;68 



NATURE 



[July 5, 1917 



the natural and proper continuation of earlier 

 work. But for young people, whether they are 

 going to be scholars or scientific investigators, 

 men of affairs or ordinary citizens, what is pre- 

 eminently needed is an education on broad lines, 

 not a sham education, warped by early specialisa- 

 tion, whether in the direction of physical science 

 or in that of the dead languages. 



Of course, it is easy to say these things, but, 

 as Sir Napier Shaw reminds us in an effective 

 piece of criticism, we are up against many diffi- 

 culties, amongst which there loom largely the 

 systems of examinations and all that these 

 imply. Like Frankenstein's monster, they have 

 developed unexpected powers of strangulation, 

 and, as with some forms of arbitrary legislation, 

 have strengthened the very abuses they were 

 designed to destroy. Are, then, examinations 

 bad in themselves, or are the evil results, of which 

 so much is everywhere heard, incidental rather 

 than essential? Some sort of test of ability and 

 efficiency will always have to be imposed, and it 

 seems to be a fact that those to whom examina- 

 tions are anathema have hitherto failed to present 

 a workable substitute. 



We may admit that many of the evils alleged 

 to flow from the examination system are real, and 

 especially the desiccating influence it has too often 

 exerted on the training of those selected as pay- 

 able candidates to be forced for competition for 

 scholarships and other still more valuable prizes 

 of life. But the root of the mischief is not 

 altogether simple; it ramifies in more than one 

 direction. In the first place, the system itself 

 naturally tends to become stereotyped. Instead 

 of providing a suitable test of the progress of* 

 those who have extended their studies in varied 

 lines, it is apt to unify direction and stifle initia- 

 tive. It is so much more easy to arrange 

 examinations for one type of curriculum, and that 

 by no means necessarily the best. So examina- 

 tion becomes a department of administration, 

 where hard cases make bad law ; and by a natural 

 process of development the examination tends to 

 become, in fact, the "final cause" of education 

 itself — a complete reversal of its true position. 



But to attack a thing because abuses have 

 grown up around it is not necessarily sound prac- 

 tice, and it certainly is not good logic. It is true 

 that the attempts hitherto made to check the evil 

 effects of the system have not been very success- 

 ful. This is due partly to the complex multiplicity 

 of the examinations themselves, partly to a de- 

 fective conception of the function to be discharged, 

 but partly also to insufficiently recognised defects 

 in the examiners. 



The call for a reduction in the number of the 

 various tests for entrance to the universities and 

 for professional courses is urgent. We hope to 

 see some practical scheme put forward by the 

 Committee on Science appointed by the late 

 Government some months ago. The chief 

 desideratum is a sufficiently elastic system which, 

 while not throttling the individuality of the school 

 and the teacher, will ensure that those who pass 

 the test do possess attainments enough to qualify 

 NO. 2488, VOL. 99] 



them to enter on the next stage of their academic 

 or professional career. The growing practice of 

 accepting examinations "in lieu" has already 

 paved the way for the introduction of a more 

 comprehensive scheme in which the principle 

 might be embodied on a large scale. 



It is not so easy to find remedies for defects 

 arising from the personality of the examiner, nor 

 is it perhaps likely that all would even admit the 

 existence of these defects, much less the need for 

 remedies. But that we are here face to face with 

 a real difficulty must, in fact, be perfectly well 

 known to all who have had wide experience ia 

 these matters. Some of the evils, partly per- 

 sonal, partly dependent on administration, are 

 more glaring than others. For example, in 

 scholarship examinations it often happens that 

 the successful candidate is selected without under 

 going any oral test at all. Sometimes this is 

 entirely the fault of those responsible for the 

 general arrangements ; sometimes the examiner 

 avoids any real contact with the examinees. While 

 such a practice may be defended in the case of a 

 pass test, it ought never to be allowed when 

 evidence of genuine ability constitutes the princi- 

 pal criterion for deciding between the competitors. 

 A good examiner will easily appraise the value of 

 written w-ork in the course of a conversational 

 oral examination. If he cannot, or if he only suc- 

 ceeds in scaring a candidate, he is not fit to dis- 

 charge the duties of an examiner, however 

 eminent he may be in other directions. Thus it 

 would appear that it is with the system and with 

 the examiner that the quarrel of the reformer really 

 lies, rather than with examination per se. Don 

 Quixote is not the only man who has wasted 

 energy in tilting at windmills owing, let us say, 

 to a lack of sense of proportion and of clear 

 vision. 



Amongst the expedients devised for obviating 

 the deficiencies of badly conducted examinations, 

 that of inspection has perhaps turned out to be 

 the best. But the personal qualities and quali- 

 fications of the inspectorate are even more im- 

 portant here than they are in the examiner. A 

 fiad official can do immense harm, whilst, on the 

 other hand, a capable one is of great value, inas- 

 much as the inspector exerts so powerful an in- 

 fluence for good or evil on the teaching. 



But, whatever their faults, the inspectorate and 

 the examination systems have a great mass of 

 good results to be placed to their credit, and they J 

 do tend to weed out at least some types of in- ' 

 competent teachers. Everyone who has had 

 experience of schools is perfectly well aware of the 

 real reason why the pupils at one centre are almost 

 uniformly bad, while in another they appear to 

 be almost as uniformly good. The difference, 

 clearly, is not inherent in the children. Further- 

 more, it is quite intelligible, from their own point 

 of view, why more than a thousand private and 

 preparatory schools continue to refuse all inspec- 

 tion : the curious thing is that such unregulated j 

 experiments on the minds of children should be 

 tolerated at all by the public of a country which 

 claims to be enlightened. Perhaps it is because 



