转载一篇ABC NEWS关于OC考试后的评论文章

kc_zhang

文章摘自ABC NEWS,作者Saman Shad is a freelance writer:
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2 ... 1604608?pfmredir=sm

"He got into the opportunity class," my friend gushed when we met last week.

I'm happy for her and, more importantly, relieved for her son.

At only 9 years old, he carries the weight of high expectations.

The opportunity class, or "OC stream", was rolled out in NSW to accelerate children who are academically gifted.

But securing a spot in the prestigious program is a numbers game — and with only 1,700 places for some 11,000 applicants, the odds are stacked against them.

Since the age of eight, her son has spent every minute of his spare time studying; his parents pushing him to his limit.

His holidays were spent sitting test after test, five days a week in pursuit of a place in the OC stream at our local primary school.

This, it seems, is what it takes to make the cut.

But ultimately, at what cost?

Parents spending $20,000 on test preparation
Parents are well aware that the odds are stacked against their children. When you account for the number of places available at inner-city schools, those odds become even starker.

While the OC stream was designed to give children a classroom environment where they could excel, in recent times, it seems the classes are full of those children who have excelled at sitting a test.

It means children (or rather, their parents) are forced to up the ante, forking out exorbitant fees for tuition colleges to get exam ready.

"Parents can spend more than $20,000 a year on preparation for [opportunity class] or selective high school tests," NSW Department of Education secretary Mark Scott remarked in 2017.

And they do.

At our local tuition college, intensive coaching holiday workshops cost $100 a day or more, depending on how many hours the children attend.

If the intention of the OC and selective stream classes was to give children from disadvantaged backgrounds a boost, then that has certainly gone out of the window.

There has been much talk about overhauling the test so it could not be coached.

However, for now things remain the same.


Coaching is not for us
When my daughter started Year 5 this year, I asked her teacher about whether she should sit the exam to gain entry into a selective high school.

My daughter is a naturally bright girl who seems to do well in class as well as her NAPLAN tests.

She hasn't, however, been coached.

"If she wants to have a chance, then she should probably get some tuition," her teacher suggests.

"More than anything so she knows what to expect in the test."

We look into a nearby coaching college and call up to make an initial enquiry before our daughter is quickly booked in to sit a two hour exam.

When we return to pick her up, I can see straight away she's unhappy.

She tells me that after the test, a mother who came to pick up her son slapped him across the face because he didn't get the marks she had wanted for him.

I look past my daughter and see inside a classroom. There's row after row of bent heads, many children as young as five or six sweating over test papers.

As a family, we decide that coaching is not for us.

I'm happy for my daughter to sit the selective test with the knowledge she probably won't get in, but at least I know she's had a childhood.

For some parents, wellbeing is secondary
For the many children spending their holidays inside coaching colleges, their lives from now until the end of their schooling will be intensely dedicated and largely devoid of play.

My friend has very stringent plans for her son.

He will go to OC, then to a selective school and then to university.

"To do medicine or law?" I ask, because ultimately, that's what all this hard work is geared for, isn't it? To get them to a degree with a high enough ATAR to show it's prestigious.

"No," my friend says. "He can do what he wants."

"So why all the pressure?" I ask her.

She shrugs. Perhaps she doesn't know herself.

"I just want him to be happy," she says.

All parents want their kids to be happy. But I can't help but wonder what emotional and mental toll spending their free time in small, airless rooms studying, while facing high parental expectations, has on these very young children.

Perhaps for many parents, wellbeing concerns are secondary. Ultimately, it's about prestige and maybe even bragging rights.

Your child got into a selective school or an OC class. It shows how good you are as parents, right?

Or is it something more competitive, like keeping up with the Joneses?

