BOARD OF EDUCATION.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4974, 2 March 1877, Page 3

BOARD OF EDUCATION.

The Board met yesterday morning at 11 o’clock. Present ; Messrs. Pharazyn (chairman), Beetham, Watt, Ross, Toomatb, Bunny, and Gisborne.

APPLICATIONS. Two of the cases to which Mr. Inspector Bee referred on Wednesday were again brought underthenoticeof the Board by the .Secretary, who stated that the two Misses Verdon, who were applicants for situations as teachers, were in attendance in the outer office, being anxious for a personal interview with the Board. It was resolved to hear them, and accordingly the ladies were introduced. They stated that they were desirous of obtaining situations, and one of them handed in a certificate from the Irish School Board as to her competency. They had lately come out from Home, and their means were such that they could not afford to be kept waiting for any length of time. In reply to the Chairman, Mr. Lee stated that there were at present no vacancies under the Board. The ladies remarked that they had been induced to come out on the understanding that they would find employment as teachers from the Government. The Chairman ; In that case you had better apply to the Government. Mr. Leb ; I may state that a sister of the ladies now present was for a time employed in the Kaiwarra school, and another sister was temporarily acting as assistant, but she was not found competent to take charge of a school. Mr. Beetham : We cannot build schools purposely to provide vacancies for applicants. The Chairman : There appear to be no vacancies at present, in which case we cannot give you employment. Should suitable situations offer, however, you may rest assured of being given a trial. A question being asked as to what Irish certificates were worth, Mr. Lee said : Generally experience has shown that they are worth very little. I may state that there is a vacancy at the Buxton school, but I feel confident that Miss Verdon would not satisfy the Local Committee. The Foxton school is one of the best under the Board. Mr. Bunny said the ladies had called upon him, and he had recommended them to take situations as domestic servants. Several of the members of the Board thought that this was the best thing the Misses Verdon could do. Mr. Lee said he did not see any chance of their being engaged by the Board. He had frequently told them so, but they had preferred to come and lay their case before the Board, The ladies were then informed that there was no prospect of any suitable vacancy occurring. f

THE INSPECTOR’S REPORT. The Board proceeded to the consideration of the letters of complaint against Mr. Lee’s report. One was heard on the previous day, namely, that by Mr. Thompson, who was present. None of the complainants were present yesterday, having made their statements in writing. ~ _ , , The first called upon was Mr. Holmes, of Te Aro. The Secretary read the following letter from that gentleman : “ Te Aro School, Teh. 24, 1877. « Sir, —Having read the Inspector’s report (page 5) of this school, I find it generally so vague and inaccurate that in the interests of the school I feel compelled to address you on the subject. Fortunately for myself, long before Mr. Lee arrived here, I have earned at Te Aro a reputation for being a careful and earnest teacher, and the curt manner in which he has been pleased to speak of my work is, to say the least, very discouraging, and would, if true, greatly diminish the success of my ere keen a falling off in Standards 11. and 111, results during the year.’ It must be borne in mind that, during this period, a large number of pupils residing in the districts of Buckle-street and the Terrace schools, who used to be pupils here, very naturally left, and attended those schools in their districts. No credit is given us for this movement, though their early training was carried out here. It is therefore fair to assume they would have passed the same Standards had they remained in the school. “2. ‘The most unsatisfactory part of the school was the upper section, in which few passed Standard 11., and only one passed Standard lII.’ Mr. Lee states distinctly that he allows them two years to pass from one Standard to another. Well, the majority of these candidates had only been one year since passing last Standard, and yet they are put down as having failed. I heard Mr. Lee put the following questions to several children. ‘How long is it since you passed last Standard ?’ —Answer : ‘ One year.’ ‘ Oh, you may go, I can’t allow you to go through my Standards like that. You are young; take another year and you will do Ibetter.’ Their writing was not examined, their poetry not heard, or their reading ; they therefore naturally thought they were not wanted, and did not appear again at the examination ; and yet' these are put down as having ‘ failed miserably,’ when I know for a fact a good deal of useful work had been done by them. “ 3, ‘The head master is much blamed for admitting privileged pupils into this section.’ I fail to understand this sentence. All the children pay the same fee. The pupils are classified Recording to their reading power; Mr. Lee admits that is correct. It may not be generally known that many children come to us who read tolerably, and know little else. The arithmetic is always taught between 11 and 12, so that those who are weak in that subject for that hour retire to a class below, in which their work is taught. _ This class (the first) which Mr. Lee calls privileged, has been taught in sections by Miss Fisher, Mr. Gor-

