THE UNIVERSITY EXAMINATIONS.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14977, 26 May 1914, Page 5

THE UNIVERSITY EXAMINATIONS.

TO THE EDITOR OK "TlfE FKKSS." Sir, —If there is any truth in Goethe's often quoted lines, tho University of New Zealand should bo rapidly forming its character. For of lato j years it ha-; certainly come out of its j academic hackrwator into the open strer>m. Hut, to change tho figure, j profe-ssors. liko partridges, are all t-he and it seoms a pity to drag thorn needlessly l>oioro tho public hy publishing in tho Wellinsjton newspapers lengthy *tji?. :»«.■»■*."'••' or'what TVr. Tlijcht, in his capacity of moinhor of the University I Senate, tolls us have hitherto boon I looked on as the ''strictly confidc-ntial j reports 1, of the Home examiners upon j their work. Jt' tho shrinking public, i very Gallio in its attitude to onU high matters, must nolens volens be taken into confidence, it should at least bo remembered that the writings of technical experts require a commentary Why not publish the report; in extenso with such extract* from the University calendar and such, elucidatory notes as would mako them, if not more j>cnorally intelligible, at legist less generally misleading? And again, why suppress all mention of subjects of such weight as Greek, Hebrew, mathematics, biology? physics, and chemistry? To thman in the street the University College and the University are very much alike. It would not be superfluous, therefore, to remind him that the condensed reports, with* their surprising scare headlines, which are now Iveiore him, apply to the University as a whole, and to warn him that no inference he may bo tempted to draw is necessarily J applicable to the University Collegeof his particular centre. This being promised, four points are worth noting in the reports as submitted. (1) They fail to discriminate clearly between iiassmon and honourmen. Such distinction no doubt will seem over subtle to tho unthinking,' yet from an academic standpoint it is not without meaning. (2) JJy indicating a widespread tendency on the part of students to rely too exclusively on the admittedly good work of their instructors, they throw into strong relief the weakness of tho present system of external examination. Obviously tho professor or lecturer who desires to secure tho maximum number of passes, and thereby gain popular applause, will fix his attention on the examination, and tho indiosyncrasies of tho individual examiner, rather than on what he himself regards as tho merits of his subject. Just as obviously, if he is fit for his position, ho will be more skilful in anticipating the lino likely to.be fol- '. lowed in such examination by such examiner than any of his less experienced students can be. It follows tliat the average student, inevitably more intent on tho immediate and profitable result of a good degree than on mental training in the abstract, will tend to lean moro and more heavily on his teacher's lectures and hints, and to depend less and less on his own, reading and thought. '

, (3) Somo of tho reports as summarised are inconsistent -with themselves. It is difficult to believe that in reporting on Economics Professor Bustahle really began by ''cursing" liis candidates, only to end by "blessi'ncc them all together.' .

He is represented as complaining that they have increased in number, but show no improvement in quality. Yet. a few lines further on he is made to assert that their general capacity compares favourably with that of candidates for similar examinations in the United Kingdom!

(I) Except to those familiar with the educational system of tho University • the reports must necessarily be mislead ing. This applies especially to Pro fessor Holdsworth's ' (alleged) ""remarks on History. These refer only to Honours candidates, of whom GO" per cent. (6 out of 10) appear to have won first or second classes, and 30 per cent. (3 out of 10), third classes. Tho latter it seems " are in the opinion of the Professor, - inferior to the best candidates for the pass B.A. To the man in the street, uneonversant with the ins and outs of University practice, this must appear an evidence of weakness on tho part of tho professors.. But tho three honourmen may quite possibly have devoted less time to tho study of history than tho passmen, who were presenting it as a repeated subject. Thoy may have been actually younger and less mature in mind than such passmen. They may have been engaged in outside work, and have had but little spare time for preparation. Or, again, and very probably, the best candidates for last year's pass B.A. may be far above the average, and safo first class men for the present year.

All these points, no doubt, are ohvious to men with a practical knowledge of educational work. They are far from obvious to the general public. It is therefore open to very grave question whether the remarkable new departure of submitting to the general public summaries of "strictly confidential reports," even when those summaries are "lengthy," is really in the best interests of University (vacation in New Zealand.—Yours, etc A PREHISTORIC GRADUATE. May 25th. 1914. TO T7IK,i:i)ITOK OK "THE TRESS." Sir.—lt is good to find that the objectioiiabJe paragraph is not a local product. As for Ihe "lengthy summary" which you rcpririi from "The Xew Zealand Tinins." t ho first sentence in it that caught my eye was thi.;:— "Regarding History. Professor \V. S. Hold&wortJi says: —'Of the ten candidates who offered History as a subject this your. ...' "' As in the first place, Profeisnr Iloldsworth was not tlio examir.e.r in History, and in the second, not ten. but Mxiy-oiie candidates offered History as a subject last year, I did not trouble to read tho "summary" any further.---Yours, etc., •J. HIGHT.