Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
GSIS and Ma On Shan
- Thread starter genome
- Start date
The survey is three questions which basically are the below.
support the board in upgrade of school and move elementary to Ma On Shan for 4 years.
Do no support the move to Ma On Shan and thus will cause the school to shrink and quality suffer. ( this is even though at present in its present format it is an excellent school)
Let the board decide in that they know best.
The survey seems to miss the point that the parents are trying to raise to the board. We all support the redevelopment of the school and welcome the futuristic thinking of the board in that respect. We do not however think that moving elementary to Ma On Shan is the best option for the four years especially with empty schools on the Island. We are only asking for the chance to see if we can collectively work together to come up with something that will work. Thank you for your PM as well which I have gone back to seperately.
support the board in upgrade of school and move elementary to Ma On Shan for 4 years.
Do no support the move to Ma On Shan and thus will cause the school to shrink and quality suffer. ( this is even though at present in its present format it is an excellent school)
Let the board decide in that they know best.
The survey seems to miss the point that the parents are trying to raise to the board. We all support the redevelopment of the school and welcome the futuristic thinking of the board in that respect. We do not however think that moving elementary to Ma On Shan is the best option for the four years especially with empty schools on the Island. We are only asking for the chance to see if we can collectively work together to come up with something that will work. Thank you for your PM as well which I have gone back to seperately.
gooddog171
Banned
Board must change course for the good of the children
Its simple.
The board made a mistake in choosing Ma On Shan.
Ma On Shan is too far away and it is not fair/healthy/safe to have young children commute that far every day. Children's welfare should always come first in these decisions.
We all make mistakes - a sign of maturity and leadership is in admitting these mistakes and rectifying them - especially when children are involved.
The board must be patient and find a more appropriate site. Once they find an appropriate site they can do their renovation.
GSIS Parent
Its simple.
The board made a mistake in choosing Ma On Shan.
Ma On Shan is too far away and it is not fair/healthy/safe to have young children commute that far every day. Children's welfare should always come first in these decisions.
We all make mistakes - a sign of maturity and leadership is in admitting these mistakes and rectifying them - especially when children are involved.
The board must be patient and find a more appropriate site. Once they find an appropriate site they can do their renovation.
GSIS Parent
gooddog 171 thank you for responding.I tend to agree with you. The GSIS board has made a mistake in thinking that Ma On Shan is the solution. I am sure that if the Education Board of Hong Kong knew that there was this much opposition to the move by parents they would be willing to work with the school and parents to come up with something that works for all parties concerned. As with all good things it may need a little patience and perseverance but I am sure a solution can be found and do not believe it is Ma On shan.
gooddog171 is correct to say that the board should just realise their mistake and change tack. However, as GSIS parents we have been here before with surveys and consultations that the board disregarded. Last time it was about replacing A-levels with IB and even though a large majority of parents and teachers felt that A-levels served the children's interests best, the board still decided to force a switch to IB regardless.
We heard they expect to gain new students from Sai Kung, etc. to make up for the families quitting over the move. But I wonder if the board has taken into account the current economic climate in their projections?
We heard they expect to gain new students from Sai Kung, etc. to make up for the families quitting over the move. But I wonder if the board has taken into account the current economic climate in their projections?
Wanchai thank you for your reply.
I like you do not think that the school has taken into account the economic climate that we are in. At the last meeting that I attended the board proposed to get funding from banks, increase the cost of entry and rely on their investments for the rebuild.
Banks aren't lending.
People are being repatriated or losing their jobs and taking back their deposits and debentures. Not to mention the cash outflow of parents taking up places at other schools due to the move to Ma on Shan.
In respect to the schools investments they must be taking a serious hit on the mark to market at current valuations just like all assets out there.
Lastly I do not think that prospective new parents to the school would be willing to pay a high cost of entry when one part of the school is a building site,the other is a temporary site at Ma On Shan and the K classes are in Pok Fu Lam.
I like you do not think that the school has taken into account the economic climate that we are in. At the last meeting that I attended the board proposed to get funding from banks, increase the cost of entry and rely on their investments for the rebuild.
Banks aren't lending.
People are being repatriated or losing their jobs and taking back their deposits and debentures. Not to mention the cash outflow of parents taking up places at other schools due to the move to Ma on Shan.
In respect to the schools investments they must be taking a serious hit on the mark to market at current valuations just like all assets out there.
Lastly I do not think that prospective new parents to the school would be willing to pay a high cost of entry when one part of the school is a building site,the other is a temporary site at Ma On Shan and the K classes are in Pok Fu Lam.
Genome... just FYI.
When we contemplated GSIS as one of our choices, we went to GSIS to tour the facilities and were told that the school would be going through an upgrade (not told about the relocation to Ma On Shan) and were told that on top of the HKD$250 000 debenture that needed to be coughed up, we would possible be looking at a capital levy because of the upgrade.
Both my husband and I were totally put off by how the CFO seemed rather arrogant and aloof about how parents are GSIS seemed like cash cows and that it would not be an issue (as we demonstrated clear incredulous looks) at the appalling idea of charging parents a heavy debenture and capital levy.