I don, and myself. Thu only special subjects I take the whole of this class in are writing and I drawing. No one could well take between sixty land seventy children together in the other subjects of our routine. Arithmetic. Now, ! in order that the children of this section should be well up in this subject for the examination, special attention had been paid to it. Besides the usual morning work from 12 to 12, it was for three months daily resumed after the afternoon studies, particularly fractions and decimals. I asked several of the children after the examination how it was they made the mistake by calling a nought one, and they told me ‘ that they felt so nervous that they did not know what they wore doing.’ Two or three children cupboard—cubboard. The proof of failure has been somewhat strained. The work of some I saw I consider was neatly presented. I am very particular with the children on this point. One little fellow, who was marked by the Inspector for commencing the decimal questions first, said we were doing the same kind of sums yesterday (meaning the day before the examination), and I thought I could get through them first. Please notice the Inspector is careful that I may not even have the credit of the pass made by G. Boss with 150 marks. His friends would contradict that statement if asked. The Fourth Standard pupils are young, and had only been preparing one year for the examination. The discipline of the school was good at the time of inspection. No misadventure occurred during the examination that I am aware of, and I fail to see in what way the 1 radical change’ is required. In conclusion, I \v on Id just ask why no reference was made to our excellent little ‘ cadet corps,’ or the ‘ Archdeacon’s Penny Bank,’ or the singing, which the Inspector said was good, or the improved appearance of the playground, now kept clean entirely by the children, and newly fenced by the Board, or the scientific diagrams I have purchased for the amusement and instruction of the children. ■ -These ■ points are minutely touched upon in the sketches of the other schools of the districts. I desire therefore that this matter may be adjusted in any way the Board may think best. I have now been a public teacher 83 years ; 23 of the best years of my life have been passed in this school, and I think I am entitled to a little more consideration than the Inspector has been pleased to give.”

Mr. Lee stated that he had written out a reply to the above, and proceeded to read as follows: .

“Wellington Education Office, “February 27, 1877.

“Sin, —I beg to reply as follows to Mr. Holmes’ letter touching my report of Te Aro school. I proceed at once to the explanation proper. “ 1. As a reason for the falling off in Standard 11. and 111. results it is asserted that a large number of pupils left during the past year for the Terrace and Buckle-street schools. Now the latter schools have been open a year and a half, and the former and more distant school for that end of the town has been open nearly a year. It is improbable, therefore, that many pupils could have left during the past year merely on account of their closer proximity to the new schools. It is not usual for the advanced pupils of a good school to be removed to another school solely on account of distance travelled, nor have I been able to trace the result of good previous training in the Te Aro school to the satisfactory work done by pupils in other schools. “2. The failure of Standard 111. and IV. candidates is ascribed to the fact that most of those passed a Standard a year ago, whereas two years is the time allowed in which to make the pass. I compare work in this school with work done in other schools. Hundreds pass in one year when the age, attendance, and instruction are favorable. See, for example, my report of the Masterton school. There were twenty-four candidates for Standard 111., and three for Standard IV., all from Mr. Holmes’ section of the school. Only one passed Standard 111. and none passed Standard IV. Of the twenty-four candidates for Standard 111., two of the failures passed Standard 11. two years ago. Of the twentythree failures, twelve were over twelve years of age, of which five were fourteen years of age. AH had been at least a year and a half at school, fifteen over three years, and two over five and a-half years. Eleven of the 23 failures had attended over 300 half days in the past year. As to results, only four of the twenty-four candidates made more than a quarter marks in arithmetic, only eight made a quarter marks in geography and history, and only three made half marks, and in English composition only five made a quarter marks. To an expert these facts need no comment. Of the Standard IV. candidates one was 13£ and the other 14J years of age, the former nearly six years and the latter over three years in school, hut one year only since passing Standard 111.

