教署侷家長賭。應該請馬會主持賭局！

aknchan

I can understand your disappointment but sadly there are simply NO 'FAIR' system.

1. Lets look at what happen when we remove the whole "自行收生" ,ignore all the points and remove the district limitation.
What's left is one big lucky draw, which is 'FAIR' since everyone has equal chance.
The school wouldn't be too happy as they have zero control now.
The people who used to have point wouldn't be too happy as their advantage disappeared.
Parents with 2 kids wouldn't be too happy too because 1 might go to school in Chai Wan and the other goes to Tuen Mun.
The people with no points are not much better off as their chance of getting into 'hot' school is just as slim or even worse with a no limit lucky draw.

2. Lets try a full scale across HK Primary School Entrance Exam.
This system is also 'FAIR' since the 'best seat' goes to the best performer. Period.
Would parents like to prepare their 5 year old for an exam?
Would parent like this system?

3. Lets try the 'Pick a school within 1 KM + volunteer work' system.
Everyone knows where the few 'hot' schools are.
Everyone knows the price of owning/renting a house in these districts.
Everyone has heard of parents using fake address for the lucky draw.
If school choices are tied with where you leave, wouldn't people argue that this system favors the rich people because they are the one who can afford to live near the 'hot' schools?
This is indeed the same argument put forth by people nowadays regarding the distinct limitation.
How about doing volunteering work improves your kid's chance of getting into a school?
Wouldn't a working mom complains that a full time mom having a better chance because she has the free time to do volunteer work?

The sad truth is that besides the extreme cases (#1 100% luck and #2 0% luck), no matter how and where you draw the line, some people will tell you is unfair.

[ 本帖最後由 aknchan 於 08-11-25 10:39 編輯 ]

jojoliu

世上無一個十全十美又公平的方法,我只希望縮短時間,最好可以在兩三個月內就可以攪掂就最好

filleul

同意到極！！

我們偉大的教處搞親出來的，都係一镬泡！不知所謂！究竟他們的腦袋去咗邊！！

無錯，呢個機制原意係想平均分配學额，本應是好事，但實際上佢地唸出來嘅所謂公平機制，基本上係佢地一厢情願嘅唸法，根本都無考虑現實嘅情况，结果好心做壊事，造成很多不公平的現象，每年為無數父母带來不必要壓力和痛苦！！！！

當然世上係無绝對公平嘅事，但至少唔好再加埋啲不知所謂嘅遊戲规则，令原本不太公平嘅事，變得更加不公平。

我同意wen2wen所講，那些甚麽宗教分、父母關係群带分等，根本就係排除異己嘅政策，完全同佢地話“有教無類、普及教育”嘅方针背道而驰！

再講甚麽按地址分區選校，美其名是為免學童要長途跋涉上學，實際係不想有些學校太多人争，有啲學校又無人讀，结果搞到有啲家長要虚報地址，真係無個樣搞嗰樣！

講真，每個人嘅要求都唔同，有啲家長認為上學便利比較重要，但亦有家長認為學校質素更重要，唔介意路途逺！眼見不少為了讓自己的子女在心儀的私校讀書，也不介意子女長途跋涉上學嗎？

為甚麽教處要抹杀家長的選擇權！！！？？？難道我們這些家長的智慧比你們低嗎！！！



越講越火滚！！！！   

原帖由 wen2wen 於 08-11-24 16:12 發表

教署侷家長賭『小一選校』一鋪。如果公正，公平，公開，家長輸了都『份』。 教署偏要在自行收生時，要計兄姊分，計宗教分，父母的母校分。

兄姊分：兄姊同校可以照顧弟妹啊。不知能照幾年呢？兄姊現在小六。 弟妹明年入小一。剛好 ...

