Research FindingsBack
|
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 8.64, rated by 109 principals, CUHK came second with an average score of 8.33, whereas HKUST ranked third with a mean score of 7.94. These top three were rated by 108 to 109 principals, for other university』s performance scores, please refer to Table 2 below.
|
| 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 |
8.64 |
0.15 |
109 |
100.0% |
|
CUHK |
8.33 |
0.15 |
108 |
99.1% |
|
HKUST |
7.94 |
0.15 |
108 |
99.1% |
|
PolyU |
6.81 |
0.10 |
108 |
99.1% |
|
HKBU |
6.35 |
0.10 |
107 |
98.2% |
|
CityU |
6.33 |
0.11 |
105 |
96.3% |
|
HKIEd |
5.84 |
0.13 |
108 |
99.1% |
|
LU |
5.66 |
0.13 |
102 |
93.6% |
|
HKSYU |
5.14 |
0.16 |
98 |
89.9% |
|
OUHK |
4.84 |
0.17 |
98 |
89.9% |
|
| 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 Joseph Y. Y. Sung topped the list with an average score of 8.29 rated by 106 respondents. Professor Lap-chee Tsui of HKU followed and attained a mean score of 8.09 rated by 104 respondents. Meanwhile, Professor Tony F. Chan of HKUST came third scoring 7.51 and rated by 93 respondents (Table 3). |
| Table 3. Overall Performance of Each Vice-Chancellor / President / Principal |
|
[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 |
|
CUHK – Prof. Joseph J.Y. SUNG |
8.29 |
0.17 |
106 |
97.2% |
|
HKU – Prof. Lap-chee TSUI |
8.09 |
0.18 |
104 |
95.4% |
|
HKUST – Prof. Tony F. CHAN |
7.51 |
0.17 |
93 |
85.3% |
|
HKIEd – Prof. Anthony B.L. CHEUNG |
6.86 |
0.16 |
99 |
90.8% |
|
PolyU – Prof. Timothy W. TONG |
6.77 |
0.14 |
86 |
78.9% |
|
CityU – Prof. Way KUO |
6.60 |
0.14 |
75 |
68.8% |
|
HKSYU – Dr. Chi-yung CHUNG |
6.35 |
0.20 |
77 |
70.6% |
|
HKBU – Prof. Albert CHAN |
6.30 |
0.12 |
81 |
74.3% |
|
LU – Prof. Yuk-shee CHAN |
6.15 |
0.18 |
74 |
67.9% |
|
OUHK – Prof. John C.Y. LEONG |
5.83 |
0.19 |
70 |
64.2% |
|
| The next question asked the respondents』 opinion on the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of. Results showed that 「work attitude」 and 「commitment to society」 were most commonly cited, as chosen by 67% and 53% of respondents respectively. The next tier included 「social / interpersonal skills」, 「global prospect / foresight」 and 「conduct, honesty」, accounting for 51%, 46% and 42% of respondents correspondingly (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?
|
|||
|
Frequency |
% of total responses (Base = 529 responses from 109 respondents) |
% of total sample |
Work attitude |
73 |
13.8% |
67.0% |
Commitment to society |
58 |
11.0% |
53.2% |
Social / interpersonal skills |
56 |
10.6% |
51.4% |
Global prospect / foresight |
50 |
9.5% |
45.9% |
Conduct, honesty |
46 |
8.7% |
42.2% |
|
|
|
|
Proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua |
42 |
7.9% |
38.5% |
Critical thinking and problem-solving ability |
35 |
6.6% |
32.1% |
Communication skills |
31 |
5.9% |
28.4% |
Emotion stability |
29 |
5.5% |
26.6% |
|
|
|
|
Creativity |
25 |
4.7% |
22.9% |
Social / work experience |
22 |
4.2% |
20.2% |
Job opportunity |
18 |
3.4% |
16.5% |
Financial management |
16 |
3.0% |
14.7% |
Self-confidence |
12 |
2.3% |
11.0% |
Academic and professional knowledge |
12 |
2.3% |
11.0% |
Computer proficiency |
1 |
0.2% |
0.9% |
|
|
|
|
Others (see Table 5) |
1 |
0.2% |
0.9% |
Don』t know |
2 |
0.4% |
1.8% |
|
|
|
|
Total |
529 |
100.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
Base |
109 |
|
|
Missing case(s) |
0 |
|
|
| Table 5. Perceived Deficiencies among the University Students in Hong Kong (Other answers) |
|
[Q3] What do you think are the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of?
