有無小朋友憑宗教分考到好學校呀?

judy

差點讓此題目誤導(有無小朋友憑宗教分考到好學校呀?)而錯過了內容。

辯論之題目應是:"[宗教分]公平嗎?"

我認為這不是好題目，因為"公平"一詞太難定義。就算全部六合彩抽獎，抽不到獎的也可大叫不公平:"不公平，對我這些没有抽獎命的不公平"。而且，一個社會，均貧容易，却無可能均富，要求"公平"之結果是社會落後。

换一下題目:"[宗教分]合理嗎?"就容易得多，畢竟，人是講理的：

1.[宗教]學校出錢出力，他們辨的學校平均質素優於官校，成本是官校之2/3。他們要求少許特權，並不過份。
2.[宗教]學校的辯學宗旨開宗明義，除了傳授知識外，還要傳播上主之愛。[宗教分]就是要利誘家長到聖堂聽道，入教。而入教也不是一件容易的事，天主教好像给准信衆一個時期静思，想清楚了オ可入教。
3.其實，只有名校，才有人在乎有沒有[宗教分]。我想，其他辦學團體其實也可争取他們的[xx分]，只是市埸不大，或太難定義之故而己。
4.在社會上，其實存在着很多[xx分]。toystory提到的醫療問題，一早存在，例如，醫管局員工家屬看醫生，公務員等等，一早就有[xx分]。不公平嗎？不合理嗎？你給了他們[xx分]，系統反而順。是為了行政和防貪。
5.小學[xx分]，是供求之關係，真資私校也是，只有出名的，[xx分]才有人理會。

ykwong

stccmc:

Except point 4, there is a little divergence, You got what I mean. It may be a confuse when talking fair and self-interest or it is inappropriate. But "追求公平好像是沒有好結果", this sentence, in your case, is what I mean. In general, I didn't mean that.

Fighting for what you think is correct, this had been discussed deeply in your past passage. Basically I appreciate your attitude and don't want to comment in this anymore.

Response to point 1:

you should shout to the policy maker, or the one who has the abilities to change.

2

If not a purely lucky draw, what you think it will be? Or simply ask you, what is your expectation? A fair expectation that others will also think it is fair.

3 & 4

Ah.. I think you were really sleepy, a little bit far from the topic.

ykwong

Judy:

Your thinking path is much more better than me. Reasonable and why the xx marks exist, good analysis.

你給了他們[xx分]，系統反而順。是為了行政和防貪。

Why people need to line up (queue)? Usually, it is because the price is wrongly fixed. People willing to pay more (time used in the queue, in economic terms, the opportunity cost). And lot of resources are wasted (total workforce in the line, while majority of them will not get the product finally)

How to minimise the size of the queue is what is called reasonable step, then we will fall into the same question again. If the reasonable step(s) fair?

說因果:

Why the school becomes popular? Because their products showed sucessfully. Is that only the school's work? or part of it only? If so, where is the other part(s)?

My answers are family, growing environmet, background, social connection, personal attitude.....

So there must be something identical to those successful candidates, what is that? is that only trained by the school? Can the school train up its students in the same way that all of them have different background or backup.

Many think that if their kid goes into A school, he should have higher chance to be some famous person: Anson from Scare Heart; Martin Lee from Wah Yan.. xx from yy..... Elite school provides higher gurantee rate to be successful, 80% of medi students came from QC WY KC St.xx.....

Let's say the above assumption is correct and still valid nowadays (that I don't believe actually).

Why most of the medi students came from these college, because they achieved high academic result.
but how they entered into these college, because they are at least band 1 students. How they became band 1, because they entered into some elite PS. But how they entered into these PS.

Because of the lucky draw!!! is it true? when we started the lucky draw, any evidence showed the lucky draw had no influence to the standard of their students. Why so many elite schools want to change into DSS and make their own through train?

My conculsion is, if there is no selection criteria, elite school will no more be elite school. They know it more than us (parents). They foresee it before we do!

If you really want to enter into these school, make yourself part of them and not make them part of you. You should be fair enough to these school, not only fair enough to you only.

judy

stccmc,

(1) 接受政府每年以千萬計的資助小學, 要求小一入學規則中優待教友是否合理?

换一换問法，你或有另一答案。

除了建新校舍時捐出千萬外，教會還幫政府管理學校，令政府每年之千萬教育經費用得其所，實際上，教會學校被証明其質素優於官校，又善用資源。現在，他們為了更好地推行基督教育，要求在小一入學規則中優待教友，利誘更多人信教，你認為這優待合理嗎？

(2) 保良局津校要求入學規則中優待捐助額到一個特定水平的人是否合理?

