UNIVERSITY SENATE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 724, 25 January 1910, Page 8

UNIVERSITY SENATE.

SENDING EXAMINATION PAPERS. ■ ■ :;: .-HOWE. ; -■>■•■■-;■■. -

MOTION BY. ME. J. AELEN. (By ; Telegraph.—Frees Association.)

At the meeting of the ■ University Senate to-day, Mr. .James Allen moved: "That it is advisable to appoint some of the examiners (now selected in England.) torn residents in. New Zealand. Farther, if this" motion be" carried that the matter be .referred'to the November' Examiners' Committee." Mr. Allen said the-time had. come for;. the :university to put off its swaddling clothes. had gained ■ our namei and having reached a certain standard, had obtained general recognition'.' Our medical ■ and dental schools were recognised, although the examinations for-those degrees were conducted m New Zealand. He suggested that an assessor should be appointed to act with each examiner who should be a professor who had been coaching candidates Tins professor should judge as to whether candidates had" fulfilled certain conditions as to attendance at lectures m various courses entered for There was a definito feeling among, the community in-favour of discontinuing tn.o practice, of sending , examination papers .Home.-. .... ..;'■.. - .' The Rev. Mr; "Evans seconded the' motion, pro forma. ■•■ .' " ■ . . ftofessor. J. .R.; Brown .(-Wellington) aud the professors at the various colleges were ,the parties'mtef-interested; and their, collective ;■ opinion should', be taken. He- therefore suggested as -an amendment "That the q?Sdon'" to ..tue. appointment of examiners in New Zealand be_referred to tho Becess-.-Ceni-mittee -_ -His objection to the motion' was that it- did:not go in the direction oT associating examining 'with teaching. .ur. : l" J " ll I university in the world that divorced-its teaching from its '"anmung. The very,best typ\ of professor was the original man, and snoli. a professor shonld be allowed to n" "*? - H - ne did' so under the present system there was 1 J™y. s .'» ganger .of his'neglecting one ofhis chief duties to his students, U, fit ting them to pass: their degreVexainina-

ment- H 4w m t^ Vther amendment: "That the question of appointing examiners , from H resident of 'New %°v»L% ttevh™ instead of xesidelts' in - England, be' referred .without prejudZT? \ 6 tte e set,up ; to'consider the B ' S t- de^63 "- He-thought esasomag from teachng tended to make teaching formal, shallow, and narrow.: Instead of his work being hve, it becamemere preparation of students ;to t answer, in writingv quesßons py on examiner not in touch with" teach-' mg.i_He.could hardly conceive any subject for the BX degree at least for which a suitable examiner-could not be found ;in,,J\ew Zealand; Each professor should Mve general control of the ejeamhang of the .students of his own. college -in. his suhject. Objections to. what fir. Allen advocated were mere objections of detail, whereas those to the present system of English ■ examiners were fundamental. It was fair to ; the professors that should ho referred to them without - ijrejudice.;. ...-. :;--, ...'■.-.■;':'/>.■■• ■-.... vV

. Professor Scott (Canterbury • College) said reform was required in > details ■of our system of home examiners not "in principle, One great' advantage of that system .was that .'knowledge of work,-of our students stood them in good- stead with examiners if , subsequenfly a student went to England. ■ . ■■■■' '.' Dr. MT)owell opposedvauy departure fromthe principle of ; the present system. The great-', argument against lodal examiners, was the' four constituted col- • leges, of..'our .university and the. great rivalry between them. .If we;had one great metropolitan: university as was the case in Melbourne and Sydney the position would.be different ■ ' : ; ■■■■■■

Professor Shand, in upholding the pre- '• sent system, remarked" that the ■ association of examination with teaching advocated by Mr. Hogben had been, .adopted by the Senate in regard to the medical' school, where it worked admirably, because there was.no difficulty in finding properly: qualified assessors''to act 'with "the,pro-! : fessorSi i He would. like to' see. the. same system, applied: to/other courEes if it were practicable, . but was, not— .;../.,:j.,.

