DOCSLIB.ORG

LANGUAGE EDUCATION ~ 328 ~ Turning from Teaching in English to Teaching in Mother Tongue: Social Realities and Contradictions in Post-1997 Hong Kong

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
LANGUAGE EDUCATION ~ 328 ~ Turning from Teaching in English to Teaching in Mother Tongue: Social Realities and Contradictions in Post-1997 Hong Kong Education Policy, Reform, and School Innovations in the Asia-Pacific Region PART III: LANGUAGE EDUCATION ~ 328 ~ Turning from Teaching in English to Teaching in Mother Tongue: Social Realities and Contradictions in Post-1997 Hong Kong Timothy Wai Wa Yuen The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong Introduction After the political handover in 1997, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government released the Medium of Instruction Guidance (MOI Guidance). The MOI Guidance aims at promoting the use of mother tongue (Cantonese in verbal language and Modern Standard Chinese in written language) in secondary schools and reducing the use of mixed code (a mixture of Chinese and English). The MOI Guidance was much resented when it was released and has remained highly controversial. This paper reviews the MOI Guidance and the controversies it arouses from a social perspective, paying particular attention to how the policy has met with the complexities in the social landscape and the reaction of the stakeholders when their interests are affected. It argues that language policy change, just like any other elements of education reform, should be grounded on careful examinations of social realities, especially on how vested interest will be affected. Apart from being a localized discussion of how language policy has become a complicated and contentious issue, it is hoped that this article can help reflection about the social complexities against which education reforms are carried out, particularly at a time when the Asian Pacific Region has seen waves of education changes. Teaching in Mother Tongue: A Historical Account Secondary schools teaching with Chinese medium of instruction (CMI) were for a long time the mainstream in Hong Kong whilst schools teaching with English medium of instruction (EMI) remained a minority. In 1958, for example, CMI secondary schools still accounted for 55% of the total number of secondary schools in Hong Kong. However, the scenario changed rapidly in the 60’s and 70’s when EMI schools quickly expanded in number and became predominant. In 1979, only 23% of secondary schools used Chinese as the medium of instruction. What caused the Chinese medium schools to lose ground? The most common cause attributed to it is that of colonialism and deliberate plans of the former colonial government in favor of EMI. This explanation, which is difficult both to verify and falsify, needs to be critically examined. To begin with, CMI secondary schools retained their mainstream status till 1950’s against the fact that the colony was founded as early as 1842. The rise of EMI secondary schools did not result from specific government policy and directives specifying the adoption of English as the official medium of instruction in schools (see Notes 1). Particularly noteworthy is that CMI secondary schools’ demise followed closely the political changes that happened in the mainland after the end of WWII. The Communist takeover in 1949 and the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950’s led to the subsequent closing of the border and put an end to the once popular path of further study and career development in China, which were pursued by ~ 329 ~ Education Policy, Reform, & School Innovations in the Asia-Pacific graduates of CMI secondary schools in Hong Kong. The comparative numbers of CMI and EMI secondary schools in terms of school number and student enrollment are given in Table 1 and Table 2 below. Table 1: EMI and CMI Secondary Schools in Hong Kong (1958-1989) Year Number of % of Number of % of EMI secondary secondary CMI secondary secondary schools schools being schools schools being EMI schools CMI schools 1958 74 45% 89 55% 1969 230 66% 120 34% 1979 333 77% 97 23% 1989 235 65% 126 35% Source: Lai, F. K. (1994). Language streaming and English standard, Modern Educational Bulletin, 32, 5-7. Table 2: Number of Students Enrolled in EMI and CMI Secondary Schools Year EMI secondary schools students CMI secondary schools students Male Female Total Male Female Total 1952 12000 4000 16000 10000 7000 17000 1961 35000 18000 53000 15000 14000 29000 1971 100000 67000 167000 25000 25000 50000 1981 No major gender 370000 No major gender 50000 difference difference Source: Adapted from Luk (2003). Hong Kong’s Education Stories: From Banyan Tree to Computer, p 160-162. Lai (ibid) explains that the growth of EMI schools (Table 1) at this period was mainly due to the development of an export-led economy in Hong Kong and the increase of jobs in both the civil service and the commercial sector that required ability to communicate in English. The relatively heavier presence of female students in CMI schools in the period 1960’s and early 1970’s (Table 2) on the other hand further underpinned the idea that parents’ choice of EMI schools for children was largely utilitarian in nature and was based particularly on the need of the job market. As girls were not expected to play an active role in the labor market in the 1950’s and 1960’s, parents were more willing to send their daughters to the CMI schools for the sake of the cherished conservative ethos of such schools. This was only reversed gradually due to the increased participation of women in the labor market in the 1970’s. Thus, it seems the colonialism notion may only be accepted up to the extent that the colonial government did not rein in the market when demand showed a strong preference for EMI places and this preference was mainly due to economic consideration. Evans, S. (2000) made an interesting note of the laissez-faire policy: ~ 330 ~ Turning from Teaching in English to Teaching in Mother Tongue: Social Realities and Contradictions in Post-1997 Hong