Introduction : Our Basic Position

　　1. It has always been firm belief that schools should aim for educational quality and excellence and that being public institutions. Schools should be accountable to the public. The subsidized secondary schools have consistently been striving to develop the potential of our students. With the limited and scarce resources allocated to basic education we take pride in being able to provide much value-added education and contribute to the success of Hong Kong by providing it with many successful leaders in various professions. Therefore,we find it utterly disappointing and humiliating to read that the Education Commission Report No. 7 begins with the following matter-of-fact statement (but without providing any empirical evidence) : “the Commission finds that there is a general lack of a quality culture in the present school system ".(Executive Summary, viii).
　　It is demoralizing to say the least that our past and present contribution to education has been summed up by this unfair and unproven overall assessment.

　　2. The nature of education, as different from any other enterprises, is characterized by its open-endedness which means that educational outcome is not necessarily linked to input by a simple causal relationship. There are many variables coming into Play in the process of education, in particular the intrinsic and human variables like student motivation, teacher personality, parental factor all of which have considerable effect on student performance. Education cannot and must not be equated with managing a business or factory where input and output are highly controllable, and outcome highly predictable. While Schools accept the responsibility for the achievement of quality education, it is of vital importance that schools are given the power to exercise their professional judgement to chose the best way to educate their students and to make continuous improvement.

　　We strongly disagree with the view that there is one particular framework or model for the building of quality school culture, and in particular, the view that the ‘ School Management Initiative’ is the only gateway to quality school education. While there has not yet been adequate or established evidence to show that SMI is the successful mode of school management (with its short history and small scale implementation in Hong Kong), the history of the development of school education in Hong Kong is a proven record that many renowned and quality schools do not operate in the SMI model but are able to provide excellence in education in their school-based and diverse ways. In order to encourage initiatives and to strive for excellence in school education, and to prevent mediocrity, flexibility and diversity but not rigidity and centralized controil are what we should be vigorously aiming for.

　　We refer to the specific recommendations in the Report and express our views as follows :the framework for the development and monitoring of quality school education

　　1. role and functions of Quality Development council

　　We propose that an independent Quality Development Council (QDC) be set up which comprises front-line practitioners such as principals and panel chairs, who have first-hand knowledge and practical working experience in school education. This QDC would report directly to and advise the Secretary of Education and Manpower on matters related to the implementation of the recommendations of the ECR 7.

　　The proposed terms of reference for the QDC are as follows :
　　　a) to advise on criteria for Quality Development Grant
　　　b) to advise on qualifying standard for Award for value-added performance
　　　c) to advise on the basic and minimum requirements for schools
　　　d) to advise and monitor the work of Quality Assurance Inspectors of the Education Department in carrying out whole school inspection
　　　e) to act as a panel of ombudsmen, on a need basis, on matters related to quality assurance inspection of schools

