Q Are language policy and the early admission scheme responsible for the brain drain?
I am writing in response to the article 'Only one top school has pupil with 5 As' (City, July 9). I believe the system that treats students with different financial and educational backgrounds differently should be abolished.
I sat for the HKCEE in 1997 and felt lucky my family was able to support me studying abroad so I didn't have to stay in Hong Kong for A-Levels. I have to confess I was a bit scared by the exams despite my outstanding results at certificate level. I did not want to go through the test prep torture again after tremendous hard work for the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination.
What's worse, the current system gives options to certain groups of people while leaving the rest without them. Some students, like myself, were lucky enough to study abroad after Form Six because our families were relatively well-off and others joined the Early Admission Scheme because of their strong academic records.
Consequently, the A-Level exams became a punishment for students who were neither rich nor smart. Every year, when the results of the HKCEE and Hong Kong A-Levels are released, the media begins counting how many top students come from the elite schools and tries to find out who the stars of the year are. Such obsession may not help us evaluate our educational system in the long term.
We don't need a school system that produces professional test-takers. We can find many across the border. Nor do we want a system that favours some people unfairly. There had been much talk about expanding the university programmes to four years and abolishing A-Level exams. Eight years after the handover, it is time to change our 5+2+3 British practice and integrate it with the American and Chinese 6+4 system.
Simon Ho Wang, Sheung Shui