告別教育政策

囝囝爸

原帖由 stjoboldboy 於 10-10-27 15:24 發表


明白哂!

這世上沒有無緣無故的愛, 沒有無緣無故的恨, 明白了你為何這麼痛恨eviepa兄, 因他無心之下刺中你的死穴!

得你明白我實感快慰, 雖然我唔明白你的明白.

身為 Eviepa 好友, 你對他了解不深.  他是否無心之失, 或對獨讀之好己習慣成多年之好, 要不斷提起.  如刺中我的死穴, 我真不覺痛, 痛就會退縮.  但真有一點恨, 原因已說過多次, 也是我要回應的原因.

你久不久對其他家長作出痛恨惡言, 有些和你無關, 或你覺是見義之為.  無原無故, 有原有故, 你最深知.

hog.wash

原帖由 囝囝爸 於 10-10-27 12:43 發表
Eviepa:

我對你一再逃避覺得難過, 因對自己認為正確的, 應理直氣壯.  不過看你上文, 我想你真的要退一下.

你還不明白, 沒有人說閱讀不好, 沒有人說公文或其他方法勝過閱讀,   你的堅持, 視閱讀獨一無二.  我看到的 ...

Just to want to add something on top of what said by 囝囝爸.

There are simply no students who only do supplementary exercises and there are no students who only do readying. The students you describe just do not exist.

My wife and me just had dinner at a friend's place. Their daughter studies P6 at the same school my two daughts went. She just had her English test. She got close to 90 marks. I asked if I could have a look and the following are how the marks were broken down:

Grammar, usage and Vocab 50% (there were more than 20 marks you cannot prepare for according to the girl.)
Comprehension (two passages) 20%
Listening 10%
Composition 20%

Accoding to her, in term exams, oral exam will be added.

Looking at where the marks go, it is only natural that the parents cannot just look at the grammar part.

However, to my horror, the girl told me that out of the 30 students in her class, 6 students got 97 marks. OMG. It really was a test of nerves for me to remain clam and convinced her that everything was all right and she was just doing fine under the situation.

However, my point is that you cannot just rely on supplementary grammar exercises to get good grades in English now and you can assume every educated parent knows that.

[ 本帖最後由 hog.wash 於 10-11-15 00:08 編輯 ]

eviepa

Uncle,

我相信我的觀察，因為不單是我的觀察，亦是stccmc等人的觀察，香港大部分的家長（可能超過90%）都認為閱讀的先後次序很低，起碼低過做補充練習、補習。

我和女兒是圖書館的常客，但真的很少碰到住在附近的親友。

和很多親友談論過閱讀，將閱讀的效能等同練習或以上的，是鳳毛麟角。將閱讀視作可有可無的，比比皆是。

eviepa

hog.wash

Dear Eviepa

I am not saying your observation is wrong. People in Hong Kong just don't read as much as people in most other developed areas or China mainland or Taiwan. I am saying there are no students who just do supplementary exercises. And students who are biased towards doing supplementary exercises are unlikely to be the students to score the top scores in their classes.

If you ask around, most schools have a lot of reading built into their curriculum and for long holidays most of them only have book report assignments for their English subject. My daughters had to finish over 10 book reports every summer starting probably from P5. Even 街坊小學 have devoted more time to reading now. One of the usual activites the NET teachers do is to read stories to the kids.

Finally I did say 'educated parent' in my post, didn't I?

[ 本帖最後由 hog.wash 於 10-11-15 09:44 編輯 ]

Share

我是一個經常上這版偷師的家長。一向都很佩服eviepa，囝囝爸，Judy,　csy-ma,Y2KChild,Uncle，stccmc等人的教育理念。
大家和而不同，君子之爭,不傷和氣。

其實每個孩子的長處都不同，各有優劣，學習的方法自然也不一樣，甚至每間學校，每對父母的要求並不完全相同，所以閱讀也好，公文也好，無話那條路是正軌。

甲之蜜糖 乙之砒霜，

大家各自為自己的孩子尋找合適的路，並發表自己的教育心得，有緣人見到自會跟隨，不用爭，爭蠃又如何？？？

過尤不及，爭過了頭，不是一件好事，也會教壞孩子.

