ESF 英基資助

siulumjing

I really think existing ESF Kindergarten students should fall into the 'existing student' category as most parents, if not all, placed their kids there for the sole purpose if entering into the ESF primary school!

siulumjing

I should have phrase it more clearly. What I meant in my previous post was that, I think existing students of ESF kindergartens should also get the subsidy should they move onto the ESF primary schools as the proposed discontinuation of the government grants were not in placed when the parents enrolled them into the kindergarten.  

Most parents, if not all, registered their kids to the ESF kindergartens so to have greater chance to continue their education in ESF primary schools. So I think the phasing out of the government subvention should extend for another 2 years, i.e., over the next 15 years instead of 13 years.

siulumjing

Just my personal opinion. I think ESF is popular not only because it is an IS with government subsidy, but because it's teaching method of encouraging kids to think independently, provide sufficient room for kids to explore and inquire but yet with good discipline. So for parents not opting for the hong kong style teaching method, it sure is one of the best option. Just my 2 cents...

siulumjing

I don't object the point of phasing out the subsidy because, yes, if we are to look at it from the governance perspective, and that it seemed the ESF objective of providing a secured schooling to those English government officials of the then colonial Hong Kong has slightly changed. What I'm saying is, at least for students of the existing ESF systems, be it from the primary schools, secondary schools AND kindergartens, the subsidy should cover them as the removal of the subsidy was not in placed when they registered.  

However, of course I also think there are sound reasons justifying ESF to continue receiving the grants. Hong Kong is now ranking almost the lowest amongst Asia, in terms of English standards of school aged children. Because ESF is not following the local systems, they are able to use their approach to produce very high standards in educating youngsters, who in future years, becomes part of the HK work force contributing to the community. Bear in mind a large population of the ESF students are HK residents and parents are tax payers. Infact a lot of the elite DSS schools have set their entrance requirements so high, or even so invisible, they are also taking advantage of the subsidy to meet the school's objective. I studied from one of these elite school when I was young, and definitely know there are students being admitted by connections. Now that ESF entry requirements are crystal clear, what's wrong with giving a better option for those parents with kids meeting  the requirements on alternative teaching methods? I'm not saying their admission criteria is without flaws, perhaps they can add another requirements of proofing kids enrolling whose parent(s) are tax payers?

siulumjing

Hey I absolutely agree that they should have the voucher system in place for all eligible residents to be fair! But the thing is our government is not good on this kind of administration, they are going to spend lots on administering this, which is a real problem too!

siulumjing

Can't agree more!

siulumjing

I'm curious that what obligations are we talking about here? ESF is providing a really good education standard to the local community. Isn't that already fulfilling it's obligation as an education institute? How about the ones that provide crap standards but following the government rules, they are meeting the obligations, not the standards but still ok?

siulumjing

ESF doesn't have the freedom to restrict or give priority to certain nationalities. All other IS give priority to citizens of their own country.

ESF is non- discriminatory in the sense that they don't test how brilliant the kid is before they offer a place( very different from most, if not all DSS, they only test on their communication skills to ensure they can get and understand whats being taught.

As to % of residence, I really have no idea on the proportion of PRs, but if by either switching to the voucher system/ imposing criteria regarding to tax paying status of the parents or some similar measures, isn't that a better way to solve the issue? After all, this grants are probably the only benefits that a lot of the so-called 'middle class' can manage to obtain without affecting any other people. Why do we have to go about cutting it out when no one will be better off?