First, one is still paying for those schools with tax money, in which Christians are overrepresented by their service by at least 5 times (some less than 10% of people are Christian in HK in total), with which if he so decides that he should go private school, that money is NOT refunded (unlike US)

Then again:

Of course there's no such exodus, because the parents has no choice at all (there simply aren't enough seats to move into - HK education system is SATURATED, look at that damn 43 people class at every high school in the urban area, and then a self-feeding ranking system ensures underfunded schools always gets underfunded), and they won't voice it, period. (oh in fact the students themselves who ARE the ones under the education, is conveniently out of the picture, again.)

No matter how that's distributed, how people "wants" to choose some 50% of people will end up there, no escape from that, period.

and that still neglects the funding/ranking attribution issue. And then of course, since the general public are only informed by a botched ranking, they never really would care.
本帖最後由 dye 於 2010/7/6 15:49 編輯

There is an escape, if there is an exodus, school will and can change hands.

For representation, there is a HISTORY in Hong Kong education system.

People did voice their opinion over the Small Class problem.  Government even responds to it somewhat.

See their information http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeID=4189&langno=2

------------
And the school is not divided between public and private in HK, period.

It is a continum from public to private.  From public to somewhat public to private.  The public part is definitely irreligous.  The somewhat public and private school only some are religious, and of those religious, only some are Christian.
回復 62# dye


The question is: escape to WHAT? Some underfunded, circulatorily underrated school? Or International schools? PLENTLY of parents learnt enough to push their kids to ISes on A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TUITION A YEAR, did the government do a jack shit to promote international school? No, thank you.


And then, as said:

No, you can't have a present without a past, but who lives on the past, using it as an excuse not to deal with things they don't want to, won't ever get to the future, because they dwell on it. What I have shown, is even that was a limitation of the past is shown in Basic Law, just like how Article 23 is effectively ignored, if the people ever has any piece of a bit of determination, that piece of freedom is FAR EASIER, than, for example, universal suffrage 2012.

And then again, a people who cares only about voting but not their constitutional rights has clearly been shown in history - it's called German Republic post WWI.

The reason why past exist, most of the time, is that we need to learn a lesson from it.


I would expect one would aware that if a HISTORY is an excuse for everything, then the HISTORY of democracy in Hong Kong definitely shows that HK people deserves nothing remotely close to a democracy. Yes, everywhere has a history and a culture, try not to abuse that argument, thank you.
>And the school is not divided between public and private in HK, period.



>>Of course there's no such exodus, because the parents has no choice at all (there simply aren't enough seats to move into - HK education system is SATURATED, look at that damn 43 people class at every high school in the urban area, and then a self-feeding ranking system ensures underfunded schools always gets underfunded), and they won't voice it, period. (oh in fact the students themselves who ARE the ones under the education, is conveniently out of the picture, again.)

No matter how that's distributed, how people "wants" to choose some 50% of people will end up there, no escape from that, period.

and that still neglects the funding/ranking attribution issue. And then of course, since the general public are only informed by a botched ranking, they never really would care.


Same shit, same reply.
History is an an excuse, but history is a reality that cannot be changed.  You can only change the present and future, but not the past.  However, what you have today DEPENDS on the past.
-------------

Christian or not, it is the SAME pool of school.

An escape is an escape from the Christian school with SIMILIAR quality education.   If you wish to have an education above normal, ofcourse you will need to pay a price.
Article 23 is NOT ignore.  It is simply stopped from developement.  If anyone is violating Article 23 in a outrageous fashion with no doubt, he will be charged for sure.  (As I repeated, the law is still there!  HK people have NO right to abolish it unless they have a bloody rebellion against PRC)
Same shit, same reply.  There is a choice.  You compare option with option, not with some randomly set idealistic brenchmark.
It is the same for reputation of a school.  It is built on history.  Rome is not built in a day.  

Parents rush to apply to certain school not because they have religious background, but because they have a HISTORY of providing quality education.

In a sense, it only make sense for school providing quality education to have more funding (which in turn is able to provide even better quality education).  If government reverse the scheme and fund school with poor quality education, is it not an encouragement for poor management of schools?
>You can only change the present and future, but not the past.

And are people showing any effort to change it? no, period. same argument still applies.

>An escape is an escape from the Christian school with SIMILIAR quality education.  

and then a self-feeding ranking system ensures underfunded schools always gets underfunded), and they won't voice it, period. (oh in fact the students themselves who ARE the ones under the education, is conveniently out of the picture, again.)

One has to be quite dishonest to say that the education quality is SIMILAR, particularly when the schools on numbers, AND funding, are misrepresented by proportion.

FYI
Article 23:
>香港特別行政區應自行立法禁止任何叛國、分裂國家、煽動叛亂、顛覆中央人民政府及竊取國家機密的行為,禁止外國的政治性組織或團體在香港特別行政區進行政治活動,禁止香港特別行政區的政治性組織或團體與外國的政治性組織或團體建立聯繫 [1] [2]。

The Article ONLY SPECIFIES the government to MAKE THAT LAW, and that Law, up to this moment, is NOT legislated, it does not exist. For the article to be read word by word it is impossible for a person to be charged by article 23 alone as the article ONLY SPECIFIES THE LAW BE LEGISLATED, NOT THE LAW ITSELF, and as long as that a legislation out of Art.23 is not done, there's no legal charge to make on the basis of a law out of article 23, it's that simple. And will that EVER be brought to the table? not in forseeable future. (in fact, Art. 23 dont even have a date, how nice)
They have protest, they have write letters.  They have shown effect but you refuse to watch, period
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Basic_Law_Article_23

>The law was then shelved indefinitely.
The law is article 23.  It is there. Article 23 IS a law.
回復 70# dye

>They do have a protest against the government reform the school system.  They are concern, just not in your particular narrow topic.


>>Which means they simply don't care about their own religious freedom, and what's a people who would freely submit that? Someone in one of those "Islamic Republic" maybe?


That, or you want to swallow your own words again?
本帖最後由 Nomad 於 2010/7/6 16:13 編輯

In English:

Article 23:
>The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own ...

It is a law to specify the HK government to legislate that law, not a law directly on itself, if you can neither read the Chinese nor the English version of it,  that's your problem. In fact, if that law even exist, there'll be no need for the legislation, nor the debate around it.
By contrast,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau_national_security_law

THIS, for example, is a case where that law exist.
回復 69# Nomad

One has to be particularly dishonest to say they have no option. You must compare option with option.  With or without religion, there WILL be ranking.  Even, with or without government, there WILL still be ranking.

Even public school system in Canada has an underground ranking.
回復 76# dye


Except in US they don't receive government funding out of the ranking - as schools in HK does, they receive funding out government funding out of this thing called the state budget. Without this part, one would NOT have a circular system to drive outside school into the bottom.
回復 76# dye


And no, I did NOT, say, for example, NO ONE, has the option, but only saying that option is very limited and the substition service provided is by no means similar. In the same argument, a heck lot of liberty impaired can be said liberty granted.
本帖最後由 dye 於 2010/7/6 16:19 編輯

The school that recieve the best student (usually also meant richest student) WILL be very differently funded regardless of what the government do (or not do).  The basic drive behind the whole idea is the wish for every parent to give their children the best education.

For example, in PRC, you will notice that the land price increase sharply in famous (public) school area.
回復 73# Nomad

The second part is YOUR word.  Not mine.

I have said from the begining that they do care about their education and freedom.  Just not the way YOU wish them to be.
高級模式 | 發新話題
B Color Image Link Quote Code Smilies
換一個