IB 出路

slamai

daisychan 發表於 16-1-21 14:32
No, the term "quota" was used by those speakers for the「神科」on their Information Days.

Could you list specific example(s) for reference?

slamai

daisychan 發表於 16-1-21 14:32
No, the term "quota" was used by those speakers for the「神科」on their Information Days.

After further checking, it seems that these "quota" deviate from the general official stance of the local universities, e.g. the following link is relevant:

聯招(JUPAS)與非聯招(NON-JUPAS)比例是否有設定

poonseelai

原帖由 slamai 於 16-01-21 發表
After further checking, it seems that these "quota" deviate from the general official stance of the  ...

所以話原則上無但實際上有

ANChan59

原帖由 poonseelai 於 16-01-21 發表
所以話原則上無但實際上有

都合理，又話教育經費不手軟，好難解釋本土課程被人比下去！

poonseelai

slamai 發表於 16-1-21 18:36
After further checking, it seems that these "quota" deviate from the general official stance of the  ...

The following paper retrieved from LegCo website should answer your questions.  Specifically points 3 and 5 extracted below:

3. Student admission is within the autonomy of the UGC-fundedinstitutions. Following the principles of fairness and merit-basedselection, each institution administers its own admission policy andcriteria for different undergraduate programmes to assess applicationssubmitted through the JUPAS and non-JUPAS routes. The UGC-fundedinstitutions strive to identify the most-deserving among all local candidates, regardless of the type of academic qualification held. AsHong Kong permanent residents, both local students applying through theJUPAS and non-JUPAS routes deserve equal opportunities to beconsidered on the basis of fair competition for articulation toUGC-funded programmes.


5. Having regard to institutional autonomy in student admission,neither the Government nor the UGC would require institutions to specifya particular ratio of local students admitted through the JUPAS andnon-JUPAS routes. That said, we understand that individual institutionshave taken the initiative to lay down guidelines which set a ceiling foradmission of local students through the non-JUPAS route.


http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr13-14/english/panels/ed/papers/ed0210cb4-362-3-e.pdf

shadeslayer

原帖由 ABC-DAD 於 16-01-21 發表
If it is all about Medical School,as a matter of fact,  there are  ceilings on both HKU n CUHK for m ...

By now you should understand, right?

shadeslayer

ABC-DAD  I knew that before CUHK established the Medical School.  發表於 昨天

Xxxxxx

Read carefully #85 citing the legco documents describing fairness and Jupas non Jupas intake of HK residents. It mentioned the issue of fairness and merit of candidates.

If you still don't see the potential issue of fairness, I have no chance of making you understand.

ABC-DAD

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Don't even close to understand your perception. I read and I read the whole clause .
You better elaborate what you really fight for, if you want people to understand you more.

Not on your side ,in the mean time, did or did not hurt anyone ?


I just don't follow. Does it annoying you that much?

ABC-DAD

After finished that particular paper, I wonder why only #3 n#5 was specified?

For discussion on 10 February 2014

Purpose
This paper briefs Members on student admission to University
Grants Committee (UGC)-funded undergraduate and research
postgraduate programmes.
Admission to UGC-funded undergraduate programmes

ABC-DAD

For reference LCQ16: Non-Joint University Programmes Admissions System  (ENG)

立法會十六題：非大學聯合招生辦法
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
　　以下為２０１３年２月２０日（星期三）
香港時間１５時０３分）在立法會會議上葉建源議員的提問和教育局局長吳克儉的書面答覆

新聞公報　

ABC-DAD

To be honest, posting these won't provide any solution to prove anything.

What is next?

I don't have a clue what to do when it comes to us.

Be optimistic and thankful, we still got someone  to love.

ABC-DAD

"The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.

To this end the organization works with schools, governments and international organizations to develop challenging programmes of international education and rigorous assessment.

These programmes encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right."

All in All, you pick the right education path for your love one. That is cool.

daisychan

slamai 發表於 16-1-21 16:13
Could you list specific example(s) for reference?