“3. The privileged section consisted of 60 or 70 pupils, nominally the first or upper class of the school, numbering 332 pupils. From this one section candidates for all four Standards were sent up for examination—representing a range of from six to eight years’ school work. They had been admitted apparently according to size, or at the request of their parents. As a proof of the unsatisfactory working of this section, 1 adduce the following facts : —MissHelyer brought up 15 girls, candidates for Standard 11., from her own sections ; 13 passed. Mr. Holmes brought up from this privileged section 30 boys, candidates for the same Standard, of the same average age, standing, and general calibre ; 6 passed. If Mr. Holmes would imply that any candidates were rejected without examination, the statement is disingenuous, as no candidates are ever disallowed. Candidates for Standard 11., for example, who stated that they had not yet learned to work division sums in class, might be at once declined, but not before it was evident on the face of the facts that they were manifestly unprepared. These, however, would be very rare and extreme cases. I certainly have not always proceeded with the examination of candidates after they have failed in one section, and therefore cannot possibly pass the Standard, unless I have done so for special reasons. Classification for reading and general intelligence in all subjects except arithmetic is my own suggestion, made in every school, and one which Mr. Holmes has been slow to adopt, and which he has not carried out in its integrity. The result is, this privileged section has been cut up into small drafts representing practically separate classes under differentteachers from time to time, instead of being a wellselected upper class of children fairly even in attainments and under one responsible teacher. This has been pointed out again and again. My notices of each school must necessarily be scant, but I possess more full information. Minor matters in regard to the appointment of a school are trivial when the essential teaching is not satisfactory. It matters little to me as an officer how industriously the boys may be employed in picking up stray pebbles in the playground if they are not diligently taught to calculate in the schoolroom,” Mr. Gisborne asked what was meant by the term “ privileged section 1”

Mr. Lee said it meant that the boys admitted into tire class referred to were not admitted in consideration of educational acquirements, which should alone guide the teacher in such a matter. The school was not properly classified. Mr. Gisbobne thought the term was capable of bearing a widely different construction : hence his question. Mr, Toomath said that he knew Mr. Holmes perfectly well, and was quite certain that that gentleman understood the art of teaching, though ho might not have practised it.

Mr. Lee did rot doubt that Mr. Holme? understood the art of teaching, but he certainly did not practise it. The fact was, that Mr. Holmes’s school contained what he might call a “ privileged ” class—a class into which boys were put at the request of their parents or themselves, whether they were entitled by their ability to be in it or not. Mr. Gisborne was glad to hear that explanation, because when the Inspector had spoken of a “ privileged ” class he thought he meant a class into which the wealthier people were received, while the poorer ones were not received. He could not see what benefit

would be gained by such a practice ; the effect would be quite the contrary, he should think. Mr. Lee quite concurred, and gave it as his opinion that the practice obtained where masters were not sufficiently determined, and were influenced by the parents. As to the charge made against him by Mr. Holmes that he had frightened the children, Mr. Lee said he did not consider it necessary to refer to that. It was a matter upon which he must ask the Board to take the popular feeling throughout the province. Mr. Gisborne said excuses of some sort were invariably made when either a man or a child failed in anything. The Chairman moved to the effect, —That the reply of Mr. Lee to Mr. Holmes’ letter is satisfactory to this Board, and that a communication to that effect be sent to Mr. Holmes. Seconded by Mr. Watt. Mr. Gisborne thought it better that the cases should he considered in the absence of Mr. Lee, and moved also, by way of .amendment, —That all the complaints, and Mr. Lee’s replies to them, should be heard before any decision was come to.

Mr. Bunny concurred in this view of the matter.

Mr. Toomath thought both sides should be heard first, and that the Board should then decide on the matter with closed doors. Mr. Gisborne said he had not contemplated the exclusion of the Press, but was willing to include that in his motion.

