Article on Ming Pao 從精英制到普及化的大學教育_(24th November 2020) From Elite to Universal University Education
| Article on Ming Pao 從精英制到普及化的大學教育_(24th November 2020)
From Elite to Universal University Education |
中文原文 |
Lin Chun Pong (Mr.)
Acting Chairman
HKAHSS
Preface
In the recent decades, there is a rapid development in tertiary education no matter whether it is in China, the United States or the United Kingdom. The governments of different countries have been actively carrying out reforms in tertiary education to match with the needs of the countries’ development, and meet the aspiration of the public on tertiary education. According to the statistical reports of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2015-2019, 44.9% of the people in the age group of 25 to 34 years old of 43 different countries (not including China) had received tertiary education. Take China as an example. In its economic modernisation since the end of 1990, there is an increase in the places for tertiary education and universities. In 2013, its gross enrolment ratio of tertiary education had reached 34.5% (Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China), and even 51.6% in 2019, which was higher than the target of 40 %. Taking the varying paces of development in different provinces in consideration, the university admission rate in most major cities and provinces must be higher than the gross enrolment ratio. In view of these, how is the pace of the universal tertiary education in Hong Kong? Are there currently enough UGC-funded university places to meet the future development, the economic growth and the needs of education development?
While acknowledging the trend of development early, we are far lagging behind after 20 years
Since mid-1980’s, there has been an increase in the number of university places in Hong Kong to match with the world trend. Subsequently, the number of people of the appropriate age being admitted to universities has been raised from 5% to 18%. Yet, at the beginning of 2000, the University Grants Committee (UGC) pointed out that only around one fifth of the people aged 15 and above had attained tertiary qualification, which did not go in line with the aim of the education reform to construct a knowledge-based economy. Thus, in the Chief Executive’s Policy Address 2000, the promotion of universal tertiary education was put up. The objective was to provide 60% of our senior secondary school leavers with tertiary education opportunities within 10 years. The HKSAR Government was far-sighted at that time to draw up the blueprint for education development through the universal tertiary education for economic development and changes.
In response to the Government’s recommendation on providing Associate Degree programmes for people aged 17 to 20, many UGC-funded universities have started offering those programmes since 2001. This has brought an increase in the ratio of senior secondary school leavers receiving tertiary education from 33% in 2000 to 66% in 2005. However, this increase in ratio is mainly attributed to the Self-financing programmes (including Top-Up Degree, Associate Degree, Higher Diploma and Certificate programmes). Among all, the percentage of students studying in the UGC-funded programmes is still very small. At present, there are 15,000 first-year first-degree places through the eight universities funded by the UGC. Compared with 14,500 places provided 25 years ago, there was only an increase of 500 places. The increase of 3.4% in the ratio of UGC-funded degree programmes in 25 years is indeed very small. Even with the inclusion of around 5,000 senior year undergraduate intake places for graduates of sub-degree programmes and students with other relevant qualifications provided by the UGC-funded universities, only 35% of students of appropriate age can receive tertiary education; which is much lower than 50% in Singapore, and far lower than the figures in the major cities in China, such as 76% in Beijing and 73% in Shanghai.
The above data show that though Hong Kong launched the promotion of universal tertiary education to support the development of knowledge-based economy 20 years ago, the number of places offered by the UGC-funded universities remains nearly the same. We do not just lag behind our main competitors in the world, but also far behind the major cities in the Mainland which have been undergoing rapid economic growth in these 30 years.
