del del del

LesMis99

I guess DaddyX would like to use a more scientific way to quantify the impact among various factors. Suppose a number is assigned to each student and then do a regression analysis against,  say address (A), etc .... It would not be too difficult to see a more meaninful result. We then do a testing of hypothesis, etc .... to prove each of our claims.  This would be the most "logical" way of analysis.

原帖由 DaddyX 於 11-2-23 14:32 發表
其實我估樓主lawson都是喜愛DGJS,覺得教學同理念同出來的學生都很好,如果不是也不會申請

我估他只是希望咁好的學校在收生也想接近perfect 同公平公正吧

其實地址真的有千萬種用途,隨口己數幾項
(1) 只簡有錢
(2)  ...

LesMis99

----------------------------------

原帖由 DaddyX 於 11-2-23 15:31 發表
多謝你這樣睇得起我會做這研究
正如我所講根本無可能得知equation左面的東東,而且input1, 2, 3..n 好可能也係related, non-independent

為何不直接跳到右面的答案嗎
它就在我們眼前-學校門口 ...

[ 本帖最後由 LesMis99 於 11-3-17 13:10 編輯 ]

pizzapan

There are a lot HK island girls in DGJS, should over 20%. They like professionals as parents especially doctors.

4eyesDad

What an interesting idea!

CC5

About the same number I heard, 25%.

原帖由 pizzapan 於 11-2-25 08:14 發表
There are a lot HK island girls in DGJS, should over 20%. They like professionals as parents especially doctors.

MyFriends

I have just joined bk. This thread looks very interesting to me. I agree with "lawsonmoon" and all others that address is taken into account during the selection process.

However, I have friends with daughters studying in DG/DB/SPCC. Their living spaces are somewhere in the region 700-950 sq ft (2-3 bedrooms).

Here is an interesting number I would like to share. In HK, only 4% of apartments has 3 or more bedrooms irrespective of locations. This means if you ask 100 people, only 4 will tell you that their home has 3 or more bedrooms. That says if your apartment has 3 bedrooms, you are already in the top 4%.

原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 10-11-25 12:08 發表
DGJS 兩次 interview 後, 雖然未有結果, 但有感而發。

校長多次在媒體說取錄與否純看小孩面試表現。但由交報名表開始，不斷要求提供住址證明(水、電費單etc.)。我心想取錄小孩子同他們住什麽地方有何關係? 何需大費周 ...

busy_penny

原帖由 DaddyX 於 11-2-23 14:32 發表
其實我估樓主lawson都是喜愛DGJS,覺得教學同理念同出來的學生都很好,如果不是也不會申請

我估他只是希望咁好的學校在收生也想接近perfect 同公平公正吧

其實地址真的有千萬種用途,隨口己數幾項
(1) 只簡有錢
(2)  ...

這些數據從哪裡得來? 真的嗎?

MyFriends

I believe research reports from big investment brokerage house should be a reliable source.

原帖由 busy_penny 於 11-3-4 10:03 發表


這些數據從哪裡得來? 真的嗎?

lawsonmoon

今期親子王介紹李寶樁, 公開講明收生用Need-Blind Policy, 光明正大；有a lot of scholarship, 只要叻就可以讀。再看看收生方法，D 讀雞精班的考試機器肯定考唔到。Oversea visit 唔係去London, New york. 李寶樁既收生和教肓理念個人覺得係直資和私政的典範。

原帖由 DaddyX 於 11-3-4 10:18 PM 發表


喂我呢D係為左說明地址可以有千萬種用途所以叫你地唔使花心機估佢係用呢做乜未必係你估果樣
誤會左就唔好

而求其寫架咋哈哈哈

MyFriends

We're here to discuss the admission to Primary ONE level. Clearly, there are some degree of difficulties to use any merit based systems to select candidates at this early stage, namely 4-5 years old. I am sure there are many more kids with high potentials who are applying to good/popular schools like DGJS/SPCC/DB/etc. The fact is that a lot of them can't get in, not because of their incapability but due to the limited places available. All discussions regarding the selection criteria will eventually lead to another biased conclusion.

原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 11-3-11 19:52 發表
今期親子王介紹李寶樁, 公開講明收生用Need-Blind Policy, 光明正大；有a lot of scholarship, 只要叻就可以讀。再看看收生方法，D 讀雞精班的考試機器肯定考唔到。Oversea visit 唔係去London, New york. 李寶樁既收生 ...

