Issuu on Google+

   


The following Council member(s) had not submitted the Annual Debate written opinion by the deadline: 以下評議會成員並無如期提交是次周年辯論書面意見:

Representative of Sports Association II 體育聯會代表二

Chow Ka Yuet Kathy 周家越

Popularly Elected Union Councilor I 普選評議員一

Chow Chun Ming 鄒俊明

President of the previous Union Session 去屆會長

Chan Koon Hong 陳冠康

   


Preface 序 The Annual Debate serves the purpose of providing a platform for Union Members to understand the running of Council Meetings, and to provide a chance for Members to voice their opinions directly to the Union. The shortage in the vacancy of university places has long been an issue in Hong Kong. Heated debates on the quota allocated for non-JUPAS and non-local students for a very long period of time. This year, the Union Council will be debating on this topic. Apart from Councillors, representatives from the University will also be invited to the debate. It will be the greatest honor and pleasure to invite all Union Members to participate in the Annual Debate. 周年辯論為會員提供一個平台認識評議會會議進程及機會發表對學生會的意見。在多年 前已有不少聲音指出香港大學學位短缺,社會上一直熱烈討論非聯招及聯招學位的配額 應如何分配。評議會本年邀請大學代表參與本次有關學額分配的辯論,並藉此誠邀各位 會員抽空出席會議及共議辯題。

LI Wai Yan, Vivian 李韋欣 Chairperson of the Council 評議會主席 HKUSU Council, Session 2013 二零一三年度香港大學學生會評議會

Content 目錄

Page 頁

Written Opinion by members of the Union Council 評議會成員書面意見

1-66

Appendix 1: A paper on the background to the admission of non-local students

i

Appendix 2: Data from the University on admission of full-time undergraduate programme

vi


President 會長

Tang Laurence Yat Long 鄧日朗

Since 1993, HKU started to admit non-local students to enrich the student's community and help the University evolve into an international university in Asia and around the world. Admitting non-local students is a global trend and practice for most of the word class universities. For the universities in Hong Kong, the percentage of intake of admission of nonlocal rose from 4% to 10%, and eventually to 20% now. Multiple benefits will be earned from the admission of non-local students. We can look into the paper presented to the Heads of Universities Committee Standing Committee on Internationalization (Attached to the booklet). I guess no one will doubt these reasons which many of us are benefiting from internationalizing the campus. Thus, the thing we have to discuss here is not whether we should intake non-local students or not, but the maximum number of non-local students we should admit. The motion for the Annual Debate is “The maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced ” . Please be reminded that i think we should only look into the undergraduate students instead of postgraduate students as there is no intake quota for nonlocal postgraduate students. Personally, I am against to the motion because of the following reasons. Non-local students competing seats with local students? Firstly, one may say that admission of non-local students will deprive local students of the opportunity of having tertiary education as non-local students will take away the intake quotas which are subsidized by the University Grants Committee (UGC). According to current government policy, institution can only admit non-local students up to 20% of the total intakequota subsidized by the UGC, with 4% is included in the intake quota while 16% is not included in the intake quota. In other words, only 4% of non-local students are under the intake quota. This will not cause direct competition between local and non-local students as most of the non-local students are admitted outside the intake quota. In fact, it is fair to give 20% of intake quota for non-local students to ensure the cultural diversity in HKU. The way to help local students to enjoy tertiary education in Hong Kong is to increase the total intake quota subsidized by UGC. Non-local students eating up resources from taxpayers? Secondly, it is claimed that the non-local students are eating up the resources from Hong Kong's taxpayers as they are subsidizing the university seats. Reducing the number of intake of non-locals seems to be a way to avoid resources spent on outsiders. Yet, it is just a part of the story when we look into the figures. Currently, the cost for a unit of undergraduate is around $225,000 per year. The tuition fee for local students is around $40,000, which is subsidized by UGC while it is around $135,000 (raised from $10,000 to $13,500 in 2013) for non-local students. True, both local and non-local students are subsidized by the UGC (money from taxpayers) in different level. Yet, we cannot overlook the positive externalities brought by the non-local students to the local student's community. The benefits can be shown in the Page  1  of  80    


attached papers. The way to solve the current phenomenon is to raise the tuition fee of non-local students rather than cutting the maximum intake quota. Still, it is critical to strike a balance between maintaining competitiveness and covering the cost. Taking other prominent universities among Asia as reference, Studying in Hong Kong is the second cheapest option (Around $540,000 for a Bachelor Degree) compared to other countries such as Singapore (Around $836,000), Japan (Around $797,000), Malaysia (Around $545,000) etc. This shows that HKU still has room to raise our tuition fees to cover the cost paid from the taxpayers as the low price position and its academic excellence in Asia. One practical way is to charge different tuition fee for different courses according to their costs. For example, the cost for the two degrees of MBBS is higher compared to other degrees such as Arts, Social Sciences. It is reasonable to charge higher to non-local students for the costly degrees. We can also charge higher price for those competitive degrees. Recommendation In fact, instead of reducing the maximum of intake of non-local, we should provide more supporting facility, both software and hardware, such as teaching staff, lecture rooms, hostels etc to accommodate the increase of non-local students. The newly built Residential College and Centennial Campus relieved the increase of students' population in HKU. Also, two more Residential Hall/College will be built in Mui Fong Street and Hospital Road in 2017 which will provide around 400 places. Another thing has to improve is the proportion of overseas students to mainland students. According to the University goals, it is to admit 50% of the non-local undergraduate students from Mainland China, and 50% from other parts of the world. This goal is to maintain a diverse group of non-local students. However, referring to the Appendix I, we can see that the percentages of overseas students to mainland students for recent four years are 61% (2010), 58% (2011), 65% (2012) and 61% (2013). HKU still cannot reach its goal for the past few years. It is understandable that HKU is not that attractive compared with other world class universities in the United States and United Kingdom. Overseas non-local students with excellent academic performance might not take HKU as their first choice. On the other hand, most of the top mainland students will choose HKU as their first choice as HKU is one of the best universities in Asia. This results in the failure of reaching the university's goal. In fact, it is still a long way for HKU to attract top overseas non-local students to study in HKU. Some general suggestion like increasing the provision of scholarship, having more comprehensive facilities such as more hostels and classrooms, having a more competitive degree (both price and quality) etc. Unless HKU becomes a genuine world class university in the world which performs excellently in both teaching and learning and researching, HKU still has to intake a greater number of mainland students in order to maintain the highest academic standards.

Page  2  of  80    


Conclusion We should not deny the positive externalities brought by internationalization by admission of non-local students. It is not a healthy situation for an international university like HKU to reducing the maximum intake of non-local students. With no doubt, the current policy is not perfect. Yet, there are many other measures as mentioned above to improve the situation. I believe that, in order to establish a genuine cultural diversity in HKU, HKSAR government, HKU and all students have to work together hardly.

 

 

Page  3  of  80    


Vice-President (Internal) 內務副會長

Wong Yee Man 黃綺文

政府政策指出,非本地生應不多於大學全部收生比例的 20%。(Institutions can admit nonlocal students up to 20% of their total intake-quota, with 4% counted against the intake quota, and the remaining numbers not counted against the intake quota (and for which therefore there is no government funding).)香港大學非本地本科生的收生比率並沒有超出此 比例,而此比例在近年來也未有改變。本地生並未因為非本地生的出現而減少學額。而減少非 本地本科生的限額也不代表本地生學額會因而增加。現時坊間減少收取非本地生的呼聲,主要 源於本地大學的入學率僅 18%,符合就讀本地大學的學生卻遠高於此比例,故希望減少非本地 生的學額以其增加其入讀大學的機會。然而,若要長遠解決現時對本地生及非本地生收生的爭 執,增加本地生學額才是治本之道。 坊間現時有輿論認為本港大學著重非本地生,甚至有社交網站設立群組「反對本港大學濫收大 陸學生」,質疑香港大學歧視本地生,在制度安排上優待大陸學生。究其原因,乃香港大學的 配套政策未趨完善,尤其是住宿制度。香港大學新落成的龍華街住宿學院,把大陸學生與其他 非本地生區分,本地生:海外非本地生:大陸學生的宿位比例成為 1:1:1,非本地生間接擁有 更多的宿位。此反映香港大學對本地及非本地生的資源分配尚須改善,而資源分配不均,導致 香港大學本地及非本地生出現矛盾。香港大學本地生在資源上固然不應有特權,大學在資源分 配上也不應偏頗某類別的學生。假若大學能更平均分配資源,令資源用得其所。

香港大學收生多元化,除了令校園更添色彩外,學生也能受惠。來自不同地區的學生能帶來不 同的思維,剌激本地學生,也能催生更多不同的看法。對學生、學校甚至是社會也帶來良性影 響。故在思考調低非本地生限額時,也應考慮有否其它舉措能緩解現時的矛盾。

Page  4  of  80    


Vice-President (External) 外務副會長

Chow Yong Kang Alex 周永康

本人認為「香港大學收生應調低非本地生限額」一命題有商榷餘地。非本地生限額可分本科生 及研究生。港大的本科生對非本地生比例尚算合理,但港大就非本地生研究生限額卻毫無節 制,政府政策及大學管理層為求從內地人中覓取資源,不只塑造港大成為學店,喪失高等學府 純追求學術、尋求知識之姿,更有使「國際化」口號淪為「大陸化」之況。 港大的本科生非本地生比例目前尚算合理。一所大學需要國際交流生,才能滋長文化交流,建 立國際視野。港大本地生對非本地生比例僅屬 8:2,當屬合理。惟有人質疑 3400 人中只有近 10﹪為真正國際生,餘下 10﹪為內地生,並不算妥善運用資源;何況本港有 2 萬餘位合資格 中六學生具資格入亦大學,卻苦無學位,本港大學應先將學位撥歸本地生,再予內地生。然 而,面對學生短缺,削減國際生學位無疑是有悖「國際文化交流、擴闊學府視野」之理念,而 削減內地生學位也可能激化族群矛盾。事實上,政府規定每所大學的非本地生本科生學額中只 有最多 4%的教資會資助學額和最多 16%的非教資會資助學額,非本生實情並不算過份佔用政 府資助學額資源,亦無對本地生學額造成不合理競爭。故此,唯一能滿足本地教育需求的解急 之藥,當屬增加大專教育資源,而不調低非本地生限額。政府一直口講「知識形經濟」,卻從 未著意撥出資源提升本地大專教育質素及學額,一直以來教資會資助學額只佔適齡就讀人口的 20%,完全忽略培養本地人才。政府奢求水平參差的私立大學能滿足本地人求學需求,亦無寧 是緣木求魚,摒棄政府承擔為市民謀福祉的責任,無視教育乃人權之一。增撥資源是唯一出 路,削減現時非本地生學額卻無從促進港大及本港發展。 惟香港大學理應調低非本地研究生限額。根據港大網頁數據,研究生學額(研究式及修課式) 總數為 11778,獲教資會資助的研究生學額僅為 3744,佔 31.6%,自資課程則為 8034,佔 68.2%;就讀研究生的非本地生則達 5690 名,佔研究生學額總數的 48%,當中內地生佔 72%。報讀研究式課程須經學術評審,環球亦無規定本地生或非本地生限額,只要有助學術發 展,收生當無分國界。惟自資課程中不受規管,質素成疑,但只要以錢財則可換成學位。而因 學位及學府之名,甚得不少內地人鍾愛,當中多少純為吸納內地生牟利,質素惡劣,公眾學生 無從得知。大學校方從自資課程中獲取的資源,將往何處運用,公眾師生亦無從監察。以自資 課程補充政府資助之不足,更是惡性循環,一方而滋長政府棄責的習慣,另一方面縱容濫竽充 數的學院課程充斥市面,扭曲大學價值,向市場低頭。「內地生人滿為患」,以致國際化有內 地化之趨勢,不少亦可能是因自資課程而萌生之像。故要根治大學資源無從監察、質素低劣的 課程不斷滋生、濫收以致資源緊張的坊間指責,公布有關自資課程的所有數字,以致適當調低 有關課程收生限額,實在刻不容緩。 故此,「香港大學收生應調低非本地生限額」此一命題並不能劃一適用於所有學位及課程,但 卻適用於非本地研究生之域,尤以自資課程為重。目前校方仍未公開有關課程之仔細數據,但 相信不少坊間指斥的內地化形像,正是源自不受規限的自資課程。校方有必要正視自身採納的 政策下產生的現像,亦有需要檢討與教資會的關係,審視大學資源來源的問題。當年香港跟從 英國「大學公司化」,實行教資會制度,今天英國早已摒棄有關制度,期望院校自主,香港各 大學卻仍未跟上其步伐。港大以至其他專上院校,實在有需要團結一致,並抗教資會一如此官 僚僵化、缺乏教育理念的過氣制度。 Page  5  of  80    


General Secretary 常務秘書

Chau Dickson Ka Faat 周嘉發

香港大學不應調低現時非本地生的收生限額。香港大學作為一所國際性高等教育學府,理應促 進不同國家之間的學術交流,推廣各地的文化交流,擴闊本地生的國際視野,從而提升整體香 港大學畢業生的學術水平及競爭力。 於九十年代,行政會議通過教資會的建議,鼓勵香港教育機構招收外地生。現時,本地院校可 以招收不多於總學額百分之二十的非本地生,而今年香港大學成功招收的非本地生佔整體新生 百分之十六。透過與非本地生的交流,同學能與來自不同背景的同輩互相學習、進行文化交 流、了解外地文化。即使畢業生將來打算到跨國公司或外地工作,亦有較高的競爭力。 由於政府投放了不少資金興建高���教育機構的基建設施,所以現時香港大學的非本地生每年需 繳交約十三萬學費,其金額較本地的本科生高出大約九萬元。可是,現時一個教資會資助的本 科生學位每年成本超過二十萬,非本地生學費應進一步提升,而減少政府補貼的比率。政府亦 可以抽調資源,增加教資會資助的學位。此外,現時部份學系提供的課程只設有普通課堂,而 未設有導修課,同學們於課堂上未必有機會跟非本地生交流,讓他們錯失了增值的機會。香港 大學應該增加本地生及非本地生的學術交流機會,於課程設計上多作改進,讓本地生在學習過 程有更多機會與不同國籍的師生交流。

Page  6  of  80    


Financial Secretary 財務秘書

Hsu Yin Man 許彥文

Stance: Negative Opinions: HKU has been admitting non-local students for over a decade since 1999. Despite the University’s efforts in promoting an internationalised environment in the campus, many members of the society have been dissatisfied with the increasing intake of non-local students. Some of them suggest that the admission quota of local universities should be reserved to local students as the university is subsidised by the taxpayers in Hong Kong. However, they might as well have neglected the benefits brought about by non-local students. As a local student, I must say that my university life would have been totally different were there not non-local students in the university. Firstly, mainland and overseas students who are admitted to HKU are often elites in their own countries due to the scarce places available to them. They can offer positive competition in academic aspect. Some of the local students even find them as a target to fight for. Since the number of admission per application for non-local students (~4%) is still far behind that of local students (~20%), there is still a room to further increase the intake of non-local students to further improve the academic standards of the university. Moreover, the cultural exchange between local and non-local students is very valuable to us. The university is basically the first time in the life for many students to have daily interaction with students with other cultural backgrounds. Through communication and spending time together, students can effectively broaden their horizons. However, these benefits could only be further achieved if there could be a plethora of international students from all over the world, instead of focusing or having more of a certain group of students, i.e. mainland students in the current situation.

Page  7  of  80    


University Affairs Secretary I 大學事務秘書一

Tsang Chung Hei 曾頌熙

Stance: I would not support to reduce the maximum intake of non-local students. Reasoning: There must be a reason for this topic to be chosen as the topic of the Annual Debate. I guess it is a respond to the phenomena that many non-local students are surrounding us, and it is giving us a pressure to change our habit. Also, as the number of non-local students has increased, someone may think non-local students are depriving local students of resources. As a student, I do see the positive impact brought from the non-local students. Most of the non-local students have a different study style when compared to us, they are more concentrate in class than local students, and they can often think creatively, reflect and give a different perspective apart from the existing view. The University has mentioned the benefits to have more non-local students in campus in their provided documents, so I will make this part short. Based on the above reason, I would like to insist that the maximum intake of nonlocal students should not be reduced. Some may argue that the increasing number of non-local students may take the resources which can be arranged to local students originally. But I would like to say it is already reflected in the difference of tuition fee between local and non-local students. Non-local students now pay $135,000 but local students only pay $ 42,100, which is a third of the amount of non-local students. So, this argument should not be a valid reason for us to reduce the maximum intake of non-local students. And from the document provided by the University, local students including JUPAS and non-JUPAS always contribute more than 80% among the newly admitted students in the past ten years and the figure keeps over 85% before the year of 2010 – 2011. So I would say the University has provided sufficient places for local students. However, I would like to recommend the University to reduce the in-take of mainland postgraduates among postgraduate level. The ratio of mainland students in undergraduate level is fine under the governing of current university policy, but it is a bit over in postgraduate level. According to the document provided by the University, there are currently no policies governing the ration of in-taking international students. Admission now is working on academic merit basis nowadays. However, from the statistics provided by the University, there is a stunning growth of the number of mainland students admitted in the self-funded full-time taught postgraduate program from 2002 - 2003’s 39 to 2012 2013’s 1022. While from the annual report of the University in the year of 2012-2013, we can see that mainland students take over 70% of all non-local postgraduate seats. It shows us that how massive is the amount of mainland postgraduate students is surrounding us. Page  8  of  80    


Although I understand that nationality should not be a concern for a University to consider the admission of a student, but it is getting more obvious that more and more mainland students are walking around the campus. So, I would like to suggest the University to set up policy for postgraduate level like the current one working on undergraduate students on the ratio of admitting non-local students from Mainland China and other parts of the world.

