E.—IB

10

Upon looking at these tables it will be seen that the number of children examined last year exceeded the number examined in 1886 by 629, being higher in every standard but Standard V.; that the number below Standard I. was 2,372, as against 2,146 in the previous year; and that the number of pupils presented expressed as a percentage of the roll number was the same as in 1886— namely, 63. With regard to the comparative results of the two examinations as far as percentages are concerned, there has been an improvement in every class but Standard 111. (fallingoff of 0'9); for the percentage of failures has decreased in Standard VI. by 2-5, in Standard V. by 8-5, in Standard IV. by 6'4, in Standard 11. by 2-5, and in Standard I. by 2-s—that is, the percentage of passes on the number examined in each class, omitting exceptions, has increased by the above amounts respectively. For all classes the percentage of passes, omitting exceptions, is 72'9, and the percentage of failures 27'06—that is, an improvement of 2'7. The seventy-five schools examined may be classified as follows: (1) two infants' schools, (2) two half-time schools, (3) forty-five schools each officered by only one teacher, (4) nine schools each officered by one teacher and one pupil-teacher, and (5) seventeen larger schools. At the two half-time schools I found that in no class could the pupils approach the requirements. Of the forty-five schools in class 3, at ten the work was very bad, and at eleven only moderate; while at fourteen it varied from fair to very fair, and at ten from good to very good. Of the ten schools in this class at which the work was very bad, four were aided schools. Of the nine schools in class 4, three showed very poor, five very fair, and one very good work. Of the seventeen larger schools it may be said that at two the work was bad, at two poor, at twelve varying from moderate in some classes to excellent in others, and at one school—Hawera—very good throughout all classes. The following table (Table D) shows the number of children examined and the percentage passed in each of the seven pass-subjects.

Table D.

Possible number of passes in subjects, 20,591; actual number of passes in subjects, 15,829; percentage of passes in subjects, 76- 9. In the preceding table I have, for purposes of comparison, included the total percentages gained in the various subjects in 1886, in addition to the total percentages gained last year ; and that the latter are higher in every case than the former may readily be seen. "Upon looking at percentages in individual standards, however, it will be found that, while many were higher last year than in the previous year, a few in certain subjects were lower. Instbuction. — Heading. —This subject was of very varied quality, not only in different schools but also in different classes in the same school. The percentage of passes was highest in Standard YI. and lowest in Standard IV. For all classes the percentage of passes was 78'5—that is, 21-5 per cent, of rfee pupils examined failed to obtain 60 per cent, of the possible marks. But in judging of the quality of the reading, in addition to taking the preceding percentages into consideration, it must be borne in mind that many of those that passed obtained just the requisite number of marks and no more. In Standard I. and Standard 11., considering the simplicity of the requirements, the ages of the pupils, and the time the pupils have been at school, 78 per cent, of passes, many of ■which were by no means strong, is a poor result. I think 90 per cent, might well be expected—in the lower class, at all events. In Standard I. I found that the results varied from almost total inability to read monosyllables in some small schools, and even in one or two large schools, as at Halcombe, to almost perfect reading in so advanced (for Standard I.) a book as Nelson's Sequel to Standard 11. Eeader, as at Western Eangitikei. Yet at the former school many of those that failed badly were over nine, and even ten, years of age, while at the latter school the average age was only eight years two months. In the lower classes reading by rote requires to be guarded against. I am inclined to think that, though the accuracy, ease, and expression of the reading of many pupils in Standard I. at some schools were all that could be desired, the term " recitation " would be more correctly applied than "reading" to the work done ; for I am afraid the book was known by heart, and that few children could have read the same words correctly in different connections. In the upper classes the most common defect I found in the reading was lack of intelligence, pupils plainly showing not only that they did not understand the general meaning of the passages read, but also that they did not recognise the predicates in the sentences. Now, the intelligence of a school will depend in a large measure upon its teaching as a whole. Whatever exercises the mental powers of children, whatever enlarges their vocabulary, will at the same time improve their

Dicta am Spell ,tion ,1 Gram and ( posit imai 1 3omion. Subject. Beading. a. ing. Wriing. Arith: letio. Geogn iphy. Drawing. Class. 1.1 a a +3 . <U CD a a !z M 4^ . CD qj J.1 a a 4^ . ll ■4-3 si H 03 si 4J ll 4^ am Q « »PM Standard VI. Standard V. Standard IV. Standard III. Standard II. Standard I. 151 297 603 773 1,056 994 92-0 79-5 75-9 77-5 78-8 78-1 151 297 603 773 1,056 994 88-7 69-0 66-9 73-1 82-2 81-8 151 297 603 773 1,056 994 98-0 95-2 91-3 90-6 92-4 90'3 151 297 603 773 1,056 994 61-6 62-3 57-0 56-8 70-6 82-3 151 297 603 773 52'3 65'3 55-7 59-2 151 297 773 65-5 65-3 73-3 1,056 994 82:. 82-. Totals ( 1887 ' [ 1886 3,874 78-5 3,874 78-0 3,874 91-8 3,874 67-7 1,824 58'5 1,221 70-3 2,050 82-3 I 75-5 i 76-2 89-0 66-3 51-8 64-4 81-