A SOLDIER'S GENERAL PAPER.
[To THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR."] SIR,—As a soldier I have been very much interested in your articles on "A Soldier's General Paper." I cannot help thinking that the comparatively poor answers obtained were the result of the manner in which the questions were framed. Those of us who have sat for examinations know the difficulty sometimes experienced in trying to arrive at exactly what it is the examiner wants. What is he driving at ? Once that is cleared up, to answer the question is comparatively simple. I think it was so in this case. The recruit did not understand what you were asking. Personally, I should not find it very easy to answer " What is France ? " in a few words, but I should find it quite easy if I was asked "What do yaa know of France P" Similarly with the other questions. "What do you know of Alfred the Great?" is much easier than " Who was Alfred the Great?" I believe if you had put the questions in this form you would have got better answers. This is borne out, I think, by the answers to the question about the Prime Minister. The fact that three men attempted to describe his functions instead of giving his name shows that they had not understood the question. If you had asked "What is the name of the Prime Minister ?" you would have got many more correct answers. I wish some other officer
would make the experiment, putting the questions in the form
[Our correspondent's criticism is well founded. We put the questions in the way we did because we desired to institute a comparison with the French results. We were obliged, therefore, to model our questions on those administered to the French recruits. They asked, " Who was Napoleon P " " What is England P "—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