Page  9  of  80    


External Affairs Secretary I 外務秘書一

Leung Ching Him 梁呈謙

近年社會上多了不少人反對大學招收非本地生及內地生,更有網民發起登報指大學濫收內地 生,稱大學內地化,剝香港學生升讀大學權利,納稅人金錢不應資助非本地生。儘管此舉或被 稱排外,更有標籤非本地生之嫌,唯校外內均對此十分關注,學校收生備受壓力,學生會對此 實應有所討論。 學生為學校組成一大基本,談到大學收生問題,便不能不論大學設立的宗旨,港大宗旨「香港 大學躋立國際優等學府之首列,標領亞洲,懷抱中華,曠眼世界」。要成為國際優等學府,故 港大要國際化及與中國接軌是無從爭辯。港大國際化,便需吸納一定數目國際學生。更多國際 學生可以增加本地學生日常跟不同文化背景同學接觸,特別是對未有出國交流經驗的同學。另 外,取錄國際學生對學校不論在管冶或教學風格上可以帶來沖擊,亦可支持大學保持全英語教 學。而國際學生多寡亦直接影響大學排名、形象,不僅影響學生畢業後出路,學生實習及交流 機會亦會大減。 當然有少數非本地的學位受到政府定額資助,有港人倒貼外人之嫌。 每年港大僅取錄二百名國際學生,無疑僅佔不足十%非華人學生,實屬校園中的少數,以觀察 所得亦未足成功推動校園國際化。相反內地生數目比國際生多逾百人,實有點不合理,港大宗 旨成為國際學府,卻近年一味增加內地生而國際生數目則停滯不前。要知道內地雖跟香港文化 有落差,唯跟香港均屬一國,本身學生已可從生活各方面中認識到內地。最近港大在《泰晤士 高等教育雜誌》大學排行榜「國際化」範疇的評分已下跌 1.4 分。要是繼續不提升國際生比 例,港大國際化排名會下降,形成惡性循環,結果愈來愈少國際學生報讀。 可是現階段如要增加非本地生數目,對不少配套設施造成龐大壓力。不少非本地生不願選擇舍 堂因未能接受舍堂文化,校方在此以外宿位提供卻只有龍華街宿舍及少數其他宿位。

Page  10  of  80    


External Affairs Secretary II 外務秘書二

Wong Zoi Lam 黃在琳

目前就讀於香港大學的學生中 ,非本地生比率高達百分之十六. 而現時香港大學就非本地生所收 取的學費約為一年十三萬。然而,大學學士學位一年的成本為廿二至廿五萬,,顯而易見,大學 所收的金額與成本距離甚遠。再者,香港自回歸後資助學士學位限額長期維持於 15000 個,而當 中撥予非本地生及非聯招生的比率按年上升,反之撥予本地生之學額則逐年遞減;另外,本地學 生入讀大學比率近二十年長期維持低於百分之二十的比率。在本地生升學率偏低的情況下若不對 非本地生學士學額做出調整,對本地生可謂極不公平。以香港大學為例,高達百分之十六於本年 度入學的新生學生為非本地生,當中所涉及學額雖然未至舉足輕重,對本地學生可謂影響深遠。 本地大學收生以本地生為主可謂理所當然,畢竟由政府資助大學的資金均為納稅人所繳付,從合 理性而言,本地大學 (包括香港大學)優先錄取本地生可算合理不過.大學其中一個目的為人才培 訓,,本地大學為一個訓練專業人才的地方。但觀乎非本地生學士畢業後留港工作的比率,相對 於香港公共體系所投放於大學培訓的資源,就吸納非本地生而言,則未能達到吸納非本地生並培 訓香港工作人口的目的。如上述所言,一個學士學位一年為廿二至廿五萬,代表一個學士學生畢 業時政府已投放至少八十萬予每一位學生。若非本地生畢業後的離港比率如此高,從效益成本的 角度看,投放於非本地生的資源實屬用之不當。 就本地學術研究發展,特別為人文及社會科學方面, 本地大學理應以本土為研究重點,為本土各 方面問題提供出路及有系統分析,非本地生往往缺乏此種面向及視野;理科或科研確實看似沒有 地域限制,從現實角度,就環保而言,相關的電池車,亦是回應香港使用汽車量的問題,非本地 生未必對本地脈絡有足夠認知以應付本地問題。以上種種雖然針對香港普遍大學情況, 但香港 大學為香港最高學府,所培養的學生回饋香港亦實屬合理。 本地大學近年致力使校園國際化,以香港大學而言, 本年度入學新生中非本地生的比例達百分之 16 。坊間對校園國際化有一定誤解,認為招收國際學生則為令校園國際化的方法.無容置宜,國 際學生之數量對國際化與否的觀感有直接影響,但非本地生數目多少與校園是否國際化並沒有太 大的直接關係。以香港大學為例,達百分之十六的非本地生比率並不能對香港大學作出校園國際 化的定論。大學是否國際化,除非本地生比率外,更應考慮的為學生對國際社會的認知思考。招 收非本地生確實為其中一個校園國際化的方法,但以港大的資源及能力,邀請更多海外學者授 課,甚至安排學生到海外做實習,在資源分配以致推動後手法上均為更適合推動港大校園國際化 的方法。  

 

Page  11  of  80    


Student Welfare Secretary 學生福利秘書

Choi Hon Pong 蔡漢邦

香港大學於二零一三年度至二零一四年度學年共錄取了約三千四百多名學生,而當中包括約五 百五十名非本地生,這意味著大學校園內的七名本科生,便有一位非本地生。 除了知識為本外,同學之間的文化交流、學習互相尊重和欣賞以達致和而不同是不可或缺的。 而現時的六比一比例,我認為已提供足夠機會促進本地生和非本地生的交流和互動,並不需要 增加或減少。 要真正達致文化交流,那七份一人的組合則非常關鍵。各國的飲食習慣、文化風俗、起居作 息、節日禮儀各有特色。同學期望看見這與本土文化的差異和多樣性,學會接納和包容其他同 住在這地球村的其他居民。因此,除了成績優異外,非本地生的構成必須多元文化,多種族和 多地區。於非本地生角度而言,他們隻身離開異地來到港大,欠缺了同鄉的陪伴,亦是促使他 們與本地生和其他非本地生交流的環境因素。可是,現行的收生情況卻與這些條件相違背。 在五百五十名的非本地生中竟有達三百三十名同學來自同一國家,意味著這國家學生的總和竟 比來自世界各地學生的總和還要多。他們來到異地後猶如遇到大量同鄉,更喜歡自成一角,那 在外讀書的意義泯滅。我不會猜度為何校方收取大量來自同一國家學生的背後原因,但校方收 取非本地生時應平均每一國家的比例,不應大幅度偏重於某一國家。

Page  12  of  80    


Publications and Publicity Secretary 出版及宣傳秘書

Leung Nga Man 梁雅雯

After studying for ten years, less than 18% of Hong Kong students can pursue study in a local university. The percentage of admitting local students to the university in Hong Kong was set to be 18% in 2000 which is far lower than the neighboring countries. On top of that, institutions can admit non-local students up to 20% of their total intake-quota that means the enrollment rate of the local students can further reduce to 14.4% at most. Base on the following reasons, I agree that the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced. According to the University Grants Committee, the cost of supporting an undergraduate student is $233,000 annually. A local student needs to pay $42,100 for their study in the university while a non-local student who is admitted to The University of Hong Kong needs to pay $135,000. The school fee for those non-local students who go to Lingnan University and Hong Kong Baptist University is $110,000 and for those who study in The Hong Kong Institute of Education is $100,000. Although the non-local students are paying a lot more than the local students, the amount they pay still cannot cover the cost. Hong Kong taxpayers are subsidizing the non-students a lot while non-local students are required to pay more or even all the full cost in other countries. Moreover, reported by the South China Morning Post, a survey done by the Association of Mainland Students (內地生聯合會) shows that over 70% of the mainland students who are studying in Hong Kong will not choose to work and stay in Hong Kong after graduation. Hong Kong is paying a lot but cannot be benefited much in return. Hence, it would be a wise act to cut down the maximum intake of non-local applicants. The intake of non-local students aims at introducing different cultures local students and enriching the student community as a whole. According to the statistic released by the University of Hong Kong, in the academic year 2013-2014, the number of mainland applicants is 12,513 which are three times more than the overseas applicants. At last, 329 mainland applicants were admitted to The University of Hong Kong while only 209 overseas applicants succeeded. Moreover, as revealed by the statistic, mainland students outnumber the oversea students for the past ten years. In fact, the number of mainland students in the University of Hong Kong is unreasonably high as they account for more than half of the total number of non-local students which cannot help fulfill the aim of the policy. If the number of the mainland students is reduced, the total number of non-local students would decrease sharply. There is a room for the university to accept more local students. Therefore, the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced.

Page  13  of  80    


Social Secretary 康樂秘書

Cheung Kar Ying 張家盈

Stance: Against (HKU should not lower its current quota in accepting International Students) Reasoning: Although having a significant percentage of International students in the University might possibly restrict the quota the University has for local students, the University needs to strike a balance between providing a Global environment to groom generations of global citizens, as well as the pressing and practical issue of funding. Many scholars have expressed that in current society, being equipped with knowledge from textbooks is not longer sufficient in this Globalized world. Young generations like us would need to equip ourselves with a global mind and understandings of various cultures. Having more International students in HKU would provide our students to meet people across the globe and equip ourselves with knowledge we can’t get from the books. This would give them the opportunity to gain knowledge from their peers (cultural exchange) through their daily interactions here in school. There are an increasing number of students applying for Exchange programs here and HKU. This is an indirect reflection of students wanting to broaden their horizons and learn more of other cultures. Having a decent number of International Students in HKU will not only add dynamics to our student body, it will also allow local students whom are unable to go on exchange gain knowledge about others’ culture. Therefore, lowering the intake of International students might rob off this benefit, for local students not going on exchange, to gain other culture understandings. To fully realize the benefits mentioned above, I feel that HKU should have a better spread of International students. HKU should aim to balance its International intake to ensure a good mix of International students, instead of having a dominant group of students coming from the same country/ethnicity. Having less International students would not only rob the opportunity mentioned above, it might also increase the financial burden on local students since the University would have to make up for the loss income through the decrease in International students’ school fees, in which is 3 times of the local students.

Page  14  of  80    


Current Affairs Secretary 時事秘書

Yip Kwan Kit 葉坤杰

香港自詡為國際都會,特區早期更已計劃發展「教育樞紐」,發展教育產業云云。可是,本港 大學入學率其實遠遠落後於各先進國,甚至低於中國大陸去年的 30%。儘管 1980 年代港英政 府加速普及高等教育,並於 1994 年提早將大學入學率提升至 18%。可是,主權移交後入學率 並無增長,本地生聯招學額亦由 1995 年的 14,500 個降至去年的 12,000 個,大量本地學生雖 然合符考評局所訂的入讀大學要求,卻不獲升讀大學的機會。以去年為例,28,418 名考生考 獲官方要求,卻有超過一半不能升讀,唯有轉讀自資或副學士等課程。 然而,犧牲本地學生而騰出的資助學位的後落轉予非本地生,當中大部份是一河之隔的中國大 陸學生。香港大學向來以香港最高學府及國際化著稱,但細閱收生數據難免令人質疑香港大學 到底是邁向國際化,還是「非本地化」?1999 至 2013 年間,獲 UGC(香港大學教育資助委 員會)資助的新入學非本地本科生中,大陸學生的數目一直凌駕於海外學生,從未試過低於後 者。至去年,後者(744 人)更幾乎是前者(396 人)的兩倍。 香港大學過度收取大陸學生,導致非本地生比例失衡,實在不智。年來,目瞪越趨激烈的學位 競爭及校園生活的衝突,有人提出「大學收生應降低非本地生學額」之議,惜不中的。國際化 的大學教育須思考的問題是如何擴闊學生的國際視野及認知,再按此決定引入海外教授或學 生,以及安排本地生到海外交流等事宜。教育的內涵及博雅教育更不可忽視的同時,學生間的 互動交流亦是達至國際化的重要一環。 有鑑於此,香港大學實應調整大陸學生及海外生間的比例,以達至真正的國際化。再者,香港 大學教育資助委員會的資金來自納稅人的稅金,根據在地使用的原則,理應優先投放予本地學 生。這不是資源分配的問題,而是猶關教育權利。於香港大學的層面,校方理應降低大陸學生 相對於海外生的比例,以展示社會承擔及對國際化的追求。

Page  15  of  80    


Administrative Secretary 行政秘書

Lo John 羅雋

在全球化的趨勢下,作為香港最高學府之一的香港大學也必須面向國際才可以保持自身之競爭 力。作為大學國際化最重要的因素之一,香港大學近年的非本地生收生亦有顯著的增長。此辯題 的出現源於部分本地生對於現行收生機制有所誤解,誤以為非本地會佔用大學教育資助委員會 (教資會)對本地生的受資助學額減少,減低本地生的入學機會。對於教資會的資助機制,將會 在內文部分詳加解釋。對於香港大學收生機制,我認為非本地(本科生)生限額並不需要調低, 而港大可以從兩方面優化非本地生政策。首先,為提高港大收生國際化,港大應該撤銷內地生收 生指引(內地生為非本地生收生之 50%),以確保非本地生之收生準則是以學術成績為本。其 次,非本地生學費(本科生)亦應上調以免港大繼續補貼其費用。 撤銷內地生收生指引 從學方取得的文件顯示,政府規定各大專院校的非本地生的收生上限為本地生的 20%,我認為 這比例能有效平衡本地生發展及港大國際化趨勢,並不需要修改非本地生收生限額。反之,我認 為真正需要改變的是香港大學對於內地生的收生指引。香港大學自行制定目標,希望內地生為非 本地生收生之 50%,以維持高學術水平及多元文化。可惜,根據校方提供的數據所顯示,內地 生的收生數字屢屢超過港大自行設立的 50%限制。在 2013-2014 年度,非本地生(本科生)的 收生數字為 538 人,其中 329 人為內地生,而其餘 209 人為海外學生,可見內地生之收生數字 已經超過非本地生總收生數字的 50% ,有違港大自行制定之目標。另外,內地生佔非本地生的 比例過高亦有礙為港大帶來多元文化,不能實踐港大邁向國際化之目標。故此,我認為校方應廢 除非本地生收生政策上自行制定內地生及海外學生收生比例,並應以非本地生的學術成績作為取 錄因素,令港大成為一所真正向國際的頂級學府。 調高非本地生學費 有本地生會憂慮非本地生佔用其學額及資助,我亦希望藉今次周年辯論澄清大專院校的資助機制, 以消除同學的誤解。根據現行政策,教資會資助的副學位、學士學位和研究院修課課程的非本地 學生人數上限為 20%,其中只有 4%可在資助學額以內取錄,而 16%須在資助學額以外取錄,學 費不受公帑資助,可見非本地學生對本地學生入讀資助學位的機會影響輕微。可是,非本地生的 學費大大低於其成本,我認為校方應增加非本地生學費以免校方繼續補貼其費用。根據校方資料 顯示,現時一個本科生學位每年成本約為 25 萬港元,而非本地生每年學費為 13 萬 5 千港元, 可見每個非本地生實際上接受香港大學每年十餘萬的資助。假如校方調高非本地生的學費,並將 先前對非本地生的資助用於學術研究發展,相信此安排對港大未來發展甚有碑益。

Page  16  of  80    


President of Sports Association 體育聯會會長

Wong Wang Hei 黃泓曦

Starting from 1999, Cantonese and English were no longer the only languages heard in the main campus, we were so happy to hear mandarin, regarding their voices as an innovative point of view. Under nearly ten year’s development, the percentage of non-local students has already grown to 16%, which mainly consists of mainland students. For the first sight, the diversified composition of students in HKU is a good thing in academic aspect. By having more mainland elites, the quality of students in the University of Hong Kong is enhanced, encouraging high level of academic interaction. The initial aim of setting up a university is of course for the aspirations of knowledge. Therefore, it is desirable to see such a phenomenon. Moreover, directly upgrading the level of academic outcomes, higher standard students help HKU to gain better place in world University ranking, promoting the academic image of Hong Kong community. Apart from the situation in the University of Hong Kong, the increasing number of nonlocal students creates a more vigorous competition for local students to gain a place in the tertiary education. Undeniably, the quality of University students in Hong Kong is improved, raising the value of a University Graduated Certificate, increasing the job opportunity for the fresh graduated. Employers could also be benefited as tertiary education would really be an ‘elite education’ with such explosive competition. However, the major concern in the local society is ‘fairness’. Competitions in university are good for both local and non-local students in the sense of learning outcomes. However, there are no direct competitions between the two different groups of students before they get into the university. Hence, there are no guarantees that the non-local students are of better quality than the local students who cannot enter the university, enforcing the local students to sacrifice for the exposure of the non-local students who can actually take a degree in their own countries. On the other hand, it would be a kind of resources waste if the product of the education industry cannot benefit Hong Kong itself. Even the mainland graduated would choose to come back to China or even oversea to start their career, not to mention those non-local students from different countries. However, government actually subsidizes the education industry, especially the tertiary industry in a large extends every year, spending a considerable sum of the tax income. It will be such a irony that Hong Kong taxpayers are actually paying for the ones who are not willing to take part in the future development of Hong Kong. After all, there are still many adjustments needed to be made in order to shape a better education system with the input of non-local students. For example, there must be deeper Page  17  of  80    


investigations on the allocation methods of different non-local students into different disciplines, avoiding the situation of talents shortage in some careers to occur in future Hong Kong. With both directional and executional obstacles to be solved, it is suggested that the University of Hong Kong should go through deeper consideration and consultation before making any decisions on the non-local students’intake policy.  