Regardless, there needs to be a better way, because for now it's the kids who are suffering for their parent's ambitions.

dandan2019

道理是对的。可现实就。。。

lisam

dandan2019 发表于 2019-10-21 10:36
道理是对的。可现实就。。。

我来说说现实。只说我观察到的事实，事实代表什么我不知道。

十多年前，中国小升初，每个小学都是考得最好的进入重点中学。按道理初中升高中应该还是这批人，但不是，只有1/3的升上（中考）本校高中部，而2/3的却是普通中学考上的。这2/3是以前小升初的时候被淘汰的。考大学同理，按道理985 211 应该是各大省重点市重点包圆的，但不是，很多区重点会出现很多在之前中考没考上更高一级重点高中的学霸考上985 211，而且即使进入大学后还是学霸。

OCV

简直妖魔化补习的孩子和父母，选择做怎样的父母和父母要怎样培养自己的孩子，都是个人的选择，为什么不想补习的父母老是要攻击去补习的家庭？好像没有看见去补习的家庭品论不去补习的。去补习的孩子都是被逼的不快乐的，不去补习的孩子都有快乐的童年，那些讨厌的混混teenage打劫闹事的肯定没补习喜欢吗？OC，selective school，好大学学医法，没毛病啊，如果这位母亲觉得看不上，那就走自己的路，爱学啥学啥，干嘛那么酸呢？真相就是，自己觉得自己孩子聪明本来可以很轻松走这条路，结果被补习的孩子挡了路很不爽，别的黑不了，只好黑人家童年不快乐，问题是补习的孩子学习好了也可以很快乐，哪个父母不觉得自己孩子聪明？

goodygoody38

说实话，对孩子有梦想追求·的家长远远好过那些让孩子自生自灭，甚至走上吸毒危害社会的家长。澳洲这个社会除了华人印度人韩国人，对孩子抓学习的家长太少了。导致在公立学校学生参差不齐，去给女儿班里做阅读自愿者，有几个孩子一年级还不会握笔写字。学校旁边有个公园，有一次3点·去·学校帮忙，见到女儿班里的同学跟不知是邻居还是兄弟姐妹6个小学小孩没有家长陪伴在公园玩。从3点放学开始玩，到·我7点搞玩事情他们还在那里。

最怕的就是这种批评家长选择让孩子努力的文章。学习可以是一种快乐，达到学习目的的可以是一种快乐，当然有人选择无所作为，也是一种快乐。前者明显要付出更多，更值得人赞扬。

lauraineyan

纯粹是个人选择，不想自己的孩子补习没问题，别人的孩子管不了评论不了，而且也不该发表评论。

一司机

可以理解作者，对于tardy乃立国之本的国家，补习的确匪夷所思，他们根本无法理解学习也可以带来快乐。人生路那么长，从小知道为了自己的目标努力不好吗？娃这次知道努力会带来好结果应该会更成熟，和娃小时候的best friend快跑进国家队效果一样啊。OC后问娃要不要减点课，人家还不同意。

黑眼圈

说实话，OC真的不是必要的。稍稍准备一下就考上最好了，考不上也没什么，长远来看，真的是浮云。

staycool

该记者太太太夸张了。

tutututu

任何的事情都需要努力和坚持，文化课，体育，乐器全都是一样的。只有努力过了，才不会后悔。

degra

最怕就是从一个极端走到另一个极端

caibutou2008

与其花那么多时间来批评OC和SELECTIVE补习是否值得，不如花时间探讨怎么提高学校的教育水准，如何考核学生的学习成果，如何考核老师的教学水平。基本的东西提高了，自然OC和SELECTIVE就不显得那么重要了。小学教育已经成为一个形式，澳洲的未来要为这个付上代价的。

更多的是白人觉得OC和SELECTIVE被亚裔攻占，心理不平衡了。其实很多西人花很多钱送孩子去私校，参加很多PROGRAM，难道和补习不也是类似的吗？西人的白领阶级和精英阶级，他们真的会放养孩子？

nis5

caibutou2008 发表于 2019-10-21 14:15
与其花那么多时间来批评OC和SELECTIVE补习是否值得，不如花时间探讨怎么提高学校的教育水准，如何考核学生 ...

这个记者的点应该是针对OC和精英学校。这些公立学校的出发点是给有能力的学生额外的机会。但是如果这些学校的的选拔需要要靠家长每年花2万块送学生去补习，那么那些出不起两万块补习的学生怎么办？他们岂不是永远没有机会了？这个和花2万送私立学校是不同的。

nis5

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 14:33
这个记者的点应该是针对OC和精英学校。这些公立学校的出发点是给有能力的学生额外的机会。但是如果这些学 ...