[ 本帖最後由 filleul 於 08-11-25 10:48 編輯 ]

jojoliu

你真係好火滚喎 ,有咩辦法,我身邊宜家多左好多"教徒",都係因為政府

原帖由 filleul 於 08-11-25 10:40 發表
同意到極！！

我們偉大的教處搞親出來的，都係一镬泡！不知所謂！究竟他們的腦袋去咗邊！！

無錯，呢個機制原意係想平均分配學额，本應是好事，但實際上佢地唸出來嘅所謂公平機制，基本上係佢地一厢情願嘅唸法，根本都無考虑現實嘅情况，结果 ...

joetsang

原帖由 BBR 於 08-11-24 16:33 發表
我淨係覺得可唔可以唔好攪咁耐,第一輪完後點解唔快D第2輪,要家長等咁耐唔知為咩,攪到樣樣唔方便,早D比小朋友同家長settle down唔得咩!!!!!

絕對同意!!

linglingkiki

其實而家我地班家長是為了小朋友入小學而經攪到咁火滾，如果有家長有小朋友升中..個基制你睇到仲滾...不如又睇下而家派位制度又玩得幾多年..早兩年一條龍...而家條龍都吾知去左邊樹咯~~~而家玩計分...又睇下計得幾耐...教局的高官..人工十幾廿萬一個月...佢地諗d野...一定吾係普通市民諗一樣...如果吾係..我地大家都可以做高官啦...係咪???

Eunisven

絕對同意!! 好唔公平

charwes

Can't agree with you more. No single system can satisfy the demands of ALL parents. People with vested interest would prefer the existing system while the others would think it's unfair. The point is, no matter how you change the system, there would be vested interest groups.

原帖由 aknchan 於 08-11-25 10:31 發表
I can understand your disappointment but sadly there are simply NO 'FAIR' system.

1. Lets look at what happen when we remove the whole "自行收生" ,ignore all the points and remove the district limita ...

sharonman

原帖由 BBR 於 08-11-24 16:33 發表
我淨係覺得可唔可以唔好攪咁耐,第一輪完後點解唔快D第2輪,要家長等咁耐唔知為咩,攪到樣樣唔方便,早D比小朋友同家長settle down唔得咩!!!!!

同意,同意...

andrewpapa

in fact, is that all becoz of government official?  

Will there be responsibility of the "education organizations" too?  They build their school with the donation of their fellow church members, is that they reserve a right to count the religion points. "remember is count but not absolute advantage"

Why father and mothers or brother and sister can count? Why not? The old boys or old girls do contribute to build up the school reputation, no matter good or bad.

Look at the game from the school point of view,  who dare to formalize another system to pick student?  

By exam?  think about our DSS interview?     .

By donation? you will know what will our beloved "legislative councilor" next to move.

By big lucky draw? Will you really stop complaint if you can't get the school you like.  If I were facing this situation, i will say big lucky draw is not fair, coz i have no right to choose the school I like.

By distance? you will say government policy helps to build up uneven distribution of property price.

I fully agree that the system is not perfect. And the system cannot please us all.  But how?
Like the old time under british coloney, the parents line up at the school to apply and we take the entry exam? Nowadays, you will complain about they are to harsh to our kids.  

How can we make a perfect system?  This kind of compliants happen in Singapore, Canada, UK, The states too

I totally agree that the time is taking too long from phase 1 to phase 2. But this issue is not about fair or unfair. Is about timing only.  

Is that as a parent, we look at the name of the school too much.  And we look at our feeling and pride too much.

Or extremely speaking, we think that some schools are not up to standard that we should abandom them.  We should only keep the shcool we like and make 20 classes in one form.  Should we tell those not up to standard teachers how disappointed we are? No! No! They will say we are too harsh and not fair to them becoz they should not be the one who bear the full responsibility to our kids education.  parents and the students themselves should share too.

all i want to say - the situation now we face is the bad fruit that we seed before.  How to change? Stop complaint and teach the true value of education to our kids - 溫故知訢.

sorry for the 口水, you might not agree, pls don't yell at me

newfather

真係多左好多不知所謂既假教徒

試問咁勢利既家長, 佢地既下一代點會好 :;pppp:

andrewpapa

sorry should be 溫故知新

happypenguin

No doubt the first round of the system is extremely unfair. At least the game should limit the first round "hereditary seats" to a reasonable percentage, eg. 20-30% to make it a little bit fairer!

