教育王國

標題: IB 出路 [打印本頁]

作者: Cammycad 時間: 16-1-16 00:44 標題: IB 出路

請問讀得IB 係咪要預左去外國讀大學？求指教

作者: HHHR 時間: 16-1-16 03:02

回覆 Cammycad 的帖子

唔一定。可透過NON-JUPAS報香港的大學。

作者: FattyDaddy 時間: 16-1-16 05:16

Study in International Schools and then apply to HK universities via non-JUPAS, that is spending a lot of money to buy a disadvantage.

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-16 09:50 標題: 引用：Study+in+International+Schools+and+then+

原帖由 FattyDaddy 於 16-01-16 發表
Study in International Schools and then apply to HK universities via non-JUPAS, that is spending a l ...

This is over simplification.

You spend money to buy education for your child and the particular IS education has an disadvantage (for some subjects it may not be a disadvantage) for most subjects in non Jupas.

If you think IS education is better for your child, this "better education" is the benefit you buy when your child finish school. And no one (even God) can take it away.

作者: canteen31 時間: 16-1-16 12:02

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

I totally agree but a lot of people are target orientated (i.e university entry)

作者: ANChan59 時間: 16-1-16 13:56 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+FattyDaddy+於+16-01-16+發表

原帖由 shadeslayer 於 16-01-16 發表
This is over simplification.

You spend money to buy education for your child and the particular IS ...

Agree.

Education more than just public exam results.

作者: FattyDaddy 時間: 16-1-16 14:55

shadeslayer 發表於 16-1-16 09:50
This is over simplification. ...

You are over complicating.
If there is certain goal already set, then there are straighter and not so straight paths towards that goal, that's it.

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-16 14:55

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-16 14:56

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-16 15:45 標題: 引用：35分以下返屋企读

原帖由 happywu 於 16-01-16 發表
35分以下返屋企读

這是什麼意思?

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-16 19:15 標題: 引用：Quote:shadeslayer+發表於+16-1-16+09:50+T

原帖由 FattyDaddy 於 16-01-16 發表
You are over complicating.
If there is certain goal already set, then there are straighter and not s ...

I understand now, your goal to education is Jupas or Non-Jupas, which is certainly different from mine.

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-16 19:18 標題: 引用：35分以下返屋企读

原帖由 happywu 於 16-01-16 發表
35分以下返屋企读

全球平均係 30分左右喎。ESF和不少其他國際學校也是35分平均左右。咁佢地大部分要返屋企！

作者: FattyDaddy 時間: 16-1-16 19:44

shadeslayer 發表於 16-1-16 19:15
I understand now, your goal to education is Jupas or Non-Jupas, which is certainly different from mi ...

No, it has nothing to do with me or my goals, it has to do with someone's comment on IB students entering HK universities via non-JUPAS, and me saying that is a disadvantaged path, clear now? :)

作者: annie40 時間: 16-1-16 19:58

吳開心又或胡開心師奶是在搞「揀篤笑」，好盞鬼！

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-16 20:28

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 16-1-16 20:31 編輯

FattyDaddy 發表於 16-1-16 19:44
No, it has nothing to do with me or my goals, it has to do with someone's comment on IB students ent ...

Now you say it is a disadvantaged path. A disadvantaged path may be if somehow someone really want local Uni after IB. You were not saying disadvantaged path in the beginning. You were saying "spending a lot of money buying a disadvantage" which I responded to in the first place.
You can tell the difference, right?

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-16 21:11 標題: 引用：吳開心又或胡開心師奶是在搞「揀篤笑」，好

原帖由 annie40 於 16-01-16 發表
吳開心又或胡開心師奶是在搞「揀篤笑」，好盞鬼！

EK 越來越多有趣新會員

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-16 21:15

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: FattyDaddy 時間: 16-1-16 21:15

shadeslayer 發表於 16-1-16 20:28
Now you say it is a disadvantaged path. A disadvantaged path may be if somehow someone really want ...

Haha, if that interpretation makes you happier, be my guest :)

作者: HKTHK 時間: 16-1-16 23:45

回覆 happywu 的帖子

邊個屋企先? 我過嚟你嗰度冇所謂啊, 幫我問吓你老母先?

作者: HKTHK 時間: 16-1-16 23:50

回覆 happywu 的帖子

殘體字睇唔明, 請重作!

