Summary of FindingsBack

The aim of the first part of the survey was to study the general public's perception of the higher institutions funded through UGC, namely, City University of Hong Kong (CityU), Hong Kong Baptist University (HKBU), Lingnan University (LU), The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), The Hong Kong Institute of Education (HKIEd), The Hong Kong Polytechnic University (PolyU), The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) and The University of Hong Kong (HKU), plus Hong Kong Shue Yan University (HKSYU) which was included for the first time. The order of these institutions was 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 institutions 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 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 8.11 as rated by 1,096 respondents, CUHK came second with an average score of 7.67 rated by 1,098 respondents, whereas HKUST ranked third with a mean score of 7.38 rated by 1,047 respondents. When compared to the findings obtained from the last survey, allno difference was observed in terms of their respective rankings regarding the overall performance of the eight institutions surveyed last year. The newly added HKSYU came ninth (Table 3).

# Newly added in 2008.

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 are highlighted in square brackets below. For actual ratings obtained by each institution 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 institution, taking into consideration one's local and international reputation, approachability, leadership, vision, social credibility and public relations, Professor Lap-chee Tsui of HKU this year had surpassed Professor Paul C.W. Chu of HKUST, who came first in 2002-04 and 2006-07, and topped the list with an average score of 7.671 as rated by 775 respondents with a very small margin. Professor Paul C.W. Chu of HKUST followed closely and had attained a mean score of 7.665 as rated by 813 respondents. Meanwhile, Professor Lawrence J. LAU of CUHK, who came 4th last year, became 3rd at 7.09 and rated by 665 respondents. The 4th to 8th ranks fell to the Vice-Chancellors/Presidents of PolyU, HKBU, HKSYU, HKIEd, CityU and LU correspondingly, with their average scores ranging from 6.15 to 6.98. However,. When compared to last year's rankings, the positions of PolyU and CUHK were swapped it is worth mentioning that six current Vice-Chancellors/Presidents had obtained recognition rates of over 50%. Professor Paul C.W. Chu of HKUST was acknowledged by 67% of the respondents while Professor Lap-chee Tsui of HKU had received a recognition rate of 64%. The recognition rates of Professor Chung-kwong Poon of PolyU, Professor Ching-fai Ng of HKBU, Professor Lawrence J. Lau of CUHK and Professor Anthony B.L. Cheung of HKIEd were 58%, 55%, 55% and 54% respectively (Table 6)

# No comparison made as the relevant post was taken up by another person then while HKSYU is newly added in this year's survey.
^ Remark: Expressed in three-decimal places, the average rating of 「HKU – Lap-chee TSUI」 is 7.671, while that of 「HKUST – Paul C.W. CHU」 is 7.665.

When cross-tabulated by respondent's education attainment and occupation, slight variations were obtained in terms of the respective rankings of the VCs/Presidents within each sub-group, though differences of most scores 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

Same as last year's survey, a question was then asked to gauge respondents' opinion on the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of. Latest results again showed that 「work attitude」 topped the list with 17% of respondents citing it. In the meantime, 「proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua」, 「conduct, honesty」 and 「social / interpersonal skills」were also frequently mentioned,, by 16%, 13% and 12% of the total sample respectively. Other commonly-cited qualities included 「Critical thinking and problem-solving ability」 and 「global prospect / foresight」, both accounting for 10% of the total sample.. Without prompting Nevertheless, 25% of the respondents failed to provide could a definite answer (Table 9).

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 16% of the total sample194 had such authority in one way or another, i.e. 200 cases (Table 10).

These respondents were further asked which institution'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 24% of these potential employers. Meanwhile, graduates from PolyU, CUHK and HKUST were preferred by 16%, 9% and 7% of this sub-sample respectively. Yet, 21% of these respondents said they had no particular preference and 11% failed to give a definite answer. No significant differences from the latest survey 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 3.5 percentage points, i.e. less than plus/minus 7.1 percentage points at 95% confidence level (Table 11).

These respondents were then asked to provide some reasons for their specific choices. Same as previous years, 「good performance of previous graduates」 was most frequently cited by 34% of sub-sample (i.e. 4% of the total sample). 「Good knowledge in job-related areas」 came second with 26% (i.e. 3% of the total sample). A respective of 15% and 12% (i.e. 2% and 1% of the total sample) preferred certain graduates simply due to the 「reputation」 of their university and 「good language ability」 of the graduates. Other than these, reasons like 「being diligent/motivated」, 「good work attitude」, 「good connection with outside」 and 「alumni」 were mentioned by relatively quite few respondents. These results were fairly similar to those obtained last year (Table 12)