The Evening Star SATURDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1874.

Evening Star, Issue 3642, 24 October 1874, Page 2

The Evening Star SATURDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1874.

The season is approaching when a sort of stock-taking of the accumulations of learning heaped up during the year by pupils in our public schools, will be estimated, and appeals made for prizes to those who are supposed to have been the most industrious gleaners. The methods adopted to ascertain the most meritorious scholars have been clumsy and unsystematic in times past, by no means calculated to ensure rewards being given to those whose attainments are the most solid. The system on which prizes have been awarded has been productive of mischief rather than benefit: it has interrupted the work of the school, led to & practice of cramming for the occasion, and given rise to a preparation for school entertainments, which, by diverting the attention both of pupils and teachers from the true work of education, has led to waste of time and energy that months of after labor are required to recoupe. There is a kindly feeling in the interest taken by the public in children’s education ; and the crowded attendance at school exhibitions is proof to both teachers and pupils that they are not forgotten or neglected. Year by year liberal donations are given for purchase of prizes in one shape or other. So far as the public are concerned this is very good, even if mistaken. But free and openhanded gifts are undoubtedly the most judicious ; for if a resort must be had to some amateur exhibition, for obtaining funds for buying prizes, not only is the amount dependent upon the caprice of the weather or the chance of obtaining efficient assistance, but the teachers are still further withdrawn from the necessary work of the school, in order to organise a concert or get up a dramatic piece, a “ nigger” entertainment, or a cheap ball. Apart from the fact that by indulgence in such easily got up affairs the standard of public taste is lowered, and a love for a *•' spree” engendered in place of refined and cultivated enjoyment, another point to be decided is whether the end proposed is desirable. The fashionable cry now is that our school system is a failure. For what, then, 'are all these preparations? These six weeks’ addition to the labors of the teachers and elite of the alumni, or, more probably, these six weeks’ subtraction from the usual course of study? If our school system be a failure, prizes must necessarily be given forinefficiency, not for proficiency; and they really form no test whatever of the merit of the receiver. It is-no doubt gratifying to a child and its parents to be able to point to a book, a pencil-case, or some other souvenir, and to say it was earned at school. But the worth of the article is much detracted from when the newspaper column is examined and it is found that sixty or seventy in a school of one hundred and fifty or two hundred received similar reward. Whatever may have been the original incentive to such gifts, for prizes they cannot be considered, abuse has grown up, and the subject should receive the serious consideration of the Board of Education and of School Committees. The following remarks by James Currie, A.M., Principal of the Church of Scotland Training College, Edinburgh, are well worthy being pondered over by all who desire our schools to be

effective and not mere shams : The giving of “ Prizes” in schools very inadequately fulfils the condition of effective re-/.’.inl.-fl.) They are not within the reach of all v io deserve them; so that their influence i« limited. A class very soon comes to see which of its members have the chance of obtainin'* prizes. On that small number the effect is •oubtless strongly stimulant; but the bulk of -he class is quite unaffected, by their knowing themselves to be hopelessly shut out from success m the contest. This defect in the system ot prizes is still more weighty when we come to apeak of conduct as contrasted with attainment. Good conduct should be rewarded; but it is gravely objectionable to single out one or two pupils who are supposed to have most distinguished themselves by their good conduct. Amongst many who have behaved well, it is impossible to say, with certainty, who has behaved best: any standard by which we thus attempt to measure out good conduct with precision must be arbitrary, and is likely to be fallacious. Injustice is done to the many, and a position of very doubtful benefit assigned to the one. If there is not a feeling of injustice, it is only because there is a feeling of indifference engendered by the conviction that the distinction ot a good-conduct prize is artificial and not real: winch is much to be deprecated in a matter so vitally important.-(2.) The other objection to the system of prizes is that they are given to natural ability rather than to diligence In practice, the pupils of best ability obtain the prizes as a matter of course ; although their application is often manifestly less than that exhibited by their less fortunate, but equally ■deserving neighbors. This is unreasonable and tends to discourage application throughout . the class as a whole. These objections to the system can never be removed. Their force is

acknowledged by all to whom it ever falls to djstnbutc prizes ; and the acknowledgment is felt to be the plain and irrepressible dictate of the merest justice. But they may be mitigated by various expedients. Thus, in addition to the general class-prizes, prizes may be held out for special exercises of different kinds, which call forth different talents. Much more efficacious, however, is the sub-division of the class into groups of pupils of ah »ut the same standing ; who may therefore with less unfairness compete with each other. For this purpose pi izes would require to be more numerous than it is the custom at present to make them: which, however, they ought to be on any consideration, even though the inherent value of each should be diminished.