I think the Board obviously knew very early on what they needed for this rebuild - we visited the school last year (sometime in Feb 08)!
When we contemplated GSIS as one of our choices, we went to GSIS to tour the facilities and were told that the school would be going through an upgrade (not told about the relocation to Ma On Shan) and were told that on top of the HKD$250 000 debenture that needed to be coughed up, we would possible be looking at a capital levy because of the upgrade.
Both my husband and I were totally put off by how the CFO seemed rather arrogant and aloof about how parents are GSIS seemed like cash cows and that it would not be an issue (as we demonstrated clear incredulous looks) at the appalling idea of charging parents a heavy debenture and capital levy.
I think the Board obviously knew very early on what they needed for this rebuild - we visited the school last year (sometime in Feb 08)!
Spockey thank you for your reply.
Once again it looks as if the transparency was opaque to say the least by not telling you that the younger children would be shipped off to Ma On Shan. I am hearing more and more of these stories where full disclosure seemed to be optional.
I am truely concerned that the board does not grasp the present economic climate and the consequences that this is going to have on funding. Some of the worlds largest financial institutions as well as governments are being brought to their knees because of this. If the board starts the project without adequate funding and the appropriate financial planning you could see Ma On Shan become temporary for more than 4 years and compromises being made on the redevelopment of the upper school due to funding constraints. This would leave you with a half finished mediocre institure of learning spread over two campuses.
However when I raised this question at one of the meetings I was told not to worry they had hired a "rain maker". Sorry professional fund raiser who could source the appropriate funds. Guess this means that for the right price you could have your name on the science lab, the main building, the Library but not the pool in that they are getting rid of it because it is not part of the grand vision.
Wishing everyone a Happy Chinese New Year!!!
Genome.
Once again it looks as if the transparency was opaque to say the least by not telling you that the younger children would be shipped off to Ma On Shan. I am hearing more and more of these stories where full disclosure seemed to be optional.
I am truely concerned that the board does not grasp the present economic climate and the consequences that this is going to have on funding. Some of the worlds largest financial institutions as well as governments are being brought to their knees because of this. If the board starts the project without adequate funding and the appropriate financial planning you could see Ma On Shan become temporary for more than 4 years and compromises being made on the redevelopment of the upper school due to funding constraints. This would leave you with a half finished mediocre institure of learning spread over two campuses.
However when I raised this question at one of the meetings I was told not to worry they had hired a "rain maker". Sorry professional fund raiser who could source the appropriate funds. Guess this means that for the right price you could have your name on the science lab, the main building, the Library but not the pool in that they are getting rid of it because it is not part of the grand vision.
Wishing everyone a Happy Chinese New Year!!!
Genome.
Based on the early posts, it seems that school is quite determined to move. What is the point of doing a survey? How will the survey results influence the school's decision?
The survey is three questions which basically are the below.
support the board in upgrade of school and move elementary to Ma On Shan for 4 years.
Do no support the move to Ma On Shan and thus will cause the school to shrink and quality suffer. ( this is even though at present in its present format it is an excellent school)
Let the board decide in that they know best.
The survey seems to miss the point that the parents are trying to raise to the board. We all support the redevelopment of the school and welcome the futuristic thinking of the board in that respect. We do not however think that moving elementary to Ma On Shan is the best option for the four years especially with empty schools on the Island. We are only asking for the chance to see if we can collectively work together to come up with something that will work. Thank you for your PM as well which I have gone back to seperately.
NvMom thank you for your questions re the survey.
The survey is being undetaken by the school and in my opinion the school is missing the point that parents are trying to raise.
Parents are not against the redevelopment of the school. We all want the school to grow and prosper but do not think that moving the elementary school to Ma On Shan is the right solution.
When looking at the survey it does seem to be slanted in such a way as to be slightly alarmist. It makes it seem as if without the move to Ma On Shan the school will have to cut classes, restrict extra curricular acivities and in general fall apart.
However I am not convinced that this would be the case in that the school has produced excellent results with its present configuration and in the current environment it may be prudent for the school to hold back and reassess.
But to answer your question directly I am not sure of the point of the survey or how it will influence the schools decision. The reason that I say this is that when I contacted the school in respect to the survey I was politely reminded that irrespective of the results the board would have the final say.
The survey is being undetaken by the school and in my opinion the school is missing the point that parents are trying to raise.
Parents are not against the redevelopment of the school. We all want the school to grow and prosper but do not think that moving the elementary school to Ma On Shan is the right solution.
When looking at the survey it does seem to be slanted in such a way as to be slightly alarmist. It makes it seem as if without the move to Ma On Shan the school will have to cut classes, restrict extra curricular acivities and in general fall apart.
However I am not convinced that this would be the case in that the school has produced excellent results with its present configuration and in the current environment it may be prudent for the school to hold back and reassess.
But to answer your question directly I am not sure of the point of the survey or how it will influence the schools decision. The reason that I say this is that when I contacted the school in respect to the survey I was politely reminded that irrespective of the results the board would have the final say.
About this archive
This is an archive of over 20 years of GeoBaby and GeoSchools knowledge and discussions, kept online as a read-only reference.