Mr. Bonny pointed out that it would be better to talk the matter over between themselves ; they might, in fact, consider themselves in the same position as judges who retired to privately consider their decision on any case coming before them. The Chairman withdrew his motion, and Mr. Gisborne’s motion was agreed to. The Board then proceeded to the next case, namely, the complaint of Mr. W. Marten, of the Karori school, .which was as follows: “Karori School, February 24, 1877.

“ Gentlemen,—l must beg very respectfully to protest against the terms in which the Inspector of Schools, Mr. X,ee, in his last report, characterises both myself and the school placed by you under my charge. I have the honor to point out—- “ 1. That Mr, Bee, in stating that ‘the school had decreased from 61 to 52,’ omits to mention that this decrease was purely temporary, being caused mainly by the migration of three families, although in reporting on other schools he pointedly offers this explanation of the decrease. Also, he does not mention what he is aware to be the case, that the attendance at this school has increased more than 50 percent. {i.e, from an average of about 30 to 60) during the nineteen months it has been under my charge. Moreover, as was explained to him at the time, many children were absent during the month for which the average quoted in his report was taken, owing to the severe influenza which was epidemic at that time. The number on my books at present is 68. “2. Mr. Lee states that I am ‘an incompetent teacher of arithmetic and oral subjects;’ that I ‘ failed to work the sums set for Standard III.;’ and that ‘all Standard 111. candidates, and all but two of the Standard 11. candidates, failed miserably, especially in arithmetic.’ It is not for me to discuss the question of my own capability, but I may remind the Board that I am a firstclass certificated master under the Nelson Education Board (without which indeed I could not have held my former appointment at Collingwood), and that when the same pupils, of whom Mr. Lee writes in such terms of unmeasured condemnation, were examined for the Local Committee’s Christmas prizes by the chairman of the committee, the Bev. W. Ballaohey, he spoke in particular praise of their progress in arithmetic, remarking as a special feature in a school examination that not one single sum was wrongly done._ Mr. Ballachey himself can confirm this, and it was recorded at the time in the Wellington papers. Moreover, as Mr. Lee’s opinion self-evidently is founded on the examination he held on 13th October, I am compelled to make a few remarks on that examination. In the first place I think his entry in the log-book after the last two examinations plainly shows the case to a certain extent was prejudged. I, unfortunately, differed slightly from Mr. Lee as to the best mode of imparting arithmetical instruction, my own opinion being founded on long experience and knowledge of the subject. I may mention that I was for several years one of the Board of Inspectors of the London Endowed Schools, and therefore may pretend to some acquaintance with methods of education. I think that Mr. Lee—unconsciously perhaps to himself bad decided in his own mind that _my mode ought not to succeed, and framed his examination accordingly. I maintain that the time allowed (fsrty-five minutes) for children, all of whom were under thirteen, and some under twelve, to do the sums specified in the list appended, which were those given out on the occasion referred to, was by far too short for them to be done properly. They did the same sums correctly, and with ease, next day, when adequate time was given. Again, in some instances, when two optional and equally correct methods existed of solving a question, and the pupils adopted one, giving a right answer, they were marked as having failed, because they did not adopt the other optional method. I submit that this is not fair either to the children or to myself. I also feel constrained to remark that Mr. Lee’s harsh manner towards the children, and what I cannot help calling his discourtesy at -times to myself in their presence, have had the effect of inspiring great reluctance on their part to attend his examinations, and I have had to. use much personal persuasion to induce them to attend. I would venture to suggest that in order to preserve discipline in schools, it is essential that the Inspector should treat the teachers with scrupulous courtesy and respect before the pupils, who would be apt to follow any example of the contrary. lam happy to be able to add that such an effect was not produced in this instance, the children feeling that rather hard measure was dealt to them as well as to myself, and sympathising accordingly. It is needless for me .to enter into fuller details here, as I was summoned by the Local Committee to attend an inquiry on the subject held on the 16th hist., when questions were put to me, founded on Mr. Lee’s report, and on statements made by the pupils themselves to their parents, my answers to which doubtless will be duly reported to you by the committee. His informing the children that if they did not pass in arithmetic he would not pass them at all m the Standard, naturally had the effect—when he pronounced their sums wrong—of rendering them careless and indifferent in the subjects (history, geography, &c.) in which they were subsequently examined. To Mr, Lee’s statement that I ‘ failed to work the sums set for Standard 111.,’ I can only give an unqualified contradiction. It must be founded on an imperfect recollection of what occurred, I distinctly declined to be placed Smong my own pupils, and set to do sums with them, regarding such a demand as unreasonable and unprecedented. Seeing that, as a Fellow of the Society of Arts, my proposers being Messrs. Frodsham, F.B.A.S;, andVul!samy,F.B.A.S., aind George Stevenson, the celebrated engineer, I was engaged with the first-named gentleman in astronomical calculations demanding advanced mathematical knowledge and arithmetical skill, the idea that I was unable to work ordinary sums is simply absurd. Besides, as a London merchant and private banker of many years standing, my business ip its numerous branches necessarily involved most complicated arithmetical operations. I place myself in the hands of your honorable Board, with full confidence that you will do me justice, uninfluenced by the unfavorable report made in some particulars by your officer. I pledge my word and honor as a gentleman and a magistrate that ray statements are strictly accurate in every particular.” »p g. i have the honor to append a testimonial in my favor.—W. M. The testimonial referred to m the above letter was also read, being as follows:—” We, parents of children attending the Karori school at the time of the late inspection, wish to express ourselves generally satisfied with Dir. Marten as the master, and with the progress our children have made since he has been here.” (Then follow the signatures.)