　　2. Quality assurance inspection by ED

　　We propose that Quality Assurance Inspection should perform the monitoring function and as well as the advisory and supportive functions in ensuring quality school education. The work of the ED(by the Quality Assurance Inspectors, QAI) in performing the above mentioned functions should include the followings :
　　　a) to develop criteria for vetting applications for Quality Development Grant
　　　b) to develop territory-wide quality indicators for external evaluation and comparison, and to use such indicators to give out value-added improvement awards
　　　c) to help schools to develop its own quality indicators for internal improvement and evaluation
　　　d) to carry out quality assurance inspection with the view to advise and support schools in its provision of quality school education, and to provide to the inspected school a written report on the profile of its strengths and weaknesses(Referring in particular to d ) which is a new approach to inspection that may result in possible measures especially on ‘under-performing’ schools, we strongly suggest that the following views of our council be seriously considered :
　　　i) Firstly we object strongly to the labelling of any school as “under-performing". Rather, as described in d) above of the work of the QAI . a school is better described in its strengths and weaknesses with areas needed improvement and action.
　　　ii) In HKSSSC‘s position paper on Quality School Education submitted earlier to the Education Commission in July 1996, we stressed that any evaluation of school education has to take the following five dimensions of school education into consideration : administration and management effectiveness : teacher and teaching effectiveness; student and learning effectiveness; optimization of physical resources, structure of educational system. Thus, any whole school inspection on the effectiveness and equality of education provided by schools has to consider all these areas in its assessment.
　　Furthermore, any assessment made need to take the various constraints of individual schools into consideration, e.g. physical environment, teacher quality, intake of students, parental factor While there are minimum and basic requirements for schools, deviations should be allowed for when considering the practical constraints in individual school environment or culture.
　　iii)Criteria and standard for inspection be made known to the public and that the views of HKSSSC, the largest official representative of the secondary schools sector be consulted and that the HKSSSC be represented in the QDC.
　　iv) On publication of the set of criteria and standard for inspection, sufficient time (grace period) must be allowed for schools to take any necessary action before this policy is actually implemented.
　　v) As to the inspection process, we suggest if necessary, to have a three round visit. First round is an informal visit to the school whereby whose strengths and weaknesses are identified and suggestions and support and additional resources are given to it to improve. An action plan and a time frame for improvement is worked out and agreed upon by both the school (the principal and its staff)and the QAI but no report is submitted to the School Management Committee (SMC) at this first round of visit. The QAI would closely monitor the school progress and if necessary, it would conduct the 2nd round visit whose findings and suggestions would then be submitted to the SMC. The third visit would be conducted if necessary, and the findings would also be reported to the SMC.
　　If the purpose of the inspection is to help school to improve, the best way is to work from bottom up by initiating the cooperation of the front-line workers (the principal and the staff). The top down model inviting the SMC at the first stage of inspection should be avoided. Furthermore if continuous improvement but not the labelling of failures is the ultimate goal of inspection, report on school findings should not be released to the public.

　　3. while schools are endeavoring to the building of quality culture, it is crucial that the ED is taking the lead in building its own quality culture by the same requirements., i.e. by being transparent, accountable, efficient, cost-effective, in order to tie in with the quality culture at the school level. Moreover, it is of paramount importance that the ED should act in the spirit of ECR 7 by allowing schools to develop their school-based (retaining the characteristics and culture of individual schools) and student-centered programmes and to exercise their professional judgment in deciding what is best for the school. The success in building quality school culture lies in the collaborative and supportive working relation, and the professional respect and mutual trust between the schools and the QAI/ED.

　　Preparing for quality school education

　　we strongly support the recommendation in Chapter eight 8.19 that if there is to be a quality culture in the school system, it is of paramount importance to provide well-planned, systematic, coordinated and comprehensive training programmes on financial and resources management for those involved in the implementation of the initiatives of the ECR 7.
But we would like to stress that equal training opportunities be provided for all principals and teachers (irrespective of the subjects taught), which we feel the existing training programmes are highly inadequate and unfair.

　　Incentives to encourage quality school education

　　1. We support the introduction of the ’Quality Development Grant‘ to fund worthwhile innovative projects and that such good practices be disseminated to the public.
　　2. Schools have never been driven to provide quality educationally any sort of cash award. But we support the giving out of award of other forms or kind as due recognition on the school’s value-added performance and its pursuit of excellence.
　　Instead cash allocated to providing incentives to encourage quality school education should all be used to fund the Quality Development Grant to promote more worthwhile projects. This would be a more effective and appropriate use of money to support the development of schools.
　　3. Referring to the criteria for the award/recognition of value-added performance we strongly feel that it should be given to schools only when both of the following conditions are met：
　　　a) a number of quality indicators be developed in student performance in the various domains of school education e.g. extra-curricular activities, moral / civic education, aesthetic development, personal growth , academic performance.
　　　b) a school be given the award when it is judged to have shown the best value-added performance in any two of the domains.
　　4. We object at the giving out of award for value-added performance to schools when only the quality indicator on academic achievement is available. We require two domains of performance to be assessed for this award to convey the message that school education should strive for a more balanced provision and emphasis on the different dimensions or aspects of schooling. And this would prevent the possibility that academic performance is the only area where all effort and recognition are placed.
Time frame for implementation of the initiatives of the ECR 7
　　1) As schools vary a lot in their culture and tradition, and differ in their starting point on their approach to quality school education, it is highly unrealistic to expect all schools to be ready to initiate the staff to implement the ideas of the CER 7 in 1998.
　　2) Quality assurance inspection should not be started until
　　　a) there are ‘quality’ or ‘qualified’

[返回上一页] [打 印]