Greater flexibility in university admission to foster whole-person and diverse development
In the “Final Report” issued by the Task Force on Review of School Curriculum on 22nd September 2020, universities are strongly recommended to exercise greater flexibility in student admissions on a case by case basis. Through the new “School Nominations Direct Admission Scheme (SNDAS)”, university education opportunities can be provided for talented students who are assessed as suitable for their own preferred programmes based on broad parameters other than HKDSE Examination results. It is expected that a maximum of about 1000 students would be nominated under the Scheme every year. While it is true that this new Scheme is the first step to nurture students of different talents, we need to know that adopting “3322” as the “General Entrance Requirements” (GER) for the first-year first-degree (FYFD) programmes has deprived quite a number of students who are talented in Mathematics and Science but cannot attain Level 3 in languages the opportunity to be admitted to universities. This also denies students who possess other different talents. In 3.8.2 of the “Final Report”, the Task Force stated that “given that the number of FYFD places provided by the eight University Grants Committee (UGC)-funded universities remains at 15 000 every year and the size of prevailing student population, in most cases students admitted to local universities would have acquired a minimum level of 3322, together with good results in the elective subjects. Thus, a relaxation in the GER would not increase the chance of admission at the system level.” This implies that if there is no increase in the number of university places, not all students who meet the GER can be admitted to universities. Merely changing the GER or having different nomination schemes cannot help to increase students’ opportunities of being admitted to universities. This in fact will undermine the effectiveness of the multiple considerations and flexibility regarding university admission. Furthermore. since the implementation of the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education (HKDSE) in 2012, there are 30% of male students and 45% of female students meeting GER every year. This imbalance has lasted for many years. Is this what the society would like to embrace? In the long run, will this affect Hong Kong’s development of knowledge-based economy and family structure? To avoid losing young talents, besides enhancing the flexibility of university admission, it is important to increase appropriately the number of FYFD places provided by the eight University Grants Committee (UGC)-funded universities. This can release the stress of secondary school students in academic studies, and give more space to schools to re-vitalise secondary school education. This can then really achieve the objectives of promoting whole-person development and broadening student learning experience as stated in the “Final Report” of the Task Force.
Ensuring equity in tertiary education to bring hope to students
The conclusion and recommendations in the research titled “Analysing Hong Kong Adolescents’ Expectation for Pursuing Higher Education from PISA” (Esther Sui-chu HO, Raymond Sin-kwok WONG, Chrysa Pui-chi KEUNG and Kwok-wing SUM, 2017) should be considered by the Government. The research pointed out that from 2009 to 2015, there is an increase in the Hong Kong secondary school students’ expectation on pursuing higher education from 47.2% to 55.2%. However, only 38% of the secondary school students can be directly admitted to the FYFD places provided by the University Grants Committee (UGC)-funded universities. This percentage is far below that of students’ expectation. Besides, the research shows that the socio-economic background of students’ families has an impact on students’ expectation on pursuing tertiary education. Students who have weak socio-economic background do not have high expectation on being admitted to universities immediately upon graduation as they may be aware that university places are seriously insufficient or they may not be able to afford the self-financing Degree or Associate Degree programmes. Thus, most of them choose to work in society upon graduation from secondary schools. When the variable of ‘high ability’ is factored in, among the 44.2% and 59.8% students ‘with high ability’ in 2009 and 2012 respectively, only 64.4% (2009) expected to pursue university education. This is far below those in Korea (94%) and Singapore (88%). All along, the Hong Kong society generally believes that education is the cornerstone for social mobility. Increasing the UGC-funded university places not only brings hope to students of different socio-economic background, but also makes them stay in Hong Kong and take Hong Kong as their home. This will enhance the quality of Hong Kong people in general and the competitiveness of our society.
