REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE EDUCATION BOARD OF SOUTH CANTERBURY FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1880.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2612, 4 August 1881, Page 2

REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE EDUCATION BOARD OF SOUTH CANTERBURY FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1880.

(Continued.)

Coming now to the Inspector’s report, in the second paragraph he writes that “ the serious illness which overtook me in February has prevented an earlier attention to the work.” What work ? Then, a#the auxiliaries shall and will fared badly in a previous document, so here wo find a similar wrong use of the auxiliary “ could ” for “ would ” when he speaks of better progress “ than I could have been justified in expecting.” Anotln r wrong use of tenses we find in another paragraph, where he writes “ the results of this experiment were so encouraging,” instead of have been so encouraging ; and, surely it is wrong to say that teachers “ have had inadequate experience,” as Mr Hammond says. They may “ have inadequate experience,” but not have had it Mr Inspector, There is failure on the Inspector’s part to distinguish between the perfect and the past indefinite tenses. Of misprints left uncorrected in this report, we have “uniform” for uniform, and a double “ and ” allowed to remain. On arriving at page 22, containing report on examination of pupil teachers, we are fairly appalled by the number of misprints. First the word five shows only its tail, “ ve,” the “ fi ” being non est, and we are inclined to cry after it fi-; I fio ! Then, with a double c in “recommended,” we have a new spelling of the word, whilst poor Marian is twice in the report and once in the table attached printed Marion, but comes right in a note in the table, and Sister Sarah is curtailed into Sara. Again, Drawing, Economy, and Needlework, which, as principal subjects, should be printed with an initial capital, are passed over with smalls, and intuition become* “ intutition.” A five barred poser, which our Pegasus cannot get over or under or through in any way, meets us in the last clause of this sentence of the report — “The work of the syllabus appears in all cases to have been honestly taken, but there is shown a want of systematic testing and examination by the masters, as evidenced by inaccuracy and a dis regard to the value of an answer.” Wliat does the last clause mean? A special fatality appears to have attached itself to the documents relating to these unfortunates, the pupil teachers. For when we come to the questions set them at the last examination, we find the same extraordinary blundering as in the regulations and reports relating to this examination. In history they arc asked, “ What were the chief provisions of the Magna Charta ?” Of uncorrected misprints we have advantag, fnd, quartarly, wster, chlorine, stcond and a word of which the head is “do” and the tail an almost imperceptible “ n,” but the main body is left out after the manner of “ Liberty.” Perhaps this word was set in this manner to test the abilities of pupil teachers for reading such a style of enigmatical writing as is adopted by that highly educational journal; In the questions in grammar .and composition we find this excellent model, “ Give the reason of you answer.” Whilst blaming the printer for “ you ” instead of your he could hardly have put “ of ” instead of " for,” and pupil teachers following the model set them must ask their pupils, “Give the reason of your answer.” In the arithmetical questions we find a novelty introduced in the mode of indicating a repetend by the abbreviated form of ef cetera, thus : •2777, etc. The Education Office is decidedly inventive in its methods. When we come to the questions upon physics this staggerer meets us as No. 1, “Explain as to a class centre of gravity.” What is meant by “ as to a class ” in this connection ? In our endeavors to find out we have suffered several explosions of our gravity, as well as very nearly the loss of our centre of gravity. Another question under the same subject must have considerably puzzled the unfortunate victims in the examination, “ On what does the boiling point of water depend? Ulus trato your answer by an experiment.” We guess they must have felt themselves rather in hot water to comply with the latter part of the question. How with mere pen and ink, and foolscap paper allowed them, they were to get up an experiment illustrative of uhat the boiling of water depends upon is what'puzzles us. The task sot by Pharoah to the Israelites of making bricks without straw, was nothing to it. I suppose, however, the Inspector simply meant them to illustrate their answer “ by naming ” or “ stating ” an experiment. But then why did he not say so ? We cannot, however, solve the problem of what he meant to be at in the following question in Domestic Economy. II a child in a largo family failed with scarlet fever, what precautions would you take to prevent the disease spreading.” We can understand the father of a large family into which scarlet fever had come “failing ” and seeking the remedy of the bankruptcy court as a precaution against further troubles connected with his domestic economy ; but “ a child failing with scarlet fever,” what can it mean ? Is it a new term in medical science ? Ye doctors, what answer would ye give to this question ? For your growth in the particular knowledge of your profession you should deputationize the Inspecter on this question, for you will be sure to meet with the fruits of this advanced, do not say amateur, doctoring when these pupil teachers come to be beads of households. So get abreast of the age. This question is altogether beyond our depth, and having failed in all attempts to fathom U, we _ give it up in despair, meanwhile setting it down as another instance of the Education Office having failed to make itself intelligible. The last twelve pages of the blue book are taken up with the report on the last scholarship examina tion and relative documents. We have already pointed out the discrepancy of statement between this report and that of the Chairman of the Board, in regard to the winners of the scholarships in Class D, and now only note one or two of the further blunders and curiosities. After mentioning the sum available for scholarships the report reads

“ we recommend hat ” and by inserting “ the ” we would then get good English and a very appropriate suggestion “ wo recommend the hat." Only it might he treated as another recommendation of the report which seems to have been cavalierly set aside without explanation. The examiners recommend that Sir Julius Vogel’s prizes be given to Watd and McLean, but when we -turn to the tables appended, those prizes are stated to have been given to Jones and Kalaugher, without explanation of the reason of the change. On page 28 a repeated “ the ” is left standing, and an “ a,” in the word practically, appears with its feet where its head should be. On page 30 again, the repeated words “ with an account ” stand glaringly in one of the questions, whilst on the opposite page the eye alights upon “ Plassy " spelt “ Plassey,” and in the Latin paper on the last page may be found hofses for hastes and lando for laudo. We have passed over without notice mistakes in punctuation which, are also numerous in the report, having found more than enough of material without these for coming to the conclusion that the reputation of the Education Office for blundering is fully sustained in this its latest annual report.