***********************************
Following is a question by the Hon Ip Kin-yuen and a reply by the Secretary for Education, Mr Eddie Ng Hak-kim, in the Legislative Council today (October 17):
Question:
According to Government information, the number of Secondary One (S1) students in the 2013-2014 school year will drop drastically by more than 5 000. Quite a number of school principals and teachers have told me that they are extremely worried about under-enrolment in secondary schools in the coming few years, and in the face of the imminent threats of reduction in classes and closure of schools, the development of secondary schools will suffer a catastrophic impact if the authorities do not implement comprehensive stabilisation measures. In fact, soon after the incumbent government officials assumed offices, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union met with the Secretary for Education to raise this issue and urge the Government to devise long-term measures to stabilise the development of secondary schools in response to one of the education objectives proposed by the Chief Executive ("CE") when he ran in the CE election, namely "to maintain stability of the education system and policies as well as allowing breathing space for the stakeholders". In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it will immediately commence planning to reduce the number of students per class at S1 level starting from the 2013-2014 school year, so as to progressively implement small class teaching (SCT) with 25 students per class in all secondary schools in Hong Kong, so as to dovetail with SCT in primary schools; and whether it will immediately commence planning to improve the teacher-to-class ratio, increase the number of permanent teaching posts within the approved teaching establishment, and to provide suitable staffing and support with an aim to improving teaching quality;
(b) given CE's pledge in his manifesto that "to ease the interim problem of under-recruitment at certain schools, we will provide more flexibility to schools to determine for themselves the class size at S1 level Schools that fail to recruit enough students will be permitted to operate small classes (25 students or below) catering for students who require additional attention or extra care", and that the number of S1 students will drop drastically in the 2013-2014 school year, of the progress in and the timetable for honouring such pledge by the authorities; and
(c) whether the Education Bureau will consider not requiring schools located in districts with serious under-enrolment to cease operation if they can operate two S1 classes, and freezing the teaching establishment of such schools to maintain the manpower for offering a sufficient number of subjects for students to choose under the New Senior Secondary curriculum?
Reply:
President,
Before replying to the three questions raised by Hon Ip Kin-yuen, I wish to give an overview on the issue of "the drop in S1 student population". As projected, there will be a drop in the number of school-age S1 students in the coming few years, amounting to a total of about 11 000 students. However, I have to emphasise that it is merely a transitional situation, since the number of S1 students will rebound steadily and annually in the 2017/18 school year and thereafter, back to and exceed the level of this school year. Therefore, when considering the options to tackle the situation, what we need are timely and proportionate transitional relief measures rather than a long-term structural change. This is to avoid shaking the education system again and affecting its long-term stability when the number of students rebounds.
Recently, an analysis suggested that with a drop of 5 400 S1 students in the next school year, there would be a reduction of 159 classes or 80 schools. This is but a result of simple division and is not necessarily equal to the actual impact on schools. As a matter of fact, we have gained experience in dealing with the issue of declining S1 student population. From the 2006/07 to the current school year, the number of S1 students has been reduced by a total of about 22 000 students. Notwithstanding this, under the various relief measures implemented by the Education Bureau (EDB) with the concerted efforts of various stakeholders, school sponsoring bodies and schools, up till now, there are only eight secondary schools, closed or to be closed upon their own decision for various reasons.
We believe that the education sector knows well that many of the relief measures taken - from formulation, planning to implementation - are the outcome of close collaboration and co-operation between the EDB and the sector. We will continue to work closely with the sector to tackle the issue of declining S1 student population.
I will now reply the three questions one by one:
(a) Regarding the effectiveness of implementing small class teaching (SCT) in secondary schools, conclusion is yet to be drawn from international studies. We need to learn from the experience of SCT in primary schools and take into careful consideration the existing conditions of secondary schools, teaching and learning environment as well as provision of support to secondary schools, overseas experience and resource allocation etc.. We should not merely take the implementation of SCT as a means of solving the problem of temporary student population decline.
Besides, we have all along been examining the manpower of teachers in secondary schools, and based on the actual need and priority in resource utilisation, consider the necessity of increasing teaching posts or providing other support measures. Apart from calculating the establishment of regular teachers according to the number of classes and teacher-to-class (T/C) ratios, we also provide schools with a number of additional teachers or cash grants for implementing various education initiatives. With the implementation of a number of measures, the student-to-teacher ratio in public sector secondary schools has improved progressively from 18:1 in the 2005/06 school year to 15.3:1 in the 2011/12 school year, similar to the figures of other advanced regions in Asia, e.g. 16.1:1 in Singapore, 18.2:1 in South Korea and 13.2:1 in Japan.
(b) As I have already said, to address the issue of the declining S1 student population, the EDB has deployed substantial resources since the 2006/07 school year and implemented a series of relief measures to stabilise the teaching force and avoid affecting the quality of education.
Some of the more significant relief measures include:
* Reducing the number of students allocated to each S1 class from 38 in the 2006/07 school year to the prevailing 34;
* Launching the Voluntary Optimisation of Class Structure Scheme and its enhanced measures in 2010; and
* From the 2012/13 school year onwards, the criteria for approving S1 classes have been further relaxed. The basis for calculating the number of approved S1 classes has been adjusted downwards from 30 to 25 students per class. Schools can operate three classes by admitting 51 S1 students, with an average class size of 17 students.
Broadly speaking, the relief measures implemented by the EDB over the years after balancing various considerations are effective. We are also pleased to see that no secondary school has to apply for the development option with the EDB due to failure in operating three S1 classes in this school year.
In response to the further decline in S1 student population in the coming few years, the education sector has proposed to us many options, e.g. reducing the number of students allocated to each S1 class, which involves changes to the school places allocation system and commitment of considerable financial resources. We are assessing its feasibility and effect on different stakeholders, including parents' choice of their desired schools. We are open-minded to this option and will also actively explore all the feasible and effective relief measures.
(c) The New Senior Secondary Academic Structure stresses the importance of providing students with a broad, balanced and diversified senior secondary curriculum. In general, we are of the view that a secondary school should have at least 18 classes (i.e. three classes for each level), otherwise it can hardly have sufficient resources to provide a broad and diversified curriculum. Following the recent completion of the first three-year-cycle under the New Academic Structure, we learned that apart from those elective subjects taught by teachers, schools may also provide students with a broad and balanced senior secondary curriculum through different means, including arranging for students to select diversified Applied Learning subjects according to their interests, establishing district school network programmes of elective subjects and so on.
As the diversified development mentioned above matures over the past few years, I, therefore, decided that starting from the next school year, we would accept those schools, with two approved classes for each level, to offer diversified elective subjects through flexible deployment of resources, different means and strategies to provide students with a broad, balanced and sustainable senior secondary curriculum. Such schools do not need to apply for any school development option. For those schools only able to operate one S1 class, they can apply for school development option. These schools can continue their operation if they will show evidences on the provision of "a broad, balanced and sustainable senior secondary curriculum". Meanwhile, I decided that all schools operating two S1 classes or less can still participate in the Secondary Schools Places Allocation System with a cap of three S1 classes. This is to allay any concerns schools may have about the labelling effect and to tide them over until the S1 student population rebounds gradually in a few years' time.
The above new measures will be implemented together with the existing measures. At the same time, we will actively explore to extend the Early Retirement Scheme for Aided Secondary School Teachers. When the details have been worked out, we will submit the proposal to the Legislative Council Panel on Education.
Ends/Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Issued at HKT 16:59
NNNN
