ts in the failing subjects, and thus to restrain them from
what threatens to lower the school percentage of successful papers,
except that in New York City such discrimination is prohibited.[46] On
the percentages of success for these examination results teachers and
even schools are wont to be popularly judged. Annual school reports may
feature the passing percentage for the school in Regents' examinations,
with a spirit of pride or rivalry, but with no word of what that
percentage costs as real cost must be reckoned. It is interesting to
note in this connection that the percentage of unsuccessful repetitions
for the three New Jersey schools is 13.7 per cent lower than for the
three New York schools. In addition to this, for the latter schools 22
per cent more of the subject failures are repeated than for the former
ones mentioned. It is important also to bear in mind that the success
percentage for the Regents' tests is computed on the number admitted to
the examinations--not on the number instructed in the subject. The
regulations are flexible and admit of considerable latitude in matters
of classification and interpretation. Accordingly, if it happens
anywhere in the state that those who are the less promising candidates,
in the teacher's judgment, are debarred from attempting Regents'
examinations by failing marks, by demotion and exclusion from their
class, or by other means, the school's percentage of pupils passing may
be kept high as a result, but the injustice worked upon the pupil in
such manner is vicious and reprehensible. Yet the whole intolerableness
of the practice will center in the rule for exclusion of pupils from
these examinations because of school failure. No one can predict with
any safe degree of certainty that the outcome of any individual's
efforts will be a failure in the Regents' tests, even though he has
failed in a school subject. If failure should happen to result, it is
chiefly the school pride that suffers; if the pupil is denied a free
trial, he may suffer an injustice to aid the pretension of the school.
Our school sanctions are not characterized by such acumen or
infallibility as to warrant our refusing to give a pupil the benefit of
the doubt. He is entitled to his chance to win success in these
examinations if he is able, and it appears that only results in the
Regents' tests can be truly trusted to tell us that he is or is not
able to pass them.

The facts depicted here may lead to