In the work of teaching secondary school mathematics in a large school where there are as many as twelve different divisions of the same subject, it would be very interesting and indeed very enlightening to see the different grades of work being done. Different teachers have their own pet ways of doing things, of presenting new matter, of conducting recitations, of drilling on old matter, of developing mathematical power in their pupils, etc. And yet they are all striving for the same results. The fact that one teacher's pupils consistently attain better results naturally should put a premium on that teacher's methods, and the work of the department would be improved if some of the other teachers would take a leaf out of the successful teacher's book. Students will often remark “So and So is a good teacher; I get a lot out of his class; he makes things clear; he has good discipline; he certainly gets the stuff over, etc.”An inspector visits the class, notes the attitude of the pupils, the personality and skill of the teacher, and oftentimes is familiar enough with the subject matter of the recitation to see if the pupils are catching and giving back the right things, and then grades the teacher as an Al man, for example. But does the opinion of the boys themselves or the visitor answer the question whether or not the teacher is successful in giving his subject to the pupils? Don't we need something more objective, more tangible, more exact on which to pin our faith? In general the supervisors are hitting it right, also the students, but we think we can do better.