To Mr. Marten Mr. Lee replied as follows, in explanation to the Board • ' “ Wellington Education Board Office, “ February 27, 1877.

“ Sir, —The committee of the Karori School having sent in to your Board a series of statements by Mr. Marten, the master of the school, and these statements being at variance with those made in my late report to your Board, I beg to submit the following additional information and reply. I have numbered Mr. Ballachey’s queries iu his copy of the evidence taken, and my numbers refer to the several queries ; “2. The master made no objections to working the sums. I always set sums without the aid of a book, and never give the same sums in different schools. It is ray practice to ask teachers to work sums for me, partly to save time, and partly that I may see the methods taught ; otherwise I work them myself, or obtain the answers by comparing the slates of the pupils who are readiest in their work. One-half of the teachers have worked sums for me, and no teacher has ever declined to do so, whilst many have voluntarily offered to obtain the answers for me. “3. Mr. Marten sat down whilst I was engaged with another class, and he was occupied for a considerable time in attempting to work the sums. After a time he left his post, and came up to notice what was going on my class. X asked him, aside, if he had obtained the answers. He replied that he had not yet finished. I begged him not to delay, as I felt sure I should have a long day’s work, and it would give me time if he would be good enough to obtain the answers for me. He moved to what appeared to me his former post, and resumed his work. Presently I noticed that he was again unoccupied, and I asked him whether he had finished. He replied,‘No; I have a headache.’ I afterwards^ examined his slate, and found one side filled with the working of the easiest sum set—one in compound long division. It was incorrect. “ 8. I always explain the meaning of each written question to a class. It was stated by me that certain sums were in rule of three and certain suras in practice. Some could be done by any method. “ 10. I have spent some time in carefully going through all my schedules of examination for every school under the Board, and find that 16 candidates out of 4080 scholars marked all or all but one of the sums set for Standard 111. at the late examinations, and that not more than two such cases occurred in any one school; and yet Mr. Marten states that most of his candidates answered all the questions but one the day after the examination.

“ 11. No limit is ever set by me to the time allowed for Standard arithmetic. I do not think a single sum —and certainly not more than two sums—among all the candidates were not marked because the method was bad. I remember saying I ought not to take such bad work ; but as might be expected under bad method, the results in nearly all, if not in every case, were too incorrect to admit of being marked. The children were somewhat noisy and undisciplined, and were told by me that there was no need to suppose that they would fail from fear or nervousness, but that there was apparently more danger of their failing from want of due care. I accordingly reminded them that if by carelessness they failed in arithmetic they would fail altogether. They were by no means crestfallen in consequence. “12. The state of the blackboard was such that it was impossible to write upon it. I could only get the chalk to take the surface by wetting the board with my fingers in the most shiny and defaced parts. I allowed all children who had any difficulty in making out the figures to come out of their places and copy down the sums. About one-third of the class did so.