作者: HKTHK 時間: 16-1-16 23:53

回覆 happywu 的帖子

Has EK stooped to a new low? Where do we get all these morons?

作者: HKTHK 時間: 16-1-16 23:55

回覆 happywu 的帖子

happywu, you are now my new love! I will not give up until I hunt you down and give you a kiss!

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-17 00:44 標題: 引用：Quote:shadeslayer+發表於+16-1-16+20:28+N

原帖由 FattyDaddy 於 16-01-16 發表
Haha, if that interpretation makes you happier, be my guest :)

It is not interpretation and you know it.

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 09:02

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 09:10

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 09:17

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 09:30

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 10:37

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 10:42

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 10:47

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: 123kachi 時間: 16-1-17 11:19

在UCAS的website内有每間英國大學的IB Entry requirements 的資訊。35分以下雖然未必入到很top的大學,但肯定仍有很多選擇。
http://search.ucas.com

作者: DreamKid 時間: 16-1-17 14:25

happywu 發表於 16-1-16 21:15
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

我嘅意思係IB 35分以下冇乜好大学嘅啦，一吓返屋企帮手打理生意，或者是但出去 ...

翻話

作者: bebemuimui 時間: 16-1-17 15:06 標題: 回覆：DreamKid 的帖子

看這版水平墮落很無奈...

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 15:36

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: happywu 時間: 16-1-17 15:46

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: bebemuimui 時間: 16-1-17 16:01 標題: 引用：回覆+DreamKid+的帖子翻話即係英文咯，細

原帖由 happywu 於 16-01-17 發表
回覆 DreamKid 的帖子

翻話即係英文咯，細路返來城口英文，屋企80幾歲嘅老人家聽唔明話係屋企少講D翻話。

番？

作者: 964000 時間: 16-1-17 16:45 標題: 回覆：IB 出路

大家吾好咁燥，吾啱聽咪一笑置之

作者: DreamKid 時間: 16-1-17 18:32

bebemuimui 發表於 16-1-17 16:01
番？

系番話

翻話—都唔知佢講物

作者: linchiih 時間: 16-1-17 18:37

Thanks for the info sharing. I did learn a lot !

作者: annie40 時間: 16-1-17 21:00

數據是死，人是生的，如何學習硏究數據，作出合理分析，轉化成為合適孩子教育的導航指南針，是一門學問。

如果唔識睇，可以唔睇，亦沒有大損失。無謂把遐想當祕笈。

單看數據，以為執到寶！傳說：「武林至尊，寶刀屠龍，號令天下，莫敢不從！倚天不出，誰與爭鋒？」是高手高高手的高論也。

作者: mattsmum 時間: 16-1-17 21:12

34/36是可以入到king's college, imperial college, Edinburgh university.

作者: mattsmum 時間: 16-1-17 21:12

本帖最後由 mattsmum 於 16-1-17 21:49 編輯

哎呀，留言兩次添

作者: daisychan 時間: 16-1-17 23:25

本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-18 10:22 編輯

唉！又喺IB的爭論！
要分清楚是比較 Jupas 和 Non-jupas 入讀本地大學的優劣，還是 IB 課程對學生的影響。
作為之前有家長所講，我係「上咗岸」嘅過來人。我和女兒都認為 IB 課程對她的個人成長及升學學習幫助很大，畢生受用。
她還笑說，將來她也會讓她的孩子和她一樣，在初中前讀本地課程學好中文，到高中時便轉入 IS 讀 IB 課程。

作者: HKTHK 時間: 16-1-18 00:50

There is no point to have a serious discussion with someone who basically come in to have a fight!

作者: nintendo 時間: 16-1-18 01:15

annie40 發表於 16-1-17 21:00
數據是死，人是生的，如何學習硏究數據，作出合理分析，轉化成為合適孩子教育的導航指南針，是一門學問。

見到一個個對 IB 有咁大仇恨的人，其實真的覺得可悲。
生活在 "恨" 之中，每天就是找機會奚落他人，
一個走了，另一個再接力，睇佢 ( 地 ) 就辛苦。

作者: Cammycad 時間: 16-1-18 02:29 標題: 回覆：IB 出路

其實我都係真心求請教，無諗到會搞到咁

作者: Cammycad 時間: 16-1-18 02:31 標題: 引用：+本帖最後由+daisychan+於+16-1-17+23:35+

原帖由 daisychan 於 16-01-17 發表
本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-17 23:35 編輯

