有無小朋友憑宗教分考到好學校呀?

hinhinmummy

KiuKiu媽媽

介不介意講你邊區呀? 我無入會wor, 因為我真係不想係我個女未認識清楚之前而帶佢去洗禮.  況且本應我之前想入果間係天主教, 我本身係基督教, 而基督教又分好多堂派, 係我個堂洗左禮都未必一定有好的基督教學校收佢.

所以我真係在自行分配學位時, 揀左一間無宗教信仰的小學. 雖然我有old boys的10分, 但係我知道呢間小學亦有d15分的小朋友入到lor.  所以無需要太灰.

我絕對不會揀名校比個女, 我不係吃不到的葡萄是酸的, 而係我一直都不想比對仔女讀書甘大壓力.

我教小朋友的宗旨, 係要佢地開開心心, 讀得開心, 快快樂樂地成長, 我不需要佢做名人, 只需要佢地腳踏實地, 老老實實, 做人有教養就可以啦.

努力啦! 開開心心放完暑假先算啦!

KiuKiu媽媽

hinhinmummy,

多謝您的分析同意見, 我同您諗法一致"我教小朋友的宗旨, 係要佢地開開心心, 讀得開心, 快快樂樂地成長, 我不需要佢做名人, 只需要佢地腳踏實地, 老老實實, 做人有教養就可以啦"!!

我都唔會入會, 我覺得無必要, 我系官塘區, 其實官塘區都有好多好學校, 我的表兒娚都系官塘區讀書, 發展都好好, 所以我都系會用番這個區的校網, 不過見到這個教育制度的不知所謂, 真系要發下"牢騷"先得!!

Snake

請問觀塘區有邊間小學校她的 ?

Snake

KiuKiu媽媽

Snake,

您可以去這里睇下作參考
http://www.baby-kingdom.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=155415&forum=7&21

Jokey2828

我有一個奇想，讓大家笑笑﹕

政府

hinhinmummy

[quote]
Jokey2828 寫道:
我有一個奇想，讓大家笑笑﹕

政府

winwin323

Jokey2828 寫道:
我有一個奇想，讓大家笑笑﹕
.............而是各位家長為求五分，不惜每星期一家大細去教會、又捐奉獻..........
Jokey2828

我囡囡已經領洗, 但係我地都會一家大細返教會.

我囡囡主日學班內的小朋友, 大部份都係已經領洗, 返學只為聽下道理, 幾好架 .   

麟媽媽

剛才網上四圍游，本想找多點關於上了小一之後的資料，點知比我見到呢段article，裡面有一些數據亦可給大家參考。
講明文章唔係我寫的，啱唔啱聽都唔好追住我，我只是轉貼的。



同一宗教信仰的五分是否會令小一自行收生不公平？

教改分成七個重點：（一）課程改革（二）語文教育（三）支援學校（四）專業發展（五）收生機制（六）評核機制（七）增加專上教育機會。七個都是重點，但最掀動人心的是收生機制，小一、中一、中六、大學都影響百萬人的心神，影響的不單是學生本人，牽連的還有學生整個家庭和學校。幼稚園的老師關心自己的學生入到那一所小學，小學的老師又關心學生被派到那一所中學，中五的老師又牽掛那些不能留讀本校的學生飄泊何方，大學更是父母們十多年心血的焦點，而家長更是受和學生全程受影響，收生機制真要請政府謹慎處理之。

現暫行小一收生機制出現20分這Magic Number，極受家長歡迎的津貼小學都需要這分數才能在自行收生裡有抽籤的機會，在這計分制度下，大部份20分想當然是適齡兒童、首名子女加上宗教信仰，當然亦有如父母或兄姊為該小學的畢業生加上適齡兒童都會有20分，而不涉及宗教分，經驗告訴我們大部份有宗教背景的學校畢業生都沒有宗教信仰。

何解需要此新暫行收生計分辦法？因為家長心儀的小學數目實在太小，而舊有小一收生機制的校長十分，自行收生百分比約六成半，統一收生只約三成半只會令受歡迎的學校更有權力選擇學生，要將收生權從受歡迎的學校手裡取回，故此校長十分沒有了，收生數目百分比改變了。當然每一制度下都將有人受益，所以須要討論、辨證或試行，以符合大多數人的利益，事實亦沒有一種制度能令所有孩子入讀父母心儀的小學，就算取消所有評量方法，來個不計背景、不計資質、不計居住地址等等，適齡入學兒童幸運大抽獎也會有人質疑抽獎的方法是否公平，最終亦會有家長痛苦失望。身為公教徒，對於宗教或辦學團體的五分有一些愚見。