*我不自量力，見笑。

[ 本帖最後由 Share 於 10-11-15 10:32 編輯 ]

hog.wash

原帖由 Y2KChild 於 10-11-15 21:14 發表
不是想爭拗，只是提出一些不同的觀察及觀點。

//There are simply no students who only do supplementary exercises andthere are no students who only do readying. The students you describejust do not exist./ ...

You are just corroborating my points. Pure grammar or pure reading just doesn't exist since the school curriculums are not structureed this way.

But you are underestimating the wisdowm of the average parent. If the exam is not just on grammar, how would you expect the parent to just concentrate on the grammar parts of the exam with the supplementary exercises. Of course, they may be biased towards them because it is the easier course of action. They know the importance of reading but we all know the story of 葉公好龍. Some parents just do not read themselves but they still like their kids to read.

Coming back to my small world of elite schools and international schools, there are a lot of educated parents whose children do read, just like you and your kid. This can also be said of a lot of BK parents as well.

Why don't we just say something general although it is not sexy. Reading helps and helps a lot but studying grammar every now and then won't hurt either. I just don't see the reason why we have to go the extreme.

[ 本帖最後由 hog.wash 於 10-11-15 21:47 編輯 ]

hog.wash

原帖由 Y2KChild 於 10-11-15 21:14 發表
想知一個人的英文水平有幾好，不計聽和講，最佳的方法是看看那個人所寫的文章，然後再了解那個人的閱讀水平，包括閱讀內容深度、速度及理解能力，絕對不是去衡量那個人識幾多英文 grammar，一個grammar perfect的人不代表能寫得出精采的文章，也不代表能讀得懂及能理解高水平的英文作品。

I almost thought it was writtten by me. There are no major differences between me and Eviepa and you, let's stop.

By the way, I did take your advice to brush up my knowlege on Einstein relativity theory versus Newton's classical theory. I suggest you do the same as well.

[ 本帖最後由 hog.wash 於 10-11-15 22:00 編輯 ]

cow

原帖由 Y2KChild 於 10-11-15 22:22 發表
My knowledge on Einstein's relativity theory, Newton's classical theory as well as the Quantum Mechanics are good enough to teach those BK parents who want to challenge my knowledge in science and physics.

You are always correct. Your knowledge are excellent. I am not wrong although my knowledge is limited.

hog.wash

原帖由 Y2KChild 於 10-11-15 22:22 發表
//My knowledge on Einstein's relativity theory, Newton's classical theory as well as the Quantum Mechanics are good enough to teach those BK parents who want to challenge my knowledge in science and physics.

You said previously to Davidmimi " ...例如牛頓的萬有引力定理，只可應用於日常生活的物體大小，但去到如星體之超大物體或粒子之超細物體便不適用。 Einsten 的 廣義相對論 Theory of General Relativity 應用範圍比萬有引力定理大得多，連星體之超大物體或粒子之超細物體也適用，可是它也有盲點，在 Singular Point (奇異點) 時便不適用 (Breakdown)。"

You also said to Cow, "...以你的有跟知識還以為 " 牛頓的萬有引力定理, 是適用於星體之超大物體" - 真可笑!

讀多幾年 sciences 才跟我討論科學問題!"


I did not read Physics at university but I did check the following with an engineering professor. I also tried to go through those related videos from the open courses of Yale and Stanford, both on your list of beloved universities.

It is not the size which matters. We only have to invoke Einstein's theory if velocities are comparable to that of light, or gravitational fields are exceptionally high. Only then do the relativity theory and Newton's theories differ in their predictions. Under most conditions Newton's three laws and his theory of gravitation are adequate. There are two key words here: velocity and gravitation. Size itself, no.

當然,當你靠近一個大星體時,引力會變大,空間會扭曲.人類最初覺察用牛頓力學解釋天文現象出現問題,源於水星軌迹問題.而水星正正是太陽系中最小的行星,只不過它是最接近太陽的行星而矣.

[ 本帖最後由 hog.wash 於 10-11-16 08:54 編輯 ]

hog.wash

原帖由 stccmc 於 10-11-16 12:55 發表
Uncle,

我常被人誤會，我不是認為不可以有練習。其實我說的，是本地學校大多英文課教學比較保守，課程課本是文法為本，以文法分類，又有課內的 workbook, worksheets drill 文法及閱讀理解。我認為在英文學習來說己太多。課外 ...

Agree with what you said completely.