Conclusion
The Hong Kong Association of the Heads of Secondary Schools (HKAHSS) is much concerned about the learning opportunity of Hong Kong students in tertiary education. In our survey conducted in 2018, among the responses of 125 secondary school principals, 85% of them opined that the Government should increase the FYFD places provided by the UGC-funded universities to satisfy students’ demand for university places. 92% felt that the Education Bureau (EDB) should review the current GER of “3322” for 4-year Bachelor’s Degree Programmes. In 2019, our Association had conducted another survey in collaboration with the Chinese University of Hong Kong titled “Survey on the Curriculum Reform – From the Present to the Future”. Among the responses of 162 secondary school principals, more principals opined that universities should take the best six subjects attaining a total of 14 marks in the HKDSE as the GER. We therefore have to ask if the strict adherence to “3322” for the core subjects as the GER for university since the first HKDSE Examination in 2012 has been able to cater for students’ multiple talents. Does it even cast away talents in Mathematics, Science and Technology? Why should so many students who can meet the GER every year have to first study Associate Degree programmes before they can be admitted to Bachelor’s Degree programmes, which actually kills their will? When there is no obvious increase in the number of UGC-funded university places, when there is no change in the GER for university admission, and when there is no change in the alignments of faculties or departments in universities, students’ expectation of their future will not be raised. When the ratio of students pursuing Bachelor’s Degree programmes in Hong Kong is far below that of our competitors in the world, when Hong Kong students’ expectation of pursuing university education is confined by the number of university places and their socio-economic background, what happens eventually is the wasting of talents in Hong Kong or affecting students’ sense of belonging to the Hong Kong society. To match with the social, economic and educational development of the future society, we hope that the Government can review the present system of UGC-funded university places, provide universal university education, enhance the quality of Hong Kong people in general, and give hope to teenagers.
| 明報 (24-11-2020) 從精英制到普及化的大學教育 | English version |
前言