唉！又喺IB的爭論！

我都明白可經non jupas 考本地大學，但IB只係non jupas 之一，請問IB 在本港出路是否很窄？thx

作者: nintendo 時間: 16-1-18 02:33

Cammycad 發表於 16-1-18 02:29
其實我都係真心求請教，無諗到會搞到咁

其實 #2 已簡單答了你，不過有D人係要搞事。

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-18 08:43 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+daisychan+於+16-01-17+發表

原帖由 Cammycad 於 16-01-18 發表
我都明白可經non jupas 考本地大學，但IB只係non jupas 之一，請問IB 在本港出路是否很窄？thx

...

分數高就易入本地大學,只得约兩成是 non jupas (不是兩成俾IB), 易定難好清楚, 在港讀IB 最好有back up plan

作者: bonboncat712 時間: 16-1-18 10:27 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+daisychan+於+16-01-17+發表

原帖由 Cammycad 於 16-01-18 發表
我都明白可經non jupas 考本地大學，但IB只係non jupas 之一，請問IB 在本港出路是否很窄？thx

...

如果純粹考慮本地大學收生的比例，大學聯招的確有較多的名額，抱歉我沒有具體數字。不過近年本港學制同資助都有變動，將來真係唔知咩事。至於讀唔讀IB,我個人覺得真係好在乎自己點睇"教育",我都好想自己小朋友揾到好工，同有好出路，但我覺得係IS其中一個優勢係個人發展同成長。
以上純個人意見，敬請大家高抬貴手，不喜勿插🙏🏻

作者: easyparent 時間: 16-1-18 11:00

bonboncat712 發表於 16-1-18 10:27
如果純粹考慮本地大學收生的比例，大學聯招的確有較多的名額，抱歉我沒有具體數字。不過近年本港學制同資助 ...

同意，各紓己見。各家環境不同，心裏把尺也不一樣。自己意見接受與否，我抱平常心。反正如果明天全部香港風水大師說某一屋苑風水好，也沒可能全香港人住進去。如是，那地方環境也轉差了。各事也有利弊。

作者: nintendo 時間: 16-1-18 13:55

poonseelai 發表於 16-1-18 08:43
分數高就易入本地大學,只得约兩成是 non jupas (不是兩成俾IB), 易定難好清楚, 在港讀IB 最好有back up pla ...

"兩成" 是 non-local ，不是 non-jupas

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-18 19:26 標題: 引用：Quote:poonseelai+發表於+16-1-18+08:43+分

原帖由 nintendo 於 16-01-18 發表
"兩成" 是 non-local ，不是 non-jupas

我是指本地資助大学给本地学生的学位中, 约八成经 jupas 收生, 兩成経 non jupas 收生

作者: daisychan 時間: 16-1-19 13:35

本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-19 14:01 編輯

Cammycad 發表於 16-1-18 02:31
我都明白可經non jupas 考本地大學，但IB只係non jupas 之一，請問IB 在本港出路是否很窄？thx

...

你問 IB 在本港出路，在 #1 你問讀 IB 是否預咗出國，所以我估你是想知用 IB 成績入本地大學的機會。

這是簡單供求問題:-

若是想入讀本地大學 Non-jupas 考生的熱門科目，如 medicine, law, global business, quantiative finance 等等。由於有 quota，學位少，又多 Non-jupas 報。所以 IB 要好高分才入到，相對地，比用 DSE 成績難入。這"出路"便窄。

若是其他本地大學 Non-jupas 考生的非熱門科目，如 architecture, social work, nursing, science, engineering, BBA 等等，都有 quota，但學位多，較少 IB 學生報，quota 比較鬆動，要求 IB 的分數自然較低，這"出路"便不錯。

作者: dcnmxw 時間: 16-1-19 18:42

daisychan 發表於 16-1-19 13:35
你問 IB 在本港出路，在 #1 你問讀 IB 是否預咗出國，所以我估你是想知用 IB 成績入本地大學的機會。

這 ...

Thank you for sharing information.

作者: slamai 時間: 16-1-19 19:25

回覆 daisychan 的帖子

There are no quota for local non-JUPAS except HKU Medicine (25%).