這問題較中性持平，但我問，如果它是特資，你是否認為合理呢？他們受到之資助額一樣啊！在特資或私立學校，"捐助額"=一部分學費，家長讀不讀視為此校之質素。明碼實價，公平得很(不會像一些學校問你捐不捐，但在通告上却只有1,3,5萬三種數目之選择)。

一轉津校，你就會發現問題多多。是嗎？

ykwong

stccmc:

You don't need to learn from me! I said if you can response immediately, that would be your real opinion. If you need time to think, you may just want to debate. I need to think only because I don't think about it before or I don't have any concept being developed yet!

ykwong

Judy and stccmc:

You two always use question to answer question. Inspire thinking?

toystory

Judy,

“合理” 的標準，比”公平” 更容易界定嗎？就如：兩鐵三巴經常所指的合理利潤，在市民來看，卻是暴利。他們都講理(為股東/自已謀最大利潤)，只是利益立場不同。

1.[宗教]學校出錢出力，他們辨的學校平均質素優於官校，成本是官校之2/3。他們要求少許特權，並不過份。

首先，他們辨學比官校好，這可能只是50步笑100步，(只因大窩飯太差) ，但最重要的，還是stccmc這個核心問題：因為教會/校友貢獻良多, 不能過橋抽板；或是平均質素優勝，因此要求少許特權，並不過份。但是，在非教友來看，這是剝削他們的利益，所以還是不合理，這便是利益立場不同。

3.其他辦學團體其實也可争取他們的[xx分]

這跟[宗教分] 性質一樣，所以反對立場也是一樣。

4.在社會上，其實存在着很多[xx分]。toystory提到的醫療問題，一早存在，例如，醫管局員工家屬看醫生，公務員等等，一早就有[xx分]。...系統反而順。是為了行政和防貪。

4.你說的例子，我卻有這樣看法：醫管局員工，公務員是政府的僱員，他們家屬看醫生，是他們的醫療福利(有別於[xx分])，跟私人公司的(醫療福利)是一樣。其實，政府大可給他的員工買醫療保險，給他們claim醫療費，只是政府選擇用自已的(醫療)資源來包底。這跟東華醫院給予東華團體成員(不是僱員啊)優先特權，有些不同。

保良局津校要求入學規則中優待捐助額到一個特定水平的人是否合理?....如果它是特資，你是否認為合理呢？

如果它是特資或私立學校，便合理(而且公平得很)。因為他們有著經費不足而倒閉的風險，因此他們可享有不同形式的特權；但我們談的是津校(只是毫無風險的大窩飯) ，也要求這要求那(特權)，便不合理。

P.S. 津校還是趕快轉直資吧。

KKParent

KKParent 寫道:
Dear all parents here in BK [especially YOU]:

Up until June 15, 2004 I had been a member of Baby-kingdom for the previous few months. Before that, I was a visiter for over One year. I seem to recall that we have a freedom to give our own comment and opinion in any discussion topic in baby-kingdom.  Most of members in baby-kingdom gave their expression to themselves. Of course, in chinese slang, a kind of rice can feed 100 difference kinds of people. Accordingly, we have difference status; situation; comment; opinion; aim; goal; and etc in the same topic. Sometimes, we could share our experience/feeling to each others. Sometimes we post it in the opposite direction. Stand or Against?! Who cares?! Because we all know the regulations in baby-kingdom. Let us here in harmony.

I was well aware of the giving out those against/in the opposite direction judges to the poster who have difference opinion will harm their feelings. As a matter of fact, I am coming in peace and also want to share my feeling. If you thought my words are harming your feelings, I am sorry about that. If you thought my words are ridiculous, please let me know. But, PLEASE DO NOT BECOME PERSONAL. Welcome all comments even criticism with good intentions.

More than once, I received someone's comment, who has an assured manner and arrogant. Nevermind, as I said above, 'A kind of rice can feed 100 difference kinds of people'. I try to make no response and find my peace place. Unfortunately, there was no escape from the fire line. Apparently, I knew I am not the only one who was attacked by that person. I am asking me, why me. Maybe my words lacerable to that person. Maybe I did not have empathy. Maybe my words misleading. After reading those pages that I was suddenly realize that person was quick to take offense.

It is hard to believe that someone is still talking that black is white this way in year 2004. Have you people (or your friends) ever heard of the concept of "How to be a mirror of your kids". Just in case your kids are righteous and ask you why to do such stuff for them. What is your answer? Will you tell them the truth? Or, will you tell another lies? Don't you know that they will shame on you because you did wrong. I knew there are lots of exception cases. That's why in our places still have bad.