Mr.'Hay'opposed, the motion. ;."■'.■:■ Professor; F. D., Brovrn' said it was evident that we were on. the eve of a' new, dispensation. A change would be brought on through the independence-of the four, colleges. . ■• ' .;.. . ; ' ■','' " : Professor Chilton .declared.'himself'a supporter of the present: system. '. Mr. Von Haast said that one great advantage of the present system was that there could be no complaint as to examiners' want of'impartiality.-. ;

Mr. AUen: Worse; than that; they have made, mistakes. '; .' .-<. ■'

Mr. Von : Heast replied that there had been mistakes mado in our matriculation and, junior scholarship examinations, and probably. local Unifersity. degree examiners would ata> "niako mistakes. - ; ...'"■■

The Cameron said he could not conceive of any: seheme.by which'outside examiners' could be dispensed with unless four different standards (ono from each college) were accepted. ■'■■'■'. •. -■■'■ ■:■ Mr. Allon said ho : thought-the practical difficulties of the l present system were understood, but apparently they were-.not. He went onto read a letter recently- sent him, showing that the examiner in England;had,evidently made a mistake by crediting ' candidates with a wrong set of'marks.; 'The examiner had been cabled 'to' on the point,' but' the only. result was a confirmation of the previous marks. Appeals had been. pouring in on the. registrar (Mr. Joynt), who. eaid. that if only a portion "of. thorn were reasonable we must Tiave an extraordinary body of examiners. This had been a unique year for unsatisfactory results. The professor was.convinced l that the examiner had made a mistake;; and the bulk of the candidates were convinced to the same effect.. ■.(:•> '■■ - ■..': ;.- ' .-. I'.-. ■-V The motion as modified by Mr. Hogben's amendment (which Mr. 'Allen accepted) was lost by 13 to S. Xt was decided on the motion of Dr. Scott that students of medicine shall, before presenting ■ themselves for the final examination, attend a short course ■ of demonstrations in elementary stomatology, and that the number of midwifery cases which students are required to attend before graduating, be increased: from six to twelve. . ■■;. _ ■. ' ; . MATRICULATION ■'EXAMINATION/ The Senate considered the report' of the Scholarship Committee.' ' The matriculation examination report was as followsi—The committee is of opinion that the standard of matriculation, is too low, and should be raised so that the whole examination should represent a reasonable result of four years' training in a secondary- school, and the examiners so instructed. . The committee recommends that the. compulsory subjects for the entrance examination should be as follows:—(1) English (two papers),'including .elementary questions, history and geography. (2) Mathematics two papers) including geometry. . (3). Latin, Greek, French,-or German (one paper): (i) One of the following branches: of science (one paper) :—Mechanics, heat and light, electricity, . magnetism, chemistry, . zoology, botany, agriculture,' and' that in addition - every candidate, shall pass one subject selected from the subjects mentioned in the existing statute, and not already taken by the < candidate, but shall not offer himself for examination in more than- two such eubjects. .

!. Professor Blown explained the differI'ence between the present system and that |: proposed. • As certain of the same committee's recommendations affecting the rB.A. degree and scholarship, examinations [ also' affected' the matriculation, he : - referred briefly to thorn also. :'■. ■'/■-. . : These recommendations aio as follow —(1) That the statute of the RA. degree be amended, by adding the provision that no . undergradnate be allowed to keep i terms,for'that degree in.affiliated college .unless.hs has passed in.Latin or Greek at,, the matriculation standard. , (2) That the_ programme .'of -. work- for the matriculation examination and junior scholarship examination be assimiuated as far "as possible. (3) That the papers in biolow for' the. matriculation j'junior, scholarship, and medical intermediate . examinations .may, wnerover. suitable, .be illostrated ■ by- photographs,, dissections, or parts of plants or animals for the purpose of identification by candidates.,■,(!). That, tho staiuto dealing with the senior national scholarships be amended by the addition of ; th'a words "such, tuition- boing limited as to the number of classes taken at the discretion <1. the Jrofessotial Board of tho eollege."

