, Mary (R.N.) St. Helens Wellington Dunn, Phyllis St. Helens, Wellington Willetts, Georgina St. Helens, Wellington Strang, Mary Isabella St. Helens, Wellington Thompson, Mary Alexandra Home, Wellington

Gee, Ivy Alexandra Home, Wellington Williams, Verna Alexandra Home, Wellington. Mercer, Georgma Female Refuge, Christchurch Munro, Mrs. Margaret A.I. St. Helens, Auckland Boscher, Maud Townley St. Helens* Gisborne Wyatt, Eliza Ann Mangonui Hospital Miller, Sarah St. Helens, Invercargil? Watt, Maggie St. Helens, Invercargil 1 Fynmore, Winifred St. Helens, Dunedin McLean, Wilhehnina St. Helens, Dunedin Gordon, Margaret, (R.N.) St. Helens, Dunedin Tolerton, Miriam St. Helens, Dunedin Cookson, Althea Harriett Medical School, Mater(R. N) nity Hos., Dunedin Mitchell, Naomi Leah Medical School, Maternity Hos., Dunedin Isbister, M. Copland Medica) School, Maternity Hos., Dunedin Sutherland, Emily Margaret St. Helens, Wellington