Research FindingsBack


The questionnaire comprised 5 simple questions. First of all, all respondents were asked to evaluate each of the 8 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 public perception, HKU received the highest mean score of 7.38 as rated by 106 respondents, CUHK came 2nd with an average score of 7.34 rated by 106 respondents, whereas HKUST ranked 3rd with a mean score of 6.97 rated by 106 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 funded through UGC 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 
 7.38 
 0.27 
 106 
 97.2% 
 CUHK 
 7.34 
 0.26 
 106 
 97.2% 
 HKUST 
 6.97 
 0.20 
 106 
 97.2% 
 PolyU 
 6.11 
 0.12 
 104 
 95.4% 
 HKBU 
 5.85 
 0.13 
 105 
 96.3% 
 CityU 
 5.84 
 0.13 
 103 
 94.5% 
 LU 
 5.70 
 0.16 
 102 
 93.6% 
 HKIEd 
 5.33 
 0.17 
 104 
 95.4% 

With respect to the perceived overall performance of the Vice-Chancellor/President of each institution, taking into consideration one's local and international reputation, approachability, leadership, vision, social credibility and public relations, results revealed that Professor Paul C.W. Chu of HKUST topped the list with an average score of 7.39 rated by 101 respondents. Professor Lap-chee Tsui of HKU followed and attained a mean score of 7.34 rated by 106 respondents. Meanwhile, Professor Edward K.Y. Chen of LU became 3rd scoring 7.04 and rated by 100 respondents (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 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?         
    Average   Standard error   No of raters   Recognition 
 HKUST - Prof Paul C.W. CHU 
 7.39 
 0.22 
 101 
 92.7% 
 HKU - Prof Lap-chee TSUI 
 7.34 
 0.24 
 106 
 97.2% 
 LU - Prof Edward K.Y. CHEN 
 7.04 
 0.20 
 100 
 91.7% 
 PolyU - Prof Chung-kwong POON 
 6.72 
 0.16 
 98 
 89.9% 
 CUHK – Prof Lawrence J. LAU 
 6.63 
 0.21 
 98 
 89.9% 
 HKBU - Prof Ching-fai NG 
 6.13 
 0.16 
 96 
 88.1% 
 CityU - Prof Richard Y.K. HO 
 5.99 
 0.19 
 70 
 64.2% 
 HKIEd - Prof Paul MORRIS 
 5.10 
 0.21 
 102 
 93.6% 

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 with 65% of respondents choosing it. In the meantime, "global prospect / foresight" and "commitment to society" followed closely behind, as chosen by 61% and 60% of respondents in respective order. Qualities of the next tier included "critical thinking and problem-solving ability", "proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua" and "creativity", accounting for 50%, 43% and 35% of valid respondents respectively (Table 4).

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 = 521 responses from 108 respondents) 		  % of valid respondents
(Base = 108) 
 Work attitude (e.g. serious, enthusiastic, diligent, responsible, motivated) 
 70 
 13.4% 
 64.8% 
 Global prospect / foresight 
 66 
 12.7% 
 61.1% 
 Commitment to society 
 65 
 12.5% 
 60.2% 
 Critical thinking and problem-solving ability 
 54 
 10.4% 
 50.0% 
 Proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua 
 46 
 8.8% 
 42.6% 
 Creativity 
 38 
 7.3% 
 35.2% 
 Conduct, honesty 
 36 
 6.9% 
 33.3% 
 Emotion stability 
 28 
 5.4% 
 25.9% 
 Social / interpersonal skills 
 22 
 4.2% 
 20.4% 
 Communication skills 
 20 
 3.8% 
 18.5% 
 Social / work experience 
 17 
 3.3% 
 15.7% 
 Self-confidence 
 16 
 3.1% 
 14.8% 
 Financial management 
 16 
 3.1% 
 14.8% 
 Academic and professional knowledge 
 12 
 2.3% 
 11.1% 
 Job opportunity 
 2 
 0.4% 
 1.9% 
 Computer proficiency 
 1 
 0.2% 
 0.9% 
 Others (see Table 5) 
 10 
 1.9% 
 9.3% 
 Nothing 
 1 
 0.2% 
 0.9% 
 Don't know / hard to say 
 1 
 0.2% 
 0.9% 
 Total 
 521 
 100.0% 
  
 Base 
 108 
  
  
 Missing case(s) 
 1 
  
  

Table 5. Perceived Deficiencies among the University Students in Hong Kong (Listing of "other answers")
 1. Ability to work under pressure 
 2. Core Value as human beings 
 3. Dedication to serve and seek for truth, freedom to materialistic gains 
 4. Enthusiasm & vision towards work 
 5. Physical health and mental health are not good enough. Independence not good enough. Moral standard not high enough. 
 6. Politeness & respect, national identity 
 7. Proper Dressing & Polite manner 
 8. Spirituality, morality, serving heart 
 9. Student of responsibility 
 10. The captioned items vary from student to student 

Question 4 asked the respondents which institution they believed was the most supportive to local secondary schools. Survey results indicated that CUHK topped the list with 40% of votes and leading others with a wide margin. HKIEd came 2nd with 19%, whereas HKUST ranked 3rd with 5%. In the meantime, 21% of the respondents did not give a definite answer to 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 = 108) 
 CUHK 
 43 
 39.8 
 HKIEd 
 20 
 18.5 
 HKUST 
 5 
 4.6 
 CityU　 
 4 
 3.7 
 HKBU 
 4 
 3.7 
 HKU　 
 4 
 3.7 
 LU 
 3 
 2.8 
 PolyU　 
 2 
 1.9 
 Hard to say 
 23 
 21.3% 
 Total 
 108 
 100.0% 
 Base 
 109 
  
 Missing case(s) 
 1 
  

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 7 below for the answers received:

Table 7. Opinions / Suggestions from School Principals
 [Q5] Is there any other opinion you would like to bring to the attention of the researchers? [open-end question] 
 1. HKU is doing well academically; HKIEd has not reached the academic level. 
 2. I would suggest researchers to invite universities to promote their supportive project to secondary schools more often. 
 3. Q1 & Q2 are difficult questions to answer 
 4. Sometimes it's very difficult to give overall ranking, which is affected by so many factors. 
 5. Teach students more about the truth: Christianity uphold creationism and down play evolutionism. 
 6. The identity of each institution is important, we don't want all institution alike. 
 7. There are good students and good professors from each university. We need to work hand in hand to prepare the youth of HK for a better tomorrow. 
 8. Youngsters especially undergraduates spend too much time in stocks & invest / Computers (even games & blog….) / pleasure & leisure 
 9. Your effort is very much appreciated