教育王國
標題: del del del [打印本頁]
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 12:08 標題: del del del
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-12 15:17 編輯
del del del
作者: mimame 時間: 10-11-25 12:17
Chance is slim but still have hope for an offer!
Wanna to ask current P1 parents of DGJS:
When you received the letter last Dec, for offer and reject, is is the same thickness? Or offer letter is thicker cos there are more papers regarding admission procedures?
THANKS
作者: AnotherHalf 時間: 10-11-25 13:25
Did the school ask more than once about the address proof ?
I just attended the first interview, so I am just curious about it.
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 12:08 發表 
DGJS 兩次 interview 後, 雖然未有結果, 但有感而發。
校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現。但由交報名表開始，不斷要求提供住址證明(水、電費單etc.)。我心想取錄小孩子同他們住什麽地方有何關係? 何需大費周 ...
作者: 亞水 時間: 10-11-25 13:42
樓主老兄：
不斷要求住址證明？？
呢家野，真係無咁既印象播…
會唔會真係你最初漏左 (我去st.pxxx都漏招)，所以追你呀？
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 13:55
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:17 編輯
del del del
原帖由 亞水 於 10-11-25 01:42 PM 發表
樓主老兄：
不斷要求住址證明？？
呢家野，真係無咁既印象播…
會唔會真係你最初漏左 (我去st.pxxx都漏招)，所以追你呀？
[ 本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 14:03 編輯 ]
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 14:02
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-12 15:18 編輯
del del del
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 01:55 PM 發表
I also applied 4-5 other schools, they just required to fill in the form, no need to provide bills for address proof. This is a logical question. If someone not consider or concern about this, why nee ...
作者: chei05 時間: 10-11-25 14:10
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: ChuLuLu 時間: 10-11-25 14:29
SPCC : Copy address proof must be submitted together with the application form. No checking of original or copy address proof at 2nd-in.
DGJS : Copy address proof must be submitted together with the application form. Checking of original address proof at 2nd-in.
原帖由 chei05 於 10-11-25 14:10 發表
I think only SPCC asked for the proof of home address...DGJS do not asked for this .
作者: share123 時間: 10-11-25 15:30
[quote]原帖由 AnotherHalf 於 10-11-25 13:25 發表
2in的確要出示住址證明
作者: Rinana 時間: 10-11-25 15:36
Yes, I remember during the 2nd interview, the lady in the waiting room checked carefully on my electricity bill as well as my daughter's birth certificate 
作者: kochiman2004 時間: 10-11-25 16:31
第二次接見仍要CHECK住址證明, 仲問多一樣點解申請表張相同你個女依家有D唔同, 我回答無乜唔同.根住就2nd int.
作者: OCEP 時間: 10-11-25 16:56
Why can't we see the proof of address as an internal thing that the school decided, to ensure no one took advantage of writing down very fancy address that didn't belong to them but instead belonging to relatives or friends. Why are we speculating foul play by the school? Why are we even mentioning Equal Opportunities Commission? The school, as a Private Organization does not need to explain it's policies to anyone. As a current parent of a DGJS girl, my daughter went through the old interview process, one single interview by Mrs Dai, I believe Mrs Dai will adopt the fairness approach to selecting your child. We were fortunate our daughter was selected even though we had no expectations. Mrs Dai will look for a variety of students, ranging from academic, sports, music and other special qualities. Some students have just the one or a combination. I am sure there will be other factors as well such as whether the child's mother is a working mother or full time mother. In my daughter class, approximately 2/3 are full time mothers. I can also vouch that address is NOT a factor in the selection process. I live some distance away from the current school location, in the New Territories so I have never doubted DGJS as being unfair and only selecting people from the most exclusive addresses. Whatever the final outcome, pls don't be hard on yourself or your daughter, enjoy the most precious time with your daughter.
作者: maynjune 時間: 10-11-25 17:19
Don't be too naive lar....
These 尊貴 schools will definitely consider the family backgrounds, so what's the point they ask you to show the address proof?
Live in New Territories? It is not a matter of how far you live, but how 尊貴 is your living place. They will accept you if you are in 九肚山.....
作者: Loso 時間: 10-11-25 17:41
Sorry, 你嘅講法有D矛盾: 學校唔計較地址，但又惊人報假地址揾着數?若果真係唔計較，報乜地址又有乜所謂?
原帖由 OCEP 於 10-11-25 16:56 發表
Why can't we see the proof of address as an internal thing that the school decided, to ensure no one took advantage of writing down very fancy address that didn't belong to them but instead belonging ...
作者: kinyee125 時間: 10-11-25 17:48
SUPPORT !!!
原帖由 OCEP 於 10-11-25 16:56 發表
Why can't we see the proof of address as an internal thing that the school decided, to ensure no one took advantage of writing down very fancy address that didn't belong to them but instead belonging ...
作者: donutbaby 時間: 10-11-25 18:02
原帖由 Loso 於 10-11-25 17:41 發表
Sorry, 你嘅講法有D矛盾: 學校唔計較地址，但又惊人報假地址揾着數?若果真係唔計較，報乜地址又有乜所謂?
I don't think there's contradiction. The school wants to make sure that no parents will 'trick' the school by stating an address that does not belong to them. This is just for the protection of the school's interest. Afterall, competition is keen and they don't want any mistakes during the process. Furthermore, some parents may think that borrowing a prestigious address may give them advantage to the admissions process. The school just wants to make sure that does not happen. It's just that simple.