“ 13. Among some children there is always a feeling of fear or nervousness in any examination ; but I should say there was less of that feeding in Karori than in most schools. “ For the further information of the Board and the School Committee, I append memoranda I made in my diary under the dates given :

° “ June 9—Karori—48 present. Arithmetic very weak. Not one pupil in the school did correctly multiplication of money by 28 ; two got right a reduction sum ; none did correctly » simple rule of three sum ; only one-did a practice sum ; four worked correctly the cost of 37 yards at 3s. fid. a yard. “ October 13—Only one candidate out of nineteen for Standard I. could do simple substraction. Several slates had meaningless work upon them. Children not obeying the orders of the master. Six candidates for Standard 111. showed very poor method in arithmetic, and the best candidates worked only three or four sums at all.” With regard to the charge made by Mr. Marten against him, of having given him a sum to do in the presence of his pupils for the purpose of insulting him, Mr. Lee explained that he always gave impromptu questions in arithmetic, and frequently asked the masters to work out the answers for him in order partly to save time and partly to ascertain the roaster’s method of teaching arithmetic. Many masters offered to work out the sums for him which he had set for one class while he was going-on with the examination of another. It had been his practice to get the masters to work the sums for him.. With regard to Mr. Marten’s statement that he had never tried to work the sums, Mr. Lee gave a flat contradiction to it. He said that Mr. Marten had worked one of the sums in long division, and had failed to do it correctly. He (Mr, Lee) was not surprised to hear that the ' boys had worked the sums correctly next day, as that was an excuse which he frequently heard. Mr. Rosa; Has Mr. Marten been up for examination under the Board yet? Mr. Lee : No. He was appointed on the strength of his Nelson certificate. He might add in addition te the statement already made, that Mr., Marten’s assertion regarding the suras set for Standard 111. was incorrect. That gentleman stated that nearly all the scholars had done the sums set for that Standard ; but he (Mr. Lee) had carefully looked up the returns, and found that out of all the scholars under the Board’s control, numbering 4080, only sixteen had passed, and not more than two in any one school—even the best in the province. He denied that be frightened the children, but admitted that he had told them, according to his usual custom, that if they failed in arithmetic they would not pass their Standard. There was less nervousness amongst the children at Karori than at other places, and he considered that if he had not cautioned them to be careful they would have had cause to complain. He found that the master had no .control Over the children, and had seen them refuse to obey Mr.’Marten's order. ;

Mr. Beetham ; Is Mr. Marten a nervous man ?

Mr. Lee : I should say; he was a little nervous.

; Mr. Beetham : I asked because it struck me that were such the case Mr. Marten might have misunderstood what you said while the examination was going on. ' - Mr. Gisborne : Are you sure that the figures you saw on the slate were Mr. Marten’s figures? f Mr. Lee: Yes ; I think he handed me the slate ; but I have no doubt about their being his figures. Mr. West’s complaint was then taken. He had written to the Wanganui Herald on the subject, and his letter was t read from the newspaper. The substance <j£ his letter was that he had been unfairly reported on by Mr. Lee, and speaking of that gentleman’s words of commendation to the assistants in the Wanganui school, he said all the good work, and none of the bad, was placed' to their credit; and he called them raw untrained lads. There was much in the report, he (iontinued, which was unfair, and harsh in the extreme. To the above Mr. Lee replied as follows: “ Wellington Education Board, “February 28, 1877.

Sin, —Mr. West, the master of the Wanganui boys’ school, having written a letter to the Wanganui Herald, in which statements are made calculated to mislead the public, I beg to reply to them in order, following the numbering adopted in the letter ; “ 1. The numbers given are not from my report. I speak of averages as struck oh the

number of passes made, and not on the number of marks obtained.

“2. When I state that only five pupils in the town are yet passed in Standard 111., I am writing from my table of results, page 14. Throughout the report no return is made of pupils no longer on the bocks of a school ; and of course the expression, ‘Five pupils’ yet passed in Standard 111.,’ means that there are as yet only five pupils, now on the books of the Wanganui schools, passed in Standard 111. I count therefore the three new passes, and two boys previously passed and remaining in the school.

