COMPETITIVE EXAMINATIONS FOR YOUNG BOYS.

[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."]

Sin,—On the 4th of August there was a debate in the House of Commons on a recent change made by the Admiralty. A Com- mittee of gentlemen has lately inquired into the working of Mr. Childers's system of limited competition for commissions in the Navy, and by the advice (or perhaps more strictly speaking, with the advice) of this Committee the system is to be abandoned. This change and the discussion which arose out of it are interest- ing and important, from their bearing on the future of the Navy, but they are far more interesting and important if we consider them with reference to the general education of the country.

It is observable that Mr. Childers did not throw the Navy open like the rest of the public service, but merely doubled the number of nominations, and then selected by competitive examination half the boys who had been nominated. The question naturally arises,—why did Mr. Childers make this distinction between the Navy and the Army? and the most likely answer seems to be that he took into account the difference in age between the can- didates for the two services, and hesitated to subject boys of twelve years old to the full strain of competition. The recent change has frequently been spoken of as a "Conservative reaction," but seeing the competition was thus restricted, we can hardly think that Mr. Ward Hunt and his colleagues would incur the unpopularity inseparable from "patronage" for the sake of " reacting " to so little purpose. However this may be, and whatever were the motives of the Government, the character and position of the inquirers appointed by the Admiralty give us an ample guarantee that the inquiry was made and the report drawn up in the most perfect good faith, so that even if we hold the Committee to have been in some degree prejudiced in the matter, what they say is, at least, worthy of our consideration.

The gist of the report will be seen from the following extracts :—

" With regard to the method of entering Cadets for the Navy, we regret to be compelled to express entire disapproval of the present system of entry by competition. Even when restricted as it is now, by the practice of nominating no more than two cadets for each vacancy, the system is, in our opinion, hurtful to the boys, and therefore injurious to the service."

"We consider that any competitive examination for a prize of such value as appointment to the Navy, with the usual hard preparatory study, must of necessity be more or less hurtful to boys of from eleven to thirteen years of age, and we have ample evidence to show that the hours during which the boys have studied prior to joining the 'Britannia' are too many

"In these remarks we wish to make no attack upon the general principle of educational competition, except as applied to young boys, as to whose qualifications we consider it both a mischievous and fallaci- ous test."—Reixe, pp. xiii., 51, 52, 54."

The report of this Committee by no means settles the question, but I would call attention to the fact that this is the only public inquiry that has been made on the subject, and that the conclu- sion arrived at is directly opposed to any system of competitive examinations for young boys.

And yet early education in this country is to a great ex- tent dominated by a system of competitive examinations for

boys between eleven and fourteen years of age. Our leading preparatory schools are becoming more and more training schools for "entrance scholarships." The endowments of Winchester, Eton, and Charterhouse afford funds for a number of these prizes to parents, and our other great schools have established similar scholarships (often out of the masters' pockets) in supposed self- defence. Any school that stood out would have to content itself with the skimmed-milk of the young population, and might be nowhere in the race for University distinctions.

Two evils (as they seem to me) have resulted from the multi- plication of entrance scholarships :-1. Severe pressure is brought to bear upon our cleverest boys at an early age. 2. Almost all the teaching force in our preparatory schools is thrown into Latin and Greek, especially into Latin and Greek grammar and composition.

Let us take this latter point before the other. It might seem at first sight that this devotion to classics was by no means

essential to the competitive system. Indeed, a very high authority in educational matters, Dr. Abbott, of the City of London School, would retain competition, but would make great alterations in the method and subjects of examination. He recommends "certain questions in arithmetic calculated to elicit thought, simple composition in English, and above all, a long and searching viva voce examination" (Report of Head Masters' Conference in 1871). I observe, too, that of the nine papers set this year at Rugby two were mathematical, one was on history, sacred and profane, and one gave the following choice for English composition Write an imaginary conver- sation between Socrates and the head of a school Eleven ; or, write English verse, in any rhyming metre, on the longest day." But even at Rugby the examination is chiefly in classics, and at some other (I believe most other) schools it is entirely so. This may be in a measure due to the predilection of head masters for the studies in which they themselves excel, but I should attribute it still more to their desire of examining with perfect fairness, and of setting subjects which there is no possibility of cramming. It is true that there is no cramming mathematics, but as a rule young boys, even clever boys, seem to have an inaptitude for anything like mathematical thinking ; and if, as Dr. Abbott suggests, much importance were attached to "a long and searching viva voce examination," the shy, nervous boy and the slow thinker would stand no chance whatever against a very inferior competitor with more readiness and self-possession. The examiner does not like to trust to his impressions where very serious issues are at stake. He has a satisfactory test for knowledge, and in some subjects, especially in classics, for intelligence shown in the display of knowledge, but he cannot gauge intelligence by itself. Indeed, unless great care is taken, intelligence will tell much less than memory or peculiar circumstances. Scholarships for modern languages simply put a premium on residence abroad ; and many subjects, like geography and history, which may be made to interest children, and so to develop their intelligence, become life- less directly they are set for competitive examination. Classics suffer less than anything else, and the classical examiner can de- termine the "order of merit" with the greatest certainty. We must not, then, rest our hopes on the probability of a change in the subjects or method of examination.

The necessary consequence, then, of the competition for entrance scholarships is and must be, that the masters of the " first-grade " preparatory schools think of hardly anything but classics. The result of this exclusively classical training is that the clever boys acquire surprising skill in the ancient languages, but its effect on ordinary boys, and still more on boys whose abilities are below the average, is deplorable. They have hardly any of the faculties of the mind developed, and when they enter the lower forms of a public school, they are found in a hopeless state of ignorance and stupidity.

These scholarships, then, have a very prejudicial effect on the education of our ordinary boys. And are we sure that the clever boys are benefited by them ? The head masters themselves seem to have had some doubts on this subject. At the Conference of 1871, the following resolution was carried unanimously :—" That in the opinion of this meeting, if scholarships at schools be offered for competition between boys of thirteen and fourteen, great care will be required so to conduct the examinations as to avoid unhealthy forcing." From the discussion which preceded, we learn that some of the head masters are strongly opposed to the present system. Others regard it as a necessary evil, arising from "a difficulty of disposing of large endowments by any other way than open competition." There are, too, several, and those by no means of the least authority, who are satisfied with its working. Dr. Ridding, whose experience at Winchester makes his evidence extremely valuable, declared himself on the whole in favour of open competition, though he admitted that "some trainers pressed their boys more than was good, and they afterwards seemed to require the same pressure." But all con- curred, as we see by the resolution, in thinking that the system was attended with very great dangers. Dr. Butler pointed out that the flower of the rising generation was affected by it, and said that the question was "of sufficient importance to justify the appointment of a Royal Commission, with full powers to receive accounts of the results of such examinations, collecting evidence from masters, medical men, and others upon it."

Mr. Matthew Arnold has declared that our great schools, in establishing these competitions, have been guilty of a "prepos- terous violation of the laws of life and health" ("Schools and Universities on the Continent," p. 60). The head masters have recorded their conviction that great care is needed to avoid un- healthy forcing. The gentlemen who have lately reported on the working of a system of limited competition have protested em- phatically against all competitive examinations for young boys. Feeling with Dr. Butler the extreme importance of the issues at stake, I would ask, should this subject be allowed to drop with- out further inquiry ?—I am, Sir, R. H. Q.