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 18:09
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:18 編輯
del del del
原帖由 AnotherHalf 於 10-11-25 01:25 PM 發表
Did the school ask more than once about the address proof ?
I just attended the first interview, so I am just curious about it.
[ 本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-26 17:44 編輯 ]
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 18:25
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:19 編輯
del del del原帖由 donutbaby 於 10-11-25 06:02 PM 發表 I don't think there's contradiction. The school wants to make sure that no parents will 'trick' the school by stating an address that does not belong to them. This is just for the protection of th ...
作者: Loso 時間: 10-11-25 18:30
越嚟越矛盾！學校為保障自己，惊人報假地址呃學校，咁做法唔係即係等於學校"關注"地址囉！若果DG唔睇地址，就冇所謂"惊人報假地址呃學校"囉。不過請不要太敏感，我冇話DG睇地址揀學生；而以為報富貴地址可以有着數亦可能係一些家長一廂情願諗法，始終難揾實証嘛！
原帖由 donutbaby 於 10-11-25 18:02 發表
I don't think there's contradiction. The school wants to make sure that no parents will 'trick' the school by stating an address that does not belong to them. This is just for the protection of th ...
作者: eemum 時間: 10-11-25 18:31
原帖由 maynjune 於 10-11-25 17:19 發表
Don't be too naive lar....
These 尊貴 schools will definitely consider the family backgrounds, so what's the point they ask you to show the address proof?
Live in New Territories? It is not a matt ...
No one will stop you think this way. Every year there are people raising such an issue. I just want to say definitely there are DGJS girls not living in those so call precious district, not even a so call "Middle classed" district.
Further, it's a private school that can choose their preferred students and they got so many choices. Why that they cannot choose one that perform smartly in the interview AND the family can support the kid with different activities with lots of family resources? But surely, that's not the only consideration point. At least you daughter need to up to their standard in the interview. If your girls is not selected, first to think if your girls is up to their standard and meets their requirment. Not on the family background as first consideration.
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 18:33
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:20 編輯
del del del
原帖由 Loso 於 10-11-25 06:30 PM 發表
越嚟越矛盾！學校為保障自己，惊人報假地址呃學校，咁做法唔係即係等於學校"關注"地址囉！若果DG唔睇地址，就冇所謂"惊人報假地址呃學校"囉。不過請不要太敏感，我冇話DG睇地址揀學生；而以為報富貴地址可以有着數亦可能係一些家長 ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 18:36
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:21 編輯
del del del
原帖由 eemum 於 10-11-25 06:31 PM 發表
No one will stop you think this way. Every year there are people raising such an issue. I just want to say definitely there are DGJS girls not living in those so call precious district, not even a ...
[ 本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 23:35 編輯 ]
作者: Loso 時間: 10-11-25 18:40
Thank you !
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 18:33 發表
u r the one who understand University Philosophy 101 "Introduction of Logic".
Good!
作者: W211 時間: 10-11-25 19:32
真搞笑...
如果覺得咁有問題，甚至"違反教義"，又或因為 "educated in western country" 而接受唔到哩d local 學校的入學程序，咁咪唔好報囉。
不過話時話，香港佔大多數既官津學校報讀時都要check 地址，而好多直資學校都同DGJS一樣要 check 一次 (instead of "不斷要求")地址，如果平機會要查，都先查左EDB 先喇。
平機會職在調查 sex discrimination, disability discrimination, race discrimination 及 family status discrimination, 香港 d local 法律有無制定 address discrimination? 我都想知.. 
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 12:08 發表
DGJS 兩次 interview 後, 雖然未有結果, 但有感而發。
校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現。但由交報名表開始，不斷要求提供住址證明(水、電費單etc.)。我心想取錄小孩子同他們住什麽地方有何關係? 何需大費周 ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 20:51
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:21 編輯
del del del
原帖由 W211 於 10-11-25 07:32 PM 發表
真搞笑...
如果覺得咁有問題，甚至"違反教義"，又或因為 "educated in western country" 而接受唔到哩d local 學校的入學程序，咁咪唔好報囉。
不過話時話，香港佔大多數既官津學校報讀時都要check 地址，而好多直資學校都同 ...
[ 本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 20:52 編輯 ]
作者: donutbaby 時間: 10-11-25 22:22
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 20:51 發表
係呀, 雖然小女未被取錄, 但會withdraw了, 感覺中這些傳统學校未必適合一些太有個性的女孩；兩次interview見到的在學女孩好像倒模一樣。
坦白講本人畢業於DBS，那個年代是9年免費教育，人人有機會入DBS；學校好像社會縮影，是 ...
you have so much character! you should send your daughter to educate in the western country as it appears the game in Hong Kong is not suitable for you - no privacy, no logic.
