wannabe

引用:

原帖由 chefung 於 2009-6-7 10:48 AM 發表

Another point, it's still in your mind that FUTURE depends on SCHOOL
Who says that a kid can't have a good future by themselves even they don't have a good public exam result?

A certificate cert ...

this is what i can observe / get from the current education system and employment situation in HK  :smile_45:
and i told you i'm one of the kids without any good public exam result and HKCEE is the only public exam i did before entering in the real world

chefung

引用:

原帖由 wannabe 於 2009-6-7 10:58 AM 發表


this is what i can observe / get from the current education system and employment situation in HK  :smile_45:
and i told you i'm one of the kids without any good public exam result and HKCEE is t ...

Then have you observed that the quality of students with better public exam results are generally better than those students with poorer public exam results?

That is my main argument with limited resources

Pretty interesting, tell you one case
I had a classmate, a pretty closed one in highschool. ( we had lunch together every school day)

His HKCEE is 0 and went to Australia for university ( or some years in prep school, not sure )
That's because their parents are fairly rich.
Now, he got the degree and doing some financial related jobs.

Without talent in studying, you have to have a sugar daddy for that.

Then, do you say having money is not fair !
How can he go to Australia for university and I have to stay in HK?
Like your case, if your parents were my parents without money, your way doesn't work. You are one of the relatively lucky kid.

My brother got 0 in HKCEE too but he is not that lucky like you

[ 本帖最後由 chefung 於 2009-6-7 11:05 AM 編輯 ]

wannabe

引用:

原帖由 chefung 於 2009-6-7 10:56 AM 發表

How can they justify your entrance?
That's something for them to judge
and surely your example is not valid unless you can specify what they based on to judge your enrollment

There are few hund ...

not valid? :smile_45:
i took the in-house 6-mth bridging course and once passed all subjects, i got thru' to the undergraduate program

chefung

引用:

原帖由 wannabe 於 2009-6-7 11:03 AM 發表



not valid? :smile_45:
i took the in-house 6-mth bridging course and once passed all subjects, i got thru' to the undergraduate program

Ya, that's the reason
You still had to PASS things to get entry
Although it may not be a "big public" exam, it's still like exams.
If you failed those one, they don't accept you. That's exam too even in your case

The case in HK, if you failed the public exam once, you can retake it. It's not saying that you failed and force you to quit. You still have chance. I do have friends having 1x points in HKCEE in first take and got 2x points in 2nd take.

In HK, either you scores many As in HKCEE then you can skip AL.
Or one can study high diploma and pass them with good results. Then one has chance to get in university without success in AL/CE ( That's my cousins are doing, one of them failed in CE and another one failed in AL). Both of them get in university now.

Can it be the counter examples to your "public exam only" HK system?

I don't think HK education system has problem with spoon-feeding or so except 3 points

-Confusing language of instruction. That really sucks to both students and teachers.

-Only 3 years of university. I am one of the victim of this. Can't cope with the US graduate
courses.

-Fixed science/art/commercial streams. Course choosing is not flexible, although I will pick science anyway. It is due to lack of resources again.

Back to the points, resources, 1 more year in university is much more expensive than 1 more year in highschool.

[ 本帖最後由 chefung 於 2009-6-7 11:17 AM 編輯 ]

wannabe

引用:

原帖由 chefung 於 2009-6-7 11:00 AM 發表


Then have you observed that the quality of students with better public exam results are generally better than those students with poorer public exam results?

That is my main argument with limit ...

glad that you use GENERALLY this word ...
but what do mean by quality? as in what? by and large, public exams covers only limited areas and can never use to judge students' ability or quality

in my HS, we got classes conducting in pure english and chinese ... from the marks on paper itself, friends of mine who learnt under the chinese teaching were no match for those in english stream ... but guess what? most students in chinese stream who were given up by the teachers and HK education system in the past are now outperforming many others ... good on them!

Sharpie

sounds like a debate going on....

hi all

wannabe

引用:

原帖由 chefung 於 2009-6-7 11:00 AM 發表


Then have you observed that the quality of students with better public exam results are generally better than those students with poorer public exam results?

That is my main argument with limit ...

by the way, who said my parents are rich? :smile_45:
i wish i born with a sliver-spoon in my mouth but that's not the case
but i have to say i'm lucky that my parents could afford me with the low currency rate at the time (1 AU to 3 HK)
other than that, i did study damn hard to get my bachelor done with distinction so you couldnt say i used money to 'buy' the degree ... it aint fair to me!

chefung

引用:

原帖由 wannabe 於 2009-6-7 11:19 AM 發表


glad that you use GENERALLY this word ...
but what do mean by quality? as in what? by and large, public exams covers only limited areas and can never use to judge students' ability or quality
...

First of all, quality I mean, ability to study in general

I agree that public exams covers only limited areas and can never use to judge students' ability. OK, I have a hypothesized question about HR problem above.

Back to my previous previous points, resources.

If you can't show that you can study well in HS, how can we trust you can study well in university? Ability needs to be built up, and possibly not only through studying, but not for the knowledge. Knowledge has to be studied.

The real world doesn't care too much about university knowledge in general, but their working attitude and abilities. However, then why do you care about your diploma if you are a very good person.

The best way probably is a public tests with a lot of interviewers interviewing individual students ONE BY ONE. That probably truly picks the best students. But then, how much resources we have to put in for this selection process?

Sharpie

引用:

原帖由 wannabe 於 2009-6-7 11:19 AM 發表 glad that you use GENERALLY this word ... but what do mean by quality? as in what? by and large, public exams covers only limited areas and can never use to judge students' ability or quality  ...

in US, the ccase is really different
i can hardly believe a student with 2200 SAT and graduate from Ivy League would end up doing some crappy work

the only reason they would fail is probably having some mental problem because they studied too hard

there are alternative ways to get into universities (via community college) but it's different status in a sense most employers prefer those graudated from good schools

i believe there are always exceptional cases
however, in my country, public exams are really important in both undergrad and postgrad admission

Sharpie

引用:

原帖由 chefung 於 2009-6-7 11:31 AM 發表 First of all, quality I mean, ability to study in generalI agree that public exams covers only limited areas and can never use to judge students' ability. OK, I have a hypothesized question abou ...

agreed with the resouces point that it's just too costly to evaluate a person's ability through his beahviors

imagine how many resumes and candidate those MNCs have everyday and who would spend to select the right ones

public exam is good for benchmarking