8.—14

64

743. Do you think it more difficult to organize a school of 250 compared with a school of 175? —I do not see the point; the organization would depend on the staff available. 744. Yes; but I want to know whether you think it is more difficult for a teacher to organize a school with an average attendance of 250 than if he only had a school with an attendance of 175 ?—I think there would be so little difference that it would be scarcely worth mentioning. 745. I will put the same question in regard to schools with attendances of 400 and 300 ?—I think there would be very little difference. 746. What is your opinion as to a maximum-sized school: would you approve of the graduated capitation grant, or would you stop at a certain point ? Supposing we took a 600 limit, and said that the maximum salary paid to a master would be in a school of 600, do you think that would be a fair basis of classification ?—I think so. I think the increase of 100 more scholars would make very little extra work. 747. Do you think that when a school reached 600 it would about remain at that?—l think when a school has reached 1,000 it has reached its maximum ; the headmaster would have many certificated teachers, and more scholars to examine. 748. Would his time not be as much occupied with 600 as with 1,000, in your opinion ?— With 1,000 there would be very much more supervision to be done. 749. Then, you are of opinion that a school of 1,000 should have a larger salary attached to it than a school of 600 ?—Yes. 750. And the same in the case of schools of 500 and 400 ?—Yes. 751. You approve of the progressive capitation grant ?—Yes. 752. What, in your opinion, constitutes a just number of pupils to be given to any teacher to control—an ordinary certificated assistant teacher?—l should say one could manage very well 50 or 60; beyond 60 the difficulties are increased; at 70 the strain is very severe. I should say that thoroughly good work could be done in a class doing the same work up to 50. 753. Could a teacher in a mixed school, teaching all standards, manage as many as a teacher with a single standard ? —No, certainly not. 754. Your experience has reference to moderate-sized schools ?—Yes. 755. You think that 50 children could be managed by a competent teacher?—l should prefer 50 myself to 70 with a pupil-teacher; I have found that I could always get on very well with 50. 756. Are you in favour of retaining the services of pupil-teachers ?—Yes. 757. Do you find that they are of great value in your school ?—Yes, they are very useful; I recognise the necessity of training young men. 758. Would you not prefer a trained teacher to a pupil-teacher ? —I should prefer a pupilteacher in one room with one standard rather than have two assistant teachers in the same room. 759. Would you prefer to follow the classification which requires an assistant followed by a pupil-teacher?— Yes, in a country school. 760. Mr. Hogben.] You have given a good deal of thought to the subject of a colonial scale of staff and salaries ?—Yes. 761. Your first argument was that assistants' salaries should be equal, or nearly equal, after passing a certain limit in the number of scholars ?—Yes ; that those doing similar work should be similarly remunerated. 762. You made an exception in the case of first assistants ?—Yes. 763. Are you aware that in some of the large schools, such as one or two of the Christchurch schools, some of the work of supervision becomes so heavy that some of it has to be divided between the headmaster and some of the assistants ? —ln a large school here there is a provision made for that. 764. Are you aware that they have to divide up subjects like science, drawing, drill, and other subjects among three or four assistant masters ?—Yes ; the same thing is done here in the Boys' Central School. 765. They are taking part of the work that belongs to the headmaster?—l do not recognise that. 766. If they help to give model lessons are they not taking part of the work of the headmaster? — They may be. 767. You have had no experience of the large schools?— No. 768. Then, your opinions are simply based on theory, and not on practice; you have not had experience of a school of 1,000? —-No. 769. Have you had any experience in a school of 400?— No, nothing above 300. 770. You have not actually had an opportunity of comparing a school of 400 with a school of 300?— No. 771. You have not seen the way in which the work of the headmaster may be divided up among the assistants ?—No. 772. With regard to payments quarter by quarter, you say that a difficulty would arise when the children came to be passed up from the side-schools into the Second Standard; .that the salary of the side-school teachers would be lowered ? —I say that would be the tendency. 773. It might act in that direction?— Yes ; it would be very hard for the teacher to have to suffer for the fact of having done good work in connection with the children. 774. Do you not think that the difficulty might be got over by making the payment on a year's average instead of on a quarter's?—lf the quarter were taken into account it would lower the salaries of the teachers; on the other hand, a teacher might just send away no more than absolutely necessary, 'and keep a good full school. 775. Surely, if such a thing was done systematically for the whole year it would be detected by the Inspector ? —lt might be detected.