作者: mictwin 時間: 10-11-25 22:31
ｉｔｈｉｎｋ ｉｆ Ｉ ｇｏｔ ａｃｃｅｐｔ Ｉ ｗｉｌｌ ｎｏｔ ｌｅｔ ｍｙ ｄａｕｇｈｔｅｒ ｓｔｕｄｙ ａｔ ｔｈｉｓ ｓｃｈｏｏｌ ｂｅｃａｕｓｅ ｔｏｏ 白鴿眼 ａｎｔ ｔｒａｄｉｔｉｏｎａｌ
作者: wootaitai 時間: 10-11-25 22:34
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: KKLmama 時間: 10-11-25 22:58
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 23:19
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:23 編輯
del del del
原帖由 KKLmama 於 10-11-25 10:58 PM 發表
My daughter is also finished the 2nd interview and waiting the result from DGJS. We are not a rich family and can be categorized as below average (against the usual DGJS kids' family) as far as we thi ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 23:21
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:23 編輯
del del del
原帖由 wootaitai 於 10-11-25 10:34 PM 發表
why.... my husband is also DBS old boy and he hates DGS too..?
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-25 23:26
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:24 編輯
del del del
原帖由 mictwin 於 10-11-25 10:31 PM 發表
ｉｔｈｉｎｋ ｉｆ Ｉ ｇｏｔ ａｃｃｅｐｔ Ｉ ｗｉｌｌ ｎｏｔ ｌｅｔ ｍｙ ｄａｕｇｈｔｅｒ ｓｔｕｄｙ ａｔ ｔｈｉｓ ｓｃｈｏｏｌ ｂｅｃａｕｓｅ ｔｏｏ 白鴿眼 ａｎｔ ｔｒａｄｉｔｉｏｎａｌ ...
作者: eemum 時間: 10-11-25 23:46
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 23:26 發表
but don't ruin her chance if your daughter is smart and suitable. 細路之間冇嘢的、大人的問題啫。
Not really agree.....Kid's will grow up and learn the value system (first from parents). So if the adult already think that's a problem, it'll easily be passed to the children and then kids will starts to have those valuation problem.
So, parents need to learn how to live with that environment. I know a parent with girl in DGJS, they are not really concern on the girl's academic result (as long as she can keep in median level), the most concern is her valuation and they spends most of time in educating the girl on getting the right valuation and personality while living in such environment.
作者: Zhaiba 時間: 10-11-25 23:51
It is really unnecessary to check the address during the interview process if the school really do not care. The logic is simple.
After you are being admitted of course then you need to have your address proof but that is another story.....administration reason.
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 00:08
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:24 編輯
del del del
原帖由 chei05 於 10-11-25 02:10 PM 發表
I think only SPCC asked for the proof of home address...DGJS do not asked for this .
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 00:11
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:25 編輯
del del del
原帖由 ChuLuLu 於 10-11-25 02:29 PM 發表
SPCC : Copy address proof must be submitted together with the application form. No checking of original or copy address proof at 2nd-in.
DGJS : Copy address proof must be submitted together with the ...
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-26 09:50
Who are you going to believe?
Someone said DGJS cares about the residential address of appliant because the applicant had to present the proof of address before the 2nd interview.
Someone said DGJS cares about the birth hospital of applicant because the applicant had to present the original birth certificate before the 2nd interview.
Someone said DGJS cares about the kindergarten of applicant because the applicant had to present the original kindergarten report before the 2nd interview.
Someone said DGJS cares about the religion of applicant because the applicant had to present the original certificate of baptism of SKH before the 2nd interview.
Someone said DGJS just cares about the abilities of applicant because her little girl was accepted by the school even she did not live in luxury apartment, did not born in private hospital, did not study in CCKG and without religion. The only thing she has got is always trying to strive for excellent.
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-26 00:11 發表
I didn't apply spcc, so according to your info, SPCC people have the same mentality as DGJS, they care about the address.
[ 本帖最後由 k.kung 於 10-11-26 15:38 編輯 ]
作者: ChuLuLu 時間: 10-11-26 10:17
Not being part of their administration, I am unable to say definitively why SPCC (or DGJS) should have concerns about the truthfulness of the residential addresses declared in the application forms. As I see it, it is difficult to generalize in matters of this nature. But if you go to read the posts in the SPCC Result thread at page 5 of this forum, you will see that against all the odds and contrary to their very pessimistic expectation, 2 "less well off" families eventually received offers from SPCC (my heartfelt congratulations to them!!). My perception arising from our dialogue with the Headmistress is that they are primarily looking for kids who are likely to be capable of satisfactorily completing primary education in the 1st 5 years, and that that is why siblings of SPCC students (obviously having the same family background) have no assurances of getting admitted.
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-26 00:11 發表
I didn't apply spcc, so according to your info, SPCC people have the same mentality as DGJS, they care about the address.
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-26 11:12
閣下的邏輯論完全建基於"校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現"。請問你是從那些媒體多次看到上述資料呢?
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 12:08 發表
DGJS 兩次 interview 後, 雖然未有結果, 但有感而發。
校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現。但由交報名表開始，不斷要求提供住址證明(水、電費單etc.)。我心想取錄小孩子同他們住什麽地方有何關係? 何需大費周 ...
作者: maynjune 時間: 10-11-26 11:19
Hahah....
I think that you still don't understand the point that Lawsonmoon is talking about.
The argument is about the submission of the address proof, which is no need to be part of acceptance consideration. They should purely assess on the capability of the kids and how they performed during the interview.....
Clear and understand ??
原帖由 eemum 於 10-11-25 18:31 發表
No one will stop you think this way. Every year there are people raising such an issue. I just want to say definitely there are DGJS girls not living in those so call precious district, not even a ...
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-26 11:44
The entire argument is just based on a purely assumption.
