E.—IB

11

Arithmetic shows improvement in every class, and the total percentage for the six standards, 79-4, is a very creditable one for this subject. The general complaint in this colony, in the Australian Colonies, and in the United Kingdom, that arithmetic is the least satisfactory subject, and shows a much lower percentage of passes than any other subject, cannot be made with regard to this district; for I find that the percentage here is within a fraction of the percentages in spelling and geography, each of which subjects shows 80-2, and that it is 11-8 higher than the percentage in grammar, which reads 676. The most marked improvement was in Standard VI. and in Standard V., namely, 9-9 and 13-3 respectively. In Standard VI. pupils met with little success in what are commonly known as compound proportion sums, through their working them by "first principles"—a mistake, in my opinion. In sums on fencing land, area was _ frequently found instead of distance round. In Standard V. pupils undoubtedly were weakest in fractions; but practice was not as strong as one might reasonably expect, " interest " was frequently worked by cumbersome methods, and cancelling was seldom employed in "proportion" and "first principles." At Hawera and Wanganui Boys' the arithmetic in these two upper standards was very fine. Standard IV. shows an improvement of 7-4. Failure was found most frequently in reduction and other sums in weights and measures, through pupils being either ignorant of their tables or thoughtless. Confusion of linear measure with square measure was very common, and sometimes I found a sum worked partly by one table and partly by the other. Some pupils were unable to divide oxmultiply by a mixed number, and in " practice " the old mistake of dividing into the wrong line I still frequently found. In the working of bills of parcels great improvement was shown, and in this branch the Aramoho School recorded quite a unique performance, twenty-nine pupils out of thirty examined working quite correctly the bills on six different sets of examination cards. I must not forget to mention that very many pupils in these three upper standards were inaccurate in little subtractions of money entailed in working problems. In the lower three standards the arithmetic was on the whole good, and there was an improvement of 6 per cent, in the passes in Standard 111., and also in those in Standard 11. In problem-working* the old fault of using division for multiplication, and vice versa, was still common. In Standard I. the style of putting down the work was very varied. Small cramped figuring never should be allowed. Some teachers might remember that the syllabus of this standard requires that "the numeration must be applied to the addition and multiplication, and the multiplication known to be a compendious method of addition." Grammar, with Composition, showed a lower percentage of passes than any other subject, namely, 67-6, but this is 2-7 higher than the percentage for 1889. In Standard VI. grammar was often good in the large schools, but in the small country schools many pupils failed to satisfy the requirements. Analysis was generally treated by this class in a better manner than any other branch of grammar, but derivations of very common words were seldom known, and most pupils failed to give any reasons for their corrections of improprieties and false syntax. Corrections without reasons point either to laziness or to lack of intellectual training, and they may be the outcome of pure guessing. In Standard V. analysis showed great improvement, but parsing often was very bad at small schools, the pupils showing little acquaintance with the kind, the voice, the mood, and in a lesser degree the tense, of the verb. In Standard IV. what Mr. Thring calls "lunatic mistakes " were far too common. For example, I examine many Fourth Standards in which few or more pupils make such senseless errors as calling "children" singular, "men" feminine, " women " masculine. But, as Mr. Thring points out, there is as much sense in this kind of work as there is in calling a dog a calf. In Standard 111. sentence-writing showing the usage of words on the cards was the weakest feature. In Standard IV. and in Standard IIL lam convinced that the work in grammar would much improve if very simple analysis were included in the syllabus for these classes. Without some knowledge of analysis the pupils in Standard IV. can in many instances only guess whether nouns are in the nominative case or in the objective case, inasmuch as the case-endings have been lost, and the case itself depends on the structural position or logical relation of the words in the sentence. It is, therefore, most important that a knowledge of the structure of the sentence and of the logical relation of its parts should be obtained as quickly as possible. . Composition varied very much as to quality. The majority of pupils now begin and end letters properly ; but the matter generally was very brief, and in the upper standards rather childish. In Standard VI. pupils are still weak in writing letters of application. Also, it was very noticeable that at comparatively few schools could the pupils in Standard VI. and Standard V. readily write sentences illustrating the usage of certain words on the cards, such as, for instance, advice, advise, receipt, recipe, practise, practice, conduct', conduct. Several times, too, I found that pupils—even those in the upper Standards—did not know for what purpose an accent was put over a particular syllable of a word, in what words the inital h is silent, what letters are consonants and what vowels, and how to divide a word into its syllables. In Standard 111. and Standard IV. the dividing of a monosyllable when the word would not fit at the end of the line— e.g., leng-th—v/^3 a common error Pupils never should be allowed to crowd words in any written work. Geography improved considerably in Standard V. and Standard VI., and in Standard 111. also by nearly five per cent, of passes. I confess, however, that I am yearly disappointed with the work done in this subject in the highest two classes, especially as I consider the questions set particularly easy and straightforward. In Standard V. pupils were often ignorant of the back work of Standard IV. The mapping from memory was very fine at some schools, notably Wanganui Boys' and Hawera. With regard to physical and mathematical geography, the remarks made last year apply again this year. It appears to me that teachers do not work according to the syllabus in these branches, so often do pupils ignore questions couched in the very language of such syllabus. Thus, the question " Write a few lines, about the distribution of land and water in the Western Hemisphere," was as so much Greek to the pupils at several schools, even after some oral explanation had been given. Laziness on the part of the pupils is, I think, responsible for a great