原帖由 andrewpapa 於 08-11-25 18:14 發表
in fact, is that all becoz of government official?  

Will there be responsibility of the "education organizations" too?  They build their school with the donation of their fellow church members, is t ...

See

我最唔like就係宗教分。不知所謂？用我地d錢辦學重要分宗教分？我呢d唔係信上帝的就無份交稅咩？d人假信教就重賤格，不知恥！

wen2wen

有人話:無可能人人都滿意,只有接受現有制度。那是見仁見智。



我主要提的是自行收生時，可以改善的地方：



賭局規矩都由教署定好。講都無用。學校投注站應該參考馬會的方法，給家長多點資訊。
1)讓『必收生』先投注。
2)現場列出：已用的『必收生』名額和各種分數的已投注人數。
讓到場投注的家長知到投注額和賠率。免得家長盲目投注。




见到現場情勢不好，低分的家長可以改投較冷的對象.

(但大家都拖到last minute 至投注，又点好呢？哈哈!)

mow-mow

Yours is not a bad idea.
All they have to do is to have a preliminary round for 必收生. Once these 必收生 numbers have been calculated & announced, then the rest can proceed the same way as now.

原帖由 wen2wen 於 08-11-25 23:27 發表


有人話:無可能人人都滿意,只有接受現有制度。那是見仁見智。



我主要提的是自行收生時，可以改善的地方：



賭局規矩都由教署定好。講都無用。學校投注站應該參考馬會的方法，給家長多點資訊。
1)讓『必收生』先投注 ...

sea

係呀! 我有個朋友係遞表前半年成日話跟我返教會, 但係都無聲氣, 點知遞表前一週問我可唔可以叫個牧師即刻幫佢個仔受浸, 我咪叫佢去城門河自己浸囉! 呵呵!

Sea

原帖由 See 於 08-11-25 22:24 發表
我最唔like就係宗教分。不知所謂？用我地d錢辦學重要分宗教分？我呢d唔係信上帝的就無份交稅咩？d人假信教就重賤格，不知恥！

super11mum

同意! 唔通香港的人多過頭，想嚇死哂D家長.........

原帖由 filleul 於 08-11-25 10:40 發表
同意到極！！

我們偉大的教處搞親出來的，都係一镬泡！不知所謂！究竟他們的腦袋去咗邊！！

無錯，呢個機制原意係想平均分配學额，本應是好事，但實際上佢地唸出來嘅所謂公平機制，基本上係佢地一厢情願嘅唸法，根本都無考虑現實嘅情况，结果 ...

filleul

係！我绝對同意： "No single system can satify the demands of ALL parents"。正如我之前所講，世上當然没有绝對公平的事。

但問题是，按現行制度，教處選擇了去滿足少數有”vested interest“嘅一群，而犧牲其餘大多數没有哪些“巧立名目”的分數的一群！

我所指的是在學额分配上，能否作出一個平衡。我同意wen2wen的講法，應從新厘定首輪自行收生的學额。

對於有兄姐在同一學校就讀的必收生學额制度，我個人没有反對，但對於哪個所謂的計分制度，看到有些發表提到“父母對母校的贡献（校友分），或對教會的资助有交代（宗教分）”云云，我雖不太認同，但只好無奈的接受！

對於享有“特别分”的一群，某程度上已享有（我個人認為）“不公平”的“優勢”，因這些“特别分”只是建基於“群带關係”上，根本和小朋友本身的能力無關，所以是否要在首輪预留50%那麽大比重的學额，值得商榷！

唉！小一選校根本就是一個現實世界的缩影，要在這個残酷的現實社會生存，實力不是最重要的因素，最重要的是”關係“。我想小朋友和家長在這個"小一派位”遊戲中真的獲益良多，多謝教處教曉我們：“凡事只能靠關係、靠運氣！！！！”

原帖由 charwes 於 08-11-25 17:20 發表
Can't agree with you more. No single system can satisfy the demands of ALL parents. People with vested interest would prefer the existing system while the others would think it's unfair. The point is, ...