原帖由 maynjune 於 10-11-26 11:19 發表
Hahah....
I think that you still don't understand the point that Lawsonmoon is talking about.
The argument is about the submission of the address proof, which is no need to be part of acceptance ...
作者: share123 時間: 10-11-26 11:49
其實,幾分鐘既面試,系咪真係完全可以肯定邊個一定得,邊個一定唔得? 話完全系取決於面試表現,系咪100%? 住址,家庭背景,幼稚園同課外活動系咪真系完全唔計?? 我覺得系一項校長既綜合考慮,應該系無formula既,總之校長用專業判斷,覺得合適佢學校咪收囉
作者: donutbaby 時間: 10-11-26 12:20
原帖由 share123 於 10-11-26 11:49 發表
其實,幾分鐘既面試,系咪真係完全可以肯定邊個一定得,邊個一定唔得? 話完全系取決於面試表現,系咪100%? 住址,家庭背景,幼稚園同課外活動系咪真系完全唔計?? 我覺得系一項校長既綜合考慮,應該系無formula既,總之校長用 ...
agree. there is no rule to this DSS game. the school is the banker and banker always wins. if you can't accept the fact that there is unfairness in this game, then it's better not to get involved to begin with.
作者: icbb1230 時間: 10-11-26 12:37 標題: address proof
BTW, I would like to ask how difficult to get an address in good residental area? Many people even borrow other's address in Kowloon Tong for 41 net central allocation. Therefore, I wonder why the schools need the residental address proof?
Anyone can answer this?
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-26 14:45
There are too many possible answers.
1. Adminisration purpose - Some applicants may move to the new living places between the period of the 1st and 2nd interview. The school may wants to ensure the information in the application form is correct and up-to-date before handing to the headmistress.
2. Interview purpose - Home address is one of the questions that frequently asked by the interviewer. When applicant's answer is different from the information showing in the application form, the headmistress can quickly identify that the discrepancies are not typos because the address have been checked according to the proofs from the parents.
3. Selection purpose - As per the discussion in this topic, it may be one of the selection criteria.
4. To shortlist those applicants whose parents did not want to cooperate.
原帖由 icbb1230 於 10-11-26 12:37 發表
BTW, I would like to ask how difficult to get an address in good residental area? Many people even borrow other's address in Kowloon Tong for 41 net central allocation. Therefore, I wonder why the s ...
[ 本帖最後由 k.kung 於 10-11-26 15:03 編輯 ]
作者: icbb1230 時間: 10-11-26 15:21
Hi k.kung,
thanks for your reply as DGJS is a school that I definitely will apply for my daughter, so I would like to know more:
1. Adminisration purpose - I think it is the responsibility of the parent if they have the case. School doesn't need to consider on this.
2. Interview purpose - yes, I think it's possible.
3. Selection purpose - I need to go through all reply in this topic first. Is the main reason to scan the family financial background?
4. To shortlist those applicants - same reason as #3?
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 19:08
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:26 編輯
del del del
原帖由 maynjune 於 10-11-26 11:19 AM 發表
Hahah....
I think that you still don't understand the point that Lawsonmoon is talking about.
The argument is about the submission of the address proof, which is no need to be part of acceptance ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 19:10
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:27 編輯
del del del原帖由 k.kung 於 10-11-26 11:12 AM 發表 閣下的邏輯論完全建基於"校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現"。請問你是從那些媒體多次看到上述資料呢?
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 19:11
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:28 編輯
del del del
原帖由 k.kung 於 10-11-26 11:44 AM 發表
The entire argument is just based on a purely assumption.
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 19:29
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:28 編輯
del del del
原帖由 ChuLuLu 於 10-11-26 10:17 AM 發表
Not being part of their administration, I am unable to say definitively why SPCC (or DGJS) should have concerns about the truthfulness of the residential addresses declared in the application forms. A ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 19:34
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:30 編輯
del del del
原帖由 Zhaiba 於 10-11-25 11:51 PM 發表
It is really unnecessary to check the address during the interview process if the school really do not care. The logic is simple.
After you are being admitted of course then you need to have your add ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-26 19:43
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:29 編輯
del del del
原帖由 k.kung 於 10-11-26 09:50 AM 發表
Who are you going to believe?
Someone said DGJS cares about the residential address of appliant because the applicant had to present the proof of address before the 2nd interview.
Someone said DGJS ...
[ 本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-26 19:45 編輯 ]
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-27 02:19
翻查星島親子王, 戴校長只在第一期接受過一次訪問, 而非閣下所形容的多次, 文中亦無提及"取錄與否純看小孩面試
表現"這番說話或相近意思的言論。 可能閣下對這遍訪問理解錯誤了。
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-26 19:10 發表
星島親子王
作者: RosalindOrlando 時間: 10-11-27 08:12
會唔會諗多咗，可能check吓有無寫錯地址及期間搬咗屋呢！
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-27 10:41
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-13 14:30 編輯
del del del
原帖由 RosalindOrlando 於 10-11-27 08:12 AM 發表
會唔會諗多咗，可能check吓有無寫錯地址及期間搬咗屋呢！
作者: natpa 時間: 10-11-27 10:54
There are always good and bad sides looking at matters.
Thinking positively, a proved read address can ensure once your girl got accepted, the acceptance letter will be delivered to your home address, rather than lost some where else (yes, we write the envelope address). This can be for the ease of the school and parents worries.