After all, I do not want to discuss/express/share in this topic anymore.  If YOU are keen on fight back, that's upto you because you have your right/freedom here.

In closing, would you please put yourself into others' shoes.

With Blessing!

kkparent

up

toystory

Judy,
[quote]一個社會，均貧容易，

ykwong

Still don't have idea in your question #2, maybe I really not interest in it!

"How to draw the line?"

Wherever you draw the line, there must be people within the boundary while some outside. The point should not be where to draw, it should be whether it need to draw or not.

"但是免費優質教育是所有小朋友都需要的, 無得揀(除非有錢及叻)。"

Don't make it personal, you think it is, in fact, it may not. You have a daughter going to school, and you want her study in a high quality school (you think). And you are a responsible mum, you think free and high quality education should be provided to every kids. That is what you think. Not all think like that.

Free:

Some parents may only want their kids study nearby to save money and time. They may not know what is high quality. More they think may only be free! The govn't provide a minimum standard of education so that everyone is gurantee to have 9-years free edu.
That is its original starting point, not the one you think.

Quality:

Some bodies, want to provide high quality education (with their own objective, maybe let you knowing god), unfortunately it need to pay more (money, of private school, baptist, for religon school, no extra payment; for some subsidy school)

Very messy, All I want to tell is different people has different needs. We have to decide how much we want (can) to pay to get certain standard of product.

The point is, the school that you think is high quality. It is your concept of high quality! (of course many think same as you) They may not be the govn't thought. In fact they are really not, see how the govn't want to re-control the school in the recent bill.

You don't care housing, medical.. but you care education! Why? because you are rich enough that such minimum services do not satisfy you, you want to pay more to obtain better services. Or you are not qualify to have such services (too rich).

Unfortunately, money cannot help in education (the one you want). You cannot pay more to obtain it, you have to pay more in other aspect that against your will (don't want to believe in god, for e.g.). So you ask for fair. Fair in your own advantage side. See, people are self-interest, and you fight for your own interest but could not bear the constraint.

名校位非常有限, 而且免費, 反之醫管局員工家屬看醫生後沒影響其他市民看醫生的權利, 完全不可比較

Of course it is wrong, there are certain amount of people to be consulted. Let's say 50 for one doctor in one session. 15 (or 10) for the elder, 15 (or 10) for civil servant. How much it left?

Sounds pinpoint to you, actually not in my mind. Only discussion.

ykwong

Suddenly, I've got some idea, ..也很難反對保良局津小, 東華津小, 甚致官立小學有特權分。 因為性質很相似..


First of all, I agree that if church gets privilege, those similar charity bodies should also have.

Why they don't ask for privilege, they are similar to church? But they have different approach in fact.

I have to assume that church's objective is to let more people knowing God. But what is the objective to those charity bodies? PLK, TWGHs and Fresh Fish Market Merchant. They want to provide education to the poor before there we have 9 years free education.

If there is something they want, it must be free education that we have it been since 197x! So what next? they don't need to care about expenditure, so more concentrate in quality. You may find that most PLK's school have comparative higher standard. Being high standard is her objective nowadays (I guess). What next? they want to select their own pupils. (See the topic at the top of this forum).

Back to the church, their objective is still valid, therefor they still ask for privilege.

ykwong

stccmc:

Forget to tell, I don't agree to the policy, in fact I disagree to all these marking system except direct entry due to elder sister/brother still studying in the school.

I saw you so angry to this 5 marks then tell some personal opinions, and not fight for the church.

My ideal method is to let the school has its own authority to select students, by written test; interview; lucky draw; queue in first come, first serve... whatever they like, even though written test to parents. And parents could apply as many as they want subject to their will and acceptance to the school policies, either educational approaches or style of selection. Some may want to sleep in the street for three nights so that no more effort is needed.

ykwong

買了手寫板，正好試用：

不對，最好的醫療骨服務，都在政府醫院，妳未曾想到祗不過是妳幸好尚未有嚴重疾病。養和的醫生大都是從２間教學醫院服務了十多年後，走出來找真銀的。 Too slow

On the other hand, this is not the case that Tuen Mun Hosipital is same as Prince Wales or Mary. Even though QE, these three are the most welcome hosipital if you got serious illness. if you got bone disease, you may want to go to Eastern Hosipital. A very famous  骨科 doctor station in that.

Flu, cool of course you will choose private doctor, but cancer, even though you are very rich, if you are famous enough, you will still choose the govn't hosipital.

The case is also not fair, if you got cancer, you are a middle class, you may afford the expensive cost in private hosipital (but quite difficult). And the best doctors and equipments are station in govn't hosipital. you are not well known enough those will send the best doctor in treating you.