 

Page  18  of  80    


President of Cultural Association 文化聯會會長

Yung Kin Ming 翁健鳴

大學乃是智識滙聚,學術文化交流的地方。香港大學貴為香港的最高學府,亞洲三大之一,領 頭促進各國學者交流自是責無旁貸。自一九九三年起,政府開始鼓勵各學院招收非本地生,讓 本地學生有機會與他國人士交流,了解各國文化差異,開拓學生們的國際視野。同時,招收非 本地生亦有助港大與外國的學院接軌,提升港大的國際地位。 但大學學位向來僧多粥少,要引入外地學者少不免令本地生的大學學位競爭更趨激烈,減少了 部份本地學生接受高等教育的機會。因此,非本地生的學額一直被受爭議,嘗試在國際化及本 地生升學機會間取得平衡。 作為世界首屈一指的香港大學,要讓自己的學術研究更國際化,招收非本地生是必然的事。過 往十年,香港大學招收的非本地生人數佔總學生人數從 10%升至約 15%,對比其他著名的海外 大學如哈佛大學,其海外生佔的比例大約為 16%,跟港大現時的配額比例相若。因此,我認為 港大現時非本地生的限額並不過高,沒有下調需要。 現時平均每七名學生就有一位非本地生,作為一家國際級的大學有此比例實不過份,更可以為 校園多添外國氣息。按此比例,非本地生的社群於港大並不會因過小以致於被忽略,在港大校 園生活的每個點滴,不論在學術或課外活動上,都可尋得到海外同學的身影,增加了本地生於 日常與不同文化背景人士交流的機會。 招收非本地生固然對本地生的大學生活百利而無一害,但不容置疑的是我們正犧牲某部分本地 生入讀港大的機會來換取更全面更國際化的港大校園生活,不免會讓本地生感覺不公平。可 是,香港的教育制度從來都是汰弱留強,跟不上就要另覓出路。而香港大學作為頂尖大學,想 入讀的人多如繁星,要抽撥部份港大學位予非本地生當然是本地生所不願看到的,但此舉卻是 香港大學力保一流地位的必要方法。 當然,配額應否為 15%自是爭議。要令一所大學變得國際化,就要盡可能讓大學每個環節都有 非本地生的蹤影,因此我們給予的配額不可以過少。若只是象徵式的招收,例如只收 5%(即三 千五百名學生中只有少於二百個非本地學生),再將他們分散於各學科中,每個學科只會有數個 海外生,難道這樣就真的可以引入國外的聲音?所以非本地生的人數不可過少,否則他們只會 被忽略,達不到真正的文化交流,提升國際視野。 現今的港大校園中,海外學生隨處可見,經常可見到本地生跟國外生共事或參與各類活動,可 見國際化在現時的配額中已然達到了,因此我認為香港大學非本地生的配額無需減少,不然便 踏上回頭路。

Page  19  of  80    


President of Independent Clubs Association 學社聯會會長

Yeung Yat Yee, Melody 楊逸意

We might observe that the number of non-local students around us in campus is rising, at the same time, voices regarding local students’ difficulties in entering local universities were heard. The proportion of local and non-local students in universities has become a major concern of many people. According to the stipulated government policy, institutions can admit non-local students up to 20% of their total intake-quota. When looking at the actual statistics of HKU, the admission number of non-local applicants, which include mainland students and overseas non-JUPAS intake, shows a marked rising trend from around 3% to around 16% in the recent ten years. It has been argued that the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced. I think such argument does not stand. First of all, university, being an academic platform to nurture community leaders, is essential to embrace different cultures. Academic knowledge is of no boundaries, so is a university. By keeping the current maximum intake of non-local applicants, HKU shows its openmindedness and tolerance towards worldwide cultures, converging worldwide academic knowledge. Conversely, if HKU lowers the maximum intake of non-local students, it adversely affects the prestige of HKU, causes indirect negative impacts on its students. Secondly, by setting this maximum intake of non-local applicants, it encourages capable nonlocal students to enroll in the university, enriching the learning environment in the school. Through interacting with international students, knowledge, cultural and experiential exchange can be attained. Apart from academic interaction, non-local students also add color to other aspects of campus life. Non-local Ex-co is common in clubs and societies like AIESEC-LC-HK, HKUSU and China Study Society, HKUSU. Non-local residents are also common in residential halls. Through working and living with students of different nationalities, students can certainly gain a unique experience, which can be helpful in their adaption to working in this globalized city. Hence, it can be concluded that intake of nonlocal applicants can create a better campus atmosphere. Whereas keeping the maximum intake of non-local applicants can help encourage more non-local people to apply, hence, allowing the school to admit more qualified students. Some might argue that the intake of non-local applicants might occupy available university places for local applicants, lowering their competitiveness. This is in fact true. Therefore, in my opinion, priorities shall be given to local applicants given that both applicants are equally capable. This will then probably result in a win-win situation in which competent students can be admitted. To sum up, the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU shall be kept. It can promote Page  20  of  80    


the goodwill of HKU, at the same time encourages competent non-local students to enroll in the university, hence, enriching campus environment. To alleviate the problem of the limited university places for local students, measures shall be applied to ensure local students can be given a priority to a university degree.  

 

Page  21  of  80    


Representative of Sports Association I 體育聯會代表一

Brandon Ryan 吳彬倫

The maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should not be reduced based on the following reasons: Firstly, an international atmosphere will enhance the learning environment. Due to Globalization, we are not competing with the local students, instead we fight for a job with students beyond the boundary. Learning with those international students can broaden our horizon and we can definitely learn from their merits. Secondly, although the competition of JUPAS is tight, keeping such a competition will boost the determination of local students in studying hard to get into universities. It’s an essential part of the personal development. Last but not least, admitting more international students can surely build up the image of HKU as an international university. Not only will the reputation of HKU be improved, but more foreign exchanges opportunities will be given from other foreign universities to local students as a reward of its international reputation.

Page  22  of  80    


Representative of Sports Association II 體育聯會代表二

Page  23  of  80    

Chow Ka Yuet Kathy 周家越


Representative of Cultural Association I 文化聯會代表一

Kwong Wai Ting 鄺慧婷

In the past few decades, intake of non-local applicants to HKU has been increased. This phenomenon has aroused much public attention and even criticism. In my view, there are both advantages and disadvantages to have more non-local students in HKU. Advantages include promoting multi-lingual and multi-cultural atmosphere to HKU students, broadening local students’ horizons, as well as attracting more foreign students to contribute to HK after graduation. From a practical point of view, it is normal for HKU, one of the internationally well-known universities, to welcome non-local competent students. However, the question falls on the limit of their successful applications. According to 2012 statistics, 20% of HKU students are non-local which is considerably high when compared with other local universities but this ratio is within a normal level when compared with other international counterparts. Therefore, I think that this limit is acceptable and instead of neither increasing nor decreasing the limit of intake of non-local applicants, maintaining the same level as what we have now may be a good resolution.

Page  24  of  80    


Representative of Cultural Association II 文化聯會代表二

Chen Sin Yee 陳倩怡

My view is that the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU, which is 20% of total intake for undergraduate programme at the moment, should be reduced. It is undeniable that admitting non-local students to an international education institution such as HKU is indispensable. It does not only allow HKU to rank high in Universities ranking, but more importantly, it exposes the students to cultures and values of different nations through learning with international peers in the same campus. However, including international students is not the only area that a good University should focus on. Other qualities, including the condition of learning environment, harmony among the campus and among the society, should be taken in to account. In academic year 2013 - 14, HKU admitted about 15.6%, out of a total of 3444 students for undergraduate programme (HKU, 2013). The figures have soared from 2005, when the Education Bureau approved to increase the intake quota of non-local undergraduates to 20% of total number of student intake (Southern China Daily News, 2013). An increasing trend of non-local students intake has been observed ever since (HKU, 2013). Although the amount of non-local students intake is yet to reach its maximum quota, problems are already bubbling from the rapid rise in non-local students admission. From local’s perspective, the huge amount of non-local students intake has undoubtedly put pressure on local applicants. A higher admission quota of non-local students means a smaller amount of places available for local applicants. Severe competition among local and non-local applicants is therefore resulted. Moreover, problems are not limited to the pre-admission stage. According to a research carried out by the Chinese University of Hong Kong, 77% of mainland students stayed in Hong Kong after their graduations in 2011 (Southern China Daily News, 2013). This influx of Mainland graduates, who stay and apply for jobs in Hong Kong after graduating from local institutions, might reduce job vacancies for local graduates. With increasing demands for both local University places and career opportunities, the University of Hong Kong should take appropriate steps to cater for these increasing local demands. Not only may over-admission of non-local students harm the interests of local students, it is also not preferable to non-local students. Due to admission of a number larger than that it can support, it is highly possible that there is not enough of corresponding resources or facilities to support the amount of non-local students intake. Housing is, among some other problems arose, one of the biggest concerns. This can be observed from the incident that the Lung Wah Residential Colleges quitted a vast number of residents last summer. The recent case that Liu Dingning, the cream of Liaoning this year, withdrew her studies from HKU due to being not familiar with HKU’s learning environment is yet another example (Hong Kong Daily News, 2013). While the reasons behind these phenomena might be multifold, they are Page  25  of  80    


signs that HKU is not yet ready to accommodate the large number of non-local students in its campus. This trend is not sustainable. While it is true that, in some aspects, injecting non-local students to Hong Kong provides an edge to the University as well as to the city, the University should not blindly increase the admission of non-local students without truly catering their needs which accompany with the increase in admission; nor should it overlook the cries of the locals which therefore arise. To remain as one of the top Universities and to maintain the high standard of education and research, HKU should first focus on its refinement of campus supporting services before it admits more non-local students. The maximum intake quota of 20% of non-local undergraduate students is too high an amount for HKU to handle for now. References: HKU. (2013). Nonlocal Students Figures. The University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Daily News. (2013 October 15). 不要獎學金 回老家考北大 內地女狀元剃港大眼 眉. Hong Kong Daily News. Retrieved October 15, 2013 from http://www.hkdailynews.com.hk/news.php?id=301826 Southern China Daily News. (2013 April 18). 留下還是離開?在港內地生的“七年之癢”. Southern China Daily News. Retrieved October 15, 2013 from http://www.scdaily.com/News_intro.aspx?Nid=67204

Page  26  of  80    


Representative of Independent Clubs Association I 學社聯會代表一

Ho Wing Sze 何穎思

“Education is not consumption. It is an investment in the future and the return will benefit society and the economy.”, mentioned by Ip Kin-yuen, an education sector lawmaker. Given that the admission of non-local students brings benefits to the development of local students and HKU, it is deemed that the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should not be reduced. Local students have been often criticized for their passive learning attitude. The admission of non-local students can act as an encouragement for local students to learn spontaneously. Furthermore, local students can be nurtured as global citizens and increase their own competitiveness with enhanced communication skills and broaden global horizon through cultural exchange with non-local students. In order to foster internationalization through an open academic environment and aspirations to excellence, there is a need for HKU to enroll the most outstanding students locally and from the worldwide, which serves as a human capital flow and better linkage with China and oversea communities. During 2013-2014, there are a total number of 3,444 students admitted to HKU, of which around 84% are local students, including both apply through JUPAS and non-JUPAS. The remaining students are non-local students who come from Mainland and overseas non-JUPAS with a student visa. This proportion is acceptable for HKU to be sustainable in being Asia’s leading international university. However, further investigating into the proportion of Mainland and overseas non-JUPAS students, it is suggested the University should maintain a balance between admission of Mainland and overseas non-JUPAS students, in which 50% of Undergraduate students should be from Mainland China, and 50% should be from other parts of the world, so as to maintain its excellent academic performances through diversified intake of non-local students from different parts of the world. Some may argue that the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced due to insufficient UGC-funded full-time undergraduate places to cater all the local students who meet the minimum entrance requirements for university admission. However, it is suggested the government should change UGC-funded full-time undergraduate programme into self-funded for non-local students but at the same time keep the current intake of nonlocal applicants for subsidizing the self-funded undergraduate programme for local students, in order to give more local qualified needy students a hand on the path to higher education. Furthermore, it is suggested that HKU should put the intake of local applicants to HKU at the first priority. In such a case, more scholarships can be provided to the non-local applicants to maintain the attractiveness of HKU. Furthermore, financial support should not be the only attraction of Hong Kong university places, academic atmosphere is also a prominent factor. Page  27  of  80    


To conclude, sufficient cohorts of high-end professionals is important to support the city’s transformation into a knowledge-based economy, with the fringe of benefits brought by nonlocal students to HKU, the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should not be reduced in order to maintain the visibility and reputation of HKU. At the same time, it is deemed that a balance intake of Mainland and overseas non-JUPAS is needed and local applicants should be prioritized in order to maintain the diversity of HKU.