Let's wish we'll received the acceptance letter :)
作者: vaga 時間: 10-11-27 10:58
恕我直言…
如果咁不滿間學校就唔好考慮囉, 何必咁怒氣呢？
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-27 11:14
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:34 編輯
del deldel del
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-27 11:28
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:35 編輯
del del del
原帖由 vaga 於 10-11-27 10:58 AM 發表
恕我直言…
如果咁不滿間學校就唔好考慮囉, 何必咁怒氣呢？
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-27 11:29
又係 "新國民"?
原帖由 natpa 於 10-11-27 10:54 AM 發表
There are always good and bad sides looking at matters.
Thinking positively, a proved read address can ensure once your girl got accepted, the acceptance letter will be delivered to your home address ...
作者: natpa 時間: 10-11-27 11:35
Yes I am, hi lawsonmoon!
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-27 11:29 發表
又係 "新國民"?
作者: donutbaby 時間: 10-11-27 11:48
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-27 11:14 發表
其實你係唔係曲線話佢地真係會睇你的地址才會兩次查証????
其實你都仲係唔明，呢個post唔係討論佢哋係唔係會考慮你住址來收生，因為我們永遠唔會知道。呢個post係討論邏輯學上的 "If....then" 問題。
其實佢哋"參考"住 ...
apologize if we never took Logic 101 and misunderstood your point. it is too bad that you did not understand this game to begin with and hence you had to argue over such a small issue.
also suggest you stop insulting other users. just trying to help you think in a less objective way because stubbornness will not get you anywhere.
作者: 4eyesDad 時間: 10-11-27 12:03
It's plain wrong to ask for address proof.
SPCCPS, a Direct Subsidy Scheme school partly funded by taxpayers, also requires address proof.
DGJS is a private school. It may choose someone from Kowloon Tong in favour of another person with the same performance from Kowloon Bay.
Is it illegal?
I don't know. But I know it's probably morally wrong.
On the other hand, SPCCPS should be better regulated, and its address proof requirement should be checked by the government.
I am also not comfortable with the recent news about DSS schools.
Someone say if you don't like them, don't apply to these two schools.
I think must parents care about principles, and care about the moralizing force of public debate.
When schools drop the demand for address proof, we can tell our children that we are on the right side of history.
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-27 12:27
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:37 編輯
del del del
原帖由 4eyesDad 於 10-11-27 12:03 PM 發表
It's plain wrong to ask for address proof.
SPCCPS, a Direct Subsidy Scheme school partly funded by taxpayers, also requires address proof.
DGJS is a private school. It may choose someone from Kowloon ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-27 12:45
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:39 編輯
del del del
原帖由 donutbaby 於 10-11-27 11:48 AM 發表
apologize if we never took Logic 101 and misunderstood your point. it is too bad that you did not understand this game to begin with and hence you had to argue over such a small issue.
also sugges ...
作者: jj_hk 時間: 10-11-27 13:16 標題: 回覆 1# lawsonmoon 的文章
noting ur grievances on dgjs. I suppose u'd better write a note to dgjs to withdraw yr application so as to let other die hard fans one more chance. It appears that your girl should be so smart to have an offer from dgjs next month.
作者: RosalindOrlando 時間: 10-11-27 13:29
你有你繼續講，人哋有權繼續咁做。如果唔滿意，可以唔比正本人睇，咪唔駛咁難受囉！
再見啦，最識諗嘢的人！
作者: vaga 時間: 10-11-27 14:54
新國民發表意見有問題？
哈!!! 又一個 "自己永遠是對的, 唔認同自己既就錯錯錯"
咁樣同呀PHDJxxxxxxx有乜分別？
咁請你自己繼續同自己討論啦, 多謝!
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-27 11:28 發表
係呀, 講左唔考慮。
點解呢個post突然多咗好多 "新國民" ，這些 "新國民" 又傾向"奴"性比較重。
呢個世界有皇帝係因為有奴才。
作者: donutbaby 時間: 10-11-27 15:00
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-27 12:45 發表
In fact, we should "祟優", learn the good thing from someone, correct the bad thing if we did.
有啲人話我既女唔好, 我應該去鬧返人 or 睇吓話得right or wrong, 然後去改? 好的父母心中有數!
TSL陳守仁, 你 ...
sorry, i am not a die hard fan. i am alum of MCS and i don't have a daughter so i have no interest on DGJS. i just cannot stand someone with such a narrow sight who sees so highly of himself.
agree with other users, you can just continue the discussion with yourself. got better things to do over this sunny weekend.
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-27 17:51
閣下在這個post開始時並非只討論邏輯, 而是虛構"校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現"。以需要提供住址證明為由, 懷疑取錄和住址有關。現在又說"呢個post唔係討論佢哋係唔係會考慮你住址來收生"。閣下言詞前後矛盾。 自己就曾多次討論對住址和取錄的觀點。例子有。
Post#17: 如果這不是考慮收生的因素。理得家長報什麼地址
Post#22: 只是唔敢同Media講住址係考慮取錄既"其中"一個因素(因為政治不正確)；所以才一定要address proof.
