要求全面取消小學派位世襲制及宗教計分制！ - 小一選校

Rank: 4


	783

161^#

發表於 11-12-2 23:49 |只看該作者

原帖由 ANChan59 於 11-12-2 22:48 發表

Me too, quicker than 50 years.....

50年快到,香港要準備把共產主義帶回大陸...

Ving

Rank: 5 Rank: 5


	3543

162^#

發表於 11-12-3 06:59 |只看該作者

如果糸你銀行自己的錢，一代傳一代，真冇問題。
但官津位是社會公共資源，一代傳一代又是否公平？？

potpot

Rank: 4


	528

163^#

發表於 11-12-3 09:48 |只看該作者

既得利益者是很難讚成改革的，不如退一步，可否提高首名入學子女分數。一來鼓勵生育，二來淡化世壟。

cykk

Rank: 5 Rank: 5


	1617

164^#

發表於 11-12-3 10:06 |只看該作者

改革當然好，問題係這些名校是否認同你們的改變？否則只會多了一些直資名校，甚至係私校！

charwes

Rank: 3 Rank: 3


	269

165^#

發表於 11-12-3 10:53 |只看該作者

同意, 夾硬要教會學校遵從家長的主觀意願可能真係會迫使僅餘的津貼名校走向直資/私立之路, 到時普羅大眾可以"爭"的名校更買少見少了...

原帖由 cykk 於 11-12-3 10:06 發表
改革當然好，問題係這些名校是否認同你們的改變？否則只會多了一些直資名校，甚至係私校！

ANChan59

珊瑚宮

Rank: 14


	113498

166^#

發表於 11-12-3 11:34 |只看該作者

原帖由 cykk 於 11-12-3 10:06 發表
改革當然好，問題係這些名校是否認同你們的改變？否則只會多了一些直資名校，甚至係私校！

一針見血......... 部份家長可能搞錯 - 莊閒/主次.......

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

To_Ma

Rank: 4


	707

167^#

發表於 11-12-3 11:40 |只看該作者

原帖由 karen55407 於 11-12-2 18:48 發表
好吖！好吖！最公正就係全港學生一齊抽，好運嘅就入到心儀學校，唔好運嘅就去到離島都唔准放棄學位，唔准叩門收生，咁就最公平了！

都幾好idea, 啲人嘅然嘈計分唔公平，不如齊齊大抽獎，齊齊搏一搏，條件係抽到邊間都冇得say no,夠公平！！！

4eyesDad

Rank: 5 Rank: 5


	2830

168^#

發表於 11-12-3 12:26 |只看該作者

原帖由 GoodGrief 於 11-12-2 20:18 發表
The prestigious schools will not be accused of being acted illegally or immorally as the “real”reason for their converting to DSS schools will never be made known to thepublic. Schools can state ve ...

I feel sorry for those elite DSS primary schools. What do they have to lose by revealing the truth of their "real" reason for converting into DSS? Do they think God doesn't know?

We do not like our children to be dishonest. We certainly do not want to have different standard on elite DSS primary schools.

I cannot see why these elite DSS primary schools could not become private schools, thereby valuable public resources could be diverted into better use in the fully publicly funded primary schools. As private schools, they will not be seen as party to a dubious admission scheme subsidized by public fund. DGJS and SSCPS are examples of reputable private primary schools.

In fact, it has been a major source of embarrassment for SPCCPS, a DSS school partially subsized by the government, to hold some large substantially unused funds for many years targetted for under-privileged children. The reason? The school unjustifiably reserves 70% of all Primary One places for hereditary and other connected children. To its credit, the school knows it has to do something differently. For the coming 2012-13 year, the school reserves some places (about 10%) for children from under-privilege background nominated by their kindergarten principals. I doubt the effectiveness of this nomination scheme but at least the school is seen to be trying. It certainly knows something has gone wrong. Why doesn't it abolish the 70% predominately hereditary places (or reduce the percentage)? Most commentators say it is a kowtow to the vested interests (the bureaucrats and alumni).

I understand civilized capitalist countries like the UK, USA, and Canada allot publicly funded primary school places based on geography. Hereditary factor does not exist for publicly funded primary school admission system. If someone called their admission system "communist" or "Marxist", it would not be taken seriously.

