Research FindingsBack

The questionnaire comprised 7 key questions. First of all, all respondents were asked to evaluate each of the 10 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 85 principals, CUHK came second with an average score of 8.51, whereas HKUST ranked third with a mean score of 8.02. For other universities’ 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	0.12	85	98.8%
CUHK	8.51	0.11	85	98.8%
HKUST	8.02	0.10	85	98.8%
PolyU	6.88	0.11	83	96.5%
CityU	6.40	0.11	82	95.3%
HKBU	6.32	0.11	81	94.2%
HKIEd	5.87	0.13	84	97.7%
LU	5.14	0.14	80	93.0%
HKSYU	4.97	0.14	78	90.7%
OUHK	4.74	0.14	77	89.5%

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 J.Y. Sung of CUHK topped the list with an average score of 8.73 rated by 85 respondents. Professor Peter MATHIESON of HKU followed and attained a mean score of 7.65 rated by 71 respondents. Meanwhile, Professor Tony F. Chan of HKUST came third scoring 7.62 and rated by 75 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	8.73	0.13	85	98.8%
HKU – Prof. Peter MATHIESON	7.65	0.16	71	82.6%
HKUST – Prof. Tony F. CHAN	7.62	0.13	75	87.2%
PolyU – Prof. Timothy W. TONG	6.79	0.14	72	83.7%
HKIEd – Prof. Stephen Y.L. CHEUNG	6.78	0.15	78	90.7%
CityU – Prof. Way KUO	6.51	0.17	67	77.9%
HKBU – Prof. Albert CHAN	6.41	0.19	74	86.0%
OUHK – Prof. Yuk-shan WONG	6.16	0.14	64	74.4%
LU – Prof. Leonard K. CHENG	5.78	0.20	67	77.9%

## The position of Principal for HKSYU was vacant during the survey period, so the respective question was dropped in 2014 and 2015.

The next question asked the respondents’ opinion on the qualities which most Hong Kong university students lack of. Results showed that “social / interpersonal skills” was most commonly cited, as chosen by 63% of respondents. The next tier included “work attitude”, “global prospect / foresight”, “conduct, honesty”, “commitment to society” and “emotion stability”, accounting for and 55%, 49%, 45%, 41% and 40% 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? You may check as many choices as you like.
	Frequency	% of total responses (Base = 387 responses from 86 respondents)	% of total sample (Base = 86)
Social / interpersonal skills	54	14.0%	62.8%
Work attitude	47	12.1%	54.7%
Global prospect / foresight	42	10.9%	48.8%
Conduct, honesty	39	10.1%	45.3%
Commitment to society	35	9.0%	40.7%
Emotion stability	34	8.8%	39.5%

Communication skills	24	6.2%	27.9%
Critical thinking and problem-solving ability	21	5.4%	24.4%
Proficiency in Chinese, English and Putonghua	20	5.2%	23.3%
Social / work experience	15	3.9%	17.4%
Job opportunity	15	3.9%	17.4%
Financial management	12	3.1%	14.0%
Creativity	10	2.6%	11.6%

Academic and professional knowledge	7	1.8%	8.1%
Self-confidence	3	0.8%	3.5%

Others (see Table 5)	6	1.6%	7.0%
Not lack of anything	1	0.3%	1.2%
Don’t know	2	0.5%	2.3%

Total	387	100.0%

Base	86
Missing case(s)	0

Table 5. Q3 (Other answers in exact wordings)

人生使命感 (著重現實考慮多於理想追求)
抗逆力、主動性
理想
責任感
對國家的愛護、了解及忠誠、欠缺對民族的認同、對中國文化的了解及認同。
毅力、刻苦、耐性

Question 4 asked the principals the impact of the current secondary school curriculum on enhancing students’ civic awareness. Results revealed that 29% of the principals thought the impact was big, 37% thought it “half-half” and 31% thought the impact was small (Table 6).

Table 6. The impact of the current secondary school curriculum on enhancing students’ civic awareness

[Q4] How big or small do you think is the impact of the current secondary school curriculum on enhancing students’ civic awareness? [one answer allowed]
		Frequency		% of valid respondents (Base = 86)
Very big	}Big	1	}25	1.2%	}29.1%
Quite big		24		27.9%
Half-half		32		37.2%
Quite small	}Small	18	}27	20.9%	}31.4%
Very small		9		10.5%

Don’t know		2		2.3%

Total		86		100.0%

Base		86
Missing case(s)		0

Question 5 is newly added this year and asked school principals whether they thought Hong Kong citizens’ civic awareness was better or worse after the student’s occupy movement last year. Results revealed that 45% of the principals think Hong Kong citizens’ civic awareness was better after the student’s occupy movement last year, 8% thought it “no change”, and 35% thought people’s civic awareness was worse (Table 7).

Table 7. Opinion on Hong Kong citizens’ civic awareness after the student’s occupy movement last year

[Q5] Do you think Hong Kong citizens’ civic awareness is better or worse after the student’s occupy movement last year? [one answer allowed]
		Frequency		% of valid respondents (Base = 86)
So much better	} Better	3	}39	3.5%	}45.3%
Slightly better		36		41.9%
No change		7		8.1%
Slightly worse	} Worse	20	35	21.1%	}36.8%
So much worse		15		15.8%

Don’t know		10		11.6%

Total		86		100.0%

Base		86
Missing case(s)		0

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 84 valid respondents gave a mean score of 48.8 marks, which was subject to a standard error of 1.96 marks (Table 9).

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 = 85)
0 – 9	3	3.5%
10 – 19	2	2.4%
20 – 29	3	3.5%
30 – 39	8	9.4%
40 – 49	15	17.6%
50	20	23.5%
51 – 59	4	4.7%
60 – 69	16	18.8%
70 – 79	10	11.8%
80 – 89	3	3.5%
90 – 100	--	--

Don’t know	1	1.2%

Total	85	100.0%
Missing case(s)	1

Mean	48.8
Median	50.0
Standard error of mean	1.96
Valid base	84

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 10 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. 教育當局不應干涉大學的自主性及不應把政治帶到中、小學當中。 2. 掌管教育的主要官員必須要熟悉教育的工作。

2. Not confidence, the leader of our EDB have no leadership skills or charm at all!!

3. Q5未清晰界定公民意識，難以回答。

4. The EDB lacks a future perspective. It is too eager to appease all stakeholders and lacks the courage to change.

5. 不接受用激烈的之法表達他們的公民意識。

6. 中學應該推行小班教學

7. 香港的大學對照顧本港學生極不公平。利用旋轉門往外地讀高中，以非聯招生返回香港讀大學，往往容易得太多太多，對本地學生絕不公平!!

8. 香港教育的本質沒有太大的變化，仍然是循環的篩選性、功能作用很大，學生最大的動力/動機是考試過關進升，不是提升學習興趣、知識。對香港教育制度的信心仍然高，是因為大部份教師仍然堅守崗位，努力教學。

9. 教育局沒有遠見亦沒有主意，給整個政治環境牽著走，欠缺承擔。大學教育不應該仍是高不可攀。但辛勤的香港師生卻不能得應得的，全人教育也因為考試為中心的制度受影響。

10. 教育局領導力不強，反由業界專業自強、發堀新方向

11. 現時的中學教育，訓練同學的批判思維，但欠缺多角度知識及資訊的提供，傳媒報導偏頗，誤以為中國代表邪惡，外國代表美好、先進、正義。這點必須改變。

12. 領導者欠教育的視野與識見，終日在政治議題上奔走撲火，全然被動。