Return to 自反而縮,雖千萬人,吾往矣

Is any of these the real reason against the Vocablearning Project ?

Alleged reasons Answers to the query
Parents and Students do not support the 10-min daily exercise as a compulsory assessment item. In a survey conducted by the school, the no. of parents opting the project as compulsory outnumbered the no. of parents opting the project as voluntary. It is almost impossible to ask all students of any schools to add a compulsory assessment item to their daily work voluntarily, no matter how beneficial the item is. Even if the subject is changed to “Having Curry Chicken as lunch”, the students’ opinion would be the same. Please don’t take advantage of the students. This is simply an autocratic/collusive decision. Even Voluntary Work can be made compulsory in the school, why can’t a 10-min a day cost-effective practice that has a very high chance in doubling the university entrance rate be.
The university admission rate of the school is already approaching 100%, proclaimed by Mr.Tam in an Applydaily interview. (The value was only 80-90% 3 months ago announced in a student assembly.) Therefore, there is no need to implement any corrective measures. This is a total dumb lie. I have evidence which has been subjected to validation by the principal proving that the UGC-subsidized degree admission rate is only about 28.1%. Mr. Tam switched the subject of statistical in the retort in order to deceive everybody. I have many witnesses of F7 graduates who are willing to testify that this is simply a lie, a lie used to evade the accountability of a principal on the very negative value-addedness of the school in the last 10 years at least.
A foreign language is best learnt in context. The project aims at helping a learner to learn effectively in context by helping him to retain all the words he has ever come across in his normal learning context. No extra words are targeted.
Extra workload would be imposed onto the teachers. It is guaranteed that no extra work will be imposed onto the teachers.
The teachers were already working hard. Learning outcome does not only depend on the diligence of teachers. If this is the only factor that matters, the figure 28.1% told us that the teachers were not working hard enough.
Students don’t need to know so many words. Numerous researches disproved this.
Students can infer the meaning of the unknown words from the context effectively. Numerous researches disproved this.
The project may have a detrimental effect on English learning. The research findings garnered disproved this.
Mr Paul Yip wants to use the project to strive for the position of the Principal of the school or has a financial interest with the project. Mr Paul Yip resigned from the position of the Assistant Principal and agreed to forfeit the copyright of the program to the school in order to move the project forward.
Only those students with high motivation will benefit from the project. The research findings garnered disproved this.
The project can be conducted on a voluntary basis. In a recent survey conducted by the school, the number of parents opting the project as compulsory outnumbered the number of parents opting it as voluntary; the effectiveness of a voluntary scheme would only be about 1/4 of that of a compulsory scheme; the UGC-funded degree offering rate of the school will strand at about 28.1% and will never reach the normal level of 75.5%.
The resolution of the School Betterment Team that academic performance would be the main focus of the school is no longer the top priority of the school. No discussions have ever been made to rescind the resolution in any meetings of the School Betterment Team. Who has the right to abandon an agreed resolution without another School Betterment Team meeting?
Students should be given freedom to choose. Free choice should be based on informed and well-thought decision. Are all stakeholders aware of the difference between 28.1% and 75.5%  and ready to bear the consequence of the performance gap? Does the school give freedom to students to choose everything? If not, what are the criteria used by the school to decide what the students can or cannot choose?
Mr Paul Yip is no long a staff member of the school. Mr Paul Yip was once the Assistant Principal of the school in charge of curriculum. If this is the real reason against the project, the project should have gone through already.

Jan 2012

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.