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-19 19:28 標題: 引用：回覆+daisychan+的帖子 There+are+no+quot

原帖由 slamai 於 16-01-19 發表
回覆 daisychan 的帖子

There are no quota for local non-JUPAS except HKU Medicine (25%).

原則上無, 但實際上各院校自設限額

作者: Ocean419 時間: 16-1-19 22:48 標題: 引用：+本帖最後由+daisychan+於+16-1-19+14:01+

原帖由 daisychan 於 16-01-19 發表
本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-19 14:01 編輯

請問知道過去2年IB分數入熱門科的分數嗎？

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-20 01:04 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+slamai+於+16-01-19+發表回覆

原帖由 poonseelai 於 16-01-19 發表
原則上無, 但實際上各院校自設限額

That is not fair. They are HK locals following non Jupas curriculum. They should have the same rights to receive aided uni education as the HK local Jupas route.

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-20 06:53 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+poonseelai+於+16-01-19+發表

原帖由 shadeslayer 於 16-01-20 發表
That is not fair. They are HK locals following non Jupas curriculum. They should have the same righ ...

完全同意! 近年好多聲音話 non jupas 是入資助大學學位捷徑, 矛頭仲直指IB, 各大學可能会越收越少 non jupas, 隨著香港越來越多學校提供IB, 我相信機會只会更低。

作者: ANChan59 時間: 16-1-20 08:01

poonseelai 發表於 16-1-20 06:53
完全同意! 近年好多聲音話 non jupas 是入資助大學學位捷徑, 矛頭仲直指IB, 各大學可能会越收越少 non jupa ...

維持現在的DSE狀況，大學都有壓力收多些好的香港本土學生，NJ是必然的方向！

作者: 964000 時間: 16-1-20 09:32 標題: 引用：Quote:poonseelai+發表於+16-1-20+06:53+完

原帖由 ANChan59 於 16-01-20 發表
維持現在的DSE狀況，大學都有壓力收多些好的香港本土學生，NJ是必然的方向！ ...

Honestly, if your target is local u, DSE is still the better and more straight forward route. You never know what will happen at the end, the NJ quotas may shrink in the future due to political pressure.

作者: 964000 時間: 16-1-20 09:33 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+ANChan59+於+16-01-20+發表維

原帖由 964000 於 16-01-20 發表
Honestly, if your target is local u, DSE is still the better and more straight forward route. You ne ...

Maybe I should rephrase, " If your target is mainly local school..."

作者: HKTHK 時間: 16-1-20 10:54

回覆 964000 的帖子

I would not recommend IB if one is targeting local university unless you are a believer in the IB educational model

作者: NoahArk 時間: 16-1-20 12:20 標題: 回覆：HKTHK 的帖子

Stay in the mainstream and don't bother with IB unless you know what it is and really like it. Not everyone deserves IB (or, put it mildly, IB is not for everyone).

作者: slamai 時間: 16-1-20 13:19

本帖最後由 slamai 於 16-1-20 13:23 編輯

點評 @ 56#
daisychan 請問你有冇去過大學的 information days 聽過？發表於昨天 23:02

Too many to mention but I did not go to those in the last two years except for the HKU Medicine talk this year.

作者: slamai 時間: 16-1-20 13:41

poonseelai 發表於 16-1-19 19:28
原則上無, 但實際上各院校自設限額

I think using "quota" for local non-JUPAS is an overstatement. It should be a "trend" instead. More often than not, IB applicants come from more resourceful families and many of them target 三大或「神科」, leaving other choices for DSE applicants. The roughly 20% "quota" for local non-JUPAS "observed" is more likely an average figure which has mixed up 「神科」and other programmes. Such % "quota" of 「神科」has been observed to be higher than the average figure.

Despite the above, the key to picking choices in university applications is to look at the previous admission scores of these programmes viz-a-viz the applicant's predicted grade, amongst other considerations.

作者: HKTHK 時間: 16-1-20 14:16

回覆 NoahArk 的帖子

Some people's goal is to get into a specific subject at a specific university. Some people's goal is to get an education. Not sure there is a right or wrong but if one's desire is to get into medicine or law in HK, IB is certainly the tougher path

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-20 14:26 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+shadeslayer+於+16-01-20+發

原帖由 poonseelai 於 16-01-20 發表
完全同意! 近年好多聲音話 non jupas 是入資助大學學位捷徑, 矛頭仲直指IB, 各大學可能会越收越少 non jupa ...