以邏輯來說, 整件事只能證明學校重現住址的真確性。相信無人會反對。
做事沒有邏輯的人, 當然是很難另人明白甚麼是邏輯。
閣下早於收到2nd interview letter時, 已經知道要帶同住址證明去面試。
If 閣下認為提供住址證明不合邏輯、感到被冒犯,
then就不應照校方要求帶齊文件去2nd interview or
閣下應該跟校方聯絡弄清原因。
If 校方解釋另閣下滿意,
then 繼續去 interview,
If not exit
但為何閣下如此不滿, 仍要繼續參加2nd interview, 直至完成後才拿出來討論?
以邏輯分析閣下之動機, 套用閣下在post #1的說話。
令人有合理懷疑閣下的不滿是因為提供住址證明給學校時發生了問題, 影響了閣下女兒的取錄機曾, 才在此時表達不滿。
閣下多次表示, 就算獲取錄亦會放棄。以邏輯分析, 其實發生機會不大, 因當時閣下在不合邏輯、被冒犯的情況下仍然依足校方指示, 不敢哼半句, 堅持兩次面試。 足證閣下內心其實是很想女兒獲取錄的, 相信獲取錄後放棄只是戲言。
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-27 11:14 發表
其實你係唔係曲線話佢地真係會睇你的地址才會兩次查証????
其實你都仲係唔明，呢個post唔係討論佢哋係唔係會考慮你住址來收生，因為我們永遠唔會知道。呢個post係討論邏輯學上的 "If....then" 問題。
其實佢哋"參考"住 ...
[ 本帖最後由 k.kung 於 10-11-28 22:35 編輯 ]
作者: HelenHillary 時間: 10-11-27 23:08
如果有人問我攞D 正本，又副本咁去証明D mud，有時我都會覚得冒犯，但有時又覚得無所謂。如果有hard feeling咪唔比，欠住先！哈！哈！
但如果有人覺得我有冋題，仲要迫我認，咁就真有問題了^^
D女人靚咗，比人話整容，都有認，有唔認啦！
校方要地址證明只是爲證明地址。可以好簡單想。正如出世紙是為了證明出生日期一樣。不過，也可以想得很深入嘅？！
出生證明，
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-28 01:10
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:40 編輯
del del del
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-28 01:14
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:45 編輯
del del del
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-28 13:15
2nd int 前都一直冇諗到；
閣下曾在Post#49說:
我真的感到冒犯，1st submission of form (need to provide copy of address proof) ，我心想我住邊有關係咩? 。
既然閣下1st interview時己感到冒犯, “2nd in前都一直冇諗到”的說法明顯前後矛盾、毫無邏輯, 難以令人接受。
可能受”親子王”影响、覺得這學校很好、很公正。
閣下推說受親子王影響, 但從閣下以往發表的文章
http://forum.edu-kingdom.com/viewthread.php?tid=2257015&page=1#pid33391875
很難相信閣下不會獨立思考, 而盲目相信親子王。假設閣下真的受親子王影響, 現在就討論一下誰是誰非。
不會查學生家庭背境…「學生在首輪面試時，老師
是不會看到學生的個人資料，所以不會因學生的家庭背境揀學生」。
文中只說首輪老師不知道學生的家庭背境揀學生,但無說次輪甚至面試完畢後不用查看。
文章尾: 「老師和校長在面試前，不會看申請人的個人檔案」。
文中只說老師和校長在第二次面試前,不會看申請人的個人檔案,但無說面試中或面試後不查看。
所以我既理解係“校長說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現” 。點解你覺得我係虛構"校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現"。
明顯是閣下理解錯誤, "面試"和"取錄"是兩回事, 不能渾為一談。 面試只是取錄決定前的其中一項評核項目, 整過程中可能還包括其它項目需要評核, 最後得出一個總分來決定取錄那位申請人。 整篇訪問是針對考生面試時要注意的事情和學校對面試的處理手法。最重要是文中從無說過面試是取錄與否的唯一指標, 所以閣下把"面試表現"和"取錄決定"劃上等號、然後說"取錄與否純看小孩面試表現"便是虛構。
如果我係怕”因為提供住址證明給學校時發生了問題, 影響了閣下女兒的取錄機會, 才在此時表達不滿。” ，我仲係到講，佢地實記得同認得我啦, result都未出，尼啲又係咩邏輯呢。唉
有兩個可能性:
1. 假設閣下被學校發現使用假地址,是不誠實行為, 影響十分嚴重,取錄機會可以說接近零, 在此發洩不滿已對result無影響。
2. 閣下女兒是否今的考生也是一個疑問。如果不是又怕甚麼?
最後K.Kung 希望你唔好介意，網絡上係針事唔針人的。因為人都是假名,
Lawsonmoon就是羅生門, 亦即是閣下喜歡討論一些各說各話、難分對錯的話題。閣下針對人的例子倒也不少。
Post#55: 我真係唔知係我諗多咗 or 你冇諗嘢?????
Post#59: 這些 "新國民" 又傾向"奴"性比較重。呢個世界有皇帝係因為有奴才。
Post#25: 印象中DGS家長挺有收養，可能時代真的變了。
Post#50: 係囉, 希望如你所說、正面啲睇佢哋, 佢哋只係蠢
閣下針對人就沒有問題, 別人針對人你就萬萬不能, 雙重標準又是甚麼邏輯和道理?
本人只是從邏輯分析閣下的言行, 絕非針對任何人。
亦冇人識who is K. Kung, who is lawsonmoon。所以要吋啲先好睇。
閣下令本人想起一位BK的故人好友。她的英文不錯, 通常是以英文寫post的。若然閣下覺得手寫中文很辛苦, 倒不如用回英文吧!
