直資學校與私立學校之討論(前為: 李國章歡迎保良局全面轉直資 -----立人問，立人說)

囝囝爸

你都講出問題之"本"來, 可惜政府的政策常常本末倒置. 它只想大力推行直資來取代官津節省開支, 無可厚非, 不果它常常低估政策的結果, 唔好教育八萬五, 像空置居屋有學校冇人讀.

學生預期不足又不夠經費小班教學, 還繼續加建新校, 雖然只有官津反對, 但現在新辦直資也是啞子吃黃蓮,  自己過咗橋唔通抽板, 想反對唔出得聲, 收生學生來源分薄, 新校之初, 學費減低, 如捱唔住時學費培增, 又繼續有新校加入戰場, 叫辦學者怎安心辦學教學呢? 如繼續有較好的津校轉直資, 開放收生, 對新辦的學校更為不利. 直資不同官津, 失敗就可能倒閉, 就讀的學生中途要轉校, 加埋一條龍, 火燒連環船, 中小學一齊拜拜.

我不怎麼同意教育自由開放競爭的說法, 政府一定的參與和監管是必須的, 如自由競爭, 不適者受市場淘汰, 學子怎能安安穩穩讀書呢, 成績資質不好的學生邊間學校會收呢? 真是有些有教無類的學校嗎? 我想有的, 不過他們因成績不好會遲早受市場淘汰.

教育改革是必須的, 不是辦學模式的表面改變, 什麼直資, 一條龍, 官津, 私立, 3-3-4制, 骨子裡都是那些人那些錢那些方法.  應該的改革是:大大提高大學和教育學院入學收生標準, 為將來學子提供真正優質師資. 改革課程, 刪除過時科目, 小學主力中英數, 現時小學生你給他們看Discovery, National Geographic 和 Documentaries的記錄片比花時問上常識堂和做projects好得多.  檢討教師的工作範圍, 留多些空間給老師進修教學, 現在有些老師兼任文書工作多過教學, 不要他們做埋那些無謂評估報告, 官樣文章的報告結果不能改變或提升學校成績質素, 只有深化老師工作量, 減低教學質素.

swl

囝囝爸

You point out a Demand and Supply problem. In fact, if we take out an assumption of 40 students per class from Auditor(???), you can find demand >> supply in Hong Kong. Try to download Auditor’s report at  http://www.info.gov.hk/aud/english/e41ch07.pdf you can find in page 31.

I believe it is a History. If education is an investment, I cannot see why the class size is still of >40 students. There is no developed countries of class size > 40. Our international schools, ESF schools and most of DSS schools are only having class size around 30.

I believe “教育改革” should not apply for all schools in Hong Kong. In the past years, it is demonstrated hopeless. There is too much resistance from parents, teachers, schools, etc.

If any changes only happen in one or two DSS schools,  there will be no resistance. No one will be care of such change. But it will show the effect, no matter it is good or bad. Hong Kong people are smart. The parent will follow the good approach and run away from the bad. This is a real market mechanism.

囝囝爸

swl:

如自由競爭, 付費教育, 質素及供求是一大要素.

香港在教育支出不比其他先進國家少, 為什麼不夠資源小班教學呢? 問題是成本高, 薪金是一大主因. 曾司長曾嘅嘆, 我們用培育一大學生同樣的錢, 如送他出國就學比在本地更省錢, 可能更優質. 如基本問題不解決, 改革是事倍功半. 雖然直資由政府部分資助, 但財政壓力會比其他辦學模式大, 因新校為殺出血路, 標榜小班教學, 優良配套, 或外籍教師, 但這些都可在低收學費可達致嗎? 長遠來說, 會走向兩極化, 一是收取如聖保羅男拔的學費(但其一前校長也摡嘆收支不能相抵), 維持優質教學, 另一是降低標準, 淪為普通學校. 但收費的普通學校要面對免費的官津競爭, 生存空間成疑. 但政府想法不同, 它們只考慮目前財政困境, 部門要向特區政府甚至中央為減赤交功課, 直資可為政府在教師薪資和學校資助方面減輕負擔, 所以急於大力推行直資, 但如對官津轉直或殺校速度不能同步而行的話, 後果是堪虞的. 一如推行資訊教學為例, 軟件錯了還可替換, 硬件錯了就後悔莫及. 你們看學校設置大批電腦但缺乏合格教師而大量棄置的例子比比皆是, 近來報章報導很多學校覺資訊教學不成功.

直資是好的, 但如你所說先小點推行, 阻力較少. 三五年看到成效再大力推行也不遲, 到時你唔推行市場都會有強烈要求. 但政府自信心爆膨, 大力推銷建校, 如唔成功時, 又如母語教學, 八萬五, 居屋空置短樁等等. 不過如教育短樁, 經歷短樁的學子受學不可能時光倒流, 會成白老鼠犧牲品.

swl

每 年 二 十 五 萬 元 !!! It is very very expensive. You can see how much the parents can pay for their kid's education. If the DSS(s) are good, I cannot see why they cannot survive. You will find more and more private/international schools in Hong Kong.

ambrose

I have one question: There are some private schools which get HK$2XXX for school fee. And they can survive. Why the DSS school get subsidization from government about HK$4XXX plus school fee and they may face finanicial problem?

