我到過一家典型的工廠，在生產的第一個工序，工人把材料分成不同的批次，每一批次30來件放成一板（一批次一板），放到運輸帶上。那批次便隨著運輸帶，按次送到不同的工作站，由工作站的工人進行加工工序。各工人都全速工作，以配合運輸帶的速度。
每位工人在加工後會檢查一次半製成品，把有問題的挑出來，修復或作廢。在生產線最後的工序，亦是進行品質檢查，把不合格的挑出來。
這一種運作模式有利於原材料規格化，產品一致的批量生產。
假如每一次原材料的質量大大不同，製成品亦每件不同時，這個方式又可以嗎？不是廢品及次品很多，便是出品的規格定得十分低。
就如創造藝術品，我相信絕不會用生產線的方式。
現在的學校制度，還不是另一模式的工廠。當每一件原材料（學童）都是質素不一，如何以標準的工序（課程與教學法）去一批一批（班）地培育出優質產品？
前一陣子介紹 Sudbury Valley School 的自由開放教育模式，網友 imak 的留言令我回想起上述說的教育工廠，更想起 Pink Floyd The Wall 的經典場境。大家可欣想一下：
well… in hk, it’s either we pay so much $ for private/international school OR you have to code with the system – academic result determines everything!!!
Really? I have different views (yes, more than one view). Try the following:
How many HKCE 10A students are now at the top of the whatever sectors (in HK or overseas)? Or of what percentage?
How many top business executives in HK are those “cream of the cream” students?
Name 10 outstanding students who are now major contributors to our society.
So, is academic success a reliable predictor for future success? I don’t think so.
But the current system do determine something. It makes the next generation weak in thinking, reserved and obedient to rules, lack creativity, and low in confidence. Of course, I’m talking about the younger generation at large. There are exceptionally outstanding kids, but not many.
Transferring the kid to high cost alternatives is the parents last hope to a more flexible and encouraging learning environment.
Ok, I was from the same HK schooling system. And I have to say, the above is also my very biased view (as a past victim of the system.) :p
發佈留言