- 在線時間
- 133 小時
- 最後登錄
- 13-8-1
- 國民生產力
- 9
- 附加生產力
- 67
- 貢獻生產力
- 0
- 註冊時間
- 06-11-22
- 閱讀權限
- 10
- 帖子
- 210
- 主題
- 7
- 精華
- 0
- 積分
- 286
- UID
- 112964
|
Many thanks, ANChan59, for your sharing. It's insightful indeed.
You have raised a few questions that are worth CKY's parents to ponder upon. To be honest, the more I learn about IB, the harder I think it is to students. IBDP provides a very challenging curriculum that is demanding as well as rewarding. It would better prepare students to pursue university studies. Students are supposed to be all-round and are independent (and critical) learners. It certainly takes more thinking, analysing and critiquing instead of repetitive drilling and memorising. I am not surprised that students need to work extra hard in order to get better exam results at IBDP. But I believe their effort will pay off beyond the exams.
I wouldn't say that CKY students would outperform the two elite schools. In fact, the comparison might not be fair anyway. Noting that the majority of IB students at DBS and SPCC would come from the best (of the best) while all CKY students (irrespective of their academic performance) would have to take IBDP. I would be happy IF their exam performance is comparable to ESF's - and I dare not compare it with Li Po Chun.
I agree with penguin_chick's observation that the pre-IB year introduced by DBS and SPCC is meant for preparing the students from local curriculum to "switch" to IB. Don't think IBO has ever endorsed such bridging course or acknowledged its necessity, not to mention its syllabus.
As far as I know, the 12-year system at CKY comprise: 5 (primary) + 5 (secondary) + 2 (IBDP). I wouldn't say CKY students are better, but it seems to me such a bridging course is not really necessary after 10 years of schooling there.
When it comes to CKY's teacher profile, there are quite a number ofthem from overseas, some IB-trained with relevant experience, eg, Principal Yip. |
|