“ 3 and 4. When the lower part of a school is satisfactory and the upper unsatisfactory, the assistants should not be unjustly passed over. In each of my reports of this school I have commended the assistants. Two of the raw and untrained lads alluded to are now doing independent work as masters at Mataongaonga and Kaitoke which is worthy of imitation. If a small school at a low standard under an untrained lad unassisted can in two years produce high average results, and place two pupils at the head of the Standard HI- list, and are very high in the Standard IV. list, what might be the standing of a large town school under a veteran teacher with good assistants after ten years’ work ? This is the question I have put to myself as an Inspector, and I trust Mr. West will put it to himself as a master.

“ 5. I state that at my last visit of inspection no worse copybook-writing was seen in any school. A quibble is again raised. The words, 8 of inspection,’,, are inserted to distinguish my former visit from the last one ‘of examination.’ At my visit of inspection only (February 16) I made the following entry in my diary :—‘ Many boys in Mr. West’s class scribbling for writing, and in thirteen out of twenty-eight cases the same error was repeated throughout a page. Best of copybooks miserably written.’

‘‘ 6. Here, as in paragraph 1, the averages are not mine, and the numbers are deceptive, in that no mention is made of the number of passes. Three candidates passed the Third Standard at the last examination, and four at the previous examination. I have struck no averages at all in Standard 111. w< rk. The great disappointment was in the number of failures.

“7. The numbers sixty-three and twentytwo, it will be clearly seen by reference to the table of results, have been taken down in error from the next columns on the right hand. I am sorry for this oversight, although the correction does not affect my statement except by raising Standard 11. passes 2 per cent, over last year. The results in any case remain over the average of all our schools. I think it is the only fragile statement, and I hope not a very material one. The school is not necessarily altogether unsatisfactory because onethird is unsatisfactorily taught.” Mr. Armstrong, of Carterton, wrote : “ Carterton, February 26.

“Dear Sin, —I shall feel much obliged by your bringing under the notice of the Board the Inspector’s report on the state of the Carterton school. To enable you to do so, I shall explain to you as briefly as possible, and at the same time say that I think the Inspector’s remarks are rather severe :

“1. The Inspector is hardly justified in stating that the decrease is owing to insufficient teaching. I do not know of a single instance where children Were withdrawn from the school through the teaching. There are other causes which tend to give excuses to parents or children to move from one school to another, other than through the teaching, and which are often very difficult to explain. “2. lam not aware of a forcing system being carried on in this school ; nor do I think the Inspector has any grounds for his assertion other than that Standard 11. failed in arithmetic.

“3. The Reading, &c.—lt would appear from the report that the reading of the whole school was very bad, yet in his_ remarks which he wrote in the log-book he only referred to Standard I. candidates, and said : 1 Standard I. readers mumbled very much, and the reading was often inaudible.’ The number of marks given by him for reading in the different Standards hardly support the ‘ wretched mumble’ &o. The Standard 11. candidates only failed in arithmetic, yet from the report you would conclude the whole school failed. The copybooks used are those sanctioned by the Board, viz., Philips' New Zealand Series, Nos. Ito 12. Although the copybooks affe difficult the writing is very fair. “ 4. ‘Most Unsatisfactory School.’—ln looking through the report I see that other schools are weak in Standard 11., as well as this one, and their per centage is much lower, yet they are not classed as ‘ most unsatisfactory.’ Last year fourteen new passes were made in Standard 11., and as a rule you cannot have good passes every year. I think the Inspector himself admits this.

“5. Discipline and Management, &c.—l can only say that during the four years I have been in charge of this school I have invariably pursued the same course of management ; I will only add Mr. Lee’s own remarks, which he made in the log-book in May last, at the time of his surprise visit. He says : ‘I find the school tidy, in satisfactory working order, and well disciplined,’ and ‘ the time-table is suitable.’