Kong The climb down over the language circulars set the tone for language policy in education in the post-war years, for although the colonial government consistently recommended the use of Chinese as the MOI at secondary level it failed to formulate and implement a clear language policy. (p.189) From this point onward, we may also need to recognize that market demand, particularly in terms of parental wish based on utilitarian calculation, can be important in matters such as the choice of teaching medium in schools. Another strand of development in the post-war period was the rapid expansion of educational provisions in Hong Kong. In 1978, 9-year free and compulsory education was first provided. The development of massive education changed the formerly elitist nature of schooling and allowed the less academically oriented students to study in secondary schools. This in return brought in the mismatch between the teaching medium and the linguistic competence of the students. Many of these students could never have made their way to the secondary schools before (see Notes 2). In 1982, the report of a visiting panel commissioned by the government concluded that most secondary students could not effectively learn in English. In the subsequent reports (report no.1 to 6) published by the prestigious Education Commission (EC) between 1984 and 1996, there were repeated calls to encourage secondary schools to teach in mother tongue. The mixed code popularly used in many of the EMI secondary schools was particularly highlighted for criticism (EC Report 4, 1990). Meanwhile, the government adopted various measures to foster the use of mother tongue. These comprised persuasion and offering support to schools teaching in Chinese. It should be understood that throughout the entire process, the government had refrained from enforcing compliance through issuing of decree and the choice of teaching language was left to schools’ discretion. Besides, schools were also allowed to develop their own approach to mother tongue teaching, for example on a subject by subject basis or a class by class basis. Tsui (2004) explained that at the time before the release of the MOI Guidance in 1997, 94% of students were studying EMI secondary schools. The figure for primary students was almost the reverse, with 93% of the primary students enrolled in schools teaching in Chinese. This unparalleled development, also reported by Luk (op cit), underlined the difficulty to learn effectively in English in secondary schools, especially in the case of the less academically oriented students and students whose families were less in touch with English. An Outline of the Medium of Instruction (MOI) Guidance In 1997, the Education Department of Hong Kong issued the MOI Guidance to secondary schools. For the first time, an administrative decree was issued to secondary schools concerning the choice of teaching medium. The MOI Guidance aims at promoting the use of mother tongue and discouraging the use of mixed code in secondary schools, particularly junior secondary level (secondary year one to three or S1-S3).The Guidance explains the benefits from mother-tongue teaching against improvements in learning and students’ preference. ~ 331 ~ Education Policy, Reform, & School Innovations in the Asia-Pacific MOI Guidance stipulates (MOI Guidance): 1. Most secondary schools should adopt mother tongue teaching with their S1 intake starting from 1998-9 school year and progressing each year to a higher level of secondary study. 2. Upon reaching S4, some schools may want to switch to English as MOI for certain subjects. If so, they should demonstrate that their teachers and students are able respectively to teach and to learn in English. For S6 and 7, schools should be free to make MOI choices. 3. However, the Government also realizes that some schools are quite successful teaching in English. Thus, these schools may continue with English as MOI if they make an application and can prove that they can satisfy the following requirements: x Student ability: Not less than 85% of the S1 intakes of the school in the past 3 years should belong to Medium of Instruction Grouping Assessment (MIGA) Groups I and III.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • May 2008 Issue No. 24 HKI
    Issue no. 24 HK May 2008 Newsletter Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research IE The Chinese University of Hong Kong In This Issue R Research Notes and Innovations 1 Research Notes and Innovations Evaluation Research on the Implementation of the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools 8 Research Programmes Principal Investigator: Professor Wing-kwong Tsang Programmes for Professional 8 Since September 1999, faculty members 1 of the Departments of Curriculum and Development Instruction (C&I) and Educational Administration and Policy (EAP), The Chinese University of Hong Kong, have carried out a longitudinal study to 10 Conferences, Seminars and evaluate the implementation of the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Public Lectures Secondary Schools (Guidance). The study is made up of three phases. The first two phases were commissioned by the then Education Department, the HKSAR 12 Development Projects government, 2 while the third phase is funded by the Public Policy Research (4009-PPR-2), the Research Grants Council of the University Grants 13 Research and Development Committee. The longitudinal study is by design an ex post facto policy-evalua- Centres tion research, which aims to assess the effects of the policy measure stipulated in the Guidance on secondary school students’ academic and psychosocial 15 Publications developments. The policy measure in point is the directive to mandate all secondary schools to “adopt Chinese for teaching all academic subjects, start- ing from their 1998/99 Secondary 1 intake” (Education Department, 1997, p. 4) unless they could prove another language (English) was as efficacious. The specific conditions for secondary schools to apply to use English as the medium 1 May 2008 Issue no.