[ 本帖最後由 k.kung 於 10-11-28 15:20 編輯 ]
作者: DaddyX 時間: 10-11-28 15:19
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-28 15:32
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:46 編輯
del del del
[ 本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-28 15:41 編輯 ]
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-28 15:38
Welcome to my post^.^
原帖由 DaddyX 於 10-11-28 03:19 PM 發表
lawsonmoon 在港畢業應不比BBC/ABC 洋化吧所以大家不會太不同類
其實看完lawsonmoon 同其他人的文大家都無錯,大家
何必咁爭執呢
大家都好落力提供資訊,非常多謝lawsonmoon 及所有其他人
我看法是 lawsonmoon 說的 ...
作者: DaddyX 時間: 10-11-28 15:38
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 10-11-28 15:51
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-15 15:47 編輯
del del del
作者: DaddyX 時間: 10-11-28 16:28
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-28 17:44
如果只是討論應否以住址收生, 是無問題, 但曲解訪問的內容和虛構取錄純看面試, 再以之責罵學校蠢、無邏輯及侮辱其所有家長無收養就很有問題。
雖然網上留言, 無人知道閣下身份, 但都應該有個底線。
原帖由 DaddyX 於 10-11-28 15:19 發表
lawsonmoon 在港畢業應不比BBC/ABC 洋化吧所以大家不會太不同類
其實看完lawsonmoon 同其他人的文大家都無錯,大家
何必咁爭執呢
大家都好落力提供資訊,非常多謝lawsonmoon 及所有其他人
我看法是 lawsonmoon 說的 ...
[ 本帖最後由 k.kung 於 10-11-28 17:47 編輯 ]
作者: DaddyX 時間: 10-11-28 17:51
提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-28 17:55
奉勸家長千其不要咁蠢，諗都唔好諗。私校革退學生係不用什麼理由的；P2-P6都可以隨時要你走。你厄得一時唔厄得一世。難道你叫個女係學校同人講6年大話，如果教個女講大話，那她讀到哈佛都冇用呢。
原來閣下對私校革退學生的運作亦有誤解, 學校要學生退學總是有一個理由的。只是這個理由不便向外公開, 例如學校未有在選生時查清楚, 誤收一個用假地址的學生, 那是很尷尬的事情, 不會四處張揚。 但該學生的家長應該心裏明白的。
十分同意閣下的講法, 千其不要咁蠢, 否則一經發現, 有得2nd interview 都無用。
大假放完了，未必有時間再覆。這裹是可自由自己開post的，我開這post係俾覺得有趣的人睇。
本人對所有要運用邏輯分析的話題都感與趣, 閣下這個post, 令本人有機會跟閣下這種讀過 University Philosophy 101 "Introduction of Logic"的邏輯高手交流一下, 明白到自己在邏輯分析和閱讀理解的水平, 實在獲益良多, 深感榮幸。
有空請回來再作交流。
[ 本帖最後由 k.kung 於 10-11-28 19:15 編輯 ]
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-28 18:00
難道誤導和侮辱別人都無錯?
原帖由 DaddyX 於 10-11-28 17:51 發表
我睇番佢都係覺得人地睇唔到佢講的重點姐
算啦,根本大家都無講錯,個focus 唔同姐
唔好再開戰啦
作者: silvia_ng 時間: 10-11-28 23:46
收地址証明係咪想睇下校車路線呀? 雖然有人唔會搭, 但都有家長鐘意比小朋友坐校車, 認下其他人架喎。
我女都有份入2ND IN, 但我地勁草根, 所以唔覺得係因為有冇$$$而要求睇地址証明。
再者, 唔鐘意咪唔好比囉。我唔鐘意果D學校我都唔會考既, 考完又COMPLAIN就無謂啦! JUST WASTE YR TIME, RIGHT?
作者: donutbaby 時間: 10-11-29 00:10
原帖由 k.kung 於 10-11-28 18:00 發表
難道誤導和侮辱別人都無錯?
support. it is ok to stand firm on one's viewpoint but insulting everyone else who does not agree with him is class-less.
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-29 00:30
我都唔明, 為何羅生門(lawsonmoon)硬要把收生和住址拉上關係, 要check清楚地址可以有其它原因, 不滿可以向學校拒絕交正本。 照做後, 又話學校無腰骨、又蠢, 家長無收養, 學生像倒模出來, 不停侮辱人、又用d下流比喻。學校咁差點解重要去2nd interview、要照學校指示做。
希望你女兒可以得到offer。 蕭亞姨係勁草根就最好(說笑), 可以證明一下dgjs是否選地址不選人。不過你情有獨鍾, 中o左唔知你讀唔讀?
原帖由 silvia_ng 於 10-11-28 23:46 發表
收地址証明係咪想睇下校車路線呀? 雖然有人唔會搭, 但都有家長鐘意比小朋友坐校車, 認下其他人架喎。
我女都有份入2ND IN, 但我地勁草根, 所以唔覺得係因為有冇$$$而要求睇地址証明。
再者, 唔鐘意咪唔好比囉。我 ...