At that time, you will also complaint about fair. Why  任關佩英,范徐麗泰,羅文, they all got the most famous doctor to be treated, and if you go to such hosipital, they may only send you a 專科實習 doctor.

Even though they don't allow you in Queen Mary or Wales, they destinate you to 那打素!

hinhinmummy

ykwong

我好多日無入黎呢度, 所以不知你們講緊d mug, 但係見到你話"不對，最好的醫療骨服務，都在政府醫院，妳未曾想到祗不過是妳幸好尚未有嚴重疾病。養和的醫生大都是從２間教學醫院服務了十多年後，走出來找真銀的"

yes, 最好的醫療設施係公立醫院, 但係你不好忘記, 樣樣都要排期, 分分鐘排到由小病到大病到未排到你.

好似我個仔甘, 最近去大口環做左個assessment, 話要盡快做磁力共震, 超聲波....好多好多化驗, 分別去不同的醫院, 有qe, qm, 葛量洪.  排期不知要排幾耐, 還話要盡快去做?

但最嬲佢的醫生, 我個仔有幾倨特徵就判左佢係某一個病, 但我自己比錢去私家醫生度再看過, 話佢只係有傾向, 而不是政府的醫生講得甘嚴重!

可能我真係好好彩, 遇著一個依書直說的醫生, 拿住張form, 係甘tick, 係甘tick, tick左幾多點, 就係架啦! 我再同佢講mug野, 佢已經聽不到, 我只係替坐係後邊, 一排排跟住佢做實習的醫生仔可憐! 替我們政府可憐, 替我們納稅人可憐, 點解我們交左甘多稅, 到頭來, 有時, 政府卻幫不到我? 要我自己再比錢出去看病? 如果我無錢, 負擔不到幾萬元, 甚至10幾萬的醫藥費, 甘軒軒係不係要坐係到等到排到期, 到時治療的機會/進度又會拖慢?

好似離晒題, 但我真係好想發洩內心的不滿!

還有, 我老公係公務員, 我都不會用公務員的身份去排期等運到!

judy

stccmc,toystory,

幾年前到米埔参觀，見到大樹上站滿黑壓壓的路鳥，地下是白茫茫的一片屎。領隊向我們介紹，這種鳥有階級之分，鳥大王站在最高，站在最低的是"平民百姓"。聽後，不禁莞爾：這和香港何其相似，阿董在上面呵，下面之"平民百姓"一身都係。

然後我想，同一種鳥，大小毛色幾乎一模一樣，為甚麽會有階級之分呢？太不公平了。轉思一想，不對：1.其他鳥可飛到第二株樹做鳥大王去，為甚麽不去呢？2.一棵大樹，最高處只可站一隻，其他就只好在下面了，可見，那鳥大王之位是通過競爭所得。同一片天空，同一太陽下，鳥大王通過竟爭而得到王位，自可仰首挺胸，威風八面了。同一道理，直資校，無論他用甚麽方法派位，無論他也一樣受政府同等之資助，因為他必須面對市場競爭，所以無人質疑其公平性。

這可見一個問題，當問題涉及市場，問題很易解决。而涉及分配時，就很多爭論，而試問，在世間，那里有公平之分配。說到”公平”，有人說，世界上最公平的動物是蟻，除了蟻后外，蟻蟻都得到绝對公平之對待。資本主義比較少涉及分配，而社會主義，共產主義却是一種着重分配的制度，我想，他們一定没有xx分吧，因為人人平得，但事實又怎樣。

三歲之小孩，也會高呼公平一詞，但”合理”一詞，很多人一生之中鲜有提及。政府花很多資金照顧傷健人士，對正常人來說，公平嗎？你可說不公平。我却說這合乎義理。運動員，為甚麽要分男女，對男性不是不公平嗎？女子之世界冠年，在男性中可能排名在幾千之後。但我說，這合理和合乎需要。小學學位分配，男女同龍，公平嗎，以两性來說，公平，但合理嗎(大都分研究顯示女性較早熟)？對香港有益嗎？我強烈保留。

我說”因為教會辦學出色, 對教育貢獻良多, 所以有特權(宗教分)亦屬合理”。是為”教會學校，用公幣…”提出反面之思考而己。實情是，政府未辦學之前，教會以為香港服務了(辦學)。教會辦學之目的，一為辦學，ニ為傳教，政府邀請教會幫他辦學，教會自然提他的條件，宗教分是這樣之產物。對我來說，如果反對其教條，不會送仔女入讀，還有很多無神論之學校可選。如果一心一意接受其教育，便須接受其傳教。合理得很！