讀傳統嘅幼稚園有無機會入到EFS 小學?

CherylMum

Re: 讀傳統

[ 本帖最後由 CherylMum 於 09-11-17 16:39 編輯 ]

gwan

Here are what I know:

Victoria, St. Catherine, York, Kentvilles are definitely not considered as international kindergarten by ESF.

But I do know a girl who attended St. Cat got accepted by ESF primary school.

ESF do place local kinder as lower priority because they were founded to help those who are unable to attend local school. They will offer interview to higher priority children first, but once you were invited for interview, it means they have a place for you if you pass the interview, everybody are equal. Whether local kinder children got a chance for interview will depend on the number of vacancies, higher priority children's number and their performance at interview.

Although ESF has their set of rules, but it appeared that individual schools may have slightly different practice.

  

CherylMum

Re: 讀傳統

[ 本帖最後由 CherylMum 於 09-11-17 16:39 編輯 ]

MAY_MOM

hi leehoma001,

I'm curious to know the esf school your child is in? And which kinder he/she was in? Could you pls let me know. You may PM me if you wish.

I would like to seek for your advice on which esf primary school may likely to have more seats available for local children? you mentioned about schools on HK island, any one in particular?

Also, may I know which esf primary has Chinese lessons? How often is it? Or none at all?

Thanks!!

CherylMum

Re: 讀傳統

[ 本帖最後由 CherylMum 於 09-11-17 16:39 編輯 ]

MAY_MOM

CherylMum:

Thanks very much for your prompt reply. I heard a relative's sons who are from Quarry Bay. They're teenagers now, going to UK for college. I remember she said this is quite a good school. Do you know more details about this school? (except those I can find from its website?) is your child in this school?

May I know do they teach Chinese words at all? or just Mandarin (oral)?

gwan

I just state a fact, like you said, fact is fact.

I didn't guess what the admission staff think, I actually was told by them about this, if you think they lied to me, then I have nothing to say.
Their policy did not say about screening the kinder, but different schools may have their own set of interpretations of how to determine who can fit in local school system and who cannot, I only have talked to one ESF primary(Kowloon side) admission officer, so I cannot say if your son's school's policy is the same.

ESF don't have to 'screen' the kindergarten, they have been in HK for so long that they know about which are the real international kinder, before the interview, the ESF staff (interviewers) actually visited those real int'l kinder and meet some of their candidates before the interview date. At least that's what happened in my son's admission year.

Newton

Well! I think I have to say that I will still trust the insider rather than one with successful experience since successful cases are likely to be isolated exceptions.

Please follow the link and read through the messages. That guy was working in ESF and in PTA and his son was studying in KGV. Although you can say his claim may not be true, from my point of view, there are no difference between yours and his claims.

Screening out children by their schools of study is legitimate way to perform the selection process. Otherwise, what should be use? Merely by people own claims that their kids are native English speaker.

Many people here have already mentioned it. There may have very large latitude for each school to select candidate even though all of them are under the same rather general admission policy.

leehoma001 寫道:
Newton,

Do you choose to believe a so called himself/herself an insider or the one who got the first hand successful experience to tell you the hard fact?
Fact is fact that you cannot deny or ignore.

I can tell you that my boy is one of the successful cases and I also know so many other similar cases who belong to Cat 3 and also studying at a local kindergarten received invitation for interview.

What noone claimed was only his/her thinking which might not be right or true.

Even if noone's claim was true, I can only conclude that it was individual school's own improper act without following the policy set by ESF. If it is the case, you should ask noone to disclose which ESF school acts like this and we will surely file complaint to ESF as well as to EMB.

It is entirely illegitimate not "legitimate" for ESF to screen out those from traditional kindergarten because ESF receives funding from EMB and their admission policy should be subject to approval by EMB.

Newton

leehoma001,

Below is the priority from the website:

*************
Category 1.          First language English speaking students who cannot attend a local school because of insufficient grasp of Cantonese.
Category 2.         Students whose first language is not English who cannot attend a local school because of insufficient grasp of Cantonese.
Category 3.         Students with English as an additional language, who qualify to attend a local school.
****************

Now, which sentence indicates that parents' English proficiency will dictate the category which the kid will go into? It is written black and white that it is the kids English proficiency matters, not their parents and yet you interpret them in your own way and claim that ESF will group children according to parents native languages.

What if a kid with non-native English speaking parents, all time speaking English at home and has been studying in a *pure* international kindergarten for 3 years without any problems. Do you think he will qualify to attend local school and should be put to category 3?

You are basicallly holding double standard here, only allowing your own interpretation but denying all from the others. Now the mentioned insider was staff of ESF and he merely claimed that type of school, you like it or not, is a measure ESF has used to gauge kids' English proficiency. It is just as legitimate as your own measure and do not in any time violate the interview priority system of ESF. It is just a way to determine kids English proficiency, not a way to put native-English speaker to category 3! That is why it is *legitimate*.

Before questioning others logic, please try to understand your own logic first.... Do you see now why I trust the claimed insider more than you?

leehoma001 寫道:

Besides, please understand the underlining meaning of the priority setting by ESF, it is refer to whether the parents are native English speakers but not the kids when grouping the applicants into different categories.

Maybe I can illustrate more clearly. If both parents are native English speakers, their kid will be classifiied into Cat 1 even though the kid can only speak cantonese but not English. On the other hand, if both parents are Chinese native speakers, their kid will be classified into Cat 3 even though the kid cannot speak any Chinese but fluent English like a native speaker.

gwan

leehoma001,
It's a waste of timing to answer your argument.
I have the impression that you are arguing for the sake of arguing, you challenge other people's integrity, memory, knowledge and common sense.
But what about yours?

Gwan  

cat_house

leehoma001, Gwan, Newton,

I can't imagine such topic would become so controversial.  Let's don't have this topic become personal and have peaceful exchange of opinion only.

courtbas

cat_house,

Just PM you.

NinaW

Agree. : I also feel that it is getting offensive.

This is a forum for sharing not a debate.  Others will get some information from your experience but there has no win or loss here. Take it easy.