AKAROA SCHOOL COMMITTEE.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 636, 18 August 1882, Page 2

AKAROA SCHOOL COMMITTEE.

+ , A meeting of thin committee was held last evening. Tho Chairman stated that he bad called a special meeting to consider the proponed level for Lavaud street, th_* effect of which would be that the school fence would be cove Pod to the height of a foot, and there would be no possibility of carting in fuel without making a rai_ed roadway into the school ground. j_ Mr Penlington stated that tho Council! had formerly given the levels to the committee, and thoso levels should have been kept Mr Sims replied that tbey were the then existing levels, but not those proposed. The Chairman suggested tbat at tho Committee would not wish to Btand in tbe way of any improvements within tho borough, it would be better that he shouldSj write-to the Board, and state the probable coat of the necessary alterations, and only in the event of the Board objecting, should the Committee lodge an objection. * It was then moved by Mr McGregor, seconded by Mr fciims, and carried, that the Chairman and Messrs Westenra and Henning be a sub-committee to consider tbe matter, and, if necessary, to lodge an objection. The Chairman read the following paper ; As it seems to be taken for granted tbat the efficiency of a master is shown mainly by the percentage of passes, I should like to draw the attention of the coinmittee*i to two points—l«t. the number of children presented for examination ; 2nd. the age at which they are presented. (Ist) If tho percentage of passes is to -be taken as a test, an opinion as to the efficiency of the teaching can be formed only by comparison with other schools, and this comparison ceases to be of value if the conditions are unequal. If all the children in one school are presented,,and in another school only those are presented who pro in the opinion of the master likely to pass, the f-sults must be very different I

believe that it has been the custom to present all the children in our school, but it does not appear that this is the ease elsewhere. In the report of the North Canterbury Education Board for 1880, Mr Kestell says: It has now become the custom, judiciously classing scholars aceorning to their fitness, to withhold from examination, z.e.,Jnot to present, unfit scholars for the next higher standard than that labt passed* Sufficient reasons for scholars being withheld aro sometimes given; these are: bad attendance, inattention to studies, idleness, and incapacity for more advanced work. In the report of the Minister of Education, 1881, I find the following:—"Some have also been ■exceedingly careful, perhaps too careful, not to present any but those that could satisfy tho demands of the most exacting inspector," The inspector of the Wellington district proposes a remedy, as also does the inspec or for Marlborough. Mr Edge .•-ports : " The best plan Would be to define the number of attendances necessary to be made in order to entitle a •scholar (to be presented in a standard ihigher than that previously passed, il being at the same time optional with the teacher whether he presented any who had snot made the required attendances." The Snspector for Westland reports that tmaßterß "announced their intention of withholding certain children from presentaition at tbe then forthcoming examination.'" The inspector for Auckland reports' " that imuch mischief will be done by putting pressure -on teachers to send up pupils prematurely." The inspector for Otago, after reporting that he had insisted on ■every pupil being presented for a standard ihigher than that which he had last passed, .adds, " I have reason to believe that 5n several parts of tho Colony a different •course has been followed. 1 ' I think it is ■evident that the same practice does not •exist in all schools, and that there is a general feeling that some change is needed. If it were understood that a master is not ibound to present all children, he would gain a power which might be greatly abused, but it seems only fair that he should not be required te present those who bave not made a certain number of attendances. At the last annual examination of our school, while the highest ■attendance was 424, there were 29 children who failed to make 300 attendances. As •bearing on this, I observe that tbe Minister of Education, in his report for 1881, gives ■the tables, and says, •" The arrangement of ■the children in their classes according to •standards at the end of the year is shown an table N. It relates to a definite tim c, and represents the judgment of ■ tie iteachers as to the proficiency of all tbeir scholars, while the statistics given in table M. are compiled from the returns of examinations held at different times, and represent the judgment of the inspector as tto tbe result* attained." The committe • will see that if all children are presented at cannot be true to say that the numbw! presented " represents the judgment «.f the teachers as to the proficiency, of all their achohuß," as it .is certain that most ■teachers, if exercising their judgtiie-it,j would withhold certain.children. I will' now draw your attention to (2) the age at which children aro presented, and ask you eto observe the average ages at which ■children pass the sev. ral standnrds k the; •Colony, iv North Cant rhury, and in Akaroa. These are a follows: —

It would appear from this table that children have been passed in standard I. .at too early nn age, and the ill effect has -leen felt as they have passed into successive standards. It is instructive to observe tbe average age of those who failed to ■pass. In standard IL tl*e average age of those who passed was 10.5, of those who failed 9;9, and of these one child was aged 14.6, and another 12, or the average -would be atill lower. In standard 111. t-here -were no passes, but the average age of those presented was 10.9, and if those over 15 years were excluded, as they ishonld have been, the average would have (been 10.4, while that for the Colony as 11.2. In standard IV., the average age of those who failed was 12.5, which is the average age of "those who passed in the Oolony, but if those over 15 were excluded ithe average would be 11.7. In standard V., the average age of those who pasßed was 13.8, of those who failed 12.9. In standard VI., one passed, aged 12.7- one f-ar.l-d_.aged 11.7. A comparison of the*, ages, with .the average ages for the Colony, •will, 1 think, show that a mistake has been .made in pre.-nting children at too early an age. A vote of thanks was passed to the <Chairman, and discussion on the subject was adjourned.

.Standard. r II. -III. IV. V. VI. •Colony. 84 10 11.2 12.3 13.3 145 North Can let bury. Akaroa. 8.9 7.1 101 10.5 11.7 10.® 12 6 11.1 13.4 13.8 14.3 12.7