Yes, these people have to pay for private education and not enjoying HK aided secondary education and in Uni they do not have the same right? They are the same tax paying citizens.

作者: NoahArk 時間: 16-1-20 14:48

Many people don't buy into local education no matter how much taxes they are paying. I for one am happily contributing to HKSAR's budget but choose to opt out when it comes to my kids' education.

作者: NoahArk 時間: 16-1-20 14:52

HKTHK 發表於 16-1-20 14:16
回覆 NoahArk 的帖子

Some people's goal is to get into a specific subject at a specific university. ...

Agree that it's probably easier to get into HKU/HKCU law/medicine (or global finance for that matter) with HKDSE results (not that everybody cares about HKU/HKCU though).

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-20 15:07

shadeslayer 發表於 16-1-20 14:26
Yes, these people have to pay for private education and not enjoying HK aided secondary education an ...

It is your choice to pay extra for education that you think is good. Even private school,the venue is using Public Resources. Can you point out how thier right being hindered?

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-20 15:13

Should extra size of land granted to IS comparing to local school be count unfair? I doubted that.

作者: annie40 時間: 16-1-20 19:46

每次講公平，就是太敏感了。總之大家養育孩子，他們最少要有本事交稅就是。

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-20 20:16 標題: 引用：Quote:shadeslayer+發表於+16-1-20+14:26+Y

原帖由 ABC-DAD 於 16-01-20 發表
It is your choice to pay extra for education that you think is good. Even private school,the venue i ...

I am saying for HK citizen paying HK tax, their children for some reason did not follow the DSE route, they should have the same right and opportunities to aided uni education in HK as the DSE route, if that is what they prefer.

Putting a ceiling on HK citizen intake from the Non Jupas route is damaging HK citizen's right and opportunity to aided uni education.  I think it is more than unfair, it is downright discrimination.

Government aided secondary education is available to all HK citizens, the eligibility does not contingent on the "kind" of primary education the children follow. Private secondary education is therefore by choice, that is ok. Tell me why would aided uni education for HK citizen should be contingent on having  DSE diploma, or a limit on how many non Jupas HK citizens the uni can take?

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-20 20:17 標題: 引用：Should+extra+size+of+land+granted+to+IS+

原帖由 ABC-DAD 於 16-01-20 發表
Should extra size of land granted to IS comparing to local school be count unfair? I doubted that.

Unrelated to what I was trying to say. See my last post.

作者: 卓遙 時間: 16-1-20 21:44

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-21 01:24 標題: 引用：回覆+shadeslayer+的帖子 "+I+am+saying+f

原帖由卓遙於 16-01-20 發表
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Official or unofficial limits on non Jupas intake which affected HK citizens are being placed. Eg HKU med school.

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-21 02:00

If it is all about Medical School,as a matter of fact, there are ceilings on both HKU n CUHK for medical students each year, are there?

作者: daisychan 時間: 16-1-21 14:32

本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-21 14:33 編輯

slamai 發表於 16-1-20 13:41
I think using "quota" for local non-JUPAS is an overstatement. It should be a "trend" instead. Mor ...

No, the term "quota" was used by those speakers for the「神科」on their Information Days.

作者: slamai 時間: 16-1-21 16:13

daisychan 發表於 16-1-21 14:32
No, the term "quota" was used by those speakers for the「神科」on their Information Days.

Could you list specific example(s) for reference?

作者: slamai 時間: 16-1-21 18:36

daisychan 發表於 16-1-21 14:32
No, the term "quota" was used by those speakers for the「神科」on their Information Days.

After further checking, it seems that these "quota" deviate from the general official stance of the local universities, e.g. the following link is relevant:

聯招(JUPAS)與非聯招(NON-JUPAS)比例是否有設定

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-21 18:44 標題: 引用：Quote:daisychan+發表於+16-1-21+14:32+No,

原帖由 slamai 於 16-01-21 發表
After further checking, it seems that these "quota" deviate from the general official stance of the ...