囝囝爸

好簡單, 如我前文所說. 開放自由競爭, 要講供求問題. 如香港樓市一樣, 當你起到通街都係樓的時候, 競爭大了, 要在質素設施改善來競爭, 成本因而會高, 脫離購買力的時候, 就是樓市倒塌的時候. 所以我較贊同小點試辦, 跟着市場走, 好的時候再大力推行, 不是較保險嗎. 說到現存的私立, 他們不是一朝一夕辦學成功而生存至今, 也是經過汰弱留強, 可同免費官津併存. 另外, 能生存的私校有它的成功要素, 有些是教會支持, 有些是成績得到學生家長支持, 他們大部分還沿用舊校舍. 我小兒讀的是有教會背境的非盈利私校, 二千多元也要收四十人以上一班才夠數, 重建校舍也要籌募, 大部份不足之數由教會支持. 所以我們就算是付費家長也不希求小班教學, 外籍老師, 我們知道辦學的難處. 直資新校一樣要經過上述洗禮. 相信很多支持直資的是有子女新入讀小學的家長, 直資確是提供較多選擇, 比政府不合理世襲運氣式派位好多了. 但我們也要考慮其他不利因素. 如無節制地推行直資, 可付費的家長, 入讀的學生, 標榜高資格優質的教師, 都從那裡來, 不過是塘水滖塘魚, 有限公司, 會夠嗎? 另外, 我們不要低估學費支出, 私立學費多跟通脹, 可預算. 但直資學費因種種關係, 預算較難. 都孩子上到較高班次時, 學費, 車費, 午膳費, 課外活動, 補習等等, 教育負擔重壓步步來. 對於經濟中下的家庭, 我還是贊成免費教育的.

CHUCHU

多口講句........
我覺得似乎~~~講得太複雜.
你們可曾參與過校內行政事務,而真的明白學校運作嗎?
我只是香港一般的家長吧.

judy

[quote]
Philipwhau 寫道:
Ambrose,

回答你的問題實在很簡單，是一個

ambrose

We've a very good discussion. Anyway, the evolution of DSS schools is a good news. At least, it can provide more choices although there is certain level of risk. If you choose DSS school, you have to prepare yourselves that there is many unknown factors. I would like to choose well-established traditional schools since they are trying to improve as the parents' demand is increasing. I have only one boy, I'm scared to take risk since there is only one chance. If I pay money but there is no gurantee, I'd prefer to get free lunch but there is hope to improve. I don't think traditional school cannot groom smart kids. In addition, I would like to save money for other investments.

swl

I haven’t involved in school management. However, if one involve in any school management, his view may not be impartial. Do you agree?

Many parents consider teachers and students ratio, class size, facilities, teachers of schools under English School Foundation(ESF) are 5-stars. If ESF can offer 4000 per month for primary school and 6500 Per month for secondary school( with government subsidies), DSS can also provide similar things with these prices. The above $$ will be benchmarks. Then, the question is if you can afford or willing to pay for it.

I am interested in knowing how much the parents would like to pay for your kids’ education for primary and secondary schools. I know it is very subjective. Please post your amount up this forum or email to me. I would prepare a summary for your reference.

囝囝爸

我對學校行政也是一竅不通, 對教育的想法也祗是個人和孩子在教育經歷體驗出來, 可能確有點主觀和坐井觀天的看法.

我想, 在一經濟自由社會, 有錢未必成事, 但冇錢就萬萬不能成事. 個別成功是有的, 個案比較少. 有什麼國家能花教育資源比美國少而能培養更好的人材來呢 ?  中國的情形, 一小企業家經理的薪資比胡主席可能更高, 可解釋部分國營效應低的原因. 香港政府高薪養廉, 星加坡政府高薪養才, 還不是錢作怪嗎. 不過, 資源不是萬能, 要有相應良好管理政策和人才, 才可成事. 在我們的政府暫時看不到有這樣的人才, 高薪厨師也做不出好菜, 有好厨師也會奇貨可居, 不會低薪屈就吧, 教師也是一樣, 就算暫時屈就也會被高薪掘角.  我們優質教育人才不多, 成本貴, 教學效益低, 是基本問題, 基本問題不解決, 新教育模式可轉變過來嗎. 我們家長經歷太多了, 看近來的副學士, 大學學位不足就急急推出, 資源不足就減少資助, 捉放曹, 搖擺不定, 我們對教育政策不應持更謹慎看法嗎.

相信很多家長對子女教育付出是不會吝惜的, 不過不是他們願付出幾多, 是他們能付出幾多.  不要高估家長的教育承擔 能力, 在現行大部分免費教育摸式下, 還有很多家長為子女教育, 節衣縮食, 苦苦張羅.

ykwong

The discussion sounds like the government tends to encourage all subsidary school change into DSS.

