Summary of FindingsBack

The first part of the survey was to study the general public's perception of the local universities, namely, The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), The City University of Hong Kong (CityU), The Hong Kong Baptist University (HKBU), The Hong Kong Institute of Education (HKIEd), The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST), The Lingnan University (Lingnan), The Polytechnic University of Hong Kong (PolyU) and The University of Hong Kong (HKU), order rotated randomly in different questionnaires in order to eliminate possible bias due to ordering. By means of a rating scale from 0-10, with 0 representing the worst, 10 representing the best and 5 being half-half, these universities were assessed one by one with regard to their overall performance.

A. Overall Performance of University

First of all, all respondents were asked to evaluate each of these local universities 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 university'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 public perception, HKU received the highest mean score of 7.94 as rated by 1,419 respondents, CUHK came 2nd with an average score of 7.56 rated by 1,404 respondents, whereas HKUST ranked 3rd with a mean score of 7.21 rated by 1,341 respondents. When compared to the findings obtained from the last survey, no difference was observed in terms of their respective rankings regarding the overall performance of the eight universities (Table 3).

Same as last year, our cross-tabulation analyses showed that, within each sub-group, the respective rankings of the universities were basically the same regardless of their education attainment and occupation. Only some insignificant differences were observed which were highlighted in square brackets. For actual ratings obtained by each university as rated by each sub-group, please refer to the tables below (Tables 4-5).

B. Overall Performance of Vice-Chancellor/President

With respect to the perceived overall performance of the Vice-Chancellor/President of each university, taking into consideration one's local and international reputation, approachability, leadership, vision, social credibility and public relations, it is worth mentioning that all the eight current Vice-Chancellors/ Presidents rated in this year's survey had obtained recognition rates of over 50% (ranging from 50% to 73%). Results also revealed that Professor Paul C.W. Chu of HKUST, who came 1st in 2002-04 and 2nd last year, topped the list again with an average score of 7.57 rated by 1,097 respondents. The increase of Professor Chu's score was also tested to be statistically significant at p=0.01 level. Professor Lap-chee Tsui of HKU followed behind, who came 1st last year, and attained a mean score of 7.37 rated by 1,088 respondents. Meanwhile, Professor Lawrence J. Lau of CUHK came 3rd at 7.09 and rated by 939 respondents. Professor Lau also managed to achieve a statistically significant improvement from 2005, but at p=0.05 level. The 4th to 8th ranks fell to the Vice-Chancellors/Presidents of PolyU, HKBU, Lingnan, CityU and HKIEd correspondingly, with their average scores ranging from 6.68 to 5.95. When compared to last year's rankings, the positions of HKBU and Lingnan were swapped (Table 6).

When cross-tabulated by respondent's education attainment and occupation, it is found that slight variations were obtained in terms of the respective rankings of the VCs/Presidents within each sub-group, though most of them fluctuated within the standard error margins. They were highlighted in square brackets for easy identification. Actual ratings obtained by each VC/President as rated by each sub-group can be found from the tables below (Tables 7-8).

C. Perceived Deficiencies among the University Students in Hong Kong

In line with last year's survey design, a question was then asked to gauge respondents' opinion on the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of. Results showed that this year "conduct, honesty" topped the list with 18% of respondents citing it, probably due to the widely respected cheating case during the public exam at that time. In the meantime, "work attitude" and "proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua" were also frequently mentioned, by 17% and 16% of the total sample respectively. Other commonly-cited qualities included "global prospect/foresight", "social/interpersonal skills" and "academic and professional knowledge", each constituting around 11% of the total sample. Without prompting, 18% of the respondents failed to provide a definite answer (Table 9).

* Remark: The question wording used for the 2003-2005 surveys was "What do you think are the qualities which most Hong Kong university graduates lack of?" So, comparison could only be made on a rough basis. [This footnote appeared at the relevant frequency table of the print report. It was added to this on-line table for easy reference.]

D. Preference for University Graduates

The survey went on to study employers' preference when selecting university graduates. To begin with, all respondents were asked if they were involved in any recruitment process of new staff in performing their office duties. Results showed that 15% of the total sample had such authority in one way or another, i.e. 225 cases (Table 10).

# Due to the statistical weighting applied, the reported figure have been rounded up and its actual adjusted value should be "224.6".

These respondents were further asked which university's graduates they would prefer most when they looked for a new employee. Graduates of HKU topped the list once again this year, as chosen by 23% of these potential employers. Meanwhile, graduates from CUHK, PolyU and HKUST were preferred by 17%, 13% and 13% of this sub-sample respectively. Yet, 16% of these respondents said they had no particular preference and 6% failed to give a definite answer. No significant differences were observed, but it has to be noted that because of the small sub-sample, the standard error has increased accordingly to less than plus/minus 3.3 percentage points, i.e. less than plus/minus 6.7 percentage points at 95% confidence level (Table 11).

These respondents were then asked to provide some reasons for their specific choices. "Good performance of previous graduates" and "good knowledge in job-related areas" were most frequently cited, by 23% and 21% of sub-sample (i.e. 4% and 3% of the total sample) respectively. Another 13% (i.e. 2% of the total sample) preferred certain graduates simply due to the "reputation" of their university. Other than these, reasons like "good work attitude", "good language ability", and "being diligent/motivated" were mentioned by relatively fewer respondents. These results were fairly similar to those obtained last year (Table 12).

E. General Educational Policies

Six topical questions were included in this year's survey to gauge respondents' opinion on various educational policies. When asked whether the existing quota for Associate Degree and Higher Diploma studies was appropriate, 37% of the respondents thought so, while 35% said it was too much, and 10% held the opposite view. Another 18% failed to make a judgment in this aspect (Table 13).

Results also revealed that, 36% of the respondents believed the government tuition subsidy for sub-degree programme students should be the same as the existing undergraduates of local universities. On the other hand, 35% thought the subsidy should be more, as contrast to 17% who considered it should be less (Table 14).

As for the establishment of private universities in Hong Kong, i.e. those without any government subsidy, 65% of the respondents agreed to the idea, whereas 29% opposed it. Meanwhile, 6% could not give a definite answer (Table 15).

Regarding the naming of faculties and schools after the donors as a token of appreciation by the tertiary institutions, 66% supported the practice, as opposed to 26% who held a negative view. Another 8% could not give a definite answer (Table 16).

With respect to a new voluntary scheme called "Qualifications Framework" implemented by the Education and Manpower Bureau, a majority of 60% claimed they had never heard of it prior to the interview, whereas 39% had (Table 17).

Finally, after briefly explained the concept of "Qualifications Framework", by which a person must obtain certain qualifications before getting employed for a certain post, 55% agreed to the concept of the scheme, whereas 30% disagreed. Meanwhile, 9% stayed neutral by choosing "half-half" and 6% were unable to provide a definite answer (Table 18).