聖士提反推百萬「票據」 議員憂仿效加劇貴族化

elbar

【明報專訊】傳統私立名校聖士提反書院附屬小學（圖），2016學年將首推自願性定期票據計劃。家長以100萬元購買，換取子女入學提名權及只須一次面試，即有機會入讀。校方稱，每級將加開一班取錄33名學生，憑「票據」入學者不會多於一班。以該校逾八成學生升讀其直屬的直資中學聖士提反書院計算，日後小學部學生將佔去中學部67%學額。

外校生升該校中學機會減

今次票據計劃由聖士提反基金推出，票據為期12年，無利息和不可轉讓，持有人的一名子女於2016或2017學年報讀該校附屬小學一年級，可優先獲取錄，但需符合該校入學要求。若成功入讀，可於2028年8月31日獲發還票據面值；若該兩個學年無法入讀，扣除手續費後可獲全額退款。

校方指計劃本月中起接受申請至今已獲超額認購，將作抽籤。聖士提反書院附屬小學副校長王勝桐說，2016學年因應有新校舍，每級將加開1至4班，每班約33人，票據限額必定不會超過新增學位數目。該校過去直升直屬中學比率逾八成，其餘到海外或轉讀國際學校。

稱填儲備 校方不認向錢看

聖士提反基金定期票據計劃發言人黎先生解釋，該校明年將有共設12個課室的新教學樓落成，已耗費不少儲備，今次推出定期票據計劃，收取資金會用作校方填補財政儲備，該校中小學校園面積大，設施維修保養費用等開支高昂，加上捐款反應欠佳，經衡量後推行票據計劃，強調校方並非「向錢看」，又指校方有提供學費減免，多年來均未用盡款項。該校小學2014學年全期學費為7.25萬元，中學2015學年學費為5.65萬元。

教育界立法會議員葉建源說，票據名額已佔小學一班數目，將進一步減低其他學生入讀該校中學的機會，無疑令學校「貴族化」，並關注如今開先例後，本港其他有直資中學的私立附屬小學會否仿效。

elbar

優先入讀聖士提反小學　準備100萬本票！

傳統私立名校「聖士提反書院附屬小學」2016學年將首推自願性定期票據計劃，家長擲100萬元購買，可換取子女的小一入學提名權，只須1次面試，即有機會直入該校。
這是首次有本地私小推出優先入學票據計劃。雖然票據無利息，不可轉讓及無擔保，但票據持有人可獲優待，提名一名子女於2016或2017學年入讀一年級，前提下是要符合該校的入學要求及水平。
票據持有人所提名的子女若未能於2016至2017學年入讀該校，可獲全數退還款項；若成功入讀，金額將於2028年8月31日，即是12年後原銀奉還予票據持有人。但校方稱推出兩周，已接獲超額認購請求，而由於名額有限，或要抽籤。
聖士提反書院附屬小學創辦於1938年，為歷史悠久的私立名牌小學，並且人才輩出，如港鐵主席錢果豐等。該校其中一賣點是供學生寄宿，每名學生在6年間要在校寄宿一年，因此深受家長熱捧，每年平均1,700人報讀，只取錄約100名學生。

視為入學條件 做法趨普遍
國際及私立學校發行債券或票據，讓家長認購作入學條件或優先入學條件，做法愈趨普遍，其中啟歷學校提供的債券最高達1,000萬元。
《經濟日報》瀏覽部分國際學校和私立學校的網頁，發現哈羅香港國際學校、滬江維多利亞學校、啟歷學校、Nord Anglia International School Hong Kong、德瑞國際學校和弘立書院，均提供不同種類債券、票據或資本證明書，部分學校列明購買債券為入學條件。
其中啟歷學校提供的債券或資本證明書種類最多，其中基礎債券索價1,000萬元。位於藍田的Nord Anglia International School Hong Kong亦發行兩款債券，Platinum Corporate Debenture Package（白金公司債券套餐）價值500萬元。弘立書院則有650萬元的本金券。(見表)

教育界憂壟斷資源
名牌私立小學新推出的定期票據計劃，引來教育界回響。立法會議員葉建源表示，私校推出債券、票據計劃，必然是有經濟能力的家長才能負擔，但長遠會造成教育階層的貧富懸殊。有私小校長則擔心，計劃設入學優待，在取錄學生的程序上，恐出現不公平現象。

CACACAROL

nintendo

國際及私立學校發行債券或票據，讓家長認購作入學條件或優先入學條件，做法愈趨普遍，其中啟歷學校提供的債券最高達1,000萬元。

But the school in the discussion is a "local school". That is definitely not 普遍。

shadeslayer

原帖由 nintendo 於 15-05-28 發表
But the school in the discussion is a "local school". That is definitely not 普遍。

Victoria is a local school.

Other private schools like CKY will probably follow suit if they do not already have something similar.

But private schools, what can you say?

caa

nintendo 發表於 15-5-28 12:33
But the school in the discussion is a "local school". That is definitely not 普遍。

Victoria and ISF are both private schools (but not international schools) that take IB. St Stephens takes DSE and is the first "local" school in HK issuing this kind of capital notes.

nintendo

caa 發表於 15-5-28 13:59
Victoria and ISF are both private schools (but not international schools) that take IB. St Stephens  ...