Page  28  of  80    


Representative of Independent Clubs Association II 學社聯會代表二

Yiu Hoi Ling 姚凱翎

本人同意香港大學收生應調低非本地生限額。 首先,收錄非本地生原意為促進多元化交流。的確,不同國籍的非本地生的存在有助本地學生 更了解各地文化,然而,現時非本地生的收生達整體的兩成,比例過高。而且,內地學生佔當 中逾六成,但其文化背景與本地學生相似,交流空間有限,比例之高似乎說不過去。其實,收 錄非本地生絕非文化交流的唯一途徑,比如說,外國大學生赴本地大學的交流計劃便是有相約 效用的方法。現時看來,大學近年似乎過分重視於以收錄非本地生推動各地學生的文化交流。 第二,自一九九九年起,香港大學非本地生的比例持續上升,當中原因與大學排名中國際化程 度一環的評分不無關係,但十多年來學位及資源的變化卻不大,本地學生整體可享受的因而無 可避免地被減少。大學的知名度縱然重要,但香港大學作為一所旨在發展學生的才智及個人潛 能的本地高等教育學府,理所當然應以本地學生的培育為優先考量。既然收錄過多非本地生會 對本地學生造成影響(包括香港大學學生及準大學生),調低其限額當為應作之舉。 由此觀之,本人認為香港大學有必要調低非本地生的限額,當中以內地生的尤甚。

Page  29  of  80    


Representative of Hornell Students' Association 康寧堂學生會代表

Chung Ka Hung 鍾嘉鴻

據大學教育資助委員會的資料顯示,在香港大專院校就讀教資會資助課程的非本地學生人數,從 2001/2002 年度的 2,253 人急升至 2010/2011 年度的 10,074 人,當中來自內地的學生佔大 多數。 在香港就讀資助課程的內地學生人數從 2001/2002 年度的 1,912 人急升至 2010/2011 年度的 8,724 人,佔總學生人數的比例從 2001/2002 年度的 2%左右急增至 2010/2011 年度的接近 20%,而這數目並未包括來港修讀非政府資助碩士課程的內地學生數目。 故此,大學接收非本地學生已成為具爭議性的問題。由於非本地學生數目近年不停提高,變相令 本地學生的學位減少,從而減少本地大學生的數目。有反對調低限額的人士認為,由於本地學生 能力跟外地學生相比有下跌跡象,收取一定數量具爭力的外地學生,不但有助維持大學本身的競 爭力及,在外地留學生競爭的情況,亦有助提升本地擁有學位的學生的質素,對大學來說,是一 舉兩得。而然在支持調低的人士看來,日益提升非本地限額,是減少本地學生的學位數目,在缺 乏大量高等教育人材之下,本地總體的競爭力亦會下降,對香港本土來說,是百害而無一利。而 筆者則認同後者的觀點。 無疑,向世界各地吸納各種人材對大學的競爭力及排行是有正面的幫助,但這種幫助,並未意味 着對香港本土有幫助。不少非本地留學生,在接受數年高等教育後,均回到自己的國家工作,這 是即是說,以香港本地自身的資源為其他國家培訓人才,以香港一個天然資源缺乏的的彈丸之 地,實在不是明智之舉。然而,即使這些人才留港工作,這些人就會成為香港本土學生的競爭者 之。根據香港入境事務處的統計數字,自 2008 年 5 月至 2010 年年底,已有 10,101 名非本地 畢業生經此安排獲准在港工作。由於中國資本在香港投資的數量日益增長,除了少數本地精英, 這些中資公司更加傾向聘請熟悉國情的內地留學生。 筆者並非一味否定吸納外地人才的做法,而是認為,沒有把本土人才培訓好而增撥資源於外地學 生,只是對大學名次有短期利益,對香港長遠而言是沒有好處的。減低對外收生學位,是為了有 更多資源去培訓本地人才,增強本地競爭力,這樣之下,香港才能有更長遠的發展,這是才是香 港大學對香港社會的責任與承擔。

Page  30  of  80    


Representative of Lee Chi Hung Hall Students' Association 李志雄紀念堂學生會代表

Chan Jason Chun Ho 陳焌皓

The maximum intake of non-local applicants at HKU should be increased. Currently, the maximum intake of non-local undergraduate students is, by government policy, limited to 20 %; and among them, 50% should be mainland Chinese students. Such a policy embodies a strong sense of “self-protection”. It is understandable that Hong Kong has to guarantee a certain number of degree places for local students so as to ensure the quality of the future local labour force; yet such a limitation on the intake of non-local students defeats the very purpose of university education. University education is more than textbooks and examinations; it is more concerned with broadening students’ horizon and promoting cultural exchange. Admitting international students means that the university would get a good mix of students from diverse cultural background. Through everyday communication and academic collaboration, local students can interact with international students, experiencing cultural impact and exchange on a daily basis. They would be more receptive towards new ideas and have better understanding of international and intercultural issues. Looking at international intake figures of top-notch universities, we can see they place great importance on the benefits brought by international students. Hong Kong, in comparison, is falling behind. If HKU is to be rated among top-ranking universities, it was high time that HKU abandon its protectionist policy and allow more international intake. On the other hand, the requirement that at least 50% the international intake should be mainland students calls strongly for reconsideration. Hong Kong has historically played an important role as a breeding ground for talents in China. However, it is observed that mainland students in HKU, due to their large number, tend to form separate social circles. This goes against the original purpose of admitting international students. Besides, with China’s tertiary education developing at unprecedented pace, there seems to be no good reasons for HKU to prioritize mainland Chinese students over other non-local students. In conclusion, in order to better achieve the purpose of university education, HKU should increase the limit on non-local student intake. The requirement on the number of mainland students should also be reduced in view of the actual situation in HKU and the rapid development of China’s tertiary education.

Page  31  of  80    


Representative of Lee Hysan Hall Students' Association 利希慎堂學生會代表

Sin Po Lun 冼葆綸

近年港大招收的非本地生限額多次提升,相信同學在校園的每個角落也不難發現非本地生的影 子。的確,非本地生對於港大這所國際化的學府而言無非能達致促進文化交流的目標,亦能增 加同學之間的競爭關係,長遠推動大學的學術發展。然而,基於現時學校能對整體學生提供的 支援以及本港學位的競爭情況,我認為香港大學收生應調低非本地生限額。

現時大學取錄的非本地生人數與其可以提供之相應支援並不成正比。先就住宿而言,雖然學校 規定全港大十三間舍堂提供約三成宿位予非本地生及海外交流生,但仍未能滿足人數龐大的非 本地生群體的需要。再講,港大的宿位一直處於嚴重供不應求的情況,單是本地已有很多有實 際需要和渴望體驗舍堂生活的同學亦未能得到學校到這方面的援助。住宿事實上只是其中一個 最明顯的問題,大學對同學的其他各類支援中亦不時出現上述情況,故此若學校調低非本地生 收生限額,相信有助增加對本地學生群體的支援。

此外本地生和非本地生在大學學位上有著間接的競爭關係,而港大作為一所政府資助的大學, 最先要的責任實為本地學生提供教育,培訓本地人才。而根據資料,單單去年九千多名於聯招 系統中將港大放在組別甲 (Band A) 的考生中,就只有二千多人成功取得學位,顯然取得一個港 大學位對芸芸本地學子而言是多麼難以達到的一個夢想。因此,若調低招收非本地生的名額, 將有助增加本地考生取錄的機會,亦更能改善社會上大學學位不足的局面。

若招收非本地生的目的是長遠為本港帶來人才及勞動力,成效恐怕令人質疑。雖然政府自零八 年推出「非本地畢業生留港就業安排計劃」,但根據入境處前年一項統計指出,超過三成非本 地生在畢業一年後離開香港,並沒有如預期成為本港專業人才。與其用大筆來自納稅人口袋的 資金作這不具把握的投資,不如投放更多資源培訓本地人才,透過高水平的教學質素及多元化 的機會,讓本地生成為日後社會上具有貢獻的動力。 非本地生能為港大帶來的正面刺激是毋容置疑的,然而問題在於是否限額愈高,上述之種種好 處亦會同步增長。若現時的限額對學校整體及本地同學已帶來負擔,甚至對每名非本地生的支 援亦有所缺乏時,調低非本地生收生限額對港大而言可能是一個明智的決定。

Page  32  of  80    


Representative of Lady Ho Tung Hall Students' Association 何東夫人紀念堂宿生會代表

Tso Kwan Yi 曹筠兒

The University of Hong Kong admitted the first cohort of non-local students in 1999, since then the ratio of non-local students to local students kept rising. The idea of admitting non-local students is mutually beneficial and is much appreciated. However, is it really what’s happening in HKU? In terms of international outlook, more non-local students do not guarantee better international reputation of the University. Times Higher Education Ranks HKU in a very low place in terms of international reputation, and the ranking is decreasing over the years while the intake of non-local students is expanding. More attention should be paid on where these non-local students are from, instead of emphasizing on the number. In HKU, half of the non-local students are from the same country – Mainland. In fact, non-local students can act as a bridge connecting the University and other parts of the world. The more places students are from, the more recognition the University gains round the world. The fact that most of the non-local students are from the same country narrows down the openness of the University, and limits the outreach of both local and non-local students. It is unwise for the University to limit herself when she has the ability to go further. Not only it doesn't help in internationalization of the University, it is adding burden to it. Besides, non-local students can help broaden the horizon of local students, and enrich their thinking perspectives. Through interacting with non-local students, local students are given a chance to know more about other cultures and traditions. This may contribute to improving their communication skills and giving confidence to others that our graduates can work well with people of different backgrounds. However, under the current situation, there is not enough supporting policy for local and non-local students to interact and have cultural exchange. The fact that local and non-local students are studying under the same environment, their community is still separated, is undeniable. Moreover, it is known that the University would set a preferred number of non-local students they want to admit before actually admitting students every year but it is becoming a usual practice for the University to admit non-local students exceeding the preferred number. This practice should be eliminated as it deeply affects the proportion of local and non-local students in the long run. In a nutshell the preferred proportion of non-local and local students by school is acceptable but it is very essential for the University to follow what’s planned, and implement more supporting policy for cultural exchange between students. Considering the original rationale of recruiting non-local students - to strengthen HKU’s international outlook and broaden students’ horizon, a more proportionate non-local student population from a wider variety of countries will be undoubtedly be more satisfactory and considerable. Page  33  of  80    


Representative of Lee Shau Kee Hall Students' Association 李兆基堂宿生會代表

Chan Hei Chun, Adrian 陳希駿

The proportion of non-local students’ intake has long been a debate among our university. Since 1997, the University of Hong Kong (HKU) has been admitting overseas students with the first mainland student entering HKU in 1999. According to official figures, the number of non-local students has risen from 1% out of total number of students in 1999 to 16% in 2013. With HKU being an international university in Asia region, such increase seems to be reasonable and acceptable. Yet, is this really the truth? Of course, being an university which strives for better reputation in the world, international students do contribute to the ranking of HKU, reflected on the fact that our university scoring nearly 100% for international students. In fact, enrolling international students brings quite a lot of benefits to the university – facilitate cultural exchange between local and non-local students, equip students with global mindsets, encourage research and information collaboration with other universities around the globe, strengthen the position of Hong Kong as a leader in tertiary education in South East Asia and so on. The HKU senate had agreed that admissions of international students are conducive to the university and they have actually taken measures to attract non-local students. For example the donation by Rosita King Ho International Charitable Foundation to HKU in 2004 aimed to catch more overseas students attentions to come to HKU. No one denies the advantages brought by enrolling international students. The question lies on whether it is fair to our local students. According to official statistics, there has been a decrease in number of JUPAS(Band A) applicants being admitted between 1997 and 2013. With the increase in number of non-local students being admitted within the same period, it is believed that local students not only are facing fierce competition for university seats, but also for resources, job and internship opportunities, accommodations, facilitates etc. At the end of the day, we are still a university in Hong Kong. Local students’ interests shall definitely be one of the most important considering factors when making decisions. With the maximum intake quota of non-local students being 20% of the total intake-quota, there should be rooms for discussions and amendments. All in all, a balance should be stroke between the maintenance of benefits brought by the enrolment of international students and the interests of local students. Thus, the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced

Page  34  of  80    


Representative of Morrison Hall Students' Association 馬禮遜堂宿生會代表

Chu Sin Bo 朱善保

In canteens and lecture theatres, students in non-yellowish races and speaking in unfamiliar languages exchanging ideas are not uncommon scenes nowadays. It is beyond doubt that HKU, leading tertiary institution in Asia, is gradually walking to the globe. A university is supposed to be a big education institution that is for local residents only because it is just a small-scale city organization. Nevertheless, in order to strengthen the links among other foreign famous universities as well as maintain our University image, since 1999, the intake of non-local students has surged substantially. Non-local students, generally defined as those originated from the mainland and overseas, are set to be a maximum amount, i.e. 20% of the total intake quota, with reference to the admission policy in the government organization. Underlying this policy, the government hopes to allocate the resources wisely among the local, overseas and mainland students. To put in this way, does this policy set to a critical level? Though, in cultural context, it can bring a lot of stimulation of ideas through discussion among the people with various traditional, cultural, religious and academic backgrounds, the cultural conflicts often occurs and it can even cause racial discrimination, like labeling PSP and NDS on mainland students. On the other hand, the intake of non-local students is alternately making some competent and potential, less clever local residents lose their chance to enjoy this honorary tertiary education. Some of the non-local students, after finishing their degrees, will choose to go back to their own homeland, leading to the decrease in professions in the Hong Kong market. The University’s resources are very limited. Take hall place as an example. Each permission for a new non-local student will deprive a local resident of the sleeping place and long hours of travelling and the involvement of large opportunity cost. As a result, people living in 2hour distant districts are going to 4 hours for travel just for a 50-minute lecture. The presence of the absolute need system, which each hall needs to admit at least a proportion of absolute need students and the separation of need and contribution scores can somehow alleviate the above problem; however, the University cannot offer similar sleeping place to local students in an inexpensive fee. Non-local intake quotas are increasing these years. We should review on the effect of the non-local students to our beloved school, the HKU.

Page  35  of  80    


Representative of R. C. Lee Hall Students' Association 利銘澤堂宿生會代表

Leung Kai Tung 梁啟東

These years, after the release of results of local students' admission to the university, on the newspaper there are always complaints from not admitted students such as ' HKU admits more and more mainland students and ignore local students' need'. In the first place this may look a bit irrational but the fact is the number of non-local students is rising and these blames truly affect HKU reputation from normal local parents' perspectives. So should the intake be reduced? As a hall representative, my answer is no but the direction of admission should be changed so that larger proportion of overseas students should be admitted. From the figures provided we can see that in fact the number of admitted local students does not change much and it is even increasing this year. It shows that HKU did not deprive the local right of applying for HKU. After the admission of non-local students especially mainland students, the number has decreased for a few hundreds since 2000. However, in terms of cultural interaction and international outlook of HKU, it seems that this drop does worth it. The problem is whether the above two aims are achieved or not. As for cultural interaction, what i can see in my hall is that there is mere cultural communication between local and non-local students. As everyone knows, halls in HKU have their own traditions which mainly are built up and carried on by local students. These traditions in fact are doing a satisfactory influence on constructing bonding among those participants. But then the problem appears. How can the non-local join these activities and merge into the society? First, these traditions are quite 'local' and others especially those who cannot speak Chinese find it difficult to enjoy the activities. Second, the strong bonding among the local refrains the others from stepping into their social circle. Apart from the tradition, sometimes even if local students actively approach non-local students via different activities like non-local gathering, room visit and team practice, the feedback is not satisfying. Majority of the non-local students (mainly mainland students) fully devote in their studies to an extent that they are not willing to communicate with local students, leading to no cultural interactions. About the international outlook of HKU, it is not the first time to hear the complaints of nonlocal students about their life in halls, which to a certain extent affect HKU international reputation as well. It is mainly because once you cannot enjoy the activities in hall, they become a big noise to your hall life. From my observation, I have to say that overseas students are much more eager to enjoy their hall life than mainland students. The university maintains quite a good balance between the number of local and non-local students right now. However to modify the situation, larger proportion of overseas students should be admitted.

Page  36  of  80    


Representative of Ricci Hall Students' Association 利瑪竇宿舍宿生會代表

Chow Sai Cheung Calvin 周世璋

Facing challenges in this era of internationalization, the University of Hong Kong (“HKU”) had admitted its first non-local student1 in 1999. The number had grown exponentially to around 3,5002in year 2013/14, which is 16% of total. From the perspective of students, having nonlocal students in HKU does foster cultural interactions and cultivate local (and non-local) students different soft skills, which are undoubtedly important qualities for their future career development. This builds HKU a strong network with overseas universities which facilitate the mobility of foreign talents and researchers, making HKU more competitive, internationally. Yet, how should we allocate our much-limited resources to maximize the benefits given an increase local demand for tertiary education? Is the current policy effective to attain a healthy composition of non-local students? HKU had around 15% of non-local student enrolments since year 2010/11 With 16% of total enrolments in year 2012/13(Appendix 1), HKU has the highest proportion of non-local student intake among other tertiary education institutes. This percentage shall be optimal, balancing the local demand and benefits of having non-local students, at the same time making HKU internationalized enough, given a high scores in this perspective in different ranking of universities. However, the university’s goal of having 50% of non-local UG from Mainland China is debatable. This goal does not fully fulfill the objectives of admitting non-local students. This may not be a healthy composition even with consideration of attracting talents and aiding the less wealthy from our motherland. Although the percentage had drop from 82% to 65% from 2009/10 to 2012/13(Appendix 1), the university goal had never been achieved once since the first enrolment of non-local student. Additional information, say admission criteria other than academic merits, from HKU is needed to justify the situation. Despite of the fact that HKU follows the government policy to have its non-local students intake less than 20% of the total intake quota, the intake situation varies among different programmes. For example, business and management related programmes admitted 479 (61% of total intake) non-local students, whereas medicine, dentistry, and health related programmes had admitted only 39 (3% of total intake) non-local students in year 2012/13 (calculated from Appendix 2 and 3). It is understandable that different faculties adopt different admission criteria and proportion for local and non-local students intake, considering the popularity of individual programmes and/or other factors, yet it is not convincing to have more non-local students than local students for the fore-stated benefits of having non-local students, even the cap for HKU is not reached. Page  37  of  80    


In a nutshell, in terms of the big number, HKU is enjoying the benefits of having non-local students. However, in terms of the composition and diversity, as well as ratio of local and non-local students of individual programmes, HKU shall justify its intake policy with additional information.