The commitfee farther euggests that in tho. event of mathematics- being : made compulsory for the. entrance examination the subject be, no longer compulsory for the B.A. degree,.and that the suggestion be referred, to the Beeess Committee appointed to consider the B.A. and BSc courses. . . •. . • .-■

;lhe professor' explained that:■' reconi. mendation No. 1 was inserted because frequently the student who passed the preliminary examination did not take Latin,or .Greek, and was handicapped in consequence. If this rulo, were made compulsory, the student would be. ableto bring himself more.up to the standard.of his. fellow-students. ■;■' / •,

. The clauses were discussed seriatim, ; Professor Brown, moved the, adoption of Clause 1..-:.'........ :■. ■■; ; . .■:...'. . ■

Mr. .Hogben seconded. The Matriculation examination;- he said, .represented the standard of .educational attainment recognised over a great part of the .world, and should represent a fair amount of scholarship.'.,. The attainment of • this standard would*.not moan unnecessary hardship inflicted'on young students. Tho clause did not mean that a student at-' tend. any particular school. He simply had to attain, a certain standard of education. He did not believe the affirmation of this principle would cause a teacher to suffer by reason'of tho: derangement of standards, i He did not think' it would injuriously, .affect more than a very fsmall proportion, of young teachers who wished to continue their education. It would not prevent;. them entering < the training college, .and. would only shut out .of the university those at present realty unfit to enter, its. doors. '„ .' r . ■~• .. Dγ; Fitchett.'expressed disapproval of the; motion, and proceeded; to point out how the matriculation examination already, proved too much for a great pro-, portion of-the candidates, and in spite of this fact {hey wished .to raise, the' standard. During the last examination, moro : students were,."plucked" than ever before. ; "A more monstrous proposal was never,before the ;Senate," he'i declared.. It was quite clear to,him.how this came about. He. understood the. proposed chaise was the wish.of the .professors. ■He did- not: blame, the professors. They acting, from a sense of '■ duty, and striving to got; a; higher propornon of first-class students. They; had,: on the other hand, Mr. .V Hogben, who .waa naturally interested in the success of the secondary..'schools,,and:did not .wish. : any students ,ia , enter. the; university except through ,the. doors of secondary schobß. Their as; trdstees .of ihe tFniyersity w.as; to :see- thai '. emmd', educatioiv : was. placed' within the reach of all. those' who; wiehed to profit by.it. ylt was in "that' light' that they should .regard the matriculation : examination, but the professors said.vit seemed'.to him,' the stimdard; at present • was. already too high. , ;. .The main evil , in raising tho standard of matriculanott'B'Ould be that, parents would nst be prepared; to send boys to stady .' at'the University.,.:-..;;■.;;.-,',;';: ; ; ,,. •■.;■, ■•.'■;. The' Key. .Mr... Cameron, said in Scotch Universities until .recent 'years there was no matriculation; standard at. all,: and. Scotland had reason to be, proud of the men who passed .through the TJniversities. If,the,matriculation standard was raised there would.be such an'.outcry frbni one end' of the country to. the.other, that it would make the Senate 'pause.; ThVobject of the tJniveisityvWas to fit people for■ life, in New 'Zealand, not .the. cultivation of a special, few. ~., ~.-■ ,",-' ' Messrs. Professor J. E. Brown spote in favottr of the , motionl '■: Professor Sabnond did so also; but ; had some doubt whether he- w.ould votein.the affirmative.:, .:.;...,:,-., :,■' ,~. - .

' Professor;Chilton said .he .had'.Kttle doubt .that the standard vfas'.very.. low. 'Hβ believed the matriculation' .examination' was used by. mon'y, students as a"«>rt of 'leaving", examination, for. secondary schools, aad many .candidates-came...,for-ward,, vety ill prepared -for the. examination, >biit entered as a.-eort of:advertise-, ment for the tcacher.of the echool.: ■ -°.

•-,The motion, was eventually carried:by li to i, -, the dissentients being the / Eev. Iff. Cameron, the Hon. Brl Collins, Dr. Pitchett,. and. Dr. ITDowelL - ',; ' ....

■ The discussion- was ■ proceeding on .oomiralsory.,subjects, for matriculation ■'' when the adjonnunent'took.place. • .' . ■■