所以話原則上無但實際上有

作者: ANChan59 時間: 16-1-21 20:18 標題: 引用：Quote:原帖由+slamai+於+16-01-21+發表Afte

原帖由 poonseelai 於 16-01-21 發表
所以話原則上無但實際上有

都合理，又話教育經費不手軟，好難解釋本土課程被人比下去！

作者: poonseelai 時間: 16-1-21 21:09

slamai 發表於 16-1-21 18:36
After further checking, it seems that these "quota" deviate from the general official stance of the ...

The following paper retrieved from LegCo website should answer your questions. Specifically points 3 and 5 extracted below:

3. Student admission is within the autonomy of the UGC-fundedinstitutions. Following the principles of fairness and merit-basedselection, each institution administers its own admission policy andcriteria for different undergraduate programmes to assess applicationssubmitted through the JUPAS and non-JUPAS routes. The UGC-fundedinstitutions strive to identify the most-deserving among all local candidates, regardless of the type of academic qualification held. AsHong Kong permanent residents, both local students applying through theJUPAS and non-JUPAS routes deserve equal opportunities to beconsidered on the basis of fair competition for articulation toUGC-funded programmes.

5. Having regard to institutional autonomy in student admission,neither the Government nor the UGC would require institutions to specifya particular ratio of local students admitted through the JUPAS andnon-JUPAS routes. That said, we understand that individual institutionshave taken the initiative to lay down guidelines which set a ceiling foradmission of local students through the non-JUPAS route.

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr13-14/english/panels/ed/papers/ed0210cb4-362-3-e.pdf

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-21 21:13 標題: 引用：If+it+is+all+about+Medical+School,as+a+m

原帖由 ABC-DAD 於 16-01-21 發表
If it is all about Medical School,as a matter of fact, there are ceilings on both HKU n CUHK for m ...

By now you should understand, right?

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-22 00:46

本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 16-1-22 00:47 編輯

ABC-DAD I knew that before CUHK established the Medical School. 發表於昨天

Xxxxxx

Read carefully #85 citing the legco documents describing fairness and Jupas non Jupas intake of HK residents. It mentioned the issue of fairness and merit of candidates.

If you still don't see the potential issue of fairness, I have no chance of making you understand.

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-22 02:33

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Don't even close to understand your perception. I read and I read the whole clause .
You better elaborate what you really fight for, if you want people to understand you more.

Not on your side ,in the mean time, did or did not hurt anyone ?

I just don't follow. Does it annoying you that much?

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-22 02:58

After finished that particular paper, I wonder why only #3 n#5 was specified?

For discussion on 10 February 2014

Purpose
This paper briefs Members on student admission to University
Grants Committee (UGC)-funded undergraduate and research
postgraduate programmes.
Admission to UGC-funded undergraduate programmes

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-22 03:18

For reference LCQ16: Non-Joint University Programmes Admissions System (ENG)

立法會十六題：非大學聯合招生辦法
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
　　以下為２０１３年２月２０日（星期三）
香港時間１５時０３分）在立法會會議上葉建源議員的提問和教育局局長吳克儉的書面答覆

新聞公報　

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-22 03:28

To be honest, posting these won't provide any solution to prove anything.

What is next?

I don't have a clue what to do when it comes to us.

Be optimistic and thankful, we still got someone to love.

作者: ABC-DAD 時間: 16-1-22 03:52

"The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.

To this end the organization works with schools, governments and international organizations to develop challenging programmes of international education and rigorous assessment.

These programmes encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right."

All in All, you pick the right education path for your love one. That is cool.

作者: daisychan 時間: 16-1-22 10:43

本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-22 10:48 編輯

slamai 發表於 16-1-21 16:13
Could you list specific example(s) for reference?

當仲有 EAS 時,三大已經在每個 programme 為 EAS, HKAL(JUPAS) 和 NON-JUPAS 訂下 quota, 就是各佔三份之一。在三大的 EAS Information Days 都有公開說明。在熱門科目, EAS 和 NON-JUPAS 的quota多數用盡,留下三份之一給 HKAL，所以當時競爭激烈。

在 double cohort 那年，是 NON-JUPAS的豐收年，享盡三年制和四年制合共兩倍的學位。所以，聽講當時熱門科目收 NON-JUPAS 要求相對低咗。

現時取消了 EAS, 那給 NON-JUPAS 的三份之一 quota, 基本上是維持的。所以，之前才有中大醫學院為照顧 DSE 考生，高調宣佈把給 NON-JUPAS的quota降低至25%.

