A NECESSARY CHANGE.

THAT target for the arrows of the aggrieved student, the marking system, (pardon me for mentioning it!) that contradictory, illogical, unjust method of classifying men, seems likely to assume an importance more than local; for it is in full operation even in our lower schools, where its effects are noticeably injurious. Work at high pressure, nervous energy and its result, nervous exhaustion, are evils put by our modern Solomons on the shoulders of young people. That cases of nervous disease occur even among young children, as a direct effect of our present school system, is known to every physician. People wonder at the increase of weak eyes, of brain disease, and insanity among us, and do not see the potent cause.

I admit the advantages of the system. It is easier to throw the dice for per cents than to estimate the true value of a year's work. It saves trouble to read through a book and affix to it a cabalistic sign. On the other hand, it requires care and judgment to note accurately the worth of daily work. But an instructor's estimate of men, not marks, would be the fairer method. Two examinations - one upon entrance, one for a degree - would obviate the difficulties of a continuous struggle for marks; if this change be too radical, let rank depend upon daily work. And the names of those whom the Faculty wished to honor could be printed on "rank-lists," not arranged in the order of one-twelfth of a per cent, but alphabetically. Then we might hear less about "leading" the class, and more about men who have clear ideas upon important topics of the times; we might have fewer bookworms and more students; and we might have a larger attendance at University concerts and lectures. Should we not, by such a change, gain in average standing, and would not that "indifference" on the part of those who do not possess extraordinary ability speedily disappear?