Chuchu said it seemed ... too complicate, so let go back to the origin of this forum.

I've checked the EMB's website and find that there are only ten running DSS Primary school up to this term!

Most of the existing DSS are promoting new approach of teaching while the well-known new coming DSS (St. Paul, DBSPS) are changed from the existing structure (some district school like 陸慶濤 also).

So you may find that new school are trying to use new method while the old school are trying to re-control their selection of students (or most likely, the parents).

Every year, at the day of announcement of SPA, you must see Headmaster Choi of 油天 complaining school has lose their right to selecting students. I think that is the main reason of PLK try to change part of their schools into DSS.

That's not the problem of money. School only want to select their own potential student, 陸慶濤 is certainly not target on rich parents while St. Paul Co may be!

TSL had been established for five years, the past three years it attracted nearly 2000 applicants per year. Does it good, I think most parents don't know.

Why they are willing to be a white mouse (so did I)?

In my personal view, the criterial of selecting a school is to select the learning environment, which include similar background of family, approach to education, teaching mode etc.

Why the traditional famous school always get good results? Are they having excellent teachers? I don't think so! Maybe the school provide good environment of competition, either in academic, music or sport. It encourages the students to fully develop their potential.

My conclusions are that successful schools are always gathering similar group of students and provide identical products. La Selle provide 寸 students while Sheung Shui La Selle provide 打得 students (see the mother of one of the defendent, you may find how important to select similar group), Wah Yan attract poor but hard working students.

So when you select a school, you are selecting the learning environment of the school. On the other hand, schools select students to whom they think most suit their environment.

That's the problem of choice, not money. 陸慶濤 is surely not to be bankruptcy and so does St. Paul.

If you believe in market force, you don't need to worry about the running difficulties of the school. They will change subject to the market demands, no matter the teaching modes or the school fee. I believe that having the subsidary from Government, a well managed DSS school could be  running without any difficulty. The only concern is whether you want to be a whit mouse or not.

Actually I don't like the term white mouse. You buy the idea of the school, making research to ascertain what they said would be what they going to be done, then you select this school and support their mode of teaching. This is not an expriment, this is the acceptance of the approach that you think it is most appropriate to your child!

It is no need to say rich people has more choice than the poor. It exists for thousands years and won't be changed for the coming thousand year.

To swl

I will pay whatever I can afford, I will cut my expense until nothing could be cut for my son's expense. I think the exact amount is meaningless. You earn 100K per month and spend 10k for your child's doesn't mean you are better than those earn 30k but spend only 5k for the kids.

HPChingchingma

我對現時政府鼓勵推銷 " 直資學校 " ，我也有自己的意見，故在另一版也發表過  ：

  Re: 唔明會有家長放棄沙呂小一學位

我諗你地誤會我意思勒！我唔係激動，而是想出另一個題目。人家要唔要 “沙呂 “是其次，只是帶出 ' 誰是最想食粥，食麵 "，應該是由我們的政府，將這擔子肩付，不是將本身既責無旁貸的責任推落 " 用者自付 " 身上。

既負責而有長遠教育政策，為何不提供免費優質教育給下一代呢？我覺得有官員曾道出 " 直資學校" 的確立，是可為中產家庭提供更多元化的選擇，這就出了岔路，試想想難道基層，草根的父母們，也何妨不想自己的子女也可進入大學，同樣也可以享受優質教育嗎？點解只有在 " 直資學校 "裡提供呢？ 而不是普及呢？

我們的教育應是全面橡 " 呂小 "的質數，無論在環境上，在學業裡，在教學理念下，在師長合力中。而不是自己既定已有而放棄不要，退而再付出自己財富，精神，時間在為自己子女，去賭注在這新興學校裡，6年生涯是否成功。現在多範疇，新理念，多元化的直資學校也在試驗階段中，仍未精確知道成效。


[size=x-large]免費優質教育越多人放棄，政府就越想將教育承擔擔子卸下

ykwong

there are 803 primary school as mentioned in the EMB website, how many of them are as "high quality" as LMC?

And high quality is very subjective, I want an apple but you give me an high quality orange, I won't be happy.

For the one gave up LMC:

Years before, when the school could still gain 10 points to their desire applicants, this school prefer full time mummy just like most of the famous school. Does it beneficial to the poor? And you should know that the project issued by the school is very time consuming. A working mums may find insufficient time to assist their kids.

Talking about money:

St. Francis's is around 2000 per months, and the subsidary school obtained $25,000 per year per student. If LMC is a good choice to you, I think you probably prefer St. Francis. Only the 2,500 is provided by the tax payer, that is you! More money is being wasted in the bad quality school.

If more subsidary school changed into DSS, the poor quality will be expelled. The resources given by the tax payer is better used.

I still don't think educational institution like PLK will collect high school fee.

ambrose

We have a very good discussion. I suggest someone to send this subject to EMB for their consideration. Maybe they don't understand because most of their children get money to study in UK.