大家肯花時間去 Information Days 的 NON-JUPAS sessions聽聽問問，自然發覺 "有冇quota"這條問題，就算 speakers唔主動講，都大把家長和學生問，一般都答是 30~33%. 讀緊嘅大學生都知自己班內嘅 NON-JUPAS是大約這個數。

仲唔信或懷疑，自己去聽聽。答完！

作者: slamai 時間: 16-1-22 15:47

本帖最後由 slamai 於 16-1-22 16:11 編輯

daisychan 發表於 16-1-22 10:43
當仲有 EAS 時,三大已經在每個 programme 為 EAS, HKAL(JUPAS) 和 NON-JUPAS 訂下 quota, 就是各佔三份之 ...

I need to clarify the followings first:

"之前才有中大醫學院為照顧 DSE 考生，高調宣佈把給 NON-JUPAS的quota降低至25%" should be 港大醫學院 instead.

"在 double cohort 那年，是 NON-JUPAS的豐收年，享盡三年制和四年制合共兩倍的學位。" More non-JUPAS applicants were admitted that year, but not doubled.

As I have said before, 「神科」do have higher "quota" than average but the overall average figure of these "quota" for non-JUPAS is definitely lower than 1/3. A rough figure of 20% has been quoted by some institution but not stated as "quota". Except for「神科」and some other programmes offered by 三大, there are many "unused quota" under the less competitive programmes. This is the global picture and arguing whether there are real "quota" or not is not fruitful at all. Bear in mind that there is no straight forward and universal conversion between JUPAS and non-JUPAS qualifications to prove if there are really such "quota". Don't mention about UCAS tariff!

作者: 卓遙 時間: 16-1-22 16:51

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: daisychan 時間: 16-1-22 17:01

本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-22 17:47 編輯

回覆 slamai 的帖子

The term "quota" was used by the programme coordinators from different faculties of different universities on their Information Days. The figures they quoted for Non-JUPAS are 30~33%, definitely more than 20%. You may find the actual figures of Non-JUPAS slighty less than 30%, because some Non-JUPAS have quitted the programmes after the term starts. This year, LLB of CUHK intakes 21 Non-JUPAS out of the 70 places. At least one Non-JUPAS has already quitted.

BTW, I don't think universities are trying to compare JUPAS and Non-JUPAS qualifications in their selection process. They would likely compare the qualifications of all the Non-JUPAS applicants only and select the most qualified and suitable candidates within the pre-determined quota. Sometimes, depending on the applicants' qualifications of that year, they might intake less Non-JUPAS applicants.

I don't want to agrue but need to put the picture right, because many parents and students here want to know about the "quota" offered to Non-JUPAS applicants.

Please take my advice to go to the Information Days or write to the admission office and ask for the statistics. If you insist "自說自話", I can't help.

作者: shadeslayer 時間: 16-1-22 19:05 標題: 引用：+本帖最後由+daisychan+於+16-1-22+17:47+

原帖由 daisychan 於 16-01-22 發表
本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-22 17:47 編輯

回覆 slamai 的帖子

HK citizens should not fall under this Non Jupas quota. All HK citizens should have equal right to uni education in HK. The same way

作者: slamai 時間: 16-1-25 22:39

daisychan 發表於 16-1-22 17:01
回覆 slamai 的帖子

It seems that you have difficulties in understanding my previous posts and others' posts on the official stance of the universities and the Govt. I went to numerous information days held by upto 5 of the universities and attended talks of different programmes before. Except for EAS (long outdated now) mentioned in the talks of the double cohort year and the HKU Medicine one this year, no quota were specifically mentioned. The observed facts are that "quota" vary among universities and programmes
Your explanations are also self-contradictory. EITHER there are rigid quota for JUPAS and non-JUPAS routes so that the applicants are compared among themselves within each route OR the "quota" are not rigid and the applicants are compared across the two routes for selection of better ones with different qualifications. You tried to mix them up to support your case for pre-set quota! While the percentages of non-JUPAS applicants admitted each year are largely comparable (which is generally understandable like the percentages of IB DP candidates getting 7s in different subjects broadly follow a stable trend over the years), claiming that admission is governed by rigid quota is another thing.

歡迎光臨教育王國 (/)