Sessional_Paper_1896 — Page 80

77

exceptions, did satisfactorily. Boys seem to be pushed on too rapidly, and before they have thoroughly mastered, so as to be able to accurately apply, the simpler rules. What is required is the use of a very large number and variety of examples carefully graduated and illustrating each rule, as it comes under notice. Few, if any, books contain a sufficient number or variety, but the masters ought to be able to supply them. If this be done there might be more thoroughness.

Algebra. This subject has evidently been carefully and well taught in Classes I., II. and III. Very creditable papers were sent up by I. A., II. A., III. A. B., and the majority of the work was charac- terised by neatness and accuracy. Only a few bad answers were sent in by ignorant or careless boys. The unevenness in the percentages of passes in different Classes is not due to difference in the difficulty of papers, for where the questions were, in the opinion of the examiners, thought to be unequal, due allowance was made in the marking. In contrast to the Arithmetic, there were here very few of the common blunders, and it is evident that the careful teaching has been appreciated. Without wishing to detract from the conspicuous merit of much of the work in this subject, we think that one of the causes of success is due to the fact that an accurate knowledge of English is not so essential here as in such subjects as Grammar, History, and Composition.

Euclid. The Euclid offered by Classes I., II. and III. is very disappointing. Any boy could have passed by doing accurate work on the First Book only; and yet but 44 boys passed out of 160 examined. Only six boys out of 45 in Class I. could write the sixth proposition correctly. With the exception of Class I. A., the whole work is very weak. There is very little grasp of the subject at all, and much evidence of attempted learning by heart: such attempts when they led, as they often did, to nonsense, were, as they deserved to be, severely marked; hence the low percentage. of passes. Over and over again boys wrote, or attempted to write, a proposition which they were not asked to write; and very few could apply I. 4 and 8 properly. If boys cannot do better than they have done, we think it undesirable that any time whatever should be spent on this subject, except in a few special cases. But if it is taught, care must be taken to discourage in every way possible the rote-learning which destroys all the value and the beauty of geometry. Boys should not be pushed on, even to the middle of Book I., till they have mastered the early propositions. Much more use ought to be made of the application of such propositions as 4 and 8 to the simplest kind of problems, of which a master should be able to supply a large store. In writing out a proposition scarcely any boys paid any attention to punctuation-this may seem a small point but it is very essential if boys are to make any use of the arguments of Euclid. The method, too, of writing continuously in one paragraph is bad, but care should be taken, if the method of writing each sentence on a separate line be adopted, that each line is not necessarily begun with a capital letter. It was impossible to tell, in some cases, whether the argument was right or not in the mind of the boy; it was certainly not correct on paper. All the old confusion in the use of "but" and "and,”

" "because" and "therefore," and in the data and quærenda in the particular enunciations appeared again and again. There was a general lacking in neatness in writing and arrangement, and sometimes the figures were lettered differently from the arguments which referred to them. Euclid being such excellent and simple English Prose, it seems desirable that it should be taught, but at present the time spent upon it is, in the majority of cases, wasted.

English to Chinese.- A number of boys showed both knowledge of English and ability to write Chinese. In the middle and lower classes there was a good percentage of passes. The difficulty Chinese boys have in understanding the meaning of English words was, however, manifest in all classes. The following may serve as illustrations:-In Class I. 15 boys out of 26 mistook the word what used relatively for the same word used interrogatively. In Class II.B. 13 boys out of 28 mis- translated the word highroad, making it mean a road at a lofty elevation. In the lower and middle classes much work was spoiled by boys, who could read English, being unable to write Chinese. Characters having a sound and tone like the Chinese equivalents of English words in the passages set, but with totally different meanings, were used, often in such a way as to destroy all the sense of the passage. Thus in VIII.A. 17 out of 39 boys wrote in Chinese words meaning close or quiet instead of the word bees. In IV.A. 9 boys out of 39 wrote the word for yellow instead of another word of the. same sound and tone meaning locusts. In IV.B. boys were required to translate the phrase straight as an arrow; 4 wrote straight as fighting, 4 straight as scissors, and 1 straight as virtue. These are typical instances. In the paper of IIIB. the word creased occurred, and no boy attempted to translate it. The practice of many boys is to use reading books in which above the English words Chinese equivalents have been written. It is, we think, a practice to be condemned; but if it is continued, the Master should see that the characters written in the books are such as really translate the English.