Vice-Chancellor's Report 1982-85

(a) Studen t Intak e Student intak e ha s alway s bee n a n impo r t an t bu t littl e appreciated aspect o f universit y functio n t hroughou t th e wo r l d , an d s o i t came a s a surpris e tha t ou r Provisiona l Acceptanc e Schem e (PAS ) should provok e th e k i n d o f debat e an d reactio n i t di d i n H o n g Kong . There ar e t wo reason s fo r suc h reaction. First , a s has been pointed ou t by man y educationalist s tim e an d again , ou r secondar y educatio n system ha s fo r th e pas t severa l decade s bee n dominate d b y publi c examinations, t h r oug h wh i c h w e asses s and selec t ou r schoo l pupils i n an apparentl y objectiv e bu t potentiall y ha rmf u l an d counter-productive manner. PA S a s a first ste p toward s a reversal o f thi s tren d goe s against th e mentalit y fostere d b y th e establishe d system . Second , th e keenness o f th e competitio n fo r th e comparativel y fe w universit y places i s suc h tha t an y chang e i s boun d t o caus e uneasines s amon g some sector s o f th e commun i t y . I t i s we ll k n own tha t ou r complicate d examinatio n system result s f r om t w o factors . I n th e mid-60 s secondar y educatio n wa s shortene d f r om si x year s t o five , renderin g i t necessar y t o hav e separat e publi c examinations f o r school-leavin g an d for university-entrance . Furthermore, the undergraduat e degre e course s o f th e t w o loca l universitie s differ i n length , an d therefore entranc e t o th e t wo universitie s require s separate examination s a t differen t points . A s a consequence, student s who wishe d t o maximize thei r chances f or entr y t o tertiar y institution s had t o tak e u p t o three , o r eve n four , publi c examination s w i t h i n a period o f thre e years . The Un i ver s i t y ha s fo r a long tim e bee n m i nd f u l o f th e harmf u l effect th e pressur e generate d b y thi s syste m ha d o n schoo l pupils, an d on the quality o f the students we admitted. Sinc e I t ook u p my appointment, considerable effor t ha s bee n devote d t o explorin g variou s possibilities wh i c h migh t solv e the problem. Howeve r , a s the situatio n was closel y linke d t o th e establishe d secondar y educatio n syste m an d public examinatio n syste m o f Ho n g Kong , ther e appeare d t o b e littl e likelihood tha t a solution requirin g concurren t change s i n othe r part s of th e educatio n syste m coul d prov e acceptabl e an d ha d an y hop e o f being implemente d w i t h i n a reasonable perio d o f time . Realizin g tha t this wa s th e cru x o f th e matter , th e Un i ver s i t y earl y i n 198 2 wo r ke d out a schem e o f Provisiona l Acceptance , th e implementatio n o f wh i ch, I ma y po i n t out , i s totally w i t h i n th e powe r an d responsibilit y of th e Senat e o f th e University . Thi s schem e wou l d , albei t on l y t o a limited extent , reduc e th e numbe r o f competitiv e examination s schoo l leavers ar e encourage d o r require d t o take . I t wo u l d als o wi de n ou r 2