本港現有六百七十間由不同宗教團體興辦的學校為香港提供教育服務，佔全港中、小學近五成，包括基督教、道教、天主教、孔教、伊斯蘭教及佛教。

天主教歷代教會在世界各地不僅傳揚福音，更孜孜不倦從事文化、慈善、社會事務和教育的工作，宗旨只為謀求人類幸福，而傳揚福音起始是用口宣講，不是登岸後就趕著辦學校。自一八四八年開始，天主教男女修會陸續來港辦學，多年來不少香港社會棟樑，實幹的中層人員，不少都是由修會學校孕育成材的。今日天主教學校深受家長們信任，以至部份學校的學位數目供不應求，全是百多年來修會的神父、修士和修女們以忘我精神，以基督的博愛教育一代又一代的青年男女，在豐富他們知識的同時，也鞏固了他們品德修養。天主教學校就讀的中、小學生佔全港學生四分之一，辦學形式亦日趨多樣化，但據統計數字，2001年在全港天主教學校就讀的學生人數達277616人，而天主教徒學生數目只是19583人，約佔總人數7%，即使在極受歡迎的學校，天主教徒學生數目所佔的百分比亦大不了多少，事實有著大部份教徒未能就讀於心儀的公教學校而失望，神父亦無能為力，無法改變派位的現況，就該接受不能改變的現實。其實不是傳統名校的學校，教學的情況並不會如想像中的惡劣，只嘆傳統名校數目太小，但請記著好學校不一定是名校。

至於應否給予有洗禮的孩子五分，除了前段提及教會學校是神職、教職員花盡心血，長年累月努力的成果外，除了津貼學校是政府的資產，教會亦須支付一筆相當龐大的開辦費，小學約需450萬，中學950萬元。亦有些校舍本來就是教會自資興建，後由私立學校轉為津貼，也從沒有向政府收取租金，故此不應斤斤計較，個人亦不宜有太多執著。我相信絕大部份學校，無論名校與否都會對每個學生都同樣重視；對每個同學都同樣珍惜。

所接觸的天主教人員給予的印象是不介意宗教五分的得失，教區對天主教學校轉為直資的態度或可佐證，亦不要懷疑各辦學團體的善心和熱誠，大部份我們、包括我都是在各年代在眾多辦學團體的津貼學校就讀，只不過我們的不是傳統名校吧，當然人望高處，父母都希望安排自己認為最好的給子女是對的，但不成功入讀傳統名校亦不宜太執著，我們不出名的母校亦等待著我們行使十分(父母為該小學的畢業生)呢。

LEON

各位可否不要再拿宗教來作爭論和開玩笑，謝謝！

janet

麟媽媽:

pls check pm~~

toffeeli

麟媽媽,

Glad that you put up the article.

I myself is a Catholic. When I see all the arguments here, I feel all the pain in my heart. Many times I wanted to put up some of my view but I worry that my poor presentation would just trigger more misunderstanding.

I appreciate that everyone may hold different views but I do hope there is more understanding and some respect.

Thanks very much.


Regards,
toffeeli

KKParent

toffeeli 寫道:麟媽媽,
Glad that you put up the article.
I myself is a Catholic. When I see all the arguments here, I feel all the pain in my heart. Many times I wanted to put up some of my view but I worry that my poor presentation would just trigger more misunderstanding.
I appreciate that everyone may hold different views but I do hope there is more understanding and some respect.Thanks very much.
Regards,
toffeeli

Do not be so upset for this arguement of this sensitive topic in here. Who don't want their children can enter those famous school to receive high quality education, right.
We all come here just for express our feelings or give personal comment or opinion. Please don't be so serious that someone's word had hurt your feelings. God bless you!

toystory

KKParent,

Perhaps we have different definition of the famous religious schools. Can any BK parents can tell if there are any successful case to get a pass in the 1st round allocation by 15 (basic) marks only for those famous religious schools such as Diocesan Preparatory School or La Salle. Besides, even u can quote 1 or 2 exceptional lucky guys who can successfully enter the famous school and it does not change the fact that the children with the 5 bonus marks by religious background have greater chance than those without religions under the unfair counting system.  

Let me conclude our discussion,
1. First of all, u criticize others for getting the religious marks unfaithfully.
2. U defend most of my criticism against the宗教分 system
3. U tell me u also suffer from this unfair policy but u know the rule of the game
4. Eventually, u tell me u are also against this 宗教分!

I am confused with your stance and your points actually. I don't know u are equally a victim under the current system if u don't mention eventually!!! It seems u JUST want to be against me rather than the unfair system (because I have quoted your words of criticizing others before??). I'm sorry about that.

janet

麟媽媽:

pls 再check pm~~

KKParent

******************************
toystory 寫道:KKParent,
Besides, even u can quote 1 or 2 exceptional lucky guys who can successfully enter the famous school and it does not change the fact that the children with the 5 bonus marks by religious background have greater chance than those without religions under the unfair counting system.
******************************

I do not want to argue with you just focus on how many figure sucess or fail to enter those famous school as you mention. I think, we are all whose kids were rejected to enter the famous school due to the unfair policy about the Regilion Marks. At least, there are lots of children sucess enter the famous school in first round allocation because they have "OLD boys/girls" and  "elder sisters/brothers"  MARKS rather than "Regilion" Marks. If you want blame on this policy, please be fair to the those Policies about the allocation Marks not only focus on "Regilion" marks, right.

