- 在線時間
- 403 小時
- 最後登錄
- 19-7-15
- 國民生產力
- 35
- 附加生產力
- 2112
- 貢獻生產力
- 0
- 註冊時間
- 06-12-10
- 閱讀權限
- 10
- 帖子
- 1597
- 主題
- 23
- 精華
- 0
- 積分
- 3744
- UID
- 116224
 
|
本帖最後由 hogwarts 於 13-3-10 11:00 編輯
回復 koala_choco 的帖子
koala_choco
You have appointed out the very reason that I always admire SPCPS Ms. Chan for all these years.
My boy came from an NGO kinder with many games but not strong in academic training and he could only spell one to ten when going to P1. Then he was admitted by whatever I don't know std of Ms. Chan (I always guess that she likes students having good reasoning ability and enjoy communicating with adult). However, I learned more about her professional believes, when I had an opportunity to discuss with her about primary education when my boy was in P6. She talked about the brain development of children. She stressed that curriculum should be designed in a manner to work together with the body and brain development but not necessary with the latest needs or trends of the society.
You can understand that I especially thankful for Ms. Chan about applying this professional view on primary education, so that SPCPS does not necessary must admit children with reasonable basic knowledge of PTH or English. As these two elements might not be the most important elements of child development at that stage. May be due to that kind of difference between the two schools, my boy and a number of boys not from elite kinders still had opportunities being admitted by SPCPS.
In my son's 6 years in the school, Ms. Chan always and only promised that when boys graduated from her school, could communicate both in PTH & Eng with reasonable std. And she did deliver that to my boy.
Both schools are good, from my humble point of view, if both schools give offer, select the less traveling time option. Children need a lot of sleep.
|
|