囝囝爸

Rank: 5 Rank: 5


	4418

169^#

發表於 11-12-3 14:14 |只看該作者

世襲乃封建惡習, 小數得益者延續利益, 大部份人得不到公平, 早應廢除.

Rickylama

Rank: 4


	885

170^#

發表於 11-12-3 21:49 |只看該作者

幼稚園收生

我覺得很多幼稚園收生也在計世襲分、宗教分，很無奈。

chinaX

Rank: 3 Rank: 3


	436

171^#

發表於 11-12-3 23:01 |只看該作者

這真是一個難題，大家正千方百計含辛如苦希望教好下一代之餘更要聲嘶力竭力陳現有教育制度之不是，壓力之大堪難想像。衆說紛紜，可行又人人稱是的方案有多少？
若佛教黃焯菴小學收的都是基督徒學生有點怪怪啊。
若所有新移民子女入全讀英文小學也可能有點吃力。
若要生育率有所增長，次名子女加5分，成效可會更大嗎？可能不用殺校了。
若一刀廢除世襲制，一些三代讀同區學校的家庭可以怎樣？他們一向以這地區學校精神為榮。多得廢除，入了別人喜愛的小學。

有家長的宏願是希望自己子女的學校，因為自己的子女而變成使人羨慕的學校。

[ 本帖最後由 chinaX 於 11-12-3 23:08 編輯 ]

4eyesDad

Rank: 5 Rank: 5


	2830

172^#

發表於 11-12-4 00:19 |只看該作者

Our civil servants and educationists are full-time professionals being paid to design a reasonable and fair publicly funded primary one admission system. They have let us down badly.

Outside HK, where on earth can you find another hereditary primary one admission system for publicly funded schools?

One of the comments here is clear: 世襲乃封建惡習, 小數得益者延續利益, 大部份人得不到公平, 早應廢除.

For the elite primary schools, why can't their alumini children face the same competition as the rest?

Carelesswhisper

Rank: 3 Rank: 3


	441

173^#

發表於 11-12-4 01:12 |只看該作者

沒有完美制度！無論如何更改，總是有人希望tailor made新方案令自己得益，爭論是沒完沒了！
無論是否可以順利因政府機制而入讀心儀官津，家長們還是努力裁培子女吧！入讀了心儀學校，配合學校教學理念和發展，家長要支援，孩子也要看自己造化！大家加油吧！

[ 本帖最後由 Carelesswhisper 於 11-12-4 01:14 編輯 ]

dadawyk

Rank: 3 Rank: 3


	361

174^#

發表於 11-12-5 09:44 |只看該作者

回復 8# Gogojuly 的帖子

認同!!! 宗教分不公平 ...

InitialD

Rank: 5 Rank: 5


	2413

175^#

發表於 11-12-5 10:26 |只看該作者

回復 7# 4eyesDad 的帖子

廢除 DSS,

[ 本帖最後由 InitialD 於 11-12-5 10:30 編輯 ]

ANChan59

珊瑚宮

Rank: 14


	113498

176^#

發表於 11-12-5 10:29 |只看該作者

I recommend parents to search in wiki - 香港教育發展史，小學派位機制.... you may find the development of the system. Lack of background, it's difficult to discuss.....

Our primary admission system is so complicated because the EDB listened too much of different stakeholders and come up something - compromised solution.

In primary school admission, except DSS and private, all should be assigned to nearby schools [Then, parents will say schools nearby are no good......]

Why so many parents question religious scores? If they are not believers why they want to send their children there; they should send them to no religious schools.

From the history, most schools in HK were founded by Missionary, they have the mission to provide education and share their religions to students. Historically, those schools are better than non- religious schools, then the Government brought them into the system........ Now, DSS brings back autonomy to those schools.

Also, most popular DSS schools can survive even without any subsidy from the government, the draw back is most families can't afford that.

