現代教育補習社宣布掛牌上市，這個決定必然有利現存股東。可能這是比銀行借貸成本還要低的擴充方法，又或者現存股東希望利用新股東注入的資金，來減少自己的投資和預期損失。
我們暫時無從引證，但如果我們從一個可能存有偏見的角度看，認為補習社的興旺是反映日校教育制度的失敗，那麼現代教育的股價將會成為投資者對正規教育制度的不信任票。但如果補習社真的是針對日校制度的不足而跑出來的話，現代教育自己又怎麼會同時間營運正規日校呢？
日夜校齊辦代表着多樣化經營，提供不同服務。再者，在我這個內行人的眼中，補習社的興起並沒有改善普遍學生的分析及語文能力。在大學裏任職的導師亦持相同意見，這樣看，近八成中學生光顧補習社又獲得甚麼服務？
日校低分學生 成補習社商機
學生接收的服務當然視乎老師的個人決定，所以，最終問題離不開日校老師與補習社老師各自面對的不同情況。由開學那一天起，日校老師所面對的學生不單止數目固定，而且還缺乏流動性，因為學生轉校是非常罕見的現象。日校學生亦很少機會有權要求校方更換老師。在這情況下，老師與學生在配對上產生問題便在所難免。老師有兩項選擇：（一）維持整體學生學術水平，花較多時間於一些水準較低的學生身上，（二）爭取公開考試A級成績數目，把潛在優異生作為設計教材筆記和講學模式的對象，放棄在班內水準較低的同學，亦即是出賣後者的利益。
只要資助學校不能合法地把爭取最高金錢利益作為其經營目的，自然地這些學校會改去爭取非金錢利益。依賴學生的A級成績來作品牌效應便是常見的後果。大部分被漠視，被放棄的學生便成為補習社的商機。補習社的成功在於它不搞精英，盡管很多補習社都慣常地在廣告中標榜奪A目的，但對象是針對一般大眾學生，帶給他們一點不離不棄的感覺。所以，筆記內容必須顯淺，一望即明，減低學生爭取成功感的交易費用。
筆記特別顯淺 增學生成功感
但膚淺的教材難以應付公開試的要求，補習社老師於是面對另一問題：怎樣說服學生筆記內容經已足夠？老師自己的財富便成為一項有關的保證，又如「座駕法拉利」，「自住凱旋門」及「多次貼中考試題目」等演變為「天王」的徽號，成功人士的代表，大大增加筆記的權威性。簡單來說，「補習天王」必須依靠信息費用的存在才能出現。
8 則留言:
見解明確
Dr chan, I am one of your "不離不棄"students. Thank you so much!
"補習無助成績" and "筆記內容必須顯淺，一望即明，減低學生爭取成功感的交易費用"
I really doubt these statements. Do you have any solid data to back it up? I think you have generalized too much in your article.
I just had my A levels this year. I didn't attend any tutorial classes, but I did borrow the tutorial materials from my classmates to study sometimes and buy some second-hand notes. From my observation and experience, quite a few 'star tutors' prepared notes that is much more difficult and rich in contents than the school textbooks. The explanations and problem selections in those notes are also more in-depth and harder than those given by day-school teachers. These additional materials certainly help those 'top students'.
For those academically less-abled students, they really do benefit from second explanations on topics studied at school.
Thus in a way, your conclusion "代表着多樣化經營，提供不同服務" is correct, albeit for entirely different reasons. The tutorial centres actually provide a remedy for the problem you mentioned: difficulty in ensuing all students with varying abilities can be catered for in a day-school. Students can choose which tutors to satisfy their individual needs.
These extra materials from tutorial schools really can help any student, but the ultimate responsibility lies with the student himself/herself. Only when the student makes full use of the materials can they enrich their learning. I guess what we see now is the result from the difference in the efficiency of using those materials.
continue @next post ==>
continue <==from previous post
"「補習天王」必須依靠信息費用的存在才能出現。 "
"補習無助成績 「天王」全靠宣傳 "
This is some baseless generalization again.
Of course, advertising has a huge role in popularizing those tutorial schools. However, as I have explained, you cannot deny that quite a few tutors really do put in some serious effort in preparing lessons and supplementing materials, even if a few tutors are not up to scratch. Students really do see the value in those tutorial classes, something they miss from day schools. It would be unfair to say that the quality work from those centres (at least for the majority) and the actual judgement/experience shared among students have little to no bearing on the success of those centres. Even if quite a few students do identify the PR exercises as important factors in their decisions, present-day students are not complete fools and decide (maybe partly) rationally for themselves.
The present-day public and media seem too pre-occupied with negative emotions. Various scandals and the extravagant advertisements appear to cause people to reject the merits of tutorial schools out of hand, or at least, make them biased.
Yes, it is a pity that education has turned into a business. Yes, it is a pity that students have become cash cow for a few students. Yes it is a pity that school teachers are garnering less respect. Yes, it is really objectionable as to whether more 'robust language' from some tutors is justified.
But all these phenomena are really the products from our sorry state of education system. If you really need to blame someone, blame those in the Education Bureau. There is a gap between the needs of the students, and those provided by and demanded from the system. Others step in, making a big profit along the way. I find it pretty rational. In some ways, the education sector IS an industry, generating jobs and contributing to the economy and society, even if the original aim is nobler. Think about how the schools are very concerned with accepting good students, and how both elite and poor schools advertise themselves with students' accomplishments, in both academics and extra-curricular activities. It's just that the tutorial centres are more overt in their business-side.
===DISCLAIMER==
For the record, I must say I too despise the overt advertising by tutorial centres, but I have come to accept them as part of reality. What I dislike even more, is that the tutorial lessons spend too much time on irrelevant talkings, apparently 'to make the lessons more interesting'. For the less motivated students, maybe these are of great use to them, but for me, these are some great turn-offs. (I had some tutorial lessons in F.5, plus my classmates talked about the experience, so I know)
However, despite all these, they do not dampen my admiration for the dedication of most of the tutors to preparing all those materials. There are really some top-notch stuff produced by them. Hence I decided to just use the notes and skip the tutorial lessons for F.6-7. And these wonderful materials played a significant role in securing my good A-level grades too. (particularly for physics)
I guess people really need to consider both sides before making any judgement.
我相信陳sir所針對的天王並不是所有補習界的老師, 而是一些不斷大肆宣傳而沒有真才實學的騙子。而你所指的那些學生們也只是某類人云亦云的考生(也許為數不少),但本文內容加上標題真的很容易會讓一些"行外人"有over generalization的感覺...
我曾看過某稍有人識的補習老師, 出版的教英文書籍, 裏面排版錯漏百出 & 有本作文書裏面有一篇的某一段是抄網上的某篇文一模一樣沒有改過, 離晒諎~
老師，我之前係遵理補開你星期2屯門個班的！現在升學了好懷念你的課！你現在不更新blog了嗎？
应该听一下MC hotdog 的《补补补》
發佈留言