COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XVI, Issue 30, 4 February 1881, Page 2

COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS.

The following is the Examiners' report: — Nehon, December 21, 1880. To THE ChAIBMEN 03? THE NELSON AND Martbobough Education Boabds. Gentlemen, — We have the honor to lay before you our report of the examination of i candidates for the College Scholarships, held - December 28th and 29th, 1880; i There were twenty Nelson candidates, f seven of whom were from the Town, thirteen ■ from the Country, Six Marlborough boys t competed, all of whom were pupils attending :• Blenheim High SchooL The winners of the Nelson Town Scbolar- ' ships were (1) J. Burltrop, (2) W. Rose, both I belonging to the first division of the Nelson f town sohools. (1) E. Hodgson, from Upper I Moutere, and (2) J. Terry, from Westporfc, gained the country scholarships. > Two scholarships were offered by the Marl- ' borough Board on this occasion, the second of ! these being tenable for one year only. The 5 first scholarship was won easily by J. O'Leary, r (he second by GL Tindill, both being pupils | attending Blenheim High School. ' The Nelson prizes offered by Sir Julius ' Yogel were awarded, in compliance with the '■ direotioni of the Nelson Board, to (I) A. ' Ledger, from Riwaka School, and (2) George Stone, from the first division of the Nelson J Boys' School — these being the two boys who ; came next in ordor of merit to the winners of the Scholarships. ' The Marlborough prize, the competition for which was restricted to girls attending Blen-. heim High School, was won by M>ry Bary. The exclusion, on this occasion, of all } candidates who had not previously passed the Sixth Standard, whilo it has reduced but slightly the number of candidates in the two districts, has told favorably on the quality of the work. The preliminary sifting has j kept out such outrageoysly had papers as we felt it our duty to complain of last year. In . 1879 four out of the eight Nelson Town hoys failed, to obtain anything like half the marks. \ In 1880, all the competitors got considerably ' more than half. Among the Nelson Country . boys, also, only five failed to get half marks this year, against nine failures in 1879. In Marlborough, the failures were by no means so gross as they were last year, the ' hoy who stood lowest on the list getting 143 marks, as against 75 marks in 1879. j Our estimate of the manner in which each subject was dealt with by tho candidates is j as follows : — Geography {Physical and Political). — The i paper on this subject was far from being an ' easy one, the first question, -which involved j some thought, and in which cramming would be useless, was beyond the powers of all but a few candidates. Nevertheless, a large proportion of the hoys did so well as to show " that they bad been thoroughly taught. The ,' specimens of map-drawing were, for the most [ part, very creditable. The answers to the , last question, on tho Geography of New Zealand, were, as a rule, very full and accurate. History (Stuart period). — When the shortness of the period of history taken up iB considered, together with the length of time during which it had been prepared, the papers > ,on this subject can only be classed as mode- • rotely good. Four boya, however, did excep- . tionally well in History — Barltrop, G. Stone, O'Leary, and E. Hodgson. The most hopeful I sign in the work was the faot that most of the s boys, instead of slavishly reproducing the exact words of their text-books, expressed ■ themselves in language whiob, though homely • ' enough, was at least their own. Arithmetic. — Great attention has evidently ' been paid to the teaching of this subject. The ; majority of the papers were both neat a~id accurate; those of Hunter, Terry, Hewetson, > and O'Leary were all but perfect. English. — This paper was the least satisfacr tory of all. Ths composition and dictation L were on the whole fair ; but many boys failed 1 in derivation, parsing, and analysis. Some of the candidates realised the fact that the 1 question on derivation was one they could 5 not answer, and judiciously declined to have 3 recourse to the most pernicious habit of guessing; others, however, with full assurance ' were nev6r at a loss for the root of a word, 3 but unfortunately the roots given were mostly " invented for the occasion. P We have, &c> W. C. Hodgson. ) ,-, .t M imiT i Examiners.

Mabks Assigned. q g w c ►. 1g .2 gp| Names. Act. School & S «•-§ al^°M So .2 i"Ss^^g 3 £ M «« HH O S fl £ •§ Maximum Marks. 150 160 100 200 600 ... Nelaon Town Boys 1. Barltrop, J. ...* 14 10 Town Boys, First 124 118 87 160 489 1 Division. 2. Johnson, F.H. 13 5 Ditto 80 97 47 140 364 4 3. Stone, Geo. .„ 14 6 Ditto 105 114 80 73 372 3 4. Hunter; W. ... 14 2 Ditto 47 54 62 200 363 5 5. Creeswell, H... 14 2 Ditto 75 60 63 166 364 4 6. Stone, 0 13 6 Ditto 84 55 80 106 325 6 7. Hose, W *13 4 Ditto 95 90 81 163 429 2 Country Boys. 8. Fairball, S. ... 14 4 Eiohmond 80y5 ... 73 73 77 133 356 5 9. Smith, M. ... 14 6 Lower Wobefield... 56 20 30 80 186 12 10. Hodgson, E....* 14 4 Upper Wakefield.., 86 102 84 166 438 1 11. Wills, Jas. 14 2 Lower Moutere ... 75 48 60 173 356 5 12. Boyes, E 14 -6 Motueha 60 44 43 133 2SO 9 13. Moffatt, W. ... 14 3 Ditto 93 51 61 166 371 4 14. Howitson, W. IS 6 Ditto 66 11 24 193 294 8 15. Thome, Geo... U 9 Ditto 65 36 27 63 191 11 16. Barlejmnn, E. 14 6 Ditto 79 36 81 140 336 6 17. Ledger, A. ... U 3 Eiwaka 80 84 51 166 381 3 18. Madigan, E.... 13 8 Ditto 75 83 57 113 328 7 19. Terry, Jiio. ...#l4 0 Westport... ... 75 80 81 200 436 2 20. Orumpton, A Keefton 29 37 30 100 196 10 Maryborough Boy«. 1. Douslin, H. ... 14 1 Blenheim High „. 63 45 45 106 259 3 2. Reeve, W 15 4 Ditto 46 61 47 46 200 5 3. Millington, W. 14 2 Ditto 54 48 20 20 142 6 4. Hustwick, P... 15 0 Ditto 55 70 38 93 256 4 5. Tindill, Gh „.* 14 7 Ditto 102 78 50 143 373 2 6. O'Leary.Jas...* 13 5 Ditto 104 117 |76 180 477 I *Winnerß of Scholarahips.