#立會去留 #RTHKLettertoHK
Participating in the upcoming extended term of the legislative council is, I feel, the lesser of two evils. Of course the one-year postponement of the election which should have been held this month was an anti-democratic trick by the government to avoid facing the voters. The extended term surely lacks legitimacy in the public eye.
But with liberal and democratic institutions being constantly undermined by an executive seeking to bring the other arms of government under its control, we must take every opportunity to voice our concerns, use every forum to fight back in the interests of Hong Kong’s governance, and the promises enshrined in the Basic Law.
Of course previously I’ve had my reservations about staying on, as it would mean accepting a quasi Beijing appointment in an un-elected legislature, ie without the people’s mandate. I’ve had my moments of a psychic tug-of-war.
It’s also understood that many of our young view some of the veterans in the democratic camp as washouts, that they belong to an earlier civilisation and should have been “outed” anyway. Some online criticism would go as far as, and I quote, “Can’t let go of the pay and the glory associated with a Legco seat, can you? Like you are being thrown a bone, a bone only but you can’t wait to go get it”, unquote.
Amongst the democrats I’m probably, probably, the one with the least
political baggage: The fact that I do not have a political party background; that I’m not young and as a result I wouldn’t need to worry too much about career development or prospects. And so perhaps I am more able to consider the “stay or quit” question with an even more free mind.
What’s happened is the number of pro-democracy legislators has already been thinned by legal manoeuvres to oust elected members. But we can perhaps muster just enough votes to deny the pro-government camp absolute control over the council.
Unrepresentative though it is, the council often is not just a talking shop and rubber stamp. It does have some ability to query officials, demand information and make constructive criticism of government proposals and policies. Even when the criticism is not particularly constructive, or some would even call it destructive, it could at least help vent public anger and frustration.
We need opposition voice to at least better health policy, labour rights, pollution, education and public transport problems.
Between now and next September we should be able to show Hongkongers that we can be of value in fighting for their interests. Although the system remains heavily weighted against us, the legislature remains a place where we can stand up, on the spot, against the arrogance and incompetence of the administration.
We don’t just make noise, we carry on to serve as the voice of the people. We shouldn’t become outsiders looking in. We need feet on the ground.
Sure we could be running into a storm without even an umbrella. Things could get painful. It’s so much easier to quit. But to quit would just be taking a placebo line. We cannot pretend the pain is not there, we just need to deal with it, fight it.
The lawmaker capacity does carry a degree of power. Once I called the agriculture and fisheries department, demanding to speak to the department head, saying it’s a matter of utter emergency. What was happening that day was a government wild pig hunting team armed with Remington's was scheduled to go to a village, provoking an unnecessary but possible violent standoff between villagers and animal rights campaigners.
My little intervention was successful. The AFCD head heeded and cancelled the hunting mission that day. And thanks to joint efforts on the civil society and Legco fronts such wild boar hunting squads have now been scrapped altogether.
Another episode that has been lodged in my head involved what happened on August 31 last year. Speculation was rife that there were fatalities inside the Prince Edward MTR station that evening, at the peak of our protest movement. I made a number of official enquiries and subsequently managed to have a face-to-face meet-up with the fire services chief.
Although in the end neither the police nor the fire department could satisfactorily explain the discrepancies in the number of injured and the state of injuries, at the time it was the only way to prompt —- if not force —- the civil servants involved to do their explaining in public, to the media.
It’s experiences of the kind that help to solidify my opinion that democrats should remain on the inside. Because of what we do, a lot of incompetence and hypocrisy, sometimes even some crookedness get exposed.
Beijing loyalists and the pro-government type would keep on politely tip-toeing around issues so as not to offend the authorities, they would keep on spinning mistruths, the democrats can counter that performance.
At a time when Hong Kong is politically, financially going down the tubes, with our young in particular feeling helpless, at a time when hope seems to be dismissed and punishment dealt, when discontent could morph into pure hate and antipathy to the government, democrats should help by not abandoning any battleline.
Anyone who wants to query government policies, draw attention to abuses, obtain information now faces increasing difficulties.
Assembly is restricted. People have to guard their words. Much mainstream media simply reflect official policies and journalists now have to be approved by the police to be treated as such. However inadequate it may be, the legislative council remains a forum for questions and comment, and is widely reported.
And popularly elected legislators in particular have standing which cannot be ignored at home, and they are also focus of foreign inquiry about Hong Kong issues. Journalistic institutions magnify the impact of such individuals who would otherwise find themselves crying in the wilderness, lone voices without a platform. Legco is a platform, however shaky.