    [Show full text]
  • SAP Crystal Reports
    浸信會永隆中學 Baptist Wing Lung Secondary School Tai Hing Gardens, Phase II, 6A Ho Hing Circuit, Tuen Mun, N.T. 24643638 [email protected] 24634382 http://www.bwlss.edu.hk Mission Statement Information of Teaching Staff We are committed to providing high quality education for the youth infused with christian values with a (including School Head) view to giving our students a balance growth in the aspects of ethics, intellect, physique, social skills, Number of teaching posts in the approved 56 aesthetics and spirituality. establishment Total number of teachers in the school 64 Qualifications and professional training (% of total number of teachers) School Information Teacher Certificate / Diploma in Education 100% Supervisor / Chairman of Dr. Chan Ping Cheung School Management Bachelor Degree 97% Committee Master / Doctorate Degree or above 38% Principal (with Mr. Cheng Kai Lam (M.Ed.) Qualifications / Special Education Training 13% Experiences) Years of Experience (% of total number of teachers) School Type Aided Co-ed 0 - 4 years 5 - 9 years ≥10 years School Motto Wisdom, Kindness, Loyalty and Faith 9% 8% 83% Name of Sponsoring The Baptist Convention of Hong Kong Year of Commencement of 1996 Body Operation Area Occupied by the About 5800 Sq. M Religion Protestantism / Incorporated Management Established School Christianity Committee Parent-Teacher Yes Past Students' Association / Yes Student Union / Yes Association School Alumni Association Association Subjects Offered in the 2019/2020 School Year Chinese Language, Mathematics*, Liberal
    [Show full text]
  • FCR(2005-06)39 on 13 January 2006
    For discussion FCR(2005-06)39 on 13 January 2006 ITEM FOR FINANCE COMMITTEE HEAD 156 - GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT : EDUCATION AND MANPOWER BUREAU Subhead 700 General non-recurrent New Item “Grant to the Language Fund” Members are invited to approve a new commitment of $1,100 million for injection into the Language Fund. PROBLEM We need to strengthen the teaching and learning of English in our secondary schools and to support the wider use of Putonghua to teach the Chinese Language subject in primary and secondary schools. PROPOSAL 2. The Secretary for Education and Manpower (SEM) proposes to inject $1,100 million into the Language Fund (the Fund) to – (a) strengthen the teaching and learning of English in secondary schools, and (b) support the wider use of Putonghua to teach the Chinese Language subject in primary and secondary schools. JUSTIFICATION 3. There is an outstanding balance of $550 millionNote 1 in the Fund as at the end of November 2005. However, more than $489 million have been /earmarked ..... Note 1 A total of $1,400 million have been injected into the Fund since 1994. Added to this is a total interest income of $186 million accrued by the Fund over the years. Taking into account the total grants of $1,030 million already approved for various projects (of which $401 million has already been spent and $629 million has been committed for initiatives in progress) and $6 million already spent on other miscellaneous expenses, there was an outstanding balance of $550 million left in the Fund as at the end of November 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Education Bureau Circular No. 6/2009
    Ref: EDB(RP)3410/15/07(6) Government of the HKSAR Education Bureau 5 June 2009 Education Bureau Circular No. 6/2009 Fine-tuning the Medium of Instruction for Secondary Schools [Note: This circular should be read by: (a) Supervisors and Heads of all government and aided secondary schools, and caput schools for necessary action; (b) Supervisors and Heads of all government and aided primary schools for information; (c) Supervisors and Heads of all schools under the Direct Subsidy Scheme and private independent schools for information; and (d) Heads of Sections for information.] Summary This circular informs (a) all schools about the details of fine-tuning the medium of instruction (MOI) for secondary schools; and (b) all government and aided secondary schools, and caput schools about the arrangements for devising MOI plans for Secondary(S) 1 entrants in the 2010/11 school year and reporting their plans to the Education Bureau (EDB) for vetting purposes. Background 2. The Government has been promoting the use of the mother tongue as the MOI in secondary schools since the early 1980’s. In 1997, the then Education Department issued the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools (Guidance) . Under the policy framework as set out in the Guidance , the mother tongue should primarily be adopted as the MOI for secondary schools. Schools wishing to use English as the MOI should fulfill three prescribed criteria as follows: students possessing the ability to learn through English, teachers possessing the capability to teach through English and schools having adequate support strategies/measures. In December 2005, the Education Commission (EC) published the Report on Review of Medium of Instruction for Secondary Schools and Secondary School Places Allocation (Report).
