Research Findings返回

The questionnaire comprised 7 key questions. First of all, all respondents were asked to evaluate each of the 9 institutions based on their perception of its overall performance using a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing the worst, 10 representing the best and 5 being half-half. Respondents were suggested to take into account the institution's local and international reputation, facilities, campus environment, qualification of its teaching staff, academic research performance, conduct and quality of its students, its learning atmosphere, as well as the diversification and degree of recognition for its courses. Survey results indicated that, in terms of principals' perception, HKU received the highest mean score of 8.37 as rated by 109 respondents, CUHK came second with an average score of 8.23 rated by 109 respondents, whereas HKUST ranked third with a mean score of 7.74 rated by 109 respondents (Table 2).

Table 2. Overall Performance of Each Institution

[Q1] Please use a scale of 0-10 to evaluate the overall performance of each institution of higher education after taking into consideration its local and international reputation, facilities and campus environment, qualification of its teaching staff, academic research performance, conduct and quality of students as well as its learning atmosphere, diversification and level of recognition of its courses, with 0 representing the worst, 10 representing the best and 5 being half-half. How would you rate the following institutions?

	Average	Standard error	No of raters	Recognition
HKU	8.37	0.14	109	97.3%
CUHK	8.23	0.13	109	97.3%
HKUST	7.74	0.11	109	97.3%
PolyU	6.83	0.09	107	95.5%
HKBU	6.40	0.09	107	95.5%
CityU	6.22	0.09	107	95.5%
HKIEd	5.72	0.13	106	94.6%
LU	5.66	0.12	101	90.2%
HKSYU	5.22	0.15	96	85.7%

With respect to the perceived overall performance of the Vice-Chancellor/ President/Principal of each institution, taking into consideration one's local and international reputation, approachability, leadership, vision, social credibility and public relations, Professor Paul C.W. Chu of HKUST topped the list with an average score of 8.27 rated by 108 respondents. Professor Lap-chee Tsui of HKU followed and attained a mean score of 8.18 rated by 108 respondents. Meanwhile, Professor Lawrence J. Lau of CUHK became third scoring 7.03 and rated by 102 respondents. Professor Timothy W. Tong, who commenced his duty as President of PolyU since January 2009, received the lowest recognition rate of 45% (Table 3).

Table 3. Overall Performance of Vice-Chancellor / President


[Q2] Please use a scale of 0-10 to evaluate the overall performance of Vice-Chancellor / President / Principal of each institution while taking his local and international reputation, approachability to the public, leadership, vision, social credibility and public relations into consideration, with 0 representing the worst, 10 representing the best and 5 being half-half. How would you rate the following Vice-Chancellors / Presidents / Principal?

	Average	Standard error	No of raters	Recognition
HKUST - Prof Paul C.W. CHU	8.27	0.14	108	96.4%
HKU - Prof Lap-chee TSUI	8.18	0.16	108	96.4%
CUHK - Prof Lawrence J. LAU	7.03	0.18	102	91.1%
HKBU - Prof Ching-fai NG	6.74	0.13	99	88.4%
HKIEd - Prof Anthony B.L. CHEUNG	6.72	0.13	98	87.5%
HKSYU - Dr Chi-yung CHUNG	6.69	0.18	85	75.9%
PolyU - Prof Timothy W. TONG	6.54	0.19	50	44.6%
LU - Prof Yuk-shee CHAN	6.48	0.13	67	59.8%
CityU - Prof Way KUO	6.27	0.16	55	49.1%

The next question asked the respondents' opinion on the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of. Results showed that 「work attitude」 topped the list chosen by 68% of respondents. 「Commitment to society」 and 「global prospect/foresight」 followed closely and were chosen by 63% and 60% of respondents respectively. Qualities of the next tier included 「 conduct, honesty」, 「social/interpersonal skills」 and 「proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua」, accounting for 47%, 43% and 43% of valid respondents respectively (Tables 4 & 5).

