THE GRADING OF TEACHERS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2831, 24 July 1916, Page 7

THE GRADING OF TEACHERS

A GOOD BEGINNING

DIFFICULTIES YET TO BE

OVERCOME

1 The,recently issued graded list of primary school teachers has naturally enough been: tho subject of keen scrutiny by the largo body of teachers who for the first time find.themselves systematically assessed in relation to each other according to their capabilities as teachers.

Ihe first attempt thus to place in correct consecutive order nearly 1000 teachcr3 such widely differing ability as would be found between that of the newest entrant to the rank of junior assistant teacher and that' of tho 'first-rank-teachers in the Dominion- was !!() -doubt a most formidable task. The Assistant' Director of Education, during , his address to the Wellington teachers, as' reported in Saturday's Dominion 1 , gave an interesting acoount of how that task had been faced, - and "how. its results might ■be assessed. He had no misgivings about-tho.success of the sohemo. He stated ' truly: enough that, if the recently published list had actually placed every one of the four thousand teachers in their correct or almost correct order it would have been a miracle, and that it would: have been, even a greater miracle if the-teachers concerned all accepted their evaluation even" from a correct list. •

Referring to some- ofv tho criticisms made concerning the grading, Mr.Caughley freely admitted-that there were cases where the grading had not succeeded, but he quite properly claimed - that against these exceptional '-cases ; there should bo put to the credit of the grading the very large percentage of correct grading. '.Even if 3000 teachers out of ■ 3800 were correctly graded, -: the ' fohiplaints of tho. 200 should not alone judge the'result. Referring to comparisons be-, tween districts, Mr. Caiaghlev explained clearly the pitfalls into wliicli many critics had fallen owing'to hasty generalisations and, sweeping statements • . made : on superficial examination' or : through lack of knowledge ;of: many vital conditions. He instanced the case of one district where, the teachers as.a body have publicly denounced tho result of the grading on the alleged ground.that their distriot was graded almost the lowest in the Dominion; Mr. Caughley stated that as a matter of fact that district was among the threß-highest graded of the thirteen districts. . -

With regard to many surprising differences in grading between teachers of similar position or salary, thero seems to be a reasonable explanatiin also. When 3fr. Caughley appealed to the experience of the teachers,present at the meeting thero "was ioticeable agreement ■with his statement "that even, between teachers of similar position or experience thero were cases whero a difference of 10 to 20 per cent, of marks would be required to mark the difference in the ability of the best and tha weakest teacher. If such surprising differences in ability actually exist, a true grading of courso must reveal them. Thes» were not anomalies in the grading, but in tho results of the .present methods of appointment. The \Educatiou-Department, as repre- : filled by the Assistant Director, seems to have every confidence in the scheme : and in its working under a first application. After Mr. Caughley lwd dealt with four or five of the l most vexed questions, showing the completeness with which the system had been built up and applied, there was a full opportunity Riven for questions, criticism, and discussion. The small extent to which this opportunity was availed of, and the general satisfaction evidenced with the replies or. explanations given, certainly seemed to justify the Department's confidence. ■ ' '. It is understood that a full- official report on the grading and its results will shortly be published by the Department, showing grounds for its-confidence in the ■Mheme ond giving ample facts-iand' fig--lires by which that confidence may .be. judged. It is intended also that as soon as'possible -the results of the grading' will be

discussed by the Assistant Director of Education with tho teachers in otlicr centres.

Wliere such an evident desire is shown by the Department to receive and discuss all suggestions for correction and improvement there should he little difficulty in removing both the misapprehensions and tho real complaints that have ■arisen. The Assistant Director's wide knowledge of the interests and views of teachers, together • with his possession of all the inner information about the results of tho grading, should be a guarantee of his avowed confidence in the scheme and' of his satisfaction at the large measure of success attained..