    [Show full text]
  • For Information Legislative Council Panel on Education Fine-Tuned
    LC Paper No. CB(4)1038/20-21(01) For information Legislative Council Panel on Education Fine-tuned Medium of Instruction for Secondary Schools – Implementation Arrangements for the Third Cycle Purpose This paper informs Members of the implementation arrangements for the third cycle (2022/23 to 2027/28 school years) of the fine-tuned medium of instruction (MOI) policy at junior secondary levels. Background 2. The Education Bureau (EDB), premised on the learning effectiveness of mother-tongue teaching, has implemented the fine-tuned MOI arrangements in secondary schools starting from the 2010/11 school year after extensive consultation with various stakeholders, with a view to enabling each and every student at junior secondary levels to have the motivation and be given more opportunities to use English to learn subject knowledge in a progressive manner that best suit their learning needs and abilities. The key features of the fine-tuned MOI arrangements are as follows – (a) We uphold the three prescribed criteria (including student ability, teacher capability and school-based support)1 for schools adopting English as the MOI as stipulated in the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools promulgated in 1997, but schools are no longer bifurcated into schools using Chinese as the MOI (“CMI schools”) and schools using English as the MOI (“EMI schools”). If a class of a school satisfies the “student ability” criterion, the school will be given full discretion to determine the MOI arrangements in the class concerned (“by-class” arrangement). 1 The prescribed criteria under the fine-tuned MOI framework include: (i) “student ability” (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Trilingual Education in Hong Kong Primary Schools: an Overview
    Trilingual education in Hong Kong primary schools: an overview Author Wang, Lixun, Kirkpatrick, Andy Published 2015 Journal Title Multilingual Education Version Version of Record (VoR) DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/s13616-015-0023-8 Copyright Statement © 2015 Wang and Kirkpatrick; licensee Springer. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/141854 Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au Wang and Kirkpatrick Multilingual Education (2015) 5:3 DOI 10.1186/s13616-015-0023-8 RESEARCH Open Access Trilingual education in Hong Kong primary schools: an overview Lixun Wang1* and Andy Kirkpatrick2 * Correspondence: [email protected] 1The Hong Kong Institute of Abstract Education, Hong Kong, China Full list of author information is Hong Kong is linguistically complex and diverse with three principal languages: available at the end of the article Cantonese, English and Putonghua. A substantial debate on the language policies governing the three principal languages has continued for more than two decades among policy-makers and educators. The political transition in 1997 has greatly affected Hong Kong society, including language education. Since then, the HKSAR government has made a series of language policy reforms trying to create a reasonable balance among the three languages in Hong Kong. The policies of ‘biliteracy and trilingualism’ and ‘mother-tongue teaching’ are two of the most significant in terms of controversy and impact.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changes of Language Policies in Hong Kong Education in the Post-Colonial Era
    International Conference on Education, Applied Sciences and Management (ICEASM'2012) December 26-27, 2012 Dubai (UAE) The Changes of Language Policies in Hong Kong Education in the Post-Colonial Era Dennis Fung, Maggie Ma entitled ‘Fine Tuning Medium of Instruction Arrangements for Abstract— The purpose of this article is to examine the gradual Secondary Schools’, as a framework for the qualified schools changes in the language policies for the Hong Kong education system to ‘fine-tune’ (switch) their MoI from CMI to EMI. In other and their related issues. The first section will critically analyze the words, this second wave of policy intended to give greater first and second waves of language policies in Hong Kong in the past autonomy to schools over choosing their MoI, in accordance few decades. The discussion will be followed by sections focusing on some of the major educational issues, including the economic drive with the criteria specified by the education authority, such as of the policy-making and the equality of education opportunity, the requirement of the students’ language proficiency and the which have been concerned and generated by the aims and impact of teachers’ qualifications (see the following sections for further the policies respectively. Finally, these issues will be summarised by information). Nevertheless, although the government made this an interaction theory based on the analysis of the students’ interest in effort to refine the language policy, the problems of the different types of secondary schools in Hong Kong. labelling effect and the unsatisfactory results in the students’ English language abilities still persist. In order to study the rationale behind the changes and the Keywords—Education System, Hong Kong, Language Policies, Post-colonial Era.