Table 4. Perceived Deficiencies among the University Students in Hong Kong

[Q3] What do you think are the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of? You may check as many choices as you like.
	Frequency	% of total responses (Base = 553 responses from 112 respondents)	% of valid respondents (Base = 112)

Work attitude	76	13.7%	67.9%
Commitment to society	70	12.7%	62.5%
Global prospect / foresight	67	12.1%	59.8%

Conduct, honesty	53	9.6%	47.3%
Social/interpersonal skills	48	8.7%	42.9%
Proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua	48	8.7%	42.9%

Critical thinking and problem-solving ability	35	6.3%	31.3%
Emotion stability	31	5.6%	27.7%
Communication skills	28	5.1%	25.0%
Social/work experience	25	4.5%	22.3%
Financial management	22	4.0%	19.6%
Creativity	21	3.8%	18.8%

Academic and professional knowledge	14	2.5%	12.5%
Self-confidence	11	2.0%	9.8%
Job opportunity	2	0.4%	1.8%

Others (see Table 5)	2	0.4%	1.8%

Total	553	100.0%

Base	112
Missing case(s)	0

Table 5. Perceived Deficiencies among the University Students in Hong Kong (Listing of "other answers")

[Q3] What do you think are the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of? You may check as many choices as you like. (Other answers)
The graduates are gradually improving in the past few years
無幹勁, 無方向

Question 4 asked the respondents which institution they believed was the most supportive to local secondary schools. Survey results indicated that CUHK was the most popular with 46% of vote share, leading others by a wide margin. HKIEd came second with 22%, whereas HKU ranked third with 9%. In the meantime, 9% of respondents were either undecided or had chosen more than one institution in this question (Table 6).

Table 6. Most Supportive Institution to Local Secondary Schools

[Q4] Which one of the following institutions do you think is the most supportive to local secondary schools? You can only choose one institution.
	Frequency	% of valid respondents (Base = 105)
CUHK	48	45.7%
HKIEd	23	21.9%
HKU	9	8.6%
HKBU	7	6.7%
HKUST	4	3.8%
PolyU	2	1.9%
CityU	2	1.9%
LU	1	1.0%

Chose more than one institution / Undecided	9	8.6%

Total	105	100.0%

Base	112
Missing case(s)	7

Question 5 is newly added this year in response to the upcoming 3-3-4 academic structure. The question asked school principals to assess their schools as well-prepared, half-half, or not well-prepared for the new academic structure. As a result, 51% of respondents said their schools had been 「well-prepared」 for the new 3-3-4 academic structure whereas 48% said their preparations were 「half-half」. Those who answered 「not well-prepared」 or 「don't know」 account to 1% respectively (Table 7).

Table 7. Opinion on the New 3-3-4 Academic Structure

[Q5] Do you consider your School is well-prepared, half-half, or not well-prepared for the new 3-3-4 academic structure?
	Frequency	% of valid respondents (Base = 111)
Well-prepared	56	50.5%
Half-half	53	47.7%
Not well-prepared	1	0.9%
Don't know	1	0.9%

Total	111	100.0%

Base	112
Missing case(s)	1

Next, respondents were asked to rate their confidence in the Hong Kong education system led by the Education Bureau using a scale of 0 to 100 marks, in which higher marks indicated a higher level of confidence. Results showed that 109 valid respondents gave a mean score of 56.2 marks under a standard error of 1.58 marks (Table 8).

Table 8. Confidence in the Hong Kong education system

[Q6] Overall speaking, how confident are you in the education system led by the Education Bureau? Please rate your confidence in 0 to 100 marks, 0 represents not confident at all, 50 represents half-half and 100 represents very confident.
	Frequency	% of valid respondents (Base = 109)
0	1	0.9%
10 - 19	2	1.8%
20 - 29	1	0.9%
30 - 39	11	10.1%
40 - 49	8	7.3%
50	21	19.3%
51 - 59	2	1.8%
60 - 69	33	30.3%
70 - 79	23	21.1%
80 - 89	7	6.4%

Total	109	100.0%
Base	112
Missing case(s)	3

Mean	56.2
Median	60.0
Standard error of mean	1.58
Valid base	109

The last question was in open-end format that served to probe for respondents' in-depth opinions regarding the subject matter and/or the survey. Please refer to Table 9 below for the submissions received.

Table 9. Opinions / Suggestions from School Principals (in exact wordings)

[Q7] Is there any other opinion you would like to bring to the attention of the researchers? [open-end question]

Admission opportunities offered by the universities leading to degree and associate degree programme.

EDB should offer more school-based supportive measures, including funding.

Q1 & Q2 can be broken down into more questions.

The EDB does not understand the situation of secondary education, for instances, the preparation of NSS. The officials in general lack of educational insight.

政府及教育局欠承擔，只求面對的難題(如教學語言)「快快搞掂」，官員自己「甩難」，卻未真心為學生福祉而用心，謀求好政策。對孫公及黃鴻超沒有信心。

教育局太多新政策「微」調為「大」調，往往推倒上手方向，無所適從。

教育局考慮事情太著眼於資源和政治考慮，實在無法舉出理想的教育制度。