|
|
| 1. Common sense | |
| Question 4 was set out to understand which institution the principals believed was the most supportive to local secondary schools. Survey results indicated that CUHK was the most popular with 40% of vote share, leading others by a wide margin. HKIEd came second with 22%, whereas HKU ranked third with 15% (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 |
CUHK |
41 |
39.8% |
HKIEd |
23 |
22.3% |
HKU |
15 |
14.6% |
HKBU |
10 |
9.7% |
PolyU |
7 |
6.8% |
HKUST |
4 |
3.9% |
LU |
2 |
1.9% |
OUHK |
1 |
1.0% |
|
|
|
Total |
103 |
100.0% |
|
|
|
Base |
109 |
|
Missing case(s) |
6 |
|
| Question 5 is newly added this year and asked school principals if they were worried that universities were not well prepared for the 「double cohort year」. Results revealed that 45% principals opted for 「half-half」 with 28% expressed worry, while only 20% were not worried (Table 7). |
| Table 7. Opinion on the Preparation of Universities for 「Double Cohort Year」 |
|
[Q5] Next year will be "double cohort year", are you worried that the universities are not well prepared? |
||
|
Frequency |
% of valid respondents |
Worried |
30 |
28.0% |
Half-half |
48 |
44.9% |
Not worried |
21 |
19.6% |
Don』t know |
8 |
7.5% |
|
|
|
Total |
107 |
100.0% |
|
|
|
Base |
109 |
|
Missing case(s) |
2 |
|
| Next, respondents were asked to rate how confident they were 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 104 valid respondents gave a mean score of 49.9 marks, which was subject to a standard error of 1.81 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 |
0 – 9 |
4 |
3.7% |
10 – 19 |
4 |
3.7% |
20 – 29 |
1 |
0.9% |
30 – 39 |
10 |
9.2% |
40 – 49 |
19 |
17.4% |
50 |
20 |
18.3% |
51 – 59 |
3 |
2.8% |
60 – 69 |
27 |
24.8% |
70 – 79 |
12 |
11.0% |
80 – 89 |
4 |
3.7% |
90 – 100 |
0 |
0.0% |
|
|
|
Don』t know |
5 |
4.6% |
|
|
|
Total |
109 |
100.0% |
Base |
109 |
|
Missing case(s) |
0 |
|
|
|
|
Mean |
49.9 |
|
Median |
50.0 |
|
Standard error of mean |
1.81 |
|
Valid base |
104 |
|
| 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] |
| 1. 270小時是不足教選修科,數學延伸單元一/二隻有2堂,還有各科的校本評核,學生是無時間發展其他學實經歷 |
| 2. 中學工作量大增, 應獲更多資源 |
| 3. 香港政府以「外行」領導「內行」, 造成香港教育一團糟 |
| 4. 香港應趁現在的經濟優勢,早著先機,大規模實行中,小學小班教學,大刀斧投放資源,為未來舖路,否則龜免賽跑,恨錯難返! |
| 5. 教改課改,一浪接一浪,應接不暇,老師欠時間與學生溝通,難以影響及教化學生 |
| 6. 教育局官員對學校前運作全不瞭解,只以紙上理論及計算去推動新高中學制,令老師及同學都疲於奔命,影真正學習 |
