E.-ld

17

counted as a pass-subject, it would be very generally taught in my district. I do not see how it would be possible to incorporate drawing and writing to count as one subject, because I am acquainted with excellent writers who are weak in drawing, and certainly great drawing-masters are by no means noted for their clever penmanship, and failure in one ought certainly not to count as failure in both. Arithmetic. —The arithmetic in Standard IV. is the only part of the compulsory syllabus which presents any real difficulty, and I think this might easily be obviated by defining the " tables " under the weights and measures to be known, and upon which questions might be set. I would suggest the following work in this subject: (1.) Compound rules—money. (2.) Weights and measures—long measure, square measure, dry measure. Beduction—money; long measure—inches to miles; square measure—acres to yards. There are several other important subjects that I should like to bring under your notice, but I am unable to do so just at present in consequence of the unusual press of office work. I have, &c, The Inspector-General of Schools, Wellington. H. Hill.

NELSON. Mr. Hodgson. Sib, — Nelson, 19th January, 1885. I have the honour to submit to you my opinion on the several points raised in your letter of the 6th January. 1. lam clearly of opinion that history and geography should be made class-subjects. Fortunately lam under no necessity of arguing this question on a priori grounds. For seventeen years— that is, until the introduction of the present standards—it had been my practice to examine all the smaller schools^which in Nelson have always formed a large proportion of the whole—in history and geography by taking the classes collectively, just as is now proposed. lam certain that both of these subjects were at least as well taught then as they are now under a system of individual examination. In a matter of this kind I hold an ounce of experience worth a ton of hypothesis. If, as occasionally happened, the work fell short of what I expected, I invariably commented on the deficiency in my published report, when an improvement usually followed. This check was found practically sufficient to secure good work in the long run. 2. I should deprecate the exclusion of English grammar from the list of subjects necessary to secure a pass, for this reason among others, that grammar and arithmetic are the only two compulsory subjects which afford a mental training of much value. 3. I see no reason for leaving history out of the syllabus, but would restrict the teaching of this subject to the scholars preparing for the Fifth and Sixth Standards, to whom I think the same period should be prescribed, in order to save the time of the teacher. 4. The plan suggested, that drawing and writing should be made one compulsory subject for the First Standard only at first, with a gradual extension to the higher standards, seems to me well worth a trial. 5. The addition of subtraction to the requirements of the First Standard in arithmetic, the excision of history from the work of the Third and Fourth Standards, and the treating of history and geography as class-subjects would, it appears to me, so simplify the work that there ought to be no difficulty in passing scholars through the six standards between the ages of eight and fourteen. Even under the present regulations, if scholars are not pushed forward too hastily at the outset, and if they attend regularly, the great majority can secure passes in successive standards year by year. My object in weighting the First Standard is merely to keep back very young children—one of the greatest difficulties with which an Inspector has to contend. Gathering from the tenour of your circular that it is the wish of the department to obtain the individual opinion of each Inspector, I have stated my views without reference to, or consultation with, any of my fellow-Inspectors. I venture, however, to express my opinion that a conference of Inspectors, presided over by the Inspector-General, and at which the knotty questions raised in your letter might be freely discussed face to face, would afford a better means of attaining the objects aimed at than the course that the department, doubtless for good reasons, has thought fit to adopt. I have, &c, W. C. Hodgson, Inspector for the Nelson and Marlborough Districts. The Inspector-General of Schools, Wellington.

SOUTH CANTERBURY. Dr. Andeeson. Sib, — Education Office, Timaru, 19th January, 1885. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th instant, on the subject of standard requirements. 1. Without entering into the question of the comparative efficiency of the two systems of examination, by which the Inspector deals with individual promotions, or reports simply on the class efficiency in any subject, leaving the promotions to the teacher, I am of opinion that the inclusion of grammar, history, and geography in Begulation IX., without any provision for a result payment or a complete remodelling of the system of reporting on, appointing, and dismissing teachers, would inevitably result in the comparative neglect of these subjects in our schools, and a corresponding reduction in the status of teachers and of primary school education. At present the amount of attention devoted to the subjects included in Begulation IX. depends partly on the attitude of Education Boards and partly on public opinion, both of which necessarily exert a considerable 3—E. lc