THE EVILS OF OUR EXAIIMTSON SYSTEM

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 520, 24 November 1928, Page 26

THE EVILS OF OUR EXAIIMTSON SYSTEM

Vigorous Attack on Pre-sent-Day Methods of “Cramming” Jl, ,nber the month of examination.s, trill noon he with us and hundreds of , u j A <' u: Zealanders have their noses close to books, night and day, in untici})titiau of the tests before th>m. In the tollou 'g article written for the "Sunday ;v. ,m- by Hr. J. Dennis, M.A., a former sptetor of schools in Australia, a trent attack is made on the whole system. mrrWFV an HAT a prodigious expenditure o£ time and energy our examiuajk JU-/ tions represent. Think of the tons of paper consumed, the printing and issuing of question sheets, the million pages of manuscript to he read and evaluated by the examiners, the multitudes of men and women who supervise the examinations, the hosts of clerks and others who compile and publish the results; and last, but greatest of all, the long sustained grind of the scholars and teachers in preparing for the ordeal. We ask, “How did we come to be burdened with this huge business?”! and "What Is the good of it all?” It seems not to have been defin- j itely and deliberately adopted at any j time, but to have grown upon us. j And its history is not a glorious one. j To understand its full effect we must consider the developments since ihe beginning of the present century. Wonderful advance has been made everywhere. In the educational sphere the same spirit of progress has been at work, but stops short of fulfilment. Fine ideals have been thought out, curricula overhauled and methods devised, but these things cannot be followed up in the schools because examinations stand in the way. The curriculum is still lopsided, being mainly scholastic. Such things as initiative, constructive power, development of interests and purpose, intellectual enterprise and adventure, music and art, do not count much in examinations and are, therefore, little regarded In the school. A dead uniformity prevails. The schools are all preparing for the same examinations, and accordingly teach Ihe same subjects In the same way. There Is little chance for adaptation to local conditions, or for taking advantage of special Interests and special abilities on the part of the staff. The whole attitude toward learning is distorted. Instead of teacher and pupils asking of a subject, “What culture or power can It give?" they must ask, “What does the examiner require to be known about it?” The methods are inevitably those of coaching and cramming. AND THE TEACHERS? What do the teachers think of it all? Listening to their annual protests against some of the questions sgt, one might judge that they condemn the examination system. But that would be a mistake. Commonly it is the particular questions they condemn, and not the system. Many of them have fitted themselves into ihe examination groove, or rather have grown up in it, and do not wish to get out pf it, even if they could. Others are neutral. The more progressive teachers, who keep abreast of modern movements in education, chafe bitterly against the restrictions placed upon them, and would welcome a change. The best teachers undoubtedly do fine work in spite of their difficulties.

The pupils are most to be pitied, though they do not complain, taking it all as it comes, as part of the nature of thiugs. They toil at their task during the day, and not being able to keep up with it, work nightshifts at home. Some of them, no doubt, get through this homework in a reasonable time, but in many cases there is much vexation of spirit, which affects in some degree the whole household. One unfortunate thing about homework is that the young people are largely shut out from the amenities of the home. This evil of excessive homework seems to be ipseparable from the examination system. Mr. Board, late Director of Education, issued more than one strong memorandum to check the abuse, but with little avail. Parents, too, have some share In the strain and anxiety. They are sometimes cited as supporters of the examination system, but without just grounds. A parent’s chief concern is that his boy shall get whatever benefits the school can bestow, and come through with credit. Very properly he rejoices when the boy gets a good pass, or wins distinction at an examination. But if there were no ex aminations, that would not worry him; he would look for other evidence of his boy’s well-doing. In defence of examinations it Is often urged that, by fixing a definite goal for teachers and pupil, they give an incentive to learning. An incentive, yes, but of the wrong kind, based upon discredited psychology, and at variance with modern educational ideals. We want effort, and strenuous effort, but it must spring from interest rather than from compulsion. A boy will learn more about electricity in a week or two tinkering about with a wireless set than he will in a whole term of school study. Again, examinations are supposed to ensure scholarship and culture. But do they? True scholarship and culture are not won by cramming. Do not many of our boys and girls, after finishing with their examinations, promptly forget what they have learned through drudgery? Ask our boys and girls who have left school a year or two whether they still read Latin or French, or even English, literature, or whether they are following up their study of mathematics, or science or history, and you are answered with an incredulous smile. Plants whose growth has been forced in a hot-house do not thrive when transferred to the open air. The certificates gained at examiua-

tions are in some eases required as a condition of employment. But it is hard to believe that employers set much store on the number of marks a boy has got for French or Algebra, or the like. What they want is some guarantee that the boy has had a sound education up to a specified standard; and they can get that more reliability from the headmaster, who can answer for the boy and his work through a course of years than from the examiner, who does not know the boy at all, and must perforce judge him by what he does in a few hours at examination. A CHALLENGE Even now a school report on a boy often carries more weight than the official certificate. Any school that grants certificates without due discrimination would soon be discredited. The school report could also be made the basis of promotion from the primary school to a higher grade, though it might be necessary to apply some simple checks. In the ways suggested above, aud in other ways, the extent of examinations could be so reduced as no longer to tyrannise over the work of our schools. There would still remain some competitive examinations, and steps should be taken to bring these more into accord with educational principles. Examination is itself an art, and by no means an easy one. Considerable research and experiment have been made concerning it, and the nature of the results is indicated in such books as McCall’s “How to Measure in Education.” How many of our examiners have mastered the technique of the art? An examiner, being generally a specials ist in his own subject, is apt to overemphasise it, and to overlook its relation to other subjects. Another drawback is that the examiner as a rule has little first-hand knowledge of schools and scholars. To remedy this lack he might confer with representative teachers. One can easily conceive that an examiner by wise and skilful methods might stimulate an interest in his subject, and promote its study. But have we not heard, on the contrary, of a subject being examined almost out of existence by making unreasonable demands? Complaints against the examination system have been rife for many years. The evil has now grown to such preposterous proportions that some definite steps should be taken to check it. It seems appropriate that teachers should make the first move.