UNIVERSITY SENATE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2720, 27 January 1910, Page 5

UNIVERSITY SENATE.

AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION. fPfiii Puess Association, f DUNEDIN, Jan. 26. At the meeting of the University Senate to-day, some interesting speeches were made on the subject of the recent matriculation examinations. It was moved that the Recess Committee’s report be agreed to. The report was to the effect that the names of 70 candidates be added to the list of those included in the number (473) to be recorded as having passed the matriculation examination.

The jßev. Mr. Cameron seconded the motion pro forma, and said ho desired! to (give some facts about this matter. He did not complain about compensation when he discovered, as a member ofi the Senate, that compensation was allowed. It came to him as a surprise. He did complain, however, that the rules that had been followed for twelve or thirteen years should have been changed without due warning being given. What was known as the practice of the Senate had been changed without warning by the Recess Committee adopting the resolution in 1908 and saying it would not come into operation until 1909, if no one but members of that committee were to know of the proposed change. Ho understood the object of the delay was to give notice to the parties concerned. A member: Who were the parties concerned ? Rev. Mr. Cameron: The Teachers and Candidates Committee in 1908 resolved to alter the rule so as to allow no compensation in three subjects, not in compulsory subjects merely, but in. three subjects. Mr. Hogben: The rule never extended to more than two subjects. Mr. Cameron said he was not in love with compensating of one subject by means of another. He held that an injustice had been done to a large number of entrants for matriculation by the alteration of the method of dealing with marks without due intimation having been given. He had previously given the number as 238. That morning it had been admitted that a number would have got through, if the rules that had been in force since 1897 had been adhered to. It would have been 47 per cent; that was to say, 179 others would have passed. Bv this report they allowed 70 of the 179 to get through, in other words, there would still be 109 who would have passed had the rules that had been- in force for 13 years been adhered to. Applying the rule as it was applied originally by the committee, he would give cases of some of the victims. There was one candidate who made 39 per cent in Latin and 40 per cent was the pass. He made 50 per cent in English, 48 per cent in arithmetic, 48 per cent in algebra. 52 per cent in geometry, 55 per cent in geography. The victim was 1 per cent short in Latin, and was failed. Mr. Hogben: That man could not be failed.

Mr. Cameron: He was failed, and he was let through. Now there is another case who was failed. A candidate made 57 per cent in Latin, 44 per cent in English, 53 per cent in arithmetic. 23 per cent in algebra, 40 per cent in geo. graphy, 64 per cent in French, and 55 per cent in history. That- candidate was failed, and finally passed. After some discussion on points of order, Mr. Cameron said he had the instance of another candidate who had failed but was finally passed, but he would not quote figures. Mr. Hogben: We have 70 of them. Mr. Cameron said h© was only giving examples. Here was a case of one who was still marked “faded,” and # he thought the Senate would be surprised. The candidate made 60 per cent in Latin, 45 per cent in English, 44 per cent in arithmetic, 16 per cent in algebra. 34 per cent in geometry, 67 per cent in geography, 49 per cent in history, and 50 per cent in German. This student had eight subjects, and therefore his lowest subjects, algebra and geometry, ought to go out, because he had still six subjects left. It was true ■he was three short in arithmetic, but he had 20 per cent to spare in Latin, while he had the required percentage in English. Mr. Hogben: He had nothing to compensate. Mr. Cameron: He had 20 per cent in Latin. It was not fair that a candidate with such a percentage, because he took two extra subjects that he did not need to take, should be failed. This candidate would have passed with a good record in any other year than this year. To his mind it was the unfairness in' making the change of method that had had disastrous consequences to great numbers. Mr. Hogden said he did not want to take up the time of the Senate again, though he thought the most unfair things had been done that could have been done in debate. He had made CA r ery explanation he could in committee. Mr. Cameron said he did not use a single fact that arose in committee. Ho was aware of them all before, except the 47 per cent. Mr. Hogben; said that was not the point of his objection. He had made a full explanation of all the. circumstances under which the committee had arrived at its report, and now a statement was made which should have been a criticism of his explanation. Mr. Hogben proceeded to defend the action of tho Recess Committee. Mr. Cohen said it was untrue that the interest of the candidates had not been properly safeguarded by the Recess Committee, and it was true that the Senate had every confidence that whatever rules tho committee made they would be the rules of* experts in examinations. He would rather see thoi sacrifice of those 20 candidates than that there should b© the faintest breath' of suspicion that the examinations of the university were , not thoroughly honest, thoroughly reliable, and worthy of the support and the confidence of tho whole public. The. motion for the adoption of the committee’s report'was then agreed to. Mr. Cameron gave notice to move that in future the results of entrance examinations be not made public until they had been received and adopted.