The School Examiner

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 51, 23 May 1927, Page 8

The School Examiner

Is There Relief for the Victim? (Written for THE SUN.) A PEARL of wisdom was cast abroad from the S.S.T. Conference at Wellington the other day by Mr. J. H. Harvey, of Auckland. He said the examinations encouraged superficial acquirements rather than intellectual profundity —they encouraged mathematical at the expense of literary subjects. He would abolish scholarship examinations, but found it difficult to suggest a substitute. Is there by any chance a prospect of relief for the examiner’s victim?

It is fortunate for the sanity of the nation that school-teachers are not allowed to frame its educational policy. Their ideas are often fantastic and not closely enough related to life. The nature of their work is such that they can seldom take the wide view which includes the whole field of national utility. They are like the scene-shifters behind the curtains at the theatre, who are unable to judge how the play is going.

The pronouncement of Mr. J. H. Harvey (of Auckland), cited above, has attained Dominion-wide publicity and apparently impressed his colleagues for a committee of investiga-

tion was set up on the strength of it. It is to be suspected that many people will not only think, but will say quite frankly that Mr. Harvey’s allocution is as resonant as the big drum —and as empty. Let it be looked at for a moment.

Examinations, according to the speaker, encourage two things—superficial acquirements and mathematical knowledge. On the other hand they do not encourage “intellectual profundity,” and literary subjects. Now the objection to so-called superficial acquirements is always suspicious. It is the refuge of the inefficient teacher who cannot get his pupils to acquire a certain specified minimum of knowledge on a certain specified subject, but who claims on the other hand that his teaching has tended to awaken

the scholars’ general powers, to make him, in fact, “intellectually profound.” The intellectually profound school-bov or school-girl is indeed a fearsome bird and a rare one. The betting is that he or she does not exist. If he (and especialy she) were to become prevalent in the community, life would not be worth living. The second part of Mr. Harvey’s profound observation is simply not in accordance with fact. Examinations have nothing whatever to do with creating a preference for mathematical subjects over literary ones. This is laid down by those who draw up the syllabus for the particular studies covered by the examination. THE PROVINCE OF THE EXAMINATION Mr. Harvey would like to abolish scholarship examinations, but naively confesses that he is unable to suggest a substitute. He does not say whether he includes the Junior Scholarships examinations, which give favourable entry of children to the secondary schools, or whether he alludes only to the University Entrance Scholarships. It would he indeed difficult for Mr. Harvey or anybody else to find any way of testing acquirement of knowledge on the part of young people other than by questioning. This inheres in life. It is consonant with commonsense. If one is testing a witness in a court of justice one does it by questions and there can be no other way. It is not the use, but the abuse, of examinations which is to be deprecated. The unskilful examiner like every other unskilful operative is worthy of execration, for he confuses and baulks his victim. THE REMEDY These observations, be it noted, refer purely to literary acquirement. In choosing men and women to be recipients of the priveleges which a University Scholarship bestows —privileges which are costly and the gift of the State—qualities of character and capacity for rendering social service come into play. It is here that examinations fail and with entire deference to Mr. Harvey and his friends, the remedy is to be found in permitting the senior teachers of the secondary schools to select thoscpupils who are to be the recipients of scholarships. This would be on the lines of the scheme devised by Cecil Rhodes, which though not perfect is as near perfection as human nature will allow. —“THE BLIGHTER.”