當仲有 EAS 時,三大已經在每個 programme 為 EAS, HKAL(JUPAS) 和 NON-JUPAS 訂下 quota, 就是各佔三份之一。在三大的 EAS Information Days 都有公開說明。在熱門科目, EAS 和 NON-JUPAS 的quota多數用盡,留下三份之一給 HKAL，所以當時競爭激烈。


在 double cohort 那年，是 NON-JUPAS的豐收年，享盡三年制和四年制合共兩倍的學位。所以，聽講當時熱門科目收 NON-JUPAS 要求相對低咗。

現時取消了 EAS, 那給 NON-JUPAS 的三份之一 quota, 基本上是維持的。所以，之前才有中大醫學院為照顧 DSE 考生，高調宣佈把給 NON-JUPAS的quota降低至25%.

大家肯花時間去 Information Days 的 NON-JUPAS sessions聽聽問問，自然發覺 "有冇quota"這條問題，就算 speakers唔主動講，都大把家長和學生問，一般都答是 30~33%. 讀緊嘅大學生都知自己班內嘅 NON-JUPAS是大約這個數。

仲唔信或懷疑，自己去聽聽。答完！

slamai

daisychan 發表於 16-1-22 10:43
當仲有 EAS 時,三大已經在每個 programme 為 EAS, HKAL(JUPAS) 和 NON-JUPAS 訂下 quota, 就是各佔三份之 ...

I need to clarify the followings first:

"之前才有中大醫學院為照顧 DSE 考生，高調宣佈把給 NON-JUPAS的quota降低至25%" should be 港大醫學院 instead.  

"在 double cohort 那年，是 NON-JUPAS的豐收年，享盡三年制和四年制合共兩倍的學位。" More non-JUPAS applicants were admitted that year, but not doubled.

As I have said before, 「神科」do have higher "quota" than average but the overall average figure of these "quota" for non-JUPAS is definitely lower than 1/3.  A rough figure of 20% has been quoted by some institution but not stated as "quota".  Except for「神科」and some other programmes offered by 三大, there are many "unused quota" under the less competitive programmes.  This is the global picture and arguing whether there are real "quota" or not is not fruitful at all.  Bear in mind that there is no straight forward and universal conversion between JUPAS and non-JUPAS qualifications to prove if there are really such "quota".  Don't mention about UCAS tariff!

daisychan

回覆 slamai 的帖子


The term "quota" was used by the programme coordinators from different faculties of different universities on their Information Days. The figures they quoted for Non-JUPAS are 30~33%, definitely more than 20%. You may find the actual figures of Non-JUPAS slighty less than 30%, because some Non-JUPAS have quitted the programmes after the term starts. This year, LLB of CUHK intakes 21 Non-JUPAS out of the 70 places. At least one Non-JUPAS has already quitted.

BTW, I don't think universities are trying to compare JUPAS and Non-JUPAS qualifications in their selection process. They would likely compare the qualifications of all the Non-JUPAS applicants only and select the most qualified and suitable candidates within the pre-determined quota. Sometimes, depending on the applicants' qualifications of that year, they might intake less Non-JUPAS applicants.

I don't want to agrue but need to put the picture right, because many parents and students here want to know about the "quota" offered to Non-JUPAS applicants.

Please take my advice to go to the Information Days or write to the admission office and ask for the statistics. If you insist "自說自話", I can't help.

shadeslayer

原帖由 daisychan 於 16-01-22 發表
本帖最後由 daisychan 於 16-1-22 17:47 編輯

回覆 slamai 的帖子

HK citizens should not fall under this Non Jupas quota.  All HK citizens should have equal right to uni education in HK. The same way

slamai

daisychan 發表於 16-1-22 17:01
回覆 slamai 的帖子

It seems that you have difficulties in understanding my previous posts and others' posts on the official stance of the universities and the Govt.  I went to numerous information days held by upto 5 of the universities and attended talks of different programmes before.  Except for EAS (long outdated now) mentioned in the talks of the double cohort year and the HKU Medicine one this year, no quota were specifically mentioned.  The observed facts are that "quota" vary among universities and programmes
Your explanations are also self-contradictory.  EITHER there are rigid quota for JUPAS and non-JUPAS routes so that the applicants are compared among themselves within each route OR the "quota" are not rigid and the applicants are compared across the two routes for selection of better ones with different qualifications.  You tried to mix them up to support your case for pre-set quota! While the percentages of non-JUPAS applicants admitted each year are largely comparable (which is generally understandable like the percentages of IB DP candidates getting 7s in different subjects broadly follow a stable trend over the years), claiming that admission is governed by rigid quota is another thing.