比如有学生A和B。本来学生A和B都没有补习，A的学习要好一些。但是学生B的家长很着急，决定每年花2万去补习。然后B的考试就比A好了。那么对于学生A和B，精英学校应该收哪个入学？

caibutou2008

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 14:33
这个记者的点应该是针对OC和精英学校。这些公立学校的出发点是给有能力的学生额外的机会。但是如果这些学 ...

我不这么认为。他的意思是整个系统已经导致必须补习才能考上。这个不是OC和精英学校的错，题目也不是他们出的。我相信这个系统刚设立的时候不是这样的，可现在已经变味了。

其实教育本身就是一个资源，所以能付的起高价的，必然有机会占有更多资源。这个是在哪里都是一样的。关键政府需要做是把基础教育抓好，而不是无所作为。

caibutou2008

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 14:37
比如有学生A和B。本来学生A和B都没有补习，A的学习要好一些。但是学生B的家长很着急，决定每年花2万去补 ...

考分达到的那个

小小白虎

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 14:37
比如有学生A和B。本来学生A和B都没有补习，A的学习要好一些。但是学生B的家长很着急，决定每年花2万去补 ...

比如有学生A和B。本来学生A和B都没有补习，A的学习要好一些。
但是B花了很多时间去参加体育运动、乐器、辩论、演讲、科学俱乐部，这些项目样样在行。而A虽然不补习，除了成绩其他都没有B出色。

精英学校要选A还是B呢？

所以最后还是一刀切看成绩

黑猫白猫

这样会有人说A有人在家教，而B没有:)

小小白虎

黑猫白猫 发表于 2019-10-21 14:43
这样会有人说A有人在家教，而B没有:)

对啊，每个个体都不一样，家庭不一样，语言背景不一样，父母学识也不同，怎么比呀？

nis5

caibutou2008 发表于 2019-10-21 14:42
考分达到的那个

这样贫穷的家庭岂不是永远没有机会了吗？

nis5

caibutou2008 发表于 2019-10-21 14:41
我不这么认为。他的意思是整个系统已经导致必须补习才能考上。这个不是OC和精英学校的错，题目也不是他们 ...

其实教育本身就是一个资源，所以能付的起高价的，必然有机会占有更多资源

这么说不符合澳洲的价值观。公立教育的目的是让所有的人都有接受教育的机会。

caibutou2008

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 15:03
这样贫穷的家庭岂不是永远没有机会了吗？

贫穷也可以考到高分啊

caibutou2008

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 15:04
这么说不符合澳洲的价值观。公立教育的目的是让所有的人都有接受教育的机会。 ...

这个和澳洲价值观联系不大。事实就摆在那里。

nis5

caibutou2008 发表于 2019-10-21 15:09
贫穷也可以考到高分啊

是啊。本来分挺高。但是没钱补习，被压过了。

nis5

caibutou2008 发表于 2019-10-21 15:09
这个和澳洲价值观联系不大。事实就摆在那里。

的确是事实。但是一个文明的社会应该尽力去维持公平。

caibutou2008

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 15:11
是啊。本来分挺高。但是没钱补习，被压过了。

所以说教育也是一种资源

caibutou2008

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 15:11
的确是事实。但是一个文明的社会应该尽力去维持公平。

觉得一个好的社会只能尽力去趋近于公平。完全公平的社会其实是没有竞争力的了，成了大锅饭了，没有了优胜劣汰，人也没有了上进的动力。共产主义啊。

tjmumu

事实上 补习了还没进oc/selective的 还大有人在；从来不参加补习， 还能上oc/selective的也不是没有。说明补习只是学校教育的必要补充，澳洲的公立教育无论数量还是质量上说都是不够的。要在澳洲教育体系中，得益于精英教育部分，额外家庭投入是需要的，除了无法控制的天赋，就是或多或少的补习和课外辅导。

tjmumu

nis5 发表于 2019-10-21 15:04
这么说不符合澳洲的价值观。公立教育的目的是让所有的人都有接受教育的机会。 ...

都有机会，公立教育领进门，修行进取在个人（家庭）。

nis5

caibutou2008 发表于 2019-10-21 15:13
所以说教育也是一种资源

补习学校这种资源需要购买。
但是政府提供的公立教育部分，不应该是价高者得。