“6. The Unsatisfactory Pupils. They are principally due to irregular attendance, abilities below the average, and other causes, for which a teacher can hardly he held responsible. “The marks given to the several successful candidates in the different Standards will enable the Board to form a tolerably correct idea of the state of the school The percentages, which are about the average, and the results of four years’ labor of the present teachers, can hardly be called unsatisfactory.” To this Mr. Lee replied : “February 28, 1877.

“Sir, —I beg to„thus reply to Mr. Armstrong’s letter in the order of his paragraphs: — “1. That children would hardly travel one, two, and even three miles further to another school if the teaching were satisfactory. I instance the Hookers and Udys, the latter travelling three miles past the Carterton school to attend the Clareville. There has been a very considerable increase in the population around Carterton school, with a large falling off in the attendance. “I stated in my last report that Standard 111. pupils were forced. I found again this year that the preparatory work from one Standard to another had been neglected. A large number of candidates were presented for Standard 111., and I think six for Standard IV. No judgment was exercised in the classification. The master appeared to want comprehension of the work required . .under the higher Standards. He aimed at much. Poor results followed, only three passing the Third Standard, and none the. Fourth, Two of the Third Standard passes were very bare ones, minimum marks being obtained. “ 3. I pointed out clearly to Mr. Armstrong what I meant by too difficult copybooks. His reply is evasive in this particular, “4. This school is most unsatisfactory, because it is retrograding, and the reading, writing, and arithmetic are all; in bad form. I do not complain so much of the fewness of the passes this year as of the character of the work. « 6. The disobedience of the children in the playground,' and the difficulty ip preventing copying, have modified my opinion of the character of the discipline. “6. The number of unsatisfactory children is too great to be thus easily explained away.” Mr. Sinclair, of the Taita, complained as follows : _ “February 27, 1877.

“ Sib, —I object to the paragraph describing the Taita school, in what purports to be the Inspector’s ‘Annual Report for the year ending December, 1876,’ on the following grounds. “1. That several members of my family have experienced, at different times, indications of dislike and prejudice on the part of the Inspector. ' “2. That ten children who were absent on the day of last inspection have been classed as ‘ unsatisfactory.’ ” Mr. Lee’s explanation in this case, the last, was as follows: —

“February 28, 1877. “ Sie, —I beg to reply briefly to Mr. Sin clair’s note.

“ 1. There are no grounds whatever for the assertion that several members of Mr. Sinclair’s family have experienced at different times indications (whatever the word may mean) of dislike and prejudice on my part. “2.,1 have stated in. my report, page 4, par. 10, that my return of unsatisfactory pupils includes in all schools pupils who have been two years at school without making a pass, even if absent from examination ; and this is said to be stated in justice to the teacher. If absentees were not included absence from examination would thereby be encouraged. “ The best pupils are generally anxious to be present and make the passes for their individual credit. If the absentees had been present and passed in proportion to those present, the results of the school would have been little affected.” The Board then adjourned for lunch, and on meeting again at 3 o’clock considered their decisions with closed doors. The following resolutions were arrived at;— Mr. Thompson’s case (heard on Wednesday). —Resolved, —That the Inspector was justified in the remarks he made as to the condition of this school, and that steps be taken for giving effect to the request of the Local Committee for the removal of the teacher. Mr. West’s case.—Resolved, — That the Board consider Mr. West’s action in appealing to the Press for redress for a supposed grievance, instead of to the Board, was highly reprehensible ; but that the Board defer taking any action on the Inspector’s report as to the condition of the school until after the next inspection. With regard to the Te Aro school (Mr. Holmes), Karori (Mr. Marten), Taita (Mr. Sinclair), and Carterton (Mr. Armstrong), the following resolution was come to; —That the Board defer expressing an opinion until copies of the complaints made by teachers, and the Inspector’s replies thereto, be referred to the Local Committees, with the request that they will report thereon. Finally the following motion was carried:— That the Board express their confidence generally in the Inspector of Schools, and thank him for the zeal and ability shown by him during his inspection, as shown by his last report. FEATHEMTON. Tenders were ordered to be called for the erection of a school and teacher’s residence at Featherston, the Building Committee being empowered to accept the tenders. The Board then adjourned till next ordinary meeting.