"Non-°©‐local" UG intakes are counted based on UGC's Definition of "non‐local" students, i.e. those without a right of abode in HK (for 2004/05 and before); and those with a student visa (for 2005/06 and after). 2 Under UGC Funded full‐time undergraduate programmes 1

Appendix 1: Non-local Student Enrolment (Headcount) of UGC-funded Undergraduate Programmes by Institution and Place of Origin, 2009:10 to 2012:13 Appendix 2: First-year Student Intakes (Headcount) of UGC-funded Programmes by Institution, Level of Study, Mode of Study and Academic Programme Category, 2012:13 Appendix 3: Non-local Student Enrolment (Headcount) of UGC-funded Programmes by Institution, Level of Study, Mode of Study and Broad Academic Programme Category, 2012:13 Please kindly refer to the following link for appendices: http://goo.gl/mVs094

Page  38  of  80    


Representative of Suen Chi Sun Hall Students' Association 孫志新堂宿生會代表

Yuen Wing Lam 袁詠琳

在全球化時代,本地的大學生要在在學時期養成與不同文化溝通的習慣,故引進非本地生理所 當然。政府和掌握撥款大權的教資會為了促成這個國際化目標,除了提升八大院校的非本地生 人數比例上限(98 年前是 2%,曾蔭權上任時是 10%,現在則增至 20%)外,還推出了國際化 撥款,以推動八大院校配合政府的國際化政策。但近年有聲音指非本地生搶佔本地生資源,令 本地生無書可讀,因此應調低非本地生限額,本人並不同意這說法。 首先,取錄非本地生絕對對我校有幫助。國際排名其中一個考慮因素便是非本地生的多少。以 兩個較受注目的大學排名,QS 與英國泰吾士報的排名為例,兩者都將學生中的國際生比例計算 在內。非本地生的比例愈多,在排名表的分數上實在愈有優勢。排名愈高,校譽愈佳,也能進 一步吸引優秀學生,故盡量爭取用盡那百分之二十的非本地生限額實在是大勢所趨。 在談論非本地生搶學位的指控時,我們也要注意推動國際化措施的實踐形式。事實上,近年愈 來愈多在本地院校就讀的內地本科生,大部分沒有佔據本地生的位置。政府雖然將非本地生的 限額加到兩成,但精確一點的說法是,他們兩成的基數是核准學額。所謂核准學額即是政府透 過教資會予各大院校的資助學額。而這 20﹪非本地生學額的分佈當中,只得 4% 在核准學額之 內,其餘的 16﹪非本地生學額則是超收回來的非核准學額。換句話說,假如一所院校獲當局批 准其開設一萬個學額,那它最後可以招收二千位非本地生。但這二千位中,只能有四百位是佔 用核准學額,其餘的千六位非本地生並不佔用那些核准學額。換句話說,非本地生的招收機制 與本地生的機制基本上是分開的,並沒有非本地生搶本地生學位的問題。 基於文化、地理等因素,香港大學的非本地生來源有多達六成是內地生,導政比例失衡 。事實 上現時的反對聲音中,有不少人是針對校園裡內地生人數愈來愈多,所以便有調低非本地生限 額之說 ,這根本是本末倒置。難道說現在男女失衡的問題,就非得減少生育不可?現在問題的 核心,是內地生在非本地生中的比例過高,而非限額過高。要真正解決問題,需從校方招收非 本地生的政策入手,例如加推政策平衡不同國籍的非本地生比例,而非一刀切削減非本地生限 額。在非本地生限額的多少根本不會大幅影響本地生入讀我校的前提底下,無理調低非本地生 限額只會損害我校學生接觸異國文化既機會,亦對非本地生不公平。因此,本人認為這辯題不 成立。

Page  39  of  80    


Representative of St. John's College Students' Association 聖約翰學院學生會代表

Wong Suet Kei 黃雪崎

I support the motion that the maximum intake of non-local students should be reduced due to the following reasons: The increasing intake of non-local students deters Hong Kong students from receiving tertiary education to some extent. As there are only 9 institutions, vacancies are very limited. It creates an even more competitive environment for students to compete for seats in university. Universities should cater the needs of local students first, otherwise it violates the original rationale of setting up an institution. Besides, apart from studying, students will also need to extend their social circles and build connections by such a diversified platform. However, the composition of non-local students is not diversified, a large proportion of non-local students are from Mainland China. Ideally, students should have chance to meet different non-local students from all over the world so that they can learn from their cultures. This cannot be achieved if most of the students are of the same nationality as local students. Concerning the allocation of resources, with more and more non-local students, local students’ benefits will somehow be harmed. For example, there are not enough vacancies in residential colleges to provide rooms for local students since a certain proportion of vacancies will be left to non-local students. However, halls are set up to facilitate students so that they can go to school more conveniently. With more people sharing the resources, local students’ benefits are infringed. With limited resources, we should act according to the constraints we have .The university should limit the intake so as to create more vacancies for local students and resources can be better utilized on local students. Overall, local students should be given the first priority when allocating resources.

Page  40  of  80    


Representative of Simon K. Y. Lee Hall Students' Association 李國賢堂學生會代表

Guan Jiayin 關嘉茵

Being an educational institution, University has its responsibilities to admit non- local students in order to provide them with tertiary education which might not be available in their home countries. It is, moreover, of paramount importance to have students from multifarious cultural backgrounds for the intellectual exchange among students and it also has a chance to experience mutual respect. Undeniably, the intake of non-local students is beneficial to both the Universities and the students themselves. Nonetheless, the price of such benefits needed to be reviewed constantly. The residential problem comes first. Non-local students do not have places to live in Hong Kong so it is the University's obligation to provide them with accommodation. As we all know, the residential halls in HKU has increased their proportion of non-local residents to 30 - 33% and new residential colleges are built to cater for the needs of incoming students. However, with the shortage of land, limited places and their absolute need in accommodation, it somehow in turn deprives local students of chances to get into the residential places. Some of the local students need to travel for 2 to 3 hours per day to school. The tiredness and waste of time will somehow lower their incentive to study, let alone the intellectual engagement. Then comes the allocation of resources. As we all know, the school fee of all University students, local and non-local students included, are UGC funded, albeit different extent. Taxpayers in Hong Kong need to pay a substantial amount in order to subsidize University students of their school fees. According to the data, around one-thirds of the students are from Mainland or overseas countries and the number is in all likelihood increasing in the coming years. With the limited resources the Government can allocate to tertiary education, the increase in the intake of non-local students will add fuels to the keen competition of the local students, thereby affecting the fairness of resources allocation. It is none too easy for Hong Kong to aid the others by providing them with chances to have tertiary education. However, Hong Kong Government should cater for the needs of Hong Kong people first when there are still sounds reckoning that places for tertiary education is not enough. If Government cannot cope with the price we have paid for the benefits, then it should be the time to review how many benefits we need.

Page  41  of  80    


Representative of Starr Hall Students' Association 施德堂學生會代表

Tjang Ming Wai 張明崴

近來社會上出現要求本地大學調低非本地生限額的聲音, 其旨在保護本地學生的教學資源與機 會,加上適逢全球大學排行的公佈, 港大非本地生限額 掀起社會各方熱烈討論。 就大學學生多樣性而言,維持,甚至調高國外學生限額並非壞事。香港是國際大都會,香港大 學作為港人尖子的搖籃,理應有眾多外地學生,在大學中促進各國文化交流,互相了解。若一 棒打死一船人,盲目調低非本地生限額 ,將減少大學中這種珍貴交流機會,長遠將影響大學在 世界的競爭力。 但,何以香港大學的非本地生學位配額政策向來為人詬病? 問題癥結, 並非因為非本地生佔用本地生教學資源, 而是內地生與國外學生的比例嚴重失衡。國 際大學排名專家關焯照指,近年內地生湧現本港大學,或會影響其國際排名,倡大學為內地生 設人數限制。 2013-2014 年度香港大學的非本地 本科生(Undergraduates)配額約百分之十六, 尚可接受, 但內地生總數卻比國外學生高出三分一。在 2012-2013 年度,港大哲學碩士博士銜 接課程的學生有 774 人,當中竟有 444 人是內地生,只有 84 人是來自其他國家。由此可見, 香港大學的國際學生人數遠比內地生少。 此等舉動令香港大學在《泰晤士高等教育雜誌》大學排行榜的評分當中,「國際化」範疇的分 數 下 跌 1.4 分 。 港 大 作 為 本 港 最 高 學 府 , 從 何 時 開 始 , 國 際 化 竟 成 為 了 港 大 曾 經 。 在內地生與國際學生的比例嚴重失衡下,我認為香港大學不必調低非本地生限額 , 校方必需將 內地生與國際學生的人數比例下調至 5:5,以維持港大之文化多元性,內地生與國外學生之數 目必須明確地分開計算,不應統稱之為非本地生,更不能將內地生納入外國學生之總人數中混 淆視聽,濫竽充數,以提高排名遊戲中的分數。增加國際學生入讀成功率,或減少吸納內地生 都有助解決問題。

無可否認,現時港人對內地生的批判多數有主觀成份。,如政治因素,生活模式,文化背景 等。但本文的出發點不是針對任何人,只是基於事件,議事論事,內地生人數過多確確實實是 港大校方一手造成又無法迴避問題,校方必須正視。

Page  42  of  80    


Representative of Swire Hall Students' Association 太古堂宿生會代表

Yu Lok Nam 余樂楠

The increasing intake of non-local students to the University of Hong Kong (HKU) has raised a debate in the school community, with major concerns within local student community. While it is evident that the internationalization of HKU has not only been broadening the horizons of local students, bringing them into different cultures in their first hands, but has also been increasing competitiveness of local students. Therefore the policy of non-local admission can be argued as a successful one by enriching diversity in educational institutions. However, controversies remain regarding whether the growing non-local admission over time would cause a lower competiveness of local students in the future job markets. With the larger increase of non-local applicants being admitted into HKU, local students are facing fierce competition in internship opportunities and job prospects. Official figures have illustrated that while there has been a decrease of number of JUPAS (Band A) applicants being admitted between Year 1997-98 and Year 2013-14, there has been a significant growth in the admission of Mainland applicants during the same time period. Therefore, the University should consider carefully regarding the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU. Furthermore, in order to secure HKU at a high ranking amongst other universities worldwide, HKU has been keen to attract non-local applicants with higher qualifications through greater values of scholarships and government funds. For example, the HKD$100,000,000 donation by Rosita King Ho International Charitable Foundation to HKU in 2004 was in the aim to attract oversea students to HKU, further increasing exchange opportunities. Consequentially, non-local applicants with the best grades are highly encouraged to apply HKU. This again, may reduce the relative competitiveness of local students. While the one of main objectives of higher non-local admissions is to make local students to realize the globally competitive age, encouraging them to equip themselves with “internationalization skills”, the University should also balance the interests of both local and non-local students, ensuring local students high employment rates. All in all, it can be contended that the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced and that the University should consider carefully in balancing the interests of the student body as a whole.

Page  43  of  80    


Representative of University Hall Students' Association 大學堂宿生會代表

Ho Chun Hin 何晉軒

本人支持校方研究降低非本地生人數比例,原因有二: 一.非本地生利處有誇大之嫌 根據官方文件透露,非本地生有利於香港作為國際都會的地位,為香港引入人才,並加強與鄰 近甚至國際地區教育團體合作,建立網絡並為其他大學提供協助;另外,非本地生亦能充實本 地學生的大學生活,提升本地生外語及與不同文化背景學生的溝通合作能力。 先談後者,本人絕對同意非本地生的存在有利香港大學學生的外語溝通能力。然而,非本地本 科生佔全體本科生近三成,若加上本地以非聯招方式進入大學的學生,將超過三份之一。參考 外國大學數字,非本地本科生一般佔總本科生人數一成至一成五,而相信此數字亦無損大學國 際地位,何故香港大學非本地生比例卻遠高於外地?加上,以上數字顯示的仍未計算從外國大 學以交流生計劃短時間留在香港的學生。這些學生正正能提供以上功能,而且數量較非聯招入 學更具彈性,即如此大量的非本地生並非必要。 再談前者,的確有不少非本地生會為本港經濟帶來貢獻,然而有資料顯示香港非本地生留港工 作人數不足三成,當中因素除了香港移民政策限制之外,許多非本地生視香港大學為一良好跳 板,多達四成非本地生只願留港一年,有利為日後升學作準備。香港人才流失問題嚴重,對比 起讓更多非本土生來港吸納資源,提升本地生比例增加可用的本地人才值得考慮。 二.本地人才供應短缺 基於本港產業飽和,以及內地對港開放程度增加,過去十年本地人才北上愈發常見。諷刺的 是,香港強調知識型經濟,以及開拓新產業以擴展行業光譜解決飽和問題,本地人才卻不斷流 失至鄰近地區以至發展中國家。無疑,能造就過際性的人才輸出足見香港教育成果,然而對香 港本土而言人才供應卻極為短缺。 要開拓新興產業及支持知識型經濟體系,具有領導才能、國際視野的人才絕不可少,大學正是 理想場所去培育下一代社會棟樑。然而一方面本地生比例比起其他國家已經不高,加上外流問 題嚴重,實不足以支持香港穩步發展。加上非本地生較少留港工作,實際上無法補充外流之人 才,因此提升本地生人數比例乃一上策。

Page  44  of  80    


Representative of Wei Lun Hall Students' Association 偉倫堂學生會代表

Chan Tsz Chun Rachel 陳芷臻

It has always been a controversy over the composition of HKU students. Most likely, people have been arguing that the proportion of non-local students in HKU is too high. To a large extent, I agree to the motion that “The maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced”. We had our first students from mainland and other parts of the world since the academic year of 1998-1999. Generally speaking, the current government policy regulates all local institutions that they can admit non-local students up to 20% of their total intake quota. However, I find it non-acceptable for the University to use up to 17.6%(as in 3 year curriculum in the academic year of 2012-2013), ahead of the fierce competition in local undergraduate spaces. The number of non-local students admitted has been increasing substantially, with average increase of 10%-20% per year. In fact, this situation has not violated any rules or regulations, but the University has its responsibilities to take a look and take care of the fierce competition in local applicants, before they admit such a number of non-local students. For instance, based on the official statistics, each year on average only have 20% local JUPAS and 10% non-JUPAS applicants successfully admitted into the University. As a local DSE student admitted through JUPAS, I do find that the competition fierce and stressful. To me, the University of Hong Kong is a local university, which tries to bring international thoughts to inspire local students, instead of an international university located in Hong Kong. Therefore, the University should put local students at first priority and try to provide them with the best resources first. Moreover, I think the University should always remember its goal: admit 50% of the non-local UG students from Mainland China, and 50% from other parts of the world, and to have as diverse a group of non-local students from as possible, whilst maintaining the highest academic standards. I think it’s true that university should strive to provide different food of thoughts, cultural interactions and to nurture us on multiple-perspective thinking. Based on these circumstances, if the University wishes to nurture us through internationality, then it has to balance the intake of non-local students, both from Mainland and the rest of the world. To conclude, I think HKU has to lower the maximum intake of non-local applicants for the benefits of its local students.

Page  45  of  80    


Representative of Architectural Society 建築學會代表

Wong Wai Lun 黃煒麟

The non-local students policy of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) encourages more nonlocal students to be enrolled to the curriculum. Hence, local students can take advantage of this opportunity to have cultural exchange and enhance their communication skills. In the view of a local student, the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced. Firstly, there is a great question that if the government should put so much “local” resources in educating non-local students. The intake of non-local students has been increasing annually in proportion to the total number of newly admitted students in HKU. The percentage has been raised from 10 percent in 2006-2007 to 17 percent in 20122013. The larger proportion means that less local students can enjoy the tertiary education in HKU. However, as a local university which is partly financed by Hong Kong Government, HKU should have the responsibility to educate local young people for the future development of Hong Kong. It can be easily proved that those local graduates from HKU had contributed much to society and this is supposed to be the first and foremost aim of HKU. Putting resources on educating non-local students may bring benefits to local students but the amount of resources involved may be too much now. Secondly, the proportion of newly admitted a non-local student has increased while the outcome of so-called cultural exchange is not so obvious. As the policy proposed, local students should have chances to communicate with non-local students. However, the increasing number of non-local students only seems to have little impact on the frequency of cultural exchange. It is not about just increasing the number of students but providing more chances for communication and exchange. To a certain extent, more non-local students will even form more non-local communities which may possibly discourage local students to approach those non-local students. HKU should put more resources on providing channels for communication and exchange between local and non-local students than maintaining, even increasing, the number of non-local students admitted. Also, the nonlocal students from Mainland China may bring even less benefits to cultural exchange because both local and non-local are Chinese. Thirdly, the educational support to other countries should be lower due to recent rapid development of some countries. One of the goals of non-local students policy of HKU is to provide aid and support to the less prosperous countries. It is true in the early years that nearby countries needed support from Hong Kong, yet it is doubtful that whether the Page  46  of  80    


support from Hong Kong is essential to them. For example, China and India have their own popular universities now and the educational support from Hong Kong seems redundant. Why don’t we put our resources on educating local students?

