New-York tribune., 1905-02-03
WRITTEN AND ORAL TEST.
In Spite of 1t, Objectionable Teach
erS Sometimes Get In.

"oulo be nearly as absurd to choose a wife by
means OF a written examination on her duties"
sad DIT Walter L. Hervey of the board OF exam
lnefs OF the New-York Board of Public Education
at Brooklyn Institute yesterday He was quoting
from PROFESSOR Cattell who is violently opposed to
me examination system. DR.. Hervey, however was
Vi the opinion that examination reveals something
or the applicant.
me present system OF examinations was estab-
Asheo in New-York four years ago. 1t consists Of
"ritten test and an oral test. during which those
successful In the written test appear before he
o@iu' me past record and recommendations of
the teacher are also taken into consideration and
tie Incense when granted, is only for three years
@ eIe record during that time being taken into con-
sloeIauon in the granting of the permanent license
-iienS stated the written test is test of fnfor-
lnauon and power of thought and expression. while
.Ie oral test IS an observation of personality This
'Ie case some OF the statistics given by Dr..
dervey open up curious fields Of inquiry
Is there any correspondence between marks IN
written examination and marks in personality?'
asked DR.. Hervey
IN certain examination sixty candidates were
Ndiiiheo Ior license. both in the written and the
oral examination The personality mark in each
case was the average Of the marks of fonr EVAN,
iners. Now, the forty candidates who made up the
upper two-thiuds in the written examination re-
celVeo an average excess of per cent over the
passing mark. The twenty who formed the lowest
third in the written examination received an aver
age excess OF only $40 per cent over the passing
mark in personality
Inc question rs TO whether the examination
marks correspond with any closeness to the teach
Ing ability was gone into very interestingly by DR..
Hervey
Are those who pass the examinations better
fitted TO teach than those who are retected? asked
he Ordinarily, it IS possible 10 obtain accurate
statistics on which TO base judgment in answer to
such question for those who are rejected are nor
IN the system In the year 1901, however owing to
the pressure for teachers, the board of examiners
was constrained lower the mark and license
] acbe Ix-bo
jected because Of their standings in examination.
Now. Of l525 teachers licensed that year eight made
complete failures of their school work and had
thelr licenses revoked OF these eight, four came
from the lO6 teachers who came in with marks he
! low the usual standard The percentage of fail
ures IN actual teaching among those who failed in
| tne written examination twelve and a half
pasein as great as among those who passed the
MN passing group one in twenty-six was failure
,snlS SENS falr TO conclude. from these and other
Investigations. that while written examinations are
!IJt actual tests Of teaching ability those persons
| 70 ..f succeed as teachers than those who fail.
his thoughts in the form of written E1eiisb Tns
! IS at a disadvantage in written examination But
| ana In most other professions The person whose
tse ag IN VIII He not come when called is at disadyan-
| physician who cannot think of his prescription
| the commercial traveller who does not remember
ms ms Jokg III & TOO late is in the same box with
| - no applicant however, is, or should be. licensed
| animation is absolutely impersonaI The oral test
| IS purely personal 1t sometimes happens that a
| examination, is found wanting the sole ground
sonality is an affair of the utmost delicacy and
dlscrlmlnatlon. IN some cases. II Is easy enough
! TO tell on sight II applicant is A gentleman
! gentiewoman. In other cases. it is not easy.
| clean applicant has appeared before the exam
iners @ suspicious Iniracuouslyclean One
| protesting that he could not have been personally
Objectionable the day OF oral examination, since
|
| sion. He had. indeed; but his appearance other
! occasions. when he had imprudently presented
! himself at the board rooms inconsistent
with MS examination elegance as to put the latter
! out Of countenance.
/ 1T not infrequenty happens that person who
says dis here for this, dat dere' for there and
goink for going, when rejected. raises the cry Of
/ prejudice. Why invoke prejudice when personal
| But now and then there comes applicant who
passes aIItests svimringlv whose oflciai record is
/ member Of the hoard This candidate Is licensed
( because there is valid reason for refusing his
! license. Thereupon, some people wonder at the
taste of the board 1t is not question Of personal
/ The complaints OF those who are kept out on
( personal grounds are nothing compared with the
and fellow teachers who obliged to work with
! such Objectionable persons as have. grleNe 10
say, been allowed IN comparatively sma1 nuIoers I3
to slip into the system. Ihe answer OF ihe ooaro
/ of Examiners is that during the last school year
out Of 231 applicants coming from single IhSutL- I
tion, all but thrty-three We're rejected, aiIhouSh
/ only half failed in the written examlnation In
computing what's done, II may be a comfort 10 re-
( member what's resisted
! 1T should be remembered also that the pressure
for teachers is great that the duty OF the toaFu
OF Examiners becomes sometimes not to select those
who are ft or reject those who unit, but to
supply teachers for the schools. Inc Iact mat I
rnentary schools is exhaused three times during the
year. means nothing else than that the ooar4 is
obliged TO license many whom 1t would ram