*****************************
Let me conclude our discussion,
1. First of all, u criticize others for getting the religious marks unfaithfully.
*****************************

I just give my personal comment/opinion. Please do not use "criticize' that so strength word. I am not that meaning, actually.

*****************************
2. U defend most of my criticism against the宗教分 system
*****************************

Once again, I am not defending your words. Just want to make sure you can understanding my meaning of my comment which showed before. That's it. You know, you really misunderstood my meaning of my comments.

****************************
3. U tell me u also suffer from this unfair policy but u know the rule of the game
****************************

I thought everyone knows the rule of the Game you mention above, right.

****************************
4. Eventually, u tell me u are also against this 宗教分!
****************************

Actually, you did not try to digest my words before. If you did, you would easy to find out I was also against this policy.

***************************
I am confused with your stance and your points actually. I don't know u are equally a victim under the current system if u don't mention eventually!!! It seems u JUST want to be against me rather than the unfair system (because I have quoted your words of criticizing others before??). I'm sorry about that.
****************************

You know why, it is because after you read that sentence just like put the fuel on the fire. And you think I am the one who's taken the advantage of "Regilion" policy.

All in all, you should "sorry for that" but not just "sorry about that".

toffeeli

KKparent,

Thanks.

*****

Dear parents,

I tried to read over and over from the very first mail on this topic before I put myself in this "sensitive" topic. In particular, I carry two identities - one as a Catholic and one as a parent.

While I'm reading again and again over the messages, I find that there are serious misunderstanding/misintrepretation over words used. While one side try to explain his/her stances, additional "side" elements stir up the discussions and it becomes more personal.

What I grasp is that there is, however, a common understanding (perhaps I should be careful and rephrase it as "most people consider") that the "system" is not  fair. I also don't think the system "as a whole" is fair.

I would, however, appeal to all that who want to continue with the discussion that it may worth reading the article put up by 麟媽媽 again.

Yet as a Catholic, I feel the pain when I find that some people baptist because of the 5 marks (I'm not commenting whether they are right or wrong as I know the Almighty will conclude one  day). But definitely I think they should "respect" (though they may not believe in) the religion by at least not mentioning it in open forum since others may be misleaded by them.

What I do hope most now is that those who baptist just because of the 5 marks and as such get into a good school should spend some time to understand the religion since they should have more time to spare  than those parents who are still busy looking for schools.

Please forgive me if my words (which I'm not too skillful in using words) would stir up the discussion or upset anyone.


Regards,
toffeeli

toffeeli

stcmcc,

Yes, I did put up my personal view. There is nothing I need to add or elaborate.

I hear what you say (I didn't notice any shouting or attacking) and my views are already placed in my previous message.

Anyhow, through discussions everyone will have some more understanding (though not necessarily concur with others).

Best wishes and Regards,
toffeeli

roader-A

首先我假設每位家長都希望其子女能進入心儀的名校.
其次我假設全港名校學位供不應求. 第三我假設每位家長都希望設計一套對其子女最有利的計分方式. 接著我想引用去年11月我貼的文:
[看報紙及本版留言, 有不少家長誤解小一派位方法, 連累子女未能入讀心儀學...誤解四: 自己不是校友, 以為取消宗教分會比較公平 . 實情: 有宗教分才可以增加他們的機會. 又喇沙為例, 有25分以上不需要抽籤. 20分才要抽, 因此就出現校友, 次子( 20分) 與 非校友, 大仔, 天主教(20分) 一同抽籤的情況, 結果是有幸有不幸. 但如沒有宗教分, 後者只有15分, 沒有機會抽籤…]

請各位合上眼睛, 心平氣和想一想. 宗教分其實是政府送給普羅百姓 (非名校畢業生) 的大禮呀. 各位為什麼要反對它呢? 假如宗教分取消了, 非名校畢業生的子女只有15分 (適齡 + 首名), 沒有資格抽籤. 名校畢業生的子女有20分 (適齡 + 校友), 圍威喂自己人抽籤 (全部都是校友子女). 宗教分取消了, 對誰有利?

有人說為了宗教分而信教是不道德, 我想再引用去年11月我貼的文:
[誤解三: 以為加入天主教很方便, 像加入影視會一樣, 可以即場申請, 即時接納, 即時受惠多5分宗教分. 實情: 起碼要一年. 所以現在有子女讀K2, 現在才開始考慮加入天主教的已經來不及了. (其他宗教的規定我不清楚)]
如果有父母肯預先用一年時間參加教會活動, 單是這份毅力, 恆心, 信念已令人肅然起敬. 當然你可以說父母這樣做是有目的, 就是為那5分. 但我反問: 難道各位做事都是漫無目的? 只看眼前, 不計劃未來?

我的結論: 假如取消宗教分, 最大得益者是名校畢業生的子女, 最大受害者是非名校畢業生的子女.

各位要求取消宗教分的網友, 都是名校畢業生嗎?
看過這麼多貼文反對宗教分, 令我想起無間道.
我去年11月貼文的題目是: 懵懂家長 禍及子女