    [Show full text]
  • Trilingual Education in Hong Kong Primary Schools: an Overview Lixun Wang1* and Andy Kirkpatrick2
    Wang and Kirkpatrick Multilingual Education (2015) 5:3 DOI 10.1186/s13616-015-0023-8 RESEARCH Open Access Trilingual education in Hong Kong primary schools: an overview Lixun Wang1* and Andy Kirkpatrick2 * Correspondence: [email protected] 1The Hong Kong Institute of Abstract Education, Hong Kong, China Full list of author information is Hong Kong is linguistically complex and diverse with three principal languages: available at the end of the article Cantonese, English and Putonghua. A substantial debate on the language policies governing the three principal languages has continued for more than two decades among policy-makers and educators. The political transition in 1997 has greatly affected Hong Kong society, including language education. Since then, the HKSAR government has made a series of language policy reforms trying to create a reasonable balance among the three languages in Hong Kong. The policies of ‘biliteracy and trilingualism’ and ‘mother-tongue teaching’ are two of the most significant in terms of controversy and impact. They are now guiding the curriculumdesigninHongKonglanguage education. The goal of the former policy is to train Hong Kong people to be truly biliterate (written English and Chinese) and trilingual (spoken English, Cantonese and Putonghua). However, Hong Kong primary schools presently do not have an agreed method for the implementation of trilingual education. After a comprehensive historical review of the development of language education in Hong Kong schools, this study aims to find out how the ‘biliterate’ and ‘trilingual’ language policy is currently implemented in Hong Kong primary schools. 155 Hong Kong primary schools participated in a questionnaire survey on how trilingual education is implemented in the schools.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2016 – 2017 8 Dumbarton
    Munsang College 民 生 書 院 Annual Report 2016 – 2017 8 Dumbarton Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong Web Site: http://www.munsang.edu.hk E-mail: info@ munsang.edu.hk Contents Page Mission Statement, School Goals and School Major Concerns 1 Introduction 2 – 4 School Layout and Facilities 5 – 6 Administration Organization 7 – 11 Administration Structure Incorporated Manangement Committee Staff of the College Qualifications and Teaching Experience of Our Teaching Staff Executive Committee Working and Standing Committees Subject Departments Report on Academic Affairs 12 – 15 Curriculum 2016 – 2017 Class Structure Number of School Days (Including Form Test and Examination) Lesson Time for 8 Key Learning Areas for F.1 – F.3 Unfilled Places in the Classes Students’ Attendance Percentage of Early Exit Students in the School Year Financial Summary 16 – 20 Financial Summary 2016 – 2017 Use of Capacity Enhancement Grant Use of Diversity Learning Grant Use of Career and Life Planning Grant Use of Learning Support Grant Students’ Performance 21 – 22 F.6 Graduates’ Pathway 2016 – 2017 External Examination Students’ Achievements 2016 – 2017 23 – 45 External Awards Internal Scholarships Inter-school Activities and Competitions Reports of Committees 46 – 107 Reports of Subject Departments 108 – 214 Evaluation of School Major Concerns 2016 – 2017 215 – 219 School Major Concerns 2017 – 2018 220 Mission Statement We adopt “Light And Life” and “All For One, One For All” as our school motto, and our commitment is to offer to students a holistic education upon Christian principles and nurture in them a positive outlook on life, so that they can be self-motivated, resolute, devoted to making valuable contributions to the community, and prepared for the sublime state of life.