[ 本帖最後由 k.kung 於 10-11-29 00:45 編輯 ]
作者: silvia_ng 時間: 10-11-29 00:42
原帖由 k.kung 於 10-11-29 00:30 發表
我都唔明, 為何羅生門(lawsonmoon)硬要把收生和住址拉上關係, 要check清楚地址可以有其它原因, 不滿可以向學校拒絕交正本。 照做後, 又話學校無腰骨、又蠢, 家長無收養, 學生像倒模出來, 不停侮辱人、又用d下流比喻 ...
希望你女兒可以得到offer。 蕭亞姨係勁草根就最好(說笑), 可以證明一收dgjs是否選地址不選人。不過你情有獨鍾, 中o左唔知你讀唔讀?
呵呵...我地家住深水步...仲唔係草根? 呢頭都冇咩豪園, 華庭, 天與地, 水與海果D貴價樓。
我情有獨鐘果間收左我呀女, 我地唔會去DGJS了。:)
作者: k.kung 時間: 10-11-29 00:58
個樓市咁癲, 現在處處都係貴價樓啦。
我知道這個好消息啦, 恭喜! 恭喜!
原帖由 silvia_ng 於 10-11-29 00:42 發表
呵呵...我地家住深水步...仲唔係草根? 呢頭都冇咩豪園, 華庭, 天與地, 水與海果D貴價樓。
我情有獨鐘果間收左我呀女, 我地唔會去DGJS了。:)
作者: mimame 時間: 10-11-29 10:07
蕭亞姨,
your daughter got an offer from TSL?
作者: vaga 時間: 10-11-29 12:40
我就係疑似新國民? 用新ID做打手?
咁你自己係乜？
lawsonmoon
鮮花級國民
UID 681693
精華 0
積分 35
文章 33
閱讀權限 0
UID註冊 日期:10-11-25
本文章發表日期: 10-11-25
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-28 01:10 發表
[quote]原帖由 vaga 於 10-11-27 02:54 PM 發表
新國民發表意見有問題？
你誤會了，這裹有啲疑似新國民ID(有小部份人或基於愛校喜歡用新ID做打手) 。 ...
[ 本帖最後由 vaga 於 10-11-29 12:52 編輯 ]
作者: silvia_ng 時間: 10-11-29 14:10
原帖由 k.kung 於 10-11-29 00:58 發表
個樓市咁癲, 現在處處都係貴價樓啦。
我知道這個好消息啦, 恭喜! 恭喜!
多謝哂...嘻嘻!
作者: silvia_ng 時間: 10-11-29 14:10
原帖由 mimame 於 10-11-29 10:07 發表
蕭亞姨,
your daughter got an offer from TSL?
係呀!
作者: mimame 時間: 10-11-29 14:14
congratulations!
作者: Chingding 時間: 10-11-29 14:26
我覺得check 地址證明，只後證實地址的真確性，但係冇話你住得貴，就收你。學校認真對代我地填的資料只表示學校係好認真，唔會比的假資料欺騙。相反學校咩都唔check 就太求期啦，我是但搵個小朋友in 都得la.係咪。再者，個小朋友得5歲人仔，張成績表科科A，都未必好讀得，面試得個10分鍾，表現上一定有誤差，所以小朋友的所有資料都應該係考慮既因素，至於準則係咩就只有學校先知道
作者: homuimui 時間: 10-11-29 15:39 標題: 回覆 93# silvia_ng 的文章
Dear Silvia,
What's meant by TSL?
Thanks.
作者: silvia_ng 時間: 10-11-29 17:24
原帖由 homuimui 於 10-11-29 15:39 發表
Dear Silvia,
What's meant by TSL?
Thanks.
保良局陳守仁小學
作者: LesMis99 時間: 11-2-22 08:54
Under the Discretionary Places Allocation for P1 of HK Education Bureau, parents apply to one school of their choice. When you hand in the application form to the school, one needs to bring in the "ORIGINAL" as a proof of address as well. As we all know, address is not taken into account in the selection process at all (0% weighting). But why don't they bother to change the protocol? I think this is quite a common practice among schools, including DGJS, as they've just inherited the procedure directly from Education Bureau. No policy risk involved! Who should bother thinking to change it ????原帖由 Chingding 於 10-11-29 14:26 發表
我覺得check 地址證明，只後證實地址的真確性，但係冇話你住得貴，就收你。學校認真對代我地填的資料只表示學校係好認真，唔會比的假資料欺騙。相反學校咩都唔check 就太求期啦，我是但搵個小朋友in 都得la.係咪。再者，個小朋友 ...
作者: CC5 時間: 11-2-22 11:31
lawsonmoon, you are too sensitive on this issue! More frustrating things than this will come later while you are living in HK or Chinese society. Just take it easy!!!
原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 12:08 發表
DGJS 兩次 interview 後, 雖然未有結果, 但有感而發。
校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現。但由交報名表開始，不斷要求提供住址證明(水、電費單etc.)。我心想取錄小孩子同他們住什麽地方有何關係? 何需大費周 ...
作者: lawsonmoon 時間: 11-2-23 10:51
本帖最後由 lawsonmoon 於 12-3-16 15:10 編輯
del del del
原帖由 CC5 於 11-2-22 11:31 AM 發表
lawsonmoon, you are too sensitive on this issue! More frustrating things than this will come later while you are living in HK or Chinese society. Just take it easy!!!
| 歡迎光臨 教育王國 (/) |
Powered by Discuz! X1.5 |