THE TEACHING OF MATHEMATICS.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14977, 26 May 1914, Page 2

THE TEACHING OF MATHEMATICS.

PASS AND HONOURS

STANDABDS.

AN INTERESTING REPORT. A matter which has aroused considerable interest in scholastic circles was the subject of much discussion at the meeting of the Board of Governors of Canterbury . College yesterday afternoon, when the report of the Special Committee appointed to consider the letter from Mr T. R. Cresswell, with the report of Professor Gabbatt, and to take evidence regarding the teaching of mathematics and the standard required for pass and honours examinations was read.

The committee reported that they had had interviews with Professor Gabbatt and Mr T. R. Cresswell with reference to tho undergraduate course of a certain student, and found as follows:—

A. (1) That according to tho marks obtained in the papers set for the exhibition in mathematics, in 1911, this student, tho only candidate, did not reach the standard required; in 1912, ho obtained considerably lower marks than the student who gained the exhibition ; in 1913. again the only candidate, ho failed to reach the requisite standard. The Professor carefully looked through the work, as ho would have liked to have awarded him the exhibition.

It should be noted that there is a very material difference between the standard for pass and honours work, and that Regulation LX., iii., "The exhibitions shall be awarded on special papers of a nioro advanced character than tlie pass papers; and no exhibition shall be awarded except to a student who has reached r> satisfactory standard in his special papers," was very clear with regard to the quality of work necessary for obtaining an exhibition, and it \vas obvious that the only judge of a satisfactory standard must Iw tho Professor of the special subject under consideration.

(2) That with reference to the student's undergraduate career, in 1911, ho. gave the impression of becoming a good student, but in examination did not answer his papers well; in 1912, having no University examination to look forward to at the end of tho session, he seemed to devote much time to the social side of college life,' and in consequence his work suffered; in 1913, he gave up devoting so much time to the social activities of tho college and worked better, but again failed to do himself justice in examination work. Tho Professor pointed out this weakness and advised him to treat the degree examination more seriously. (3) That senior scholarships were granted to the best men of the year, aud not ofc necessity to one at or above a certain standard 'of proficiency, as was the case in exhibitions. ,

B. That with regard to the standard required by the Professor- of Mathematics and the University examination results:—

(1) The standard required was certainly high, ■ but not too high for efficiency, while many difficulties were presented to the student owing to the more modem methods differing so much from the old-established ones.

(2) That the results of the degree examinations, of those presenting themselves for the College and University examinations showed uniform success.

(3) That, owing doubtless to mathematics being now an optional subject, the number of students was smaller. Those conditions also existed in the other University colleges.. " C. That many timesin the nfetory of the college students who had failed to obtain an exhibition had won a senior scholarship. The committee stated :—

, (1) They were satisfied that no injustice had been done to the student. On the contrary, the evidence showed that the Professor of Mathematics had given him every assistance in his power towards his fulfilling the promise of his school career.

(2) They had the fullest confidence in the manner in which the Professor of Mathematics carried out his duties. The chairman, in moving the adoption of the report, said that, the committee had gone very fully into the whole question, and felt that its report was a fair and just one. Mr Davey asked that the second letter received from Mr 1\ It. CressweJl concerning this question ehould bo read.

The Registrar proceeded to road the letter from Mr Cresswell, who thanked the sub-committee on mathematics for its kindnese in allowing him to be present at the cub-committee's meeting, and to elaborate the points made in his previous letter. . Hβ had attended quite unprepared to take so prominent /a part in the proceedings, and in consequence was at a disadvantage. Hβ particularly complained that, though Professor Gabbatt tad had his letter for two months, and was able to coneider every point in it, the writer was not permitted by the committee to know the tenor of the Professor's reply. The letter went on to strongly criticise Professor Gabbatt's nfethods in the awarding of exhibitions, stating that he awarded as few as possible while other professors awarded as many as possible. "His attitude towards >is pupils," the letter continued, ''is depreciatory. They are a poor 10t. ,. At this stage, the Registrar said that the name of the student occurred in the portion he had yet to read. Several members expressed the opinion that as the letter was addressed to a committee it should be treated as "in committee."

Mr Davey said that Mr Cresswell had been placed in a false position. Mr Montgomery interposed that Professor. Gabbatt had .no chance of replying to Mr Cresswell'e letter.

The chairman said that the committee had taken a considerable amount of trouble over the enquiry. Certain members had attended two meetings, but some could not attend either. With all due deference to Mr Davey, he thought that , the onus of the conduct of the meetings lay with those who attended.

Mr Davey said he had been unable to attend the first meeting,,and he did not get notice of the second, it did not matter about the onus of the conduct of the meetings. It was nght to bring up the letter now, and Mr Cresswell had the right of a reply from tho Professor.

Mr Montgomery: These insinuations of Mr Cresswell are letting forth to the worid absolutely ex-parte statements. I object to this letter being read in open Board.

Mr Davey said that as pzxt of the letter had been read, the whoJ* shauid be reed. If the letter had been wboijy in favour of the Professor the vffco.'e letter would have been read.

One momber said that th* lortar was addressed to the eub-committeo.

The Registrar said that the letter was addressed to him. There were no instructions with it. and he had held it over to be dealt with by the committee.

After further discussion tho Board went into committee to hear the remainder of the letter, and to discuss the whole qnestion.

On resuming, the chairman reported that the report of the committee had been adopted.