近數十年，不論中國、美國或英國等地，高等教育都在迅速擴展。各地政府積極推動高等教育改革，以配合國家發展需要，並滿足社會大眾對高等教育的需求。根據經濟合作及發展組織（OECD）2015至2019年統計，43個不同國家（不包括中國）的25至34歲人口中，曾接受高等教育的平均人口百分比達44.9%。又以中國為例，自1990年代末在經濟現代化的帶動下，高等教育開始擴大招生並進入學位大眾化階段，至2013年，高等教育毛入學率（gross enrollment ratio）已達到34.5%（中華人民共和國教育部，2015），至2019年已超過原定40%的目標，達51.6%。若將中國各鎮各地不平均的發展計算在內，可以推算出大部分重點省市的大學入學率必然遠高於毛入學率。反觀，香港的高等教育普及化速度又如何？現時資助學士學位又是否能配合未來社會、經濟及教育發展的需要？
配合經濟早着先機 20年後卻遠被拋離
上世紀80年代中起，香港的大學學位開始增加，進入大學的適齡人口由約5%提升至18%，與世界趨勢接軌。踏入2000年代初，教資會指出全港15歲及以上人口具備大專學歷的只佔約五分之一，這與教育改革提出要建立知識型經濟並不匹配，故2000年《施政報告》提出推動高等教育的普及化，要在10年內令香港高等教育的普及率達到60%。當時特區政府已洞燭機先，提出教育發展藍圖，必須為經濟發展及轉型而大力發展高等教育普及化。
自政府建議大學可為17至20歲人口提供副學位課程後，教資會屬下多所院校於2001年起陸續推出副學位課程，以致香港高中畢業生接受專上教育的比率，由2000年的33%，增至2005年的66%；惟增幅主要來自非資助課程（包括銜接學士學位、副學士、高級文憑及證書課程），當中資助學士學位比重只佔少數。現時教育資助委員會資助大學第一年學士學位約為1.5萬個，較25年前的1.45萬個，只上升了500個；單看資助學士學位的增加幅度，25年來僅增加了3.4%，即使加上計算教資會資助大學高年級學位學額約5000個，估計只佔適齡人口35%，不但低於新加坡的約50%，更遠低於內地一線城市，如北京的76%、上海的73%。
上述數字顯示，雖然香港早於20年前已提出配合知識型經濟發展，大力推動高等教育普及化，資助大學學額卻一直原地踏步，不但落後於國際主要競爭對手，更遠遠落後於近30年經濟急速起飛的內地城市。
增大學收生靈活性 培育全人啟迪多元
學校課程檢討專責小組於9月22日發出「最後報告」，建議大學按個別情况增加收生靈活性，透過新設立「學校推薦直接錄取計劃」，讓不同才華的學生可以透過文憑試以外的指標入讀大學，預計每年將有最多約1000名學生透過此計劃獲得推薦。誠然，此項新計劃的確是對培育具備不同才華的學生踏出第一步，須知「3322」的「一般入學要求」每年埋沒了多少語文能力未及第3級而數理能力優異的人才？又讓多少具備其他能力的學生望門興嘆？然而，小組報告3.8.2段指出：「由於八所教資會資助大學提供的第一年學士學位課程學位仍會維持在每年15,000個，以現時學生人數來說，學生一般仍需要考獲比『3322』更高的成績，以及在選修科目取得佳績，才有入讀本地大學的機會。故此，放寬『一般入學要求』不會提高入讀大學機會。」此說明在不增加大學學士學額的大前提下，連符合「一般入學要求」都未能全獲取錄，單單改變收生標準或增加不同的錄取計劃，都無助增加學生踏入大學學習的機會，直接影響了大學收生的多元化及靈活性。而自2012年香港中學文憑考試實施以來，每一年約30%男生符合「3322」的要求，女生則約為45%，持續多年男、女生失衡情况，是否社會樂見並同意接受？長遠來說又會否影響香港的經濟社會發展以及家庭結構？歸根究柢，要避免埋沒或流失各有不同長處的年輕一代，除了要增加大學收生靈活性，更要合理地增加資助大學第一年學士學位課程的學額，以紓緩中學生的學業壓力，並為學校創造空間，活化中學教育，這才能真正做到小組報告中「培育全人啟迪多元」的目標。
確保高等教育公平 為青年帶來希望
參考〈從PISA剖析香港青少年對升讀高等教育的期望〉（何瑞珠、黃善國、姜培芝、岑國榮，2017）研究，其結論及建議實在值得政府深思。研究指出自2009至2015年，香港中學生對升讀高等教育的期望有所提高，由47.2%升至55.2%；惟香港曾只有38%的中學生可直接入讀資助學士學位一年級課程，可見升學比率遠低於學生期望。此外，研究顯示家庭社經地位對學生升學期望會有影響，來自低下階層的學生較少期望直接升讀大學，原因可能是他們明白資助大學學位嚴重不足，亦未能負擔自資學位或副學士，故多選擇完成中學後先投身社會工作。當同時參考「高能力者」對升大學的期望，2009至2012年間，香港分別有44.2%和59.8%的高能力者，當中只有64.4%（2009年）期望升大學，遠低於韓國的94%及新加坡的88%。香港社會普遍相信教育是社會流動的基石，增加資助學士學位，不單為不同社經地位的青年帶來希望，讓他們扎根香港，以港為家，亦有助提升香港整體人文素養及城市的競爭力。
總結
香港中學校長會關注香港學生的專上教育機會，於2018年進行問卷調查，125份中學校長回應中，85%認為政府應考慮增加教資會的第一年學士學位課程學額，以滿足學生升學需求；92%認為教育局應檢視現行的「3322」4年制學士學位課程最低入學要求。本會於2019年與香港中文大學合作進行「課程改革的調查研究——從現在到未來」，從162位中學校長回應中，較多認為應以文憑試最佳6科總成績14分為入讀大學的基本要求。自2012年首屆文憑試至今，一直維持大學收生門檻為核心科目「3322」的最低要求，會否未能全面及平衡地考核學生的多元能力？甚至埋沒了數理科技人才？為何每年要讓不少學習能力已符合大學入學要求的考生，先讀副學士後，再修讀學士學位，從而消磨其意志？當資助學士學位數目沒有明顯增加時，收生門檻改變或大學學系增減，都不會令學生對未來的期望提高。當香港升讀學士學位比率低於其他競爭地區時，當香港學生升讀大學期望受制於學位數目及社經地位時，最終只會浪費了香港的人才，或會影響學生對香港社會的歸屬感。盼望香港真的能配合未來社會、經濟及教育發展的需要，檢討現時資助學士學位的制度，提供普及化的大學教育，提升香港整體人文素養，給予青年希望！
作者是香港中學校長會署理主席