77

H.—l

It is also important to notice that there is, in some few instances easy of indication, a marked contrast between the work of those teachers who, either on account of distance, or from want of energy, have failed to attend these lectures, and that of those who have availed themselves of this opportunity for improvement. With reference to the pupil-teacher staff, I am sorry, notwithstanding the general improvement, to see some of the same schools as before again occupying an inferior and unsatisfactory position in the classed lists ; and I regret to observe that some of the written answers by pupil-teachers indicate more dependence upon their own learning by rote than upon able direction and intelligent instruction by the principal teacher. Hence they rely more upon the sound than the sense, and, although they may be able to state some of their work correctly, they sadly fail in any attempt to explain it. A recurrence of the same cause for complaint may render it my duty to recommend the Board to enforce the regulation (No. 13) relating to this contingency. It is important that the pupil-teachers should receive regular, faithful, and efficient instruction during the year, and that less dependence should be placed upon extraordinary exertions just before the examination. I have the honor, in accordance with advice from the Education Department, communicated to me, to report upon the "general principles upon which the schools are inspected," and "as to the standards in use," and to supply " a summary of the results of examination." Examinations for classing the scholars according to the standards they can pass are held once a year, it being possible for scholars to gain one standard yearly: few could do so in less time, except in the lowest standards; and in the highest, VI. and V., very few succeed in that interval. In rare instances, and in schools of higher efficiency, scholars have gained two of the lowest standards in one year. Notice is sent, about a fortnight previous to the inspection, to permit of the teachers preparing lists (Form No. IV.), according to the Standard Regulations. An Inspector might possibly exercise some discretion as to passing scholars who succeed in five out of six subjects, or seven out of eight, but the requirements for passing each standard appear to be too definite to permit of any such relaxation of the rule without an additional regulation to that effect; and in my own judgment such a provision is unnecessary. I exercised some leniency in first initiating the system in cases where the average attainments exceeded the standard requirements ; but I have since found, whether in examining scholars previously classed by myself, or by another Inspector, that the leniency of one year insures the failure of the next; also, that certain subjects are badly taught in certain schools, and that, if leniency is shown, attention to these subjects is not enforced. It seems to me that the plain duty of the Inspector is not to pass any scholar who cannot fulfil the requirements of his standard so far as having a good general knowledge of each subject. Casual and trivial errors may be overlooked; but a scholar cannot pass the standard if he shows gross ignorance of any one subject. For instance, I cannot pass a Fourth Standard scholar who does all his other work well but gives " is," " a preposition ;" " when," " a verb." Something like two-thirds of full marks all round insure a pass; if less be required, most of the scholars fail at the next inspection. The " Amount of Attendance " column, in Form No. IV., often supplies sufficient explanation of the failure of individual scholars. Tables of results are annexed. Together with other information, they supply the following tests of efficiency : 1. The average age in each standard ; 2. The range in standards ; 3. The proportion remaining iv or below Standard. L; 4. The percentage of passes; and, generally, each or all of these data compared with those of the former year. No one of these tests taken alone is decisive ; but the school must be a bad one in which, given the usual conditions, every one of these tests is unfavourable. It is very gratifying to be able to adduce from these tests satisfactory indications of the continued and increasing efficiency of the schools. There are, generally, a lower average age in each standard, a higher range, a steadily-improving percentage of passes, and fewer scholars in or below Standard I. It may be as well, however, to explain these tests more fully, with a view to their general or particular application. I. The average age in each standard is a criterion of careful teaching, fairly distributed among the several classes. Boys from six to nine years of age have passed Standard I.; from eleven to sixteen, Standard VI.; but the younger ages are very rare instances. Allowing that the general results are affected by new schools and others in an anomalous condition, the following are the average ages at which classes should be able to fairly attempt the several standards : Standard VI., 13| ; Standard V, 12|; Standard IV., 11! ; Standard 111., 10! ; Standard IL, 9 ; Standard 1., 8. As stated above, few ordinary scholars can gain one of the higher standards, V. or VI., in one year: that so few pass them at all, is obviously because most scholars leave school too soon to allow of the attempt. Scholars who attend less than three-fourths of their time cannot be expected to gain a standard in a year, although some instances of such success have occurred. 11. The percentage of scholars passing as presented indicates efficiency and tact, careful and successful teaching, and judicious rather than ambitious classification— i.e., scholars not being presented to pass two standards at once unless they are fairly well qualified to make the attempt, nor even to pass the First Standard before they are fit. The greatest mistake made in this respect seems to have been the supposition that scholars can skip a standard and learn it by induction from the higher one. 111. A low range in standards (say, no scholar passing higher than the third) is a very unfavourable indication, except in the case of new schools. IV. A large proportion of scholars not yet past Standard I. (say, more than one-fourth in country schools, or more than one-third in those in towns) is an unfavourable result; but one-half of the total still remaining in or below Standard I. generally indicates a new or backward school, and either inadequate teaching-power or gross inefficiency, or both.