 

 

Page  47  of  80    


Representative of Arts Association 文學院學生會代表

Ng Wai Ka 吳偉嘉

「香港大學收生應調低非本地生限額」這條辯題,就本科生而言,不應成立。 原因簡單,招收更多海外學生入讀,令港大成為國際一流的大學,在不影響本地學位供求 下,沒有理由反對。 影響本地生入讀機會? 本地學生,不論透過聯招與否,所獲大學學額皆受政府資助。港大每年最多可招收 20%的 非本地本科生,當中 4%為公帑學位,即同時與本地學生競爭,但影響極微。另外 16%則 為自資學額,部分受政府津貼,但不會影響本地生入讀機會。 這些學額應否獲政府資助是另一個議題,但無論如何,對本地生影響並不大。 國際化?內地化。 引入更多海外生旨在令港大成為更多元化的社區,原則上並非壞事,只是實行上有問題。 關鍵在於過高的內地生比例。港大教務長數年前曾表示,港大的目標是把非本地生的比例 增加至兩成,當中的四分三為內地生,其餘則為海外學生。今年收取非本地生佔總收生人 數 15.5%,當中有 10%來自內地,離目標不遠矣。校方收取非本地生旨在令港大國際化, 卻是背道而馳,變成內地化。 ‘The maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU should be reduced’ this motion shall not stand in terms of undergraduates. There is no reason to object recruiting more overseas students, provided that this does not come at the expense of local degrees offer. Reducing local applicants’ admission chances? Full-time local undergraduates degrees, applied through JUPAS or non-JUPAS, are all government-funded. Each year, the University can admit non-local applicants up to 20% of their total intake-quota, with 4% government-funded, which may affect the local applicants a little. The remaining 16% is self-financing, partly funded by the government yet does not affect the chances of admissions by local applicants. Whether these degrees shall be funded is another issue, but either or not, it does not lead to huge influence on local students. Internationalization? Mainlandization Creating a more diverse community through recruiting more overseas students is in principle not a bad thing, but problematic practically. The key is the high ratio of mainland students. The Registrar has claimed a few years ago that HKU’s goal is to increase the ratio of non-local applicants to 20%, fourth-thirds of which are mainland students. This year, non-local students take account for 15.5% of the total intake quota, with 10 % coming from the mainland. The figure is very close to HKU’s goal. However, what HKU does has defeated its purpose ─ this is Mainlandization, but not Internationalization. Page  48  of  80    


Representative of Business and Economics Association 經濟及工商管理學會代表

Ho Oi Mei 何藹薇

近年,大學學位競爭激烈,莘莘學子為了入讀大學,不惜十年寒窗,不過仍有大部學生未能考 入大學。香港大學收取非本地生佔整體收生人數,由零九的百分之十二點六,升至一三年的百 分之十五點六。由於大學學位供不應求,部份人認為,香港大學應調低非本地生限額,令更多 本地學生入讀大學。不過,本人對此觀點有所保留,原因基於以下要點: 首先,香港大學收取非本地生能夠提升其競爭力。香港大學素來以國際化自居,並於近年積極 吸納各地專才令其愈趨多元化。根據英國機構泰晤士高等教育的大學排名評分準則,國際化為 其中一項評分範疇,可見收取非本地生能夠提升大學在世界的排名及地位。故此,香港大學收 取非本地生,能夠讓其在國際保持地位。另外,此舉亦有助大學促進其與世界各地的學府的交 流。因此,調低非本地生對香港大學的優勢會有負面的影響,損害其競爭力。 再者,香港大學收取非本地生能為香港吸納人才。基於香港大學為世界知名的學府,不少非本 地生爭相報讀。以二零一三年為例,香港大學共收到一萬五千份非本地生入讀的申請。香港大 學培育本地優才外,還吸引了世界各地的優秀人才來港。這些非本地生在香港大學畢業後可在 香港工作一年,及後其公司可為他們申請繼續留港工作。作為香港首屈一指的學府,香港大學 吸納優才來港能提升人力資源的質素。 有人認為,香港每年超過一萬個考生,努力苦讀,卻未能入讀大學,故提出香港的大學應調低 非本地生的限額,以增加聯招學位。事實上,非本地生只佔整體收生其中一個部份,非聯招收 生亦是令聯招收生下跌的一個主要原因。以香港大學為例,非聯招的收生,約佔整體收生百分 之二十,更高於非本地生的人數。由此可見,針對聯招學位不足,大學應審慎考慮非聯招收 生,而非盲目減低非本地生的收生人數。香港大學減低非本地生的限額雖能增加學位,但卻令 其失去國際化的優勢。 以上可見,收取非本地生能維持香港大學在國際的地位,並為香港吸納優才,對其本地學生有 正面影響,因此,香港大學不應調低非本地生的限額。

 

 

Page  49  of  80    


Representative of Dental Society 牙醫學會代表

Liu Chi Hang 廖智恒

It is no surprise that local students complain about the increasing intake of non-local students into HKU in these few years. People are saying these non-locals are ‘consuming’ our resources and would take their talents and knowledge away without contributing to Hong Kong after they graduated. There are even perceptions that the University is intentionally admitting certain amount of non-local students coming from different countries in order to improve its international rankings. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the current intake percentage of non-local students is acceptable as long as the University admits these students based on their talents and ability instead of blindly craving for rankings. What most local students complain about is that the non-locals students are competing for the local students’ resources. It seems to us the numbers offers for local students decreases as the non-local students ‘take our seats’. However, is this really the whole picture? Officially, there are already fixed amounts of resources allocated to the local and non-local students each year respectively. Thus, technically, the intake of local and non-local students is isolated. Moreover, non-local students would not have the government subsidies on their school fees. Hence the subsidy on local students would not be affected. Therefore, strictly speaking, local and non-local students are not competing on the same resources. However, some may argue that if the university decreases the intake of non-local students, won’t there be more places for local students? In some extreme cases, people might even suggest that a local university should only intake local students. Yet, do we truly understand the meaning of having university institution? It is a place for exchanging but not spoonfeeding knowledge, is a place for expanding our social network but not only studying. University is a mini-society for us to experience and learn. In reality, especially in Hong Kong, we always have to encounter people coming from all around the world. Universities offer us a chance to work with, to exchange ideas and knowledge and to interact with international students. As one of the best universities in Hong Kong, HKU allows us to have such valuable experiences. What we gain is much more than knowledge but also a broader perspectives and international experience when we graduate. Undoubtedly, the universities offers for local students are not adequate at this moment. Taking this year as an example, only about 18% of the secondary school students taking HKDSE are able to get offers for the Government-funded Undergraduate Programmes. However, what should be done is not cutting down the offers for non-local students but to allocate more resources on undergraduate education! This has to be done by the Hong Kong Government. This way, not only more local students can secure government-funded offers, also the proportion of local and non-local students need not be changed. Hence, the benefits of having international students would not be affected. Page  50  of  80    


I think not a lot of people would disagree with the benefits of having non-local students. Most importantly are why the University has to admit these students. They ought to admit these students based on their talents, abilities, and the benefits they will bring to the school. I believe this is the true meaning why international students really count when considering the quality and the ranking of a university.

Page  51  of  80    


Representative of Education Society 教育學會代表

NG Chi Hin 吳志騫

在全球化的世界中,高等教育的發展對香港的國際地位影響深遠。因此,社會各界一直關心政 府在高等教育上的資源投放。根據教資會資助院校的開支統計表,二零一一至二零一二年度的 總開支為 24,819 百萬元,佔本地生產總值百分之一點二六,於每位學生投放了 233,000 元。 然而,在這種情況的支助下,升學率仍不足百分之二十。我們不禁會問:問題的核是甚麼? 教資會資助院校主要統計數字顯示,二零一二至二零三年度的整體學生人數為 93,934 人,非本 地生的人數為 13,661 人,佔總人數百分之十四點五;學士學位課程的整體學生人數為 76,353 人,非本地生的人數為 8,399 人,佔百分之十一。更值得留意是,在香港大學的學士學位課程 下,非本地生的人數為 2,224 人,佔百分之十六,比二零一一至二零一二年度高了百分之二。 香港既邁向全球化,大學國際化是無可避免的現象,要讓學術交流的層次更廣闊,大學自然需 要吸納來自世界各地的人才,當中包括了學生和教職員。然而,本地大學亦有責任培育本地人 才。根據教資會的統計數字,於二零零八年至二零一三年間,非本地生佔整體學生人數的比率 為百分之十一點六、百分之十二點七、百分之十三點五、百分之十四點二及百分之十四點五, 可見非本地生的比率逐年遞增。然而,教資會對高等教育的開支(相對本地生產總值的比率) 卻由二零零八年的百分之一點三八跌至二零一二年的百分之一點二六,由此推論,政府對投放 於本地學生的資源減少了。在這個情況下,本地大學對於培育本地人才的責任方面,實有待重 新審視。 政府的資金來自市民,投放於教育上的資源也應以回饋市民為主,但是這並不代表大學多收本 地生會影響大學國際化,只要政府調整投放於高等教育的資源,保障本地生的升學率,大學國 際化與本地的專上教育機會其實可以達至雙軌並行。 為此,在能提升本地生升讀大專的機會下,即增加對高等教育的資源投放下,非本地生的限額 應可保持不變。  

 

Page  52  of  80    


Representative of Engineering Society 工程學會代表

Cheung Kin Long 張健朗

Students in HKU, for both undergraduate and postgraduate students, can basically be categorized into local students, who holds permanent living right or student visa in Hong Kong, and non-local students, who holds Student Visa or Student Entry Permit for foreign students and Mainland students respectively. The policy of admitting non-local students was firstly carried out ten years ago aiming at enhancing the interaction between Hong Kong students and foreign students and broadening the vision of education in the global extend. However, it has been recently argued that too many non-local students were admitted every year, especially for undergraduate programmes, and such circumstance resulted in dissatisfaction to local students on the rationale that the intake of local students was limited and even reduced. It is significantly being discussed among HKU students. In my point of view, on educational grounds which I care most for an university, the maximum intake of non-local students of 20% of total intake-quota is reasonably acceptable. The primary purpose of in-taking non-local students to HKU is to provide more channels to local students to communicate and interact with students who come from various countries with different cultural backgrounds. It can actually be observed the effectiveness of the policy on this purpose, through the performance and the quality of local undergraduate students. On average students of HKU have always been well evaluated having great performance on the communication skills and facilitating interpersonal relationship, as well as high level on speaking English. It is also applicable to workplace. This may not be obvious to be seen that it is resulted from the policy mentioned. But, the opportunities to get along with students who are using other languages as their mother language will definitely help to improve students’ speaking in English. English is used as the official language for the education in HKU. The only way to consolidate the abilities of students, especially for local students, is to provide sufficient and various ways for them to use and apply the skills and knowledge gained in classes, and which is clearly to be utilized in their daily life. Admission of non-local applicants can directly achieve the purpose above. English is just an example to be used to explain the importance of admitting non-local students. No matter for other languages or students from other countries, even from Mainland China speaking Mandarin, they all giving the same situation. But the argument, on the whole to say, is on the amount of intake of non-local students. The Government of HKSAR has launched the policy on the admission of non-local students that up to 20% of the total intake-quota can be non-local students being admitted by each institution. Looking back to recent years, 17.6% and 17.2% non-local applicants were admitted to HKU last year, and 15.6% non-local applicants were admitted this year. Actually if we can think from the prospect of education on bring the university to the global level, these Page  53  of  80    


numbers are rational. Optimally one fifth of total undergraduate students being admitted as non-local students equivalent we can meet a non-local students in every five students. Using the mentioned purpose of the policy, in fact it is merely enough to create an international atmosphere to HKU students as it is based on the opportunity for local and non-local students to interact with each other. The admission of non-local students actually does not affect the limit of the intake quota of local students. Some local students may consider such policy ruin the benefits of themselves since part of the proportion of intake-quota is distributed to non-local students and thus the intake-quota and even resources for education to them. Certainly it brings international vision to University students. Look from other angles, the policy carried out by the University is acceptably to be considered as a booster to local students to study hard and to make progress. The future of the education in Hong Kong should be looking forward to the space to make advancement and develop to a higher level. Our vision, shall broaden to a wider views.  

 

Page  54  of  80    


Representative of Law Association 法律學會代表

Li Chee Wing 李芷穎

香港大學素以其國際化教育為譽, 上至校長,下至學生均強調國際視野、開放思維。以此為目 標,香港大學制定了相應的收生政策,吸納不同文化背景的海外學生。然而,吸納非本地生亦 非達致此目的的唯一途徑。按香港現實情況而言,香港大學調低非本地生收生限額確無可避 免。 香港大學於去年錄取新生時,非本地生佔總數之百分之十六,較十年前(百分之三)足足增長 五倍。反觀本地生之入學率於十年間僅微升百分之十。再者,相比鄰近地區,香港本地學生接 受高等教育的機會仍遠低於台灣、南韓及內地沿海省份等地,情況未如理想。即使考生符合高 等院校普遍入學要求成績, 仍有大約三成人不獲錄取。有學者推算資助大學學額須增至約三萬 個,較現時多一倍才能錄取所有達到最低入學門檻之學生。於此前提下,大學仍將資源投放於 增加錄取非本地生而忽視本地生對學位之需求乃不公不智之舉。資源錯配以致本地大學學位供 不應求,提供高限額予非本地生更使情況惡化。 現時香港大學非本地生限額為所有入學本科生的百分之二十,當中百分之四為有政府資助學 位。推算之下,每年約有一百三十多名非本地生佔用香港本地學生的之資源於港就讀大學。調 低非本地生限額以減低對非本地生之資助學位可避免資源錯配,確保本地學生升讀大學的機會 得以提高。 有學者提出調低非本地生限額會導致大學之國際化程度減弱,間接令教育質素下降。然而, 非 本地本科生數量並非衡量大學國際化程度之單一條件。雙贏政策如提高交換生數目、增加國際 學術交流平台、調低學生到海外實習的門檻等更為有效。 香港作為知識型社會,日後發展均由 接受高等教育的下一代帶領。香港大學應調低錄取非本地 生限額,以重新分配資源培育為香港建設未來的一群。 The University of Hong Kong (HKU) is renowned for its excellent international exposure. Members of the University, from the Vice-Chancellor to ordinary students, emphasize a lot on international insight and open-mindedness. The University has implemented related policies to fulfil such aims and admit overseas students with distinct cultural backgrounds. Nevertheless, admitting non-local students is never the only way to achieve the above goals. Base on the status quo in Hong Kong, HKU should reduce the maximum intake of non-local students. In the previous year, 16% of all newly admitted students in HKU are non- locals. The figure is approximately 5 times of that 10 years ago (3%). However, the intake of local students has only increased for 10% in 10 years. Additionally, the proportion of students receiving territorial education is still very low when comparing with neighbour countries, such as Taiwan, South Korea and Mainland cities. Worse still, only 70% of the students who fulfilled the minimum requirements of receiving territorial education can be admitted. Scholars Page  55  of  80    


suggest that 30,000 admission quotas for local applicants will be required to admit all students who passed the threshold. In such circumstances, it is unwise and unfair for the University to insist on placing resources on non-local students. Such misallocation of resources is the main factor contributing to the shortage of local students’ admission quotas. With the increase of intake of non-local applicants, the situation has been worsening in the previous 10 years. Nowadays, the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU is 20% of all newly admitted students, in which 4% is funded by the Government. It means that there are about 130 nonlocal students occupying the resources of local students each year. Reducing the maximum intake of non-local applicants to HKU, particularly government-funded quotas, is essential to raise the opportunity of local students to receive territorial education. Some scholars pointed out that reducing quotas for admitting non-local applicants would impact the internationality of the University and thus the quality of education. Nonetheless, the proportion of non-local students is not the only criteria in assessing the internationality of the University. Other win-win policies, for example raising the number of exchange students, increasing international platforms for intellectual exchange, lowering the threshold of overseas internships, will be more effective and efficient. Hong Kong is a knowledge-based economy. Our development is all depending on the future generations. HKU should reduce the maximum intake of non-local applicants in order to reallocate resources to better equip the local students, who hold the future of Hong Kong.