These schools are doing non local curriculum and demography of the school community is definitely not similar to a typical "local school". I do not think they should be considered a "local school" in any way.
My kids are in ESF. I believe parents that chose non-local curriculum have their own reasons. They are willing to pay more also with their own reasons and justification.

Not saying international schools should be very different. But not sure how to justify paying that premium, but going to a school following local curriculum.

Anyway, $1M is nothing to a lot families. I am sure many parents are willing to pay that amount.

shadeslayer

原帖由 nintendo 於 15-05-28 發表
本帖最後由 nintendo 於 15-5-28 16:15 編輯

It is not about justification, it is supply and demand. What I would like to know is that if the school compromise student intake to much for money.  It seems to be the case.

If a school has been doing this for a long time, debenture or capital notes are not going to change quality of education.

If a school is like ESF where they are non selective in admission, then introducing nomination rights is in theory not affecting quality of student intake.

If a school has been selective in admission but suddenly because of the need to raise capital, they compromise their student intake too much, then alumni, current students/parents and the like would want to know more I suppose.

Cheeselover

Let's see the attitude of Education Department toward the impact of private school on public education system, despite I don't have much expectation. The department should require any local schools (80% above students with HKID) to share 50% seats to "ordinary" people with free like other public school. Noble school would be disappeared.

shadeslayer

Cheeselover 發表於 15-5-30 07:30
Let's see the attitude of Education Department toward the impact of private school on public educati ...

How can anyone expect a private school give half of their seats for free and ask the other half of the students to pay double tuition?  Fair?
Are you talking about school voucher?


Should noble schools be eliminated is the wrong question to ask. We should be asking if a school is providing quality education to students, Noble schools or not.

HKTHK

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

shadeslayer, Victoria, CKY, ISF are all private independent schools. St Stephens is a private school

shadeslayer

原帖由 HKTHK 於 15-05-30 發表
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

shadeslayer, Victoria, CKY, ISF are all private independent schools. St Ste ...

Oh, I did not know there is a difference. Is a private school more controlled by the government. But by its very name, it has to be responsible for their own profit and loss.

HKTHK

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

An overview of school types
https://www.ab.ust.hk/hro/PubDoc/new_staff_guide/resources/school_types_in_hk.pdf

shadeslayer

原帖由 HKTHK 於 15-05-30 發表
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

shadeslayer, Victoria, CKY, ISF are all private independent schools. St Ste ...

Thanks for the reference. I assume SS is a private local school. Apart from the one off land grant and construction grant which are one-off in nature, the on going operation of the school does not seem to be different as the private local schools should not have a problem admitting 70% of HK students.

It does not change the "private" nature of the school and CheeseLovers suggestion of half of the places of a private school are offered free to the public is still problematic. Who is going to pay for them?  The other half of the students paying double tuition.  The labeling effect will be horrifying.

Cheeselover

原帖由 shadeslayer 於 15-05-30 發表
本帖最後由 shadeslayer 於 15-5-30 13:04 編輯

I am thinking the fairness of all students sitting for DSE. It's a fact those rich families have more resource to the children. There is a tendency that more traditional band 1 school changes to private or noble school; it exploits the chance of poor getting better education indeed. The Education Department should carry out some measures to stop the situation, otherwise children of rich are always at high ground, more children are desperate to get higher class and more poor are dispirited. I just don't want to see the unfairness, why we give a strong concept of different classes in the society to children at early age?

shadeslayer

Cheeselover 發表於 15-6-2 06:30
I am thinking the fairness of all students sitting for DSE. It's a fact those rich families have mor ...

What is fair?  What if the public school style is not suitable for some children.  No private schools?  People who save up money for their children's education have no choice other than the public schools.  Is that fair?  According to your standard of fairness or my standard of fairness.
I was responding to your comment on private schools giving half of the seats to the public and let the other half of the students to pay double tuition. Is that your idea of fairness?

Now you talk about traditional public schools turning into DSS and private which is a different matter.

If we don't want to wait for long queues in the hospitals, we can go to private clinics or private hospital. Is the availability of choices a good thing or a bad thing?  Is it fair?

If we want to spend more money on private housing, we can buy a more expensive flat. Is the availability of choices a good thing or a bad thing?  Is it fair?

If parents are not satisfied with public education, they can enroll their children to private schools.  Is the availability of choices a good thing or a bad things?  Is it fair?

Cheeselover

Wealthy family could have more resources indeed. What if more and more schools privatise? There are not many choices for the poor. Provided we have sufficient enough resource, why don't we be generous to the poor.

Cheeselover

Wealthy family could have more resources indeed. What if more and more schools privatise? There are not many choices for the poor. Provided we have sufficient enough resource, why don't we be generous to the poor.

shadeslayer

Cheeselover 發表於 15-6-2 18:40
Wealthy family could have more resources indeed. What if more and more schools privatise? There are  ...

If more and more schools are privatized and still makes enough money to survive, it means the society "needs" that many private schools and the demand is here. As long as there is enough public schools for those who either cannot afford to pay or those who choose not to pay, it is fine right?  Education diversity and choices cannot be a bad thing, right?