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

KLN

Rank: 4


	744

177^#

發表於 11-12-5 14:19 |只看該作者

回覆 1# ANChan59 的文章

照計父 /母係康港讀過小學都有世襲分, 何來吾公平?

yinglongma

Rank: 4


	750

178^#

發表於 11-12-5 15:10 |只看該作者

很同意ANChan59所講, 看問題應了解埋其歷史背景. 教署現行制度, 好明顯考慮及平衡了各方利益而設立的. 有必收, 有計分, 有抽獎. 所謂的世襲是校友嗎? 大家所指向的學校, 如只有校友分, 即得20分, 其實都要同無數的20分抽籤的, 沒有可能世襲得到. 除非加上同宗教才有可能"入硬".

其實要"入硬"某些學校不難, 難在一定要入名校. 我認為這就是家長的不健康心態, 為什麼人人都要入名校呢? 其實已有一部份名校是直資/私校, 有本事的就考入去, 他們有學費減免制度, 基層學生一定可以獲全免. 只是中產家庭得不到減免, 但如家長真要子女入讀不可, 咪自己辛苦D, 賺多點錢給子女交學費.

夠竟是否因為那幾間名校, 就硬要改變整個選校制度呢? 一定要全人類大抽獎嗎? 真的實際嗎?

這兒的家長的意見都不一致, 又怎可妄想入學制度一致, 人人用同一個方法入學呢? 現行制度已有不同的方式考慮了不同人的利益, 要知道抽獎已佔整體學額五成, 計分只佔兩成, 還要"食"埋那兩成才可嗎?

另外大家對公平的看法也不一樣, 以派6000元為例, 有人認為足18歲的學生也派是不公平, 因他們未對社會作出貢獻, 也有新移民覺得只派三粒星不公平, 他們都很需要那6000元. 有人認為有錢人不需要6000元, 反而窮人需要. 那視乎從什麼角度看, 是需要? 是貢獻? 是三粒星的永久居民?

派學位也是, 學校的發展, 根本就是來自歷代的校友, 校友對學校有貢獻, 子女有分加(也不是入硬), 教會學校辦得好, 貢獻是來自教會, 教會靠教友去支持, 教友亦算有貢獻吧! 為什麼也要招來其他無關係的人不滿呢? 從需要的角度, 兄弟子妹是有需要讀同一學校(尤其小學)方便家長照顧; 有信仰的家長希望子女入讀有信仰的學校, 也是需要. 不理所有貢獻和需要, 一味的抽籤, 真的看不出公平在哪!

實際點, 就算將所有名校的位拿來抽籤, 也滿足不到要求名校的家長, 學位始終有限吧. 反而家長應調節只要求子女入讀名校的心態. 另外名校學生全由抽獎獲得, 學生參差情況可想而知, 相信大家即使夠幸運入到該校, 也沒什麼值得慶幸的, 學校過多幾年, 名校成績不能保持, 慢慢也做不了名校了.

4eyesDad

Rank: 5 Rank: 5


	2830

179^#

發表於 11-12-5 17:25 |只看該作者

Warren Buffett’s objection against hereditary arrangement is this: Do you select our Olympic team based on their parents’ previous participation?

When we educate our children in an obviously unequal and indefensible education system, do we expect them to treat others fairly when they grow up?

I like another comment here by Potpot:
我不是N冇人仕,但也支持改革, 原因:世龑阻礙人類進步，過時產物.
遠的例子:中國五仟年歷史中從世龑得位又稱得上是好皇帝又多少？
近的例子:新界原居民世龔特權,土地有限，特權無限,何時方休！
人可選擇沉黙,或跟自己說:跟着遊戲規則玩便是了,何來合理不合理? 不過要我選,我會選voice out的一羣. 因為深信連水点也不滴,怎可制造漣漪,再滙集成流乘風而去変成大浪！

TOKIN

Rank: 4


	802

180^#

發表於 11-12-7 11:53 |只看該作者

Just worry :
If all elite schools let lucky draw 100%, perhaps they will not to be elite schools anymore in the near future.

Thus, there is no difference among all the primary schools.

It's quite healthy to the kindergaten age children, because of no keen competition. No need to learn many things indeed.

But, for the schools, they don't have the choice to pick up their expected students. Their resources will be shared more to look after those behind students, and slow down the religious study progress, than before.
The final outcome is shown on all the students.