Page  56  of  80    


Representative of Medical Society 醫學會代表

Chan Man Yu, Don 陳文裕

我認為港大在考慮降低非本地生比例之先,當考量如何劃定非本地生的各個組成部分,從而維 持本地與非本地生的互利關係。 香港大學作為先進學府,理應容納世界各地之學子,以促進各地文化與知識之交流,以著重惠 及本地學生,擴闊其視野、增長其學識修養,方能成為世界學術進展助力之一。香港作為國際 都會,對海外人才的確需求殷切。 現時支持降低非本地生比例的論點主要繫於本地中學生人數遠比大學學額多,學位供不應求。 大學學位固然是當今主要求職門檻之一,於是非本地生佔有一定學生比例,變相是減少本地人 的就業機會。 此外另一論點是內地生佔非本地生比數過大,對本地生之國際視野或文化學識皆無所裨益,更 甚至雪上加霜,醞釀出本地生對內地生的抗拒及反感。 當大家將目光聚焦於香港大學之上,自然認覺得港大應以港人福祉為先。然而事實上,香港的 大學學位從未足夠。回顧往史,香港曾經只有一所香港大學,連中三甚至小六也需臨歷考試篩 選。今時今日香港正轉型為知識型社會,抽減非本地生學位顯然無助長遠教育發展,更未必能 解燃眉之急。增設大學、多建立與海外大學的連結,大量增加本地生所能觸及之學位,才是長 遠之道。 我認為有關招收非本地生,最為值得商榷之處是內地生所佔比重。據規定,外地生最多可與內 地生佔有同樣數量學額,但近年外地生數量遠遠未及標準上限。宏觀到底在如此比例下,招收 非本地生能否達至推廣國際文化交流,成果昭然可視。若論到如何讓招收非本地生一舉收預期 之效,當務該是加收外地生,提升校園內的文化種族多元性。

Page  57  of  80    


Representative of Science Society 理學會代表

Ngai Ting Hong 魏庭康

近年,中港間的矛盾日益白熱化;雙非媽媽、搶奶粉等問題都挑起了不少謾罵。問題���後,直 指現時政府投放過量資源矛內地人,間接剥削港人應享有的資源,將港人納稅所得的轉贈他 人。同樣地,在各大專院校的圈子中,亦有聲音指近年各大學取錄內地生的人數急劇上升,削 弱本地學生的競爭力,到底這是中港間矛盾白熱化的結果,抑或是真有其事?如果事實如此, 香港大學作為香港大專院校的一份子,又應否調低非本地生收生限額? 現時各資助院校的學士學位課程可招收的非本地學生人數上限為有關課程的核准學額指標的 20%;翻查政府網頁資料,在 2004 年前,院校招收非本地生的比例上限只為 8%,其後改為 10%,並再於 2008 年大幅調高比例限額致 20%。根據香港大學的數據,本年(2013-2014)共 取錄 538 位非本地生學士,其中有 329 名及 209 名分別來自內地及海外,佔全體學士人數 15.6%;對比 2007-2008 年 299 (259 及 40) 位的 10.2%數字相比,有超過 5 個百份點的增 長。雖然如此,這數字似乎未如現時所指,內地生佈滿港大整個校園。實情為,香港大學在深 造學位上(Postgraduate programme),取錄不少內地生,其中以自資全日制的授課式深造學位 最多(Taught postgraduate programme),有超過 1000 位學生;在研究式深造學位(Research postgraduate programme (MPhil + PhD) ),亦有類似情況,有 400 多位學生。 這樣的數據反映,現時的說法可能是由於大量修讀深造課程的內地生所導致。不過仍然值得關 注的,是內地生與海外生取錄比例的問題。取今年的情況作例子,內地生人數佔全體非本地生 人數的 61%,與港大在針對非本地生的政策中提出希望取錄到 1:1 的內地生與海外生的目標; 雖然在入學申請的數字上,內地生的申請有近 12500 位,而海外生的申請只有約 3000 位, 在維持學生質素及能力上來說,是無可厚非;但香港大學作為香港的第一最高學府,應該以提 升整體實力以吸引更多優秀的海外生為目標。只取錄成績優秀的內地生,是不足以令港大的學 生有更多與其他國家同學交流的機會,亦不足以培養同學在全球化下面對各國競爭的能力。 香港大學作為全球一流的學府,取錄不同的非本地生是全球的大趨勢,但要確保的是,收生人 數不能傾向內地方面,而是要平衡內地生與海外生人數的比例,否則是不能有效提升港大學生 的整體質素。

Page  58  of  80    


Representative of Social Sciences Society 社會科學學會代表

Sham Kwan Ho 沈君浩

踏入二十一世紀,香港大學有追求國際化的願景,故開始招收來自內地及其他國家的學生來校 就讀本科生學位。現時,其限額大概佔總體收生百分之二十,而實際上每年招收的國際生人數 亦大致如此。然而,自新高中文憑試實施起,每年均有一萬多名考生的成績屆"三三二二"的最 低要求卻未能升達本地資助大學。因此,亦有人把問題的原因歸咎於本地資助大學過多地收取 非本地生,令本地學生未能入讀。到底,非本地生與本地生的關係,是否勢成水火,互相爭奪 資源?恕筆者未能苟同,原因有二: 首先,古語有云:大學之道,在明明德,在親民,止於至善。大學的目標,在於令學生培養個 人品行,塑造其成為一個君子。這亦和港大校訓明德格物有所呼應。而在這些目標中,從來亦 沒有提及非本地生不應來港大就讀,亦未有指出香港大學必定要成為香港人的大學。若大學的 教學純粹是為了令學生有所成長,品格更為完全,非本地生亦理應不被排擠在外。 再者,其實本地生與非本地生之間,亦未必只存在單純的鬥爭,相反兩者應該可以相輔相成。 作為社會科學學院的學生,對此感受甚深。例如一節政治導修課中,一名來自以色列的非本地 生談到以巴衝突的內情,可能比書本的刻板描寫更為透徹。所謂的文化衝擊,文化融和,旨在 令不同學生在同一校園下互相感染交流。這培訓了兩批學生的容人之量,以及對人最基本的尊 重。故此,調低限額實會令此一利處泯滅,不利學生的成長。 或有人認為二十個百分比的比例過多,應作適度的調低,最終就可以給予香港的學生更多學 位。不過,筆者卻認為百分之二十這一標準已經十分合理。因為若限額過少,非本地生就會完 全變成一群無人理會的絕少數,而且人數之少會容易造成忽略。總括而言,港大不應調低招收 非本地生的限額。

Page  59  of  80    


Popularly Elected Union Councilor I 普選評議員一

Page  60  of  80    

Chow Chun Ming 鄒俊明


Popularly Elected Union Councilor II 普選評議員二

Kuang Kai Shan 鄺凱珊

立場:反對 首先,香港大學的抱負提及:“香港大學躋立國際優等學府之首列,標領亞洲,懷抱中華,曠 眼世界。教學科研,是必竭心悉力,交流廣益......薈萃天下英才。’ 以及其使命:“群策群力,靈活通變,研精學術,共相勉助,藉此培育優秀學者,吸聚中外人 才,使他們安心留在港大,在啟發創意、鼓勵學習,以及可思想自由、探究和表達的文化氛圍 中各展所長。” 由此可見, 大學對於培育中外人才十分重視。而現時香港大學對於非本地生的收生名額雖逐年 增加,如參照 2013-2014 年度收生情況,內地生收生名額為 329 人,海外生為 209 人,而聯 招及非聯招的本地收生名額為 2906 人,相較之下,非本地生名額其實只占約 16%,對於保持 大學多元文化交流是有其積極作用而不會過分佔用大學資源。 再者,內地生收生人數占申請人數的百分比少於 3%,又海外收生所占百分比少於 7%,可見收 生精英制。因此我認為,對於吸納人才的原意我們不應該干預收生名額的設定,反之,應該樂 于接納這群帶有不同文化背景以及優秀才能的人士。假如大學決定調低非本地生收生名額,那 麼應該如何設定限制的名額呢?又應該如何向公眾交代此決定之餘仍能保障香港大學作為國際 優等學府廣納人才的形象呢? 因此,本人反對香港大學收生應調低非本地生限額。

Page  61  of  80    


Popularly Elected Union Councilor IV 普選評議員四

So Cheuk Yiu 蘇卓堯

The issue of insufficient places for local students to enter statutory university has been exist for a decade. Recently, there are voices on the society suggests to decrease the number of quota for international students as to offer more opportunity for local students to study in universities in Hong Kong. Introducing international students into campus could lead to variant level of advantages and disadvantages. According to the report "Report of the Strategic Dialogues on Internationalization and Engagement with Mainland China", admitting non-local students could bring several benefits. For instance, non-local students can expose different cultures to local students and help build up the relationship with overseas communities. Overseas students could also help HKU to establish good reputation in the world. Moreover, introducing high quality students could enrich the learning environment. On the other hand, the disadvantage is quite obvious; the quota for local students decreased and will lead to lessen the opportunity for them to study in HKU. As mentioned in the report "Aspirations for the Higher Education System in Hong Kong" prepared by the University Grants Committee, only about 18% of the 17-20 age group can enter UGC-funded institutions which include 7 statutory universities in Hong Kong1. This clearly shows that there are insufficient places for local students to study in universities. In order to maintain the balance between opportunity for local students to study in HKU and provide students more chance to expose to different culture, I recommend the university to consider the following suggestions. 1. The maximum percentage of quota for international students remain unchanged at 20% as defined in the policy which implemented by the HKSAR government.2 2. The ratio of non-local quotas for students from different countries or areas should be equivalent. 3. Remaining quotas that for non-local students from different countries should transfer to the category for local students especially for non-JUPAS local students. This could allow the university to keep its internationality and provide more chances for local students to enjoy quality undergraduate life in HKU. The University of Hong Kong should also review its own non-local students admission policy on the ratio of students from overseas and Mainland China. As mentioned in the report from University Grants Committee, "Currently, the majority of our non-local students are from the Mainland."1, this implies that students from Mainland China should be classified into the category of non-local student. The report also stated that "Internationalisation is not the same Page  62  of  80    


thing as developing relationships with Mainland China and encouraging Mainland students to study in Hong Kong."1 and "internationalisation requires a much greater diversity of nonlocal students"1, which indicated that the ratio of non-local students from different parts of the world should be similar in term of internationalization. To conclude, the percentage of maximum quota for international students should remains unchanged while the university should limit the number of students from different countries and the ratio for each region should be equivalent. Meanwhile, vacant places for non-local students should convert to places for local students. This could help the university to maintain its image as an international institution and at the same time still provide rational chances for local students. Reference: 1. University Grants Committee. Accessed on 12th of December, 2012. Aspirations for the Higher Education System in Hong Kong. Page 29. Retrieved from http://www.ugc.edu.hk/eng/doc/ugc/publication/report/her2010/her2010-rpt.pdf 2. Legislative Council. (2012). LCQ18: Non-local students enrolled in UGC-funded institutions. [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201212/05/P201212050310.htm

Page  63  of  80    


Popularly Elected Union Councilor V 普選評議員五

Wong Wing Long Leo 黃穎朗

香港大學的收生政策近十年迅速國際化。根據港大 2012 年的數字,現時本科生之中有 22%為 海外學生,而 2011-2012 年度有近 25%新生為海外學生,顯示大學招收非本地生的比例正在 上升。全部海外學生中,有超過一半來自中國內地;而連同研究生一併計算,港大約有 34%的 海外學生,當中有近 66%來自內地。 國際化的收生政策對港大確有不少正面影響。香港大學教育資助委員會的文件表明,招收非本 地生可以擴闊本地學生的教育經驗和觀點、提高他們的溝通技巧、促進文化互動、豐富學生群 體、加強與海外院校的聯繫、帶來高質素的學生和維持一所國際大學的地位。而大學管理層最 關注的,相信是國際化的收生對大學排名的效果。不少公佈排名的機構,均以非本地生的數字 衡量一所大學是否達到國際水平,間接令本港院校在近年不斷提高國際學生的比例。 可是,筆者認為我們在評估現行收生政策的成效、及利弊時,應回歸最基本的兩條問題: 一、 取錄更多海外學生是否大學步向國際化的必要條件? 二、 取錄海外學生的同時需要取捨甚麼?這種取捨是否值得?應怎樣平衡存在矛盾的目標? 取錄更多海外生

非國際化條件

就第一個問題,筆者不認同取錄更多海外學生是大學步向國際化的條件的說法。一所大學是否 國際級大學,最重要的因素應是「硬件」和「軟件」(例如教學/研究設施(如圖書館)、教務 人員資歷、課程設計、研究和教學水平、學生發展工作等)是否達到國際水準才是國際化的條 件。只有各項因素的配合,才可建構一所可持續發展的國際級大學。盲目追求取錄更多海外學 生,根本不能提升大學的教學和研究質素,又怎能說得上是國際化的條件呢? 此外,從平日的觀察所得,海外學生較多與其他海外學生溝通和進行學術活動。基於本身的文 化和生活方式,除了有住宿舍堂的學生外,本地學生與海外學生的交流和接觸實在不多,可見 單純提高海外學生的比例根本無助增進兩類學生的交流。要提高學生的國際視野,最根本的方 法是舉辦更多促進海外生和本地生交流的活動, 例如在課程中引入加強兩類學生合作的元素, 並增加本地生到海外交流的機會。盲目追求海外學生的數目,是本末倒置之舉。 本地生為主

海外生為輔

就第二個問題,我們需要了解到,香港的高等教育資源是有限的。取錄更多非本地生,意味本 地學生接受高等教育的機會減少。根據最新的教資會數據,每年獲資助的新入學學位佔全港中 學畢業生人數僅約 17%,未能獲得資助學位的學生只能透過自資學位、副學位、文憑課程等接 受高等教育。因此,其中一個關鍵問題,是如何在取錄海外學生帶來的優勢與香港本地生的接 受高等教育的機會作出平衡。筆者認為,作為一所國際級大學,港大固然不應拒優秀海外生於 門外;但同時,作為香港首屈一指的學府,也有責任為香港培養更多人才,以提升本地學生知 識水平和涵養作為辦學宗旨。因此,港大的本科生收生政策應以「本地生為主、海外生為輔」 為主軸;並就現時取錄的海外生佔新生近四分之一的情況作出檢討。 Page  64  of  80    


調低海外生比例

並增加交換生數目

筆者認為,其中一個最切實、有效、可行的方法,是一方面調低錄取海外生的比例,另一方面 大幅增加本科生參與交換生計劃的機會。海外生的比例可以調低至 20%以下,即每年新入學海 外生比現時減少約 200 名,並撥歸本地收生;而海外生的地區比例(例如超過一半海外生來自 內地),也有需要檢討。交換生計劃方面,2012 年的數字顯示,969 名港大學生在該年度參 與交換生計劃,佔全校本科生 8%。以三年制課程推算,大概只有 25%本科生能參與交換生計 劃。這個比例假如大幅提高至約 40%,則意味每年到外地交流的港大生及到港大交流的海外生 都會增加約 500 人。這樣,港大不但可以維持國際化的學術環境,更可以實質地提升港大生的 國際視野。而兩項政策的調整,淨影響是每年比現時多 300 名海外學生在港大就讀或交流。 增加交換生計劃的參與學生數目,相對增加取錄更多海外學生而言,有兩項重要優勢。第一, 交換生計劃的宗旨是同時增加大學內的同學和參與計劃的港大生的國際視野,每增加一名交換 生在港大交流,都代表多一名港大生到海外交流。但是,取錄更多海外學生,只會佔去更多本 地學生的學位,當中獲益最多的是在香港接受高等教育的海外生,而香港學生的得益則難以量 化(上文分析顯示本地生受惠有限)。 第二,從更廣的角度看,取錄愈多海外學生,其實是在畢業生求職市場製造更大的競爭。本身 競爭並非壞事,但香港的經濟已漸趨飽和,製造更多本地生與海外生的競爭只會減少本地畢業 生的就業選擇,對本地畢業生帶來衝擊。優化交換生計劃正正避免這種衝擊,同時維持大學的 國際競���力。 綜上所述,調低非本地生限額是利多於弊的措施。筆者建議海外生佔全部本科生的比例調低至 20%以下,而另一方面在數年內將本科生能夠參與交換生計劃的比例提高至約 40%。港大立足 香港,有責任以香港學生的學術發展為首要考慮,不應為招收海外學生而犧牲本地生的利益。