    [Show full text]
  • Emb (Ec)101/55/1/C
    File ref: EMB(EC) 101/55/1/C LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL BRIEF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THE REVIEW OF MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION FOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS AND SECONDARY SCHOOL PLACES ALLOCATION INTRODUCTION At the meeting of the Executive Council on 4 January 2005, the Council ADVISED and the Chief Executive ORDERED that the Education Commission (EC)’s proposal to launch a three-month consultation on its recommendations for the future Secondary School Places Allocation (SSPA) and Medium of Instruction (MOI) arrangements which were set out in the A consultation document at Annex A, should be approved. JUSTIFICATIONS Background 2. In September 2000, the Government accepted the Reform Proposals for the Education System in Hong Kong (Reform Proposals) published by the EC, and undertook to review the short-term mechanism of the SSPA system in the 2003/04 school year. Separately, the Government started implementing the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools (Guidance) in 1998. In 2000, the Government accepted the recommendation of a joint working group set up by the former Board of Education and the Standing Committee on Language Education and Research that the MOI arrangement for secondary schools should be considered alongside the review of the SSPA mechanism in the 2003/04 school year. The EC hence set up the Working Group on Review of SSPA and MOI for Secondary Schools (Working Group) in July 2003 to take forward the review. Current MOI Policy for Secondary Schools 3. A number of studies indicate that students learn best in their mother tongue. On the other hand, Hong Kong does have a practical need for a workforce with a high level of English proficiency in order to maintain her competitiveness as an international commercial and financial centre.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Panel on Education to the Legislative Council On
    立法會 Legislative Council LC Paper No. CB(2)1887/08-09 Ref : CB2/PL/ED Report of the Panel on Education for submission to the Legislative Council Purpose 1 This report gives an account of the work of the Panel on Education during the 2008-2009 Legislative Council (LegCo) session. It will be tabled at the Council meeting on 24 June 2009 in accordance with Rule 77(14) of the Rules of Procedure of the Council. The Panel 2. The Panel was formed by a resolution passed by the Council on 8 July 1998 and as amended on 20 December 2000, 9 October 2002, 11 July 2007 and 2 July 2008 for the purpose of monitoring and examining Government policies and issues of public concern relating to education matters. The terms of reference of the Panel are in Appendix I. 3. The Panel comprises 17 members, with Hon Cyd HO Sau-lan and Dr Hon Priscilla LEUNG Mei-fun elected as its Chairman and Deputy Chairman respectively. The membership list of the Panel is in Appendix II. Major work Capital works projects for the University Grants Committee (UGC)-funded institutions 4. During the current legislative session, capital works projects proposed for the UGC-funded institutions were high on the agenda of the Panel. A total of 12 capital works projects in relation to the implementation of the four-year undergraduate programmes under the new 334 academic structure were needed for the purpose of expanding the existing space and facilities in the university campuses in order to accommodate the additional students starting from the - 2 - 2012-2013 school year.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Ethnic Minorities in Hong Kong's Education System
    LC Paper No. CB(2)2559/03-04(01) Race and Equality: A Study of Ethnic Minorities in Hong Kong’s Education System A research project by the Centre for Comparative and Public Law and Unison Hong Kong - for Ethnic Equality Project Report and Analysis by Kelley Loper Centre for Comparative and Public Law Faculty of Law The University of Hong Kong Occasional Paper No. 12 February 2004 Centre for Comparative and Public Law Faculty of Law The University of Hong Kong The Centre for Comparative and Public Law was established in 1995 within the Faculty of Law of The University of Hong Kong. The purposes of the Centre are to promote research and other activities in the field of public and comparative law. The Centre has organised many seminars relating to international law and human rights in Hong Kong, and has active research projects covering such topics as the implementation of international human rights standards in Hong Kong law and practice; equality and the law; trafficking of women into Hong Kong; and comparative sexual harassment law. The Director of the Centre is Associate Professor Carole Petersen; the Deputy Directors are Associate Professor Donald Lewis and Associate Professor Simon Young. The Assistant Research Officer is Lison Harris; and the Executive Secretary is Flora Leung. This Occasional Paper was written by Ms. Kelley Loper, B.A. (Yale), LLM in Human Rights (The University of Hong Kong), recipient of the Anna Wu Prize for Human Rights, and former research officer of the Centre. Further information about the Centre and other occasional papers published by the Centre are available on the Centre’s website: http://www.hku.hk/ccpl/.
    [Show full text]