4eyesDad

Surely, an element of education is leading by example.
I, for one, look to leading schools, including leading primary schools, to show us that "honesty" is important value in Hong Kong.
When leading primary schools are using an objectionable selection criterion, such as the vetting of applicant's address at interview stage, some parents are concerned.
I expect leading primary schools do not practise "address vetting". Therefore, St. Stephen's College Preparatory School in Stanley, for example, does not vet address.
Unfortunately, DGJS and others still vet address even though "catchment areas" are irrelevant in thses private/DSS schools.
I expect honest primary schools will confess that address vetting is unnecessary and will be dropped immediately.
Does the headmistress of DGJS know about "address vetting"?

lawsonmoon

del del del

原帖由 4eyesDad 於 11-3-14 10:24 AM 發表
Surely, an element of education is leading by example.
I, for one, look to leading schools, including leading primary schools, to show us that "honesty" is important value in Hong Kong.
When leading ...

lawsonmoon

del del del

原帖由 DaddyX 於 11-2-23 02:32 PM 發表
其實我估樓主lawson都是喜愛DGJS,覺得教學同理念同出來的學生都很好,如果不是也不會申請

我估他只是希望咁好的學校在收生也想接近perfect 同公平公正吧

其實地址真的有千萬種用途,隨口己數幾項
(1) 只簡有錢
(2)  ...

LesMis99

Here are two more examples which clearly indicate that address is not the critical factor.

1. My daughter has some classmates (> 5) living in the same area and attending the same kindergarten. All applied to DG but only 1 got accepted.

2. I have friends' daughters living in Mid Level (1360+ sf) and another living in Old Peak Road (2500+ sf) but both were turned down by the school. However, I have another friend living in Wan Chai (40+ years old building, 700 sf) who got an offer from DG too.

I agree that address is used in the selection process but its role is no more than sending a reply letter to tell you the result.

原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 11-3-14 18:20 發表
其實我喜愛DBS, 未讀過DGS, no comment.
我認為作為教會學校，有些道德價值觀係要遵守的。

有家長話我可能報假地址給發現，所以這樣說。我只可以話大家bandwidth唔同，亦不希望DGJS的家長是這個水平。其實報這些要in小朋 ...

LesMis99

If address is that important, DG should not have asked "亞嬸" to check the original. They would have asked a senior teacher to do the checking. So, this tells me that DG does not treat address as important as what you have been thinking.

However, you can also argue that there might be further checking behind the door when they prepare the finalist. I can rule out this possibility based on the two aforementioned examples. If girls living in the same areas not all got accepted AND girls living in luxurious area like Old Peak Road and Mid Level got turned down, all these convince me that address only worths  2 cents!

原帖由 lawsonmoon 於 11-3-14 17:47 發表
其實我心底裏都覺得教會學校應該唔會"Address Vetting"去收生，所以先想叫佢哋堂堂一間名校唔做一啲咁肉酸既動作(叫個亞嬸check人的Original)。DBS冇咁囉；如果咁做, D old boys 肯定會反映和叫停。因為實在太有失大體了 ...

wingsma

I’m not saying about the actual reason for the address checking by DGJS. I just want to point out that the 2 example canNOT CLEARLY INDICATE that address is not the critical factor. It can just indicate that address is not the ONLY factor. Say a academically very poor girl(can’t speak even very simple English), even she lives at the peak, still would not be accepted. And a girl lives in Tin Shui Wai, but has the most outstanding performance in the interview, might got accepted.
The point is that, if two girl of the same performance , are their address a factor to be considered by the school? You couldn’t showed it.

LesMis99

The question is how to select 140 out of the finalist of say 500 candidates who have the following characteristics:
- good personalities
- good backgrounds
- talented or gifted
- multiskilled - piano, painting, swimming
- multi-linguial

Address is really nothing when you come to the stage. Just like what you have pointed out that anyone who lives in remote area is eligible provided that she is smart.

原帖由 wingsma 於 11-3-16 10:05 發表
I’m not saying about the actual reason for the address checking by DGJS. I just want to point out that the 2 example canNOT CLEARLY INDICATE that address is not the critical factor. It can just indic ...