E. K. MULGAN.]

63

E.—l2.

193. What do you think of the requirements for entering the training college, and also the leaving certificates, which mean three years of secondary schools? —The requirement under the new regulations is also a leaving certificate instead of matriculation. 194. What, do you think of that?— That would mean lowering the qualifications before entering, 195. At the present time they generally get only two years before becoming probationers? —Yes. 196. So that by giving three years you would lengthen by one year? —I would rather lessen it by one year. 197. Lessen it from the ideal, but increase it on the present practice? —Yes. 198. That is to say, you would have as an intermediate step to increase it from two to three years, instead of from three to four? —Yes. 199. You would not cut out the B students from entering the training college?—l would not prevent them from entering. 200. You would not prevent the best of the teachers in the country schools from entering the training college after qualifying for matriculation?—No; but I understand that now the training colleges and the authorities get as many A students as possible to enter. Here and in other colleges there is only a certain percentage of B students. I would not prevent them from attending, but I would like always to see the proportion of B students smaller than that of the A students. 201. The Chairman.] Is there any bar to the admission of B students at present?— The college will only accommodate a certain number of students--say, 100. Suppose there are only ninety A students coming forward, they are considered first. We may fill up the ten vacancies with B students. 202. Mr. Hogben.] The regulation reads that the number shall not be increased by the admission of students other than A students above 100? —Yes. 203. With regard to agricultural instruction in the training colleges, is it not a fact that under the regulation every training college must give agricultural instruction? —Yes. 204. And such teaching will not lie efficient unless yon have enough ground to work the course practically?—lt would not. 205. Has not the Department on two occasions in its reports recommended that there should be sufficient ground attached to each school?—I know of one occasion, but 1 do not remember the second. 206. Is not the difficulty that of finding the ground?—l think it is rather more than that. My interpretation of Regulation 25, clause 2, is that if the student is going to the University College, and taking up such subjects as zoology and geology, he may be exempt from agriculture. 207. Is there not a difficulty in finding a place on the time-table?— Yes; but my opinion is that agriculture should be a compulsory subject in the training college for every student, male or female. A course of geology and zoology- would not teach gardening. 208. Do you think that, in spite of the time-table, some other subject should give way?—l do. 209. You think that a University course in science would be an advantage?— Certainly, provided the student is able to profit by the instruction given at the University. 210. That is presuming that the University should not admit any one who was not able to profit by it?—l think it is provided for in the Training College Regulations. 211. The Chairman.] You would prefer that that reservation should be withdrawn—that the course should be compulsory while the student is at a training college in preference to the University course ?—I would not propose that it be withdrawn, but it should be modified in the direction of insisting on practical instruction being given to every student at the training college. 212. Mr. Hogben.] Then, you would say " except in the case of agriculture "? —Something of that kind. 213. Will you turn to the Regulations for the Inspection and Examination of Schools, clause 8, page 5. Does not that mean that in a small school the Inspector is practically examining the whole school in order to ascertain the character of the teacher?—Tn most cases it does. 214. That the number of pupils in each class in a small school is really small, and he would practically take the whole class?— Yes. 215. Does it not mean that his object is to find out the character of the teacher? Is not that more important than classification? —Yes. 216. Do you not think that a teacher who can really teach is also qualified to say which class his pupils ought to be in? —Yes; but is not that begging the question? Of course, a teacher who can really teach is able to do so. I think the question asked me applied to teachers who are not able to teach. 217. The same thing which taxes their power to classify taxes their power to teach?— Yes. 218. Mr. Pirani.] Will you turn to clause 5 in the same regulation, which relates to the periodical examination? Do you read that as meaning that every one of the periodical examinations must be a complete examination of all the pupils in all subjects?—l did read it so, and I think the teachers interpret it in that way, and have acted upon it in this district. 219. Do the records of the last of the periodical examinations for the year include the marks? —They do. 220. But does the regulation require that? —You have to satisfy the examining authorities. How are you to record the result of the examination without something of the kind? 221. You think you could not do it by an added statement?—At any rate, we do not do it, and it is not done in other districts. 222. Would you make any other alteration than reducing the number of periodical examinations in schools? —At present I would say No. I have not thought of making any other alterations.

10— E. 12.