Page  65  of  80    


Editor-in-chief of Undergrad 學苑總編輯

Leung Kai Ping 梁繼平

自 1996 年大學教育資訊委員會(教資會)發表《香港高等教育》報告書,提出未來高等教育需吸納 更多非本地生,到 2003 年董建華提出發展香港成為「區域教育樞紐」,大學「國際化」成為發展趨 勢。除體現於推動英語授課、提高國際學術排名、增加交換生及外國交流計劃等之外,招收非本地生 成為重要手段。政府將非本地生限額由 2%大幅增加至現時 20%,例如在 2011/12 年度,八大院校共 取錄 2,004 名非本地學生入讀第一年學士學位課程,約佔整體人數 14%,數字按年不斷上升。 香港為中西文化薈萃之國際城市,香港大學更是存留英殖遺風之百年學府,「國際化」指標更是首屈 一指。港大招收更多非本地生,誠然能締促進文化交流、引入各國專才、拓展國際視野、提高國際排 名等等。若與鄰國頂尖學府新加坡國立大學與東京大學比較,國際生比率分別為 20%及 15%,故香港 訂立非本地生上限為 20%亦屬合理。社會亦有聲音指招收非本地生會加劇學位及資源爭奪,然而在現 行政策下,教資會只會資助 20%核准上限中的 4%非本地生人數,其餘學額則由院校自負盈虧。以 2010/11 年度為例,教資會的核准收生人數為 14 580,實際總收生人數為 16,054 人(超額 110.1%),當中經聯招獲取錄為 11,660 人,經非聯招(副學位、高級程度會考、國際預科文憑等學 歷)為 2,535 人,而非本地生為 1,859 人。所以整體本地學生為 14,195 人,佔教資會核准收生人數 的 97.4%,即絕大部份非本地生均透過核准學額以外進入本地大學,與本地學額未必構成直接衝突。 然而,香港本地大學招收非本地生出現的問題主要有三。第一,大學以「國際化」之名行「大陸化」 之實,以香港大學 2013/14 年度之收生數字為例,538 名的非本地生當中,有超過三分之二為內地 生(329 名),有違港大校方原先訂立內地生不超過非本地生 50%之目標。若非本地生學額只傾斜於 內地生,根本不能達成學生國籍多元化、促進文化交流、開展國際視野云云。加上,香港大學能登上 國際排名高峰,有賴超越牛津哈佛的國際化指標(以外地學生和教職員所佔比例等因素計算),但實 質上是輸入大量內地生,甚有「發水」之嫌,無怪最新的大學排名均指出港大於「國際化」評分下 跌。 第二,非本地學生入讀本地大學之學費約為 10 至 13 萬(港大為 13.5 萬),雖遠高於本地學生之花 費,但仍低於每個學士學額之 20 萬成本,故最後仍須以納稅人之公帑補貼外地生,而未能入讀資助 學額之本地學生反倒不獲資助,政府不以本地學生利益優先之做法有欠公允。 第三,在不斷招收更多非本地生的同時,近十年來本地大學的資助學額絲毫無上升,入讀率維持低水平 之 18%,如何能令整體本地學生得益?相較美國之 72.6%、英國之 59.5%、日本之 47.7%及新加坡之 33.7%,香港可謂望塵莫及。而政府提倡發展「區域教育樞紐」也只是「假大空」,新加坡早於 1998 年邀請世界多間頂尖學府到當地開辦課程及分校,並鼓勵當地私立院校提高質素。反觀香港政府鼓吹教 育商品化、對自資院校缺乏監管,任由萃萃學子被迫入讀高收費、低認受之副學士或自資院校,卻無足 夠大學學額作銜接。香港政府撒手放任,本地學生苦叫無門,難怪將矛頭指向愈來愈多的非本地生。 故在推崇大學「國際化」、廣招非本地生的同時,院校應對內地生設限額,避免收生傾斜而淪為大陸 化,同時應檢討非本地生學費,減低以納稅人之公帑補貼外地生的情況,並將多收之學費資助本地學生 升讀自資大學學位或私立院校。長遠而言,政府應增加本地大學資助學位及具質素之私立院校,推動大 專教育普及化。讓港大能真正立足香港,面向國際。 Page  66  of  80    


Chairperson of Campus TV 校園電視主席

Mok Ka Hei 莫嘉熙

香港大學不應減少對非本地學生的招收學額 「明德格物」,是香港大學的校訓,意指培養自身的道德操守,並探求各事物之間的道理。 大學,被稱為社會的縮影。在其中發生的事、出現的現象,都和現今香港中的時事有著相似之 處。非本地學生選擇於香港大學--一所屬於香港本地的大學,和本地生一同學習,就仿如外 國公司於香港投資,長期理應對「外國」及「香港」兩方有益。不但未有因瓜分投資機會而導 致本地有損失,更可從外來引入財富促進發展,本地投資者不應因外來資金而發出怨言。 第一,非本地學生能提升香港大學學生的知識水平。對於本地學生,香港教育制度中的大學聯 招計劃(JUPAS)允許本地學生對各大專學府的各種學位作出志願排名,即或成績未如理想,學 生亦有離開香港繼續升學、投入社會工作等選擇,實有多重保障。相對地,非本地學生若要希 望獲得香港大學的學位,必須要有離鄉別井、奮力圖強的心理準備,以及處理到港後起居飲食 各種問題。假如沒有十足的把握能夠在香港獲得學位,必然不會選擇貿然破釜沈舟,以自己的 未來作賭注。基於大學沒道理去為非本地生降低入學門檻,在一方有多重保障而另一方必須肯 定自己有走進香港大學校園的資格的情況下,入學的非本地生成績應較好。若說成績不能反映 一個人的知識水平,那更多的非本地學生代表更多的外界接觸、更多的知識來源、更多的文 化,相信在大學內能聚集更多不同方面的知識。簡括而言,非本地生入學是為大學帶來即時益 處的。 第二,外來知識能促進本地學術研究,為未來發展帶來優勢。如上段提及,非本地學生會帶來 不同的文化背景和不同的生活習慣,而這樣的不同亦塑造、培養了非本地生不同的思維方式及 不同的價值觀。當一群人之中出現不同的想法和行動取向,因著人與人之間的比較以及求問求 真的精神,這一種文化碰撞引起的火花既能促進大家再次對目前慣常的做法尋找原因,亦對學 生處理未有而將來到的新事物時有更多的批判性思考,於未來學術上的發展帶來更有系統的比 較及更多層次的分析。 第三,本地學生應更願意接受非本地學生。在金融社會中,若最佳投資機會被其他公司奪去, 只能慨歎自己未能把握機會,而及後需自力更新提升競爭力,或與其他公司合作。在學校中, 學生應以良好競爭的心態與其他同學相處,在學術上變得更進取,並與不同同學互相切磋,樂 於接受不同的意見和想法,一同走在大學之路上。 最後,香港大學的非本地學生的招收學額只佔總收生學額約百分之十五,而我認為此數字並不 算多,能夠平衡本地學生及非本地學生的比例,讓他們互相切磋,其好處令我覺得香港大學應 維持現時的非本地學生的招收學額,不應減少對非本地學生的招收學額。 Page  67  of  80    


President of the previous Union Session 去屆會長

Page  68  of  80    

Chan Koon Hong 陳冠康


Student Senator I 教務委員會本科生代表一

Lee Kai Tik Jack 李啟迪

我認為香港大學在本科生課程,應保持現時的百分之二十的非本地生限額,而當中的一半應該 非來自中國內地的非本地生。研究課程則應將非本地生限額定為百分之五十。 非本地生的數量是大學國際化的一頂重要指標,在各大學排行榜上,是計分的項目。對學生而 言,非本地生在港大就讀,固然可促進文化交流,擴闊國際視野。對來港的非本地生而言,他 們可在港大認識香港和中國。非本地生現時須繳付較高昂的學費,亦有補助大學收入的作用。 基於以上的好處,非本地生就讀港大,本質是相得益彰的。 不過,非本地生對本地生會構成資源競爭。現時,香港公立的大學採取雙軌收生制,理論上是 不影響本地生入讀的機會。但長遠而言,大學亦提供了教學的資源予非本地生,減少取錄非本 地生,當可使用原有的資源加開本地生的學位。奇怪的是,教資會資助的本科學位在一九九七 年以來幾乎沒有上升過,維持在一萬八千個的水平。現政府對普及專上教育的對策是開立更多 私立院校。究竟非本地生入學是否導致本地學位數目無法上升的原因則無從得知。 宿舍宿位的分配體現了非本地生與本地生直接的資源衝突。香港大學現時所有舍堂加上住宿學 院的宿位比政府對現有學生規模的要求尚欠二千個。現時的宿位分配政策,是厚侍非本地生 的。首先,他們入住的宿位受公帑資助。計分方法上,他們是長期獲得滿分。而無法分配宿位 的非本地生,也能得到校方資助租住私人樓宇。本地生對宿位的需求甚為殷切,但在現行計分 和分配制度下,不少居住非常偏遠地區的本地生也無法入住宿舍。非本地生加入私人租屋市 場,也推高了租金水平,使本地生更負擔在外租屋的租金。 研究生收生方面,現時來自中國內地的非本地生已佔學額七成,比例已屬失衡。雖說研究院的 課程是擇優取錄,無分國藉。但過於單元的學術團隊,是會影響研究的文化以致成果。再者, 本地生入讀研究院課程的機會大幅減少,妨礙了香港的學子晉身學術界的機會。故此,研究生 收生的限額有必要調整,確保本地生的學額。 學額的分配,應只從資源分配角度考慮。或許雙方存在文化甚至是族群的衝突,但這些不應是 學額分配的考慮因素。

Page  69  of  80    


Appendix 1: A paper on the background to the admission of non-local students A paper on the background to the admission of non-local students (A) In May 1993, the (then) Executive Council of the government approved recommendations of the (then) University and Polytechnic Grants Committee relating to the admissions of non-local students. It was agreed, among other things, that, on educational grounds, the Hong Kong institutions should be encouraged to enroll some non-local students as

(B)

(a)

non-local students enrich the student community as a whole by broadening the education experience and perspective of local students, providing opportunities to enhance their communication skills and facilitating cultural interactions; and

(b)

non-local students help the Hong Kong institutions maintain their status as international institutions and contribute towards the ability of Hong Kong graduates to function effectively as members of a community with an international outlook.

The HKU Senate at a meeting in November 1993 specifically agreed (a)

that the presence of non-local students would enrich the student community, and would also help the University strengthen its links with overseas institutions and maintain its image as an international university; and

(b)

that Hong Kong, a city much better off economically than many of its neighboring countries, should provide aid and support to the less prosperous countries, and that admission by the University of students from such countries and providing them with tertiary education was one of the means of doing so.

(C) HKU admitted its first students from the Mainland in 1999, and its first students from the rest of the world in the middle of the following decade. Both of these followed approval of appropriate conditions by relevant governments and government departments. Since then, applications from these two areas have increased enormously, with the Mainland UG applications asymptoting around 12,000 p.a. and overseas applications similarly growing year on year by 20% or more (currently around 5,000 p.a.). The recruitment of non-local students has led to the visibility and reputation of HKU increasing substantially around the world, but particularly in Asia. The actual enrolment of such students has also significantly contributed to the current rankings of HKU (in the QS Asia rankings, for example, HKU scores nearly 100% for its international students). (D) In 2012, UGC held dialogues, and exchanged views, with institutions on internationalization and engagement with Mainland China. In its “Report of the Strategic Dialogues on Internationalization and Engagement with Mainland China”, UGC summarized the views about the admission of non-local students, as follows “The admission of non-local students has multiple benefits. It could  

 

 

i  


Appendix 1: A paper on the background to the admission of non-local students

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)

enable Hong Kong institutions to take full advantage of our niche to become eminent international universities within China; benefit local students and the Hong Kong community at large; introduce different cultures and learning experiences to local students; bring in high-quality students; help institutions build reputation worldwide; support the use of English as a medium of instruction; help build links with overseas communities; and better the career prospects of local students.

Different learning styles of non-local students also serve as good stimulation to local students who are more accustomed to a more passive style of learning.” (E)

The following are existing policies on the admission of non-local students: Undergraduate Students (a)

Government policy (to be followed by all institutions) : Institutions can admit non-local students up to 20% of their total intake-quota, with 4% counted against the intake quota, and the remaining numbers not counted against the intake quota (and for which therefore there is no government funding).

(b)

University goals : Each year, our goal is to admit 50% of the non-local UG students from Mainland China, and 50% from other parts of the world, and to have as diverse a group of non-local students from as possible, whilst maintaining the highest academic standards.

Postgraduate Students There is no specific policy of the government or the University on the admission of nonlocal students to Tps or Rpg programmes. Admission is always on academic merits basis. There could be special admissions requirements, such as professional experience, but nationality is not a criterion for admission to any of the University postgraduate programmes. (F) The following is a somewhat extended summary of the advantages of internationalizing the student population at HKU, extracted from a paper presented to the HUCOM (Heads of Universities Committee) Standing Committee on Internationalization (HUCOMSCI). It breaks down the value of internationalizing the campus by different levels. Individual level (a) Knowledge per se (of different cultures, attitudes etc., and the self-evaluation of one’s own culture, attitudes, behaviours and belief systems that results from this).

 

 

  ii  


Appendix 1: A paper on the background to the admission of non-local students (b) (c)

(d)

The applied value of such an understanding, for example, with respect to helping to minimize conflict amongst different races, cultures, religions. Competing internationally for jobs: perceptions. Hong Kong graduates must understand the increasing competition worldwide (subcontinent and beyond). There are millions of graduates in, for example, economics every year. Many of these, with the increasing mobility of today’s world, could be applying for local jobs. Competing internationally for jobs: skills. They must, as a result, equip themselves with the skills required in this new globally competitive age, in order to be competitive with other graduates from around the globe. How do Hong Kong’s graduates fare in this globally competitive market? How will they be chosen by the top companies? The “internationalization” skills required by many are sometimes referred to as “global competencies”. Examples from the literature of such global competencies are: Global mind-set, meaning, the ability to manage: o Multicultural teams o Personal and organizational learning o Uncertainty and chaos o Organizational adaptability o Complexity o Competitiveness o Global vision o Cultural empathy o Interpersonal expertise o Global negotiating skills o Global ethics and integrity o Ability to help globalise a firm

(e) (f)

(g)

 

Similarly, Hong Kong graduates will increasingly be considering jobs elsewhere in the world, and must be suitably equipped for this, in terms of understanding that foreign culture. In summary, graduates today from Hong Kong, as from anywhere in the world, need an upbringing and education that will help them to personally develop a better understanding of business and other career opportunities. In today’s “flatearth”, where competition between many countries exists because of the internet and ease of world travel, graduates must understand other cultures and practices to successfully join this competition. Even graduates moving into multinational or, indeed, any organizations locally need an understanding of the business practices of different cultures, races, religions and nationalities. An internationalized education can be gained from spending time studying abroad, or by having an international experience in a Hong Kong institution (with international students, international activities etc.). Other than students, there may be significant staff benefits from the internationalization of education, occurring through benchmarking on issues of practice (e.g. developments in teaching, laboratory equipment, ICT), through

 

  iii  


Appendix 1: A paper on the background to the admission of non-local students more cultural understanding stemming from sabbaticals and joint research with overseas institutions, which can flow into teaching. Institutional level (a) Competition is now global not local. This is true of all universities, not just those emphasizing research. Top students, for example, can choose between a Hong Kong university and a leading American, Australian or British university. This is the competition now. Students favouring a liberal arts education have alternatives abroad. Students going into an associate degree programme have many top-up degree routes with overseas universities. This competition can be seen to help drive innovation and development. (b) International recruitment increases the quality of students by drawing from a wider body. (c) For some universities, there may be increased revenue from international recruitment (especially the Australian and British universities). (d) Branding – universities are ranked, to a significant extent, by how well they are known internationally. Hong Kong universities need linkages to universities abroad (teaching and learning programmes, research, projects). (e) The rankings that do not depend entirely on research statistics use the number of non-local students as a parameter in compiling their rankings of universities. (f) Benchmarking – International collaboration and linkages allow Hong Kong universities to benchmark themselves against other leading universities around the world, which itself is a form of quality assurance. (g) Sharing – the links also allow local institutions to share and follow the good practices of the overseas institutions, leading to quality improvement, as all as to showcase our own good practices for others to consider. (h) Research collaboration – local collaboration in Hong Kong does not allow the depth of breadth of research to develop, because of our size. It is critical to be able to engage with leading researchers around the world. This is true, of course, even in well developed research economies. It is helped by student mobility across universities. (i) Closely matched institutions can gain considerable additional advantages through closer strategic alliances, including those of networks or consortia. Some have argued that the rationale for strategic alliances have moved from cultural reasons to economic and political purposes. National level (a) Human resources and human capital. For a community or country, internationalization has, depending on the circumstances: o Economic benefits in the case of revenue from tuition fees, and o Economic benefits that accrue to a country from attracting top talent to the country. A recent review of this area can be found in the 2007 OECD publication, Cross-Border Tertiary Education: A Way towards Capacity Development, in particular, the chapter on GATS by Geloso-Grosso. (b) International trade and positioning of Hong Kong. Hong Kong needs its future workforce to have had an international education in order to be competitive, for the reasons stated in the above section.

 

 

  iv  


Appendix 1: A paper on the background to the admission of non-local students (c)

Build capacity in other countries. While Hong Kong has traditionally been seen as somewhat independent of the ASEAN and other countries around it, it could be argued that it should in future be seen as a leader in this part of Asia. Just as many developed countries help developing countries in the region through development aid and educational aid, Hong Kong should be at least matching their provision, given the proximity of its neighbours other than Mainland China. (d) Increased competition brings a requirement for local universities and the local education system to be able to benchmark themselves favourably alongside the overseas competitors. Local benchmarking, while also necessary, is no longer sufficient. Thus, internationalization has a quality enhancement and innovation function, both in terms of each of the individual universities in that country and in terms of the educational system (e.g. government structures and funding committees) in that country. Global level (a) The issue of access (i.e. equal access for all, regardless of socioeconomic background) is assuming greater importance within countries. However, more far-sighted educationalists have also considered this across countries, where per capita GDPs vary enormously and access to quality educational provision varies similarly. One answer to this has been to set up online institutions (e.g. U21Global), but another is to leverage off the internationalization of education (such as students exchanges, community projects with developing countries). (b) Equity – or equality of opportunity – through education could be regarded as a basic principle of a developed world based on meritocracy. The more international the education, the greater is this equality. (c) Many of the issues addressed above at the individual, institution, or national level are also relevant in sum at the global level.

 

 

  v  


Appendix 2: Data from the University on admission of full-time undergraduate programme    

 

 

  vi  


Appendix 2: Data from the University on admission of full-time undergraduate programme    

 

 

  vii  


8  


[Annual Debate 2013] Written Opinion by Council Members