If results of an opinion poll —-expected by Tuesday —-commissioned by the Democratic Party tell us to go —- easy, we’ll just pack up.
But Im hoping for the opposite. I for one would want to keep staying on the Legco frontline, standing up for what I believe. Nothing egotistical about it. We will simply take what's left and fight it out.
I’m prepared to take the lesser evil.
XXX
https://www.rthk.hk/radio/radio3/programme/lettertohongkong
「what does the us department of education do」的推薦目錄:
what does the us department of education do 在 芬蘭.媽媽的日常 Facebook 的最佳貼文
考試與評估研討會18分鐘精華
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgopnHD3Lg8
文字重溫 highlight transcript:
0241-0938 考試與評做在美國、香港及芬蘭的狀況
(Exam and Assessment) Situation in US, HK and Finland
Situation in the USA
Dr. Stephen Krashen: "The United States Department of Education has an obsession with competition. We’ve got to win, we’ve got to be number one in everything we do.
The Race to the Top increase testing, my estimate, about 20 times what we had before.
The effect of taking a standardized test to predict college achievement, the SAT. The SAT added nothing to the prediction. Teachers’ evaluation of students is the best measure we have.
A heroic movement called Opt-Out. Opt out was begun by parents, public school teachers and a few university professors on zero budget.
It spread by word of mouth. In New York State last year, 20% of the public school students eligible to take the test, did not take the test."
Situation in HK: TSA & PISA
Professor Esther Ho: "Both PISA and TSA are actually system level assessment as I said before, but then during the process we will use this score to identify individual school. So for TSA, the government has individual school ID, so they can really abuse it, not just misuse it, to make school accountable for the percentage correct, report every year to individual schools, but that is not fair, particularly for TSA, because in the primary level, all students are entering their schools by residential criteria, also will have very different family backgrounds.
Actually we have a very comprehensive assessment system if we stop the TSA in this little area, that won’t ruin the whole assessment system. We still have many different kinds of survey to understand the school.
In 2014, a group of international scholar including Stephen Ball, Henry Giroux, wrote an open letter to Andrew Schleicher, the leader of PISA since 2000.
They said, PISA tests are damaging education worldwide.
While standardized testing has been used in many nations for decades, PISA has been contributing to an escalation in such testing and a dramatically increased reliance on quantitative measures.
This emphasizing a narrow range of measurable aspects of education, take the attention away from the less measurable or immeasurable educational objectives like physical, moral, civic and artistic development, our student self-concept, anxiety, all the non-quantifiable items are less emphasized anymore because every three years, when they report these international results, the media always focus on the ranking.
So this kind of assessment regime is controversial if it’s a continual cycle of global testing, it will harm our children and impoverishes our classroom, and even de-skill the teachers, and then also endanger well-being of students and teachers.
I think HK should join the US movement, No Unnecessary Testing, the NUT movement from Stephen, and then really create the space to really nurture the competency, the soft skills, the passion and compassion of our students. And then really review the roles of all kinds of exams and tests on student learning, particularly when the test is hurting children at a very young age, what should we do as responsible adults? These adults are not just about the parents. They include the teachers, school administrators, principals, policy makers and scholars."
Response: Prof. Hau Kit Tai, CUHK: "I think we have a wrong focus because if we want to change the system, we have to work on high stake ones. So in HK in particular, we have to work on the high stake secondary school placement system, which TSA does not serve this purpose. TSA is low stake or no stake system by design.
Response: Legislator Ip Kin Yuen: "KT just say TSA is a low stake testing according to design. But just according to design. We all know that it has become a very highstake assessment in reality. So that is the problem if we do not face this reality, we miss the point."
Mediator: Prof. Stephen Chiu, CUHK: "We don’t want to compare school with factories. But if you have two factories, one has a good output with standard working hours, another one has better output but with a lot of overtime work, which one is the better factory? Which one is more productive.? That’s something that we have to put into context."
How do they test and assess in Finland?
Dr. Kristiina Erkkilä: "There are no national authorities for testing learning outcomes, nor are there any ranking list. Moreover, there is no school inspector. Evaluation of learning outcomes is based on national surveys. The aims are to produce information for both schools and students to develop.
The whole purpose to evaluate is to support learning of a student. And I think who does best is the teachers who are very close by, and the other adults and themselves. We have a strong emphasis on self evaluation, and also evaluation by their peers and by their community, because we also engage the families and the parents in participating in the growing of the child.
We are not perfect and we have problems being a remote country with a lot of darkness and harsh weather. Life is very hard in Finland too, but maybe in different respect. So may I said we try to keep our school a pleasant place and not add to that pressure in schools. "