UNIVERSITY EXAMINATION PAPERS

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 187, 4 May 1940, Page 10

UNIVERSITY EXAMINATION PAPERS

In the light of the statement made by Dr. K. E. Bullen, senior lecturer in mathematics at Auckland University College, replying on behalf of the examiners in arithmetic for the University Entrance Examination to the criticism passed by the Executive Council of the University Senate on the manner in which the marking of candidates’ papers was carried out, public opinion will feel that further ventilation is necessary. The Senate Committee recorded its “strong disapproval of the lack of responsibility and of reasonable care shown by examiners of arithmetic,” and referred to “errors of various descriptions.” As the result of a comprehensive revision of the marked papers 170 additional candidates were subsequently awarded passes. On the face of it, this suggested a haphazard system of marking which in its effects would have resulted in serious injustice to candidates had the Senate Committee not intervened. In any case, it was for the public a disquieting revelation, for the future careers of many young people were at stake. . ; Dr. Bullen, in his reply, contends that the Senate Committee's report is unjust to the examiners, and states hi’s “definite opinion” that there has been “a substantial decline in the quality of arithmetic scripts” since he previously examined in this subject four years ago. “It appears to me,” he says, “that the committee has failed to face up to this position.” Bound by confidence on certain of the facts, he adds, he is unable at present to amplify his statement. Further enlightenment is obviously due. Candidates are fully entitled to safeguards against careless work on the part of the examiners. The university itself, on the other hand, must be safeguarded against the deterioration of the standards of higher education through the acceptance of inferior work on the part of the candidates.