LCQ14: Regulation of tertiary institutions and standards of their programmes
************************************************************

     Following is a question by Dr Hon Lam Tai-fai and a written reply by the Secretary for Education, Mr Eddie Ng Hak-kim, in the Legislative Council today (December 2):

Question:

     Earlier on, some press reports alleged that the Associate Vice-President and Comptroller of Lingnan University (LU) had plagiarised concerning his doctoral thesis and he subsequently resigned from the position. Later on, there were also press reports that Lifelong College, the Principal of which was a member of LU's Council, had allegedly assisted its students in making forged documents to fast-track those students' being awarded bachelor's and higher degrees by overseas institutions (non-local degrees); and some staff members of LU, the Hong Kong Shue Yan University, the City University of Hong Kong (CityU), the School of Continuing and Professional Education under CityU, the Hong Kong Community College of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and the School of Continuing and Professional Studies of The Chinese University of Hong Kong, as well as quite a number of celebrities from the political and commercial sectors, had enrolled in the non-local programmes (NLPs) jointly offered by the overseas universities concerned and Lifelong College. The Hong Kong Management Association (HKMA) and the Spare Time Study Centre of the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (HKFTU) have also co-organised such programmes. On the other hand, the Hong Kong Council for Accreditation of Academic and Vocational Qualifications (HKCAAVQ) has indicated that all of the 13 NLPs currently provided by Lifelong College have been allowed to register with the Non-local Courses Registry (NCR) of the Education Bureau (EDB), but the College has not yet applied to HKCAAVQ for accreditation of these programmes. EDB has indicated that it has requested Lifelong College to provide information such as the student registers of its programmes, records of transfers/exemptions of credits, attendance records of classes/tutorial classes, and if any suspected violations of regulations are identified, the Bureau will investigate and handle the cases, as well as refer them to law enforcement agencies for follow-up where necessary. Regarding the regulation of tertiary institutions and the standards of their programmes, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) how the authorities may, under the existing legislation, hold local education institutions (e.g. those institutions which have assisted their students in making forged documents to fast-track those students' being awarded non-local degrees) which have contravened regulations responsible and penalise them;

(2) whether it knows how the institutions funded by the University Grants Committee (UGC) (UGC-funded institutions) penalise those teaching staff members who have tendered false information on their academic qualifications or have obtained their academic qualifications through improper means;

(3) given that LU is one of the UGC-funded institutions, how the authorities will follow up the aforesaid incidents and hold it responsible;

(4) whether the authorities will step up the monitoring of LU; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(5) whether it has assessed if the aforesaid incidents will impact on the image, ranking and student intake of LU, as well as the funding provided to it by UGC; if it has assessed and the outcome is in the affirmative, of the details; if the assessment outcome is in the negative, the reasons for that;

(6) whether the authorities and the various UGC-funded institutions thoroughly checked the background of the members of the supreme governing bodies (generally known as "the Council") of these institutions (including the Council member of LU involved in the aforesaid incident) in the past five years; if they did, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(7) whether it knows if the various UGC-funded institutions require their Council members (including the Council member of LU involved in the aforesaid incident) to declare interests when handling matters relating to the appointment of teaching staff; if they do, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(8) whether it will review if there is any inadequacy or loophole in the existing system for the appointment/election of the Council members of the various UGC-funded institutions; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(9) whether it has looked into the reasons why the 13 NLPs of Lifelong College have been allowed to register with NCR, but the College has not applied to HKCAAVQ for accreditation of such programmes; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(10) of the total number of programmes offered by Lifelong College which have been allowed to register with NCR since the establishment of the College;

(11) whether it knows the total number of programmes for which Lifelong College has applied to HKCAAVQ for accreditation since the establishment of the College; among such programmes, of the respective numbers of those which have been accredited and acquired a recognised status equal to that of accredited local programmes, as well as those which have failed to be accredited;

(12) whether EDB will proactively deploy staff to conduct a comprehensive investigation in the office of Lifelong College, so as to expedite the completion of the investigation; if EDB will, when EDB will do so;

(13) whether it has compiled statistics on the current number of education or commercial institutions in Hong Kong that are similar to Lifelong College and offer NLPs; if it has, of the details (including the background of the operating institutions and the responsible persons) of such programmes; if not, the reasons for that;

(14) whether it has examined how the standards of Lifelong College's NLPs co-organised by HKMA and HKFTU compare to those of accredited local programmes; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(15) whether it has compiled statistics on the current number of NLPs in the territory which are allowed to register with NCR but have not been accredited by HKCAAVQ; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(16) whether the authorities have regularly examined if the standards of the local programmes and NLPs offered by private universities, education or commercial institutions are comparable to those of accredited local programmes; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(17) regarding the teaching staff members of UGC-funded institutions who have been awarded non-local degrees after completing NLPs, whether it has followed up if these people have obtained their academic qualifications through improper means; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(18) whether it knows if HKCAAVQ will review the existing accreditation criteria for NLPs in the light of the aforesaid incidents; if HKCAAVQ will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(19) whether it will review the existing registration procedures for NLPs; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(20) whether it will review the Non-Local Higher and Professional Education (Regulation) Ordinance (Cap. 493), with a view to imposing more stringent regulation on NLPs and the relevant institutions; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(21) whether it has compiled statistics on the current number of civil servants and employees of subvented organisations who have been awarded non-local degrees after completing the NLPs offered by Lifelong College; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(22) whether it has assessed if the aforesaid incidents have led to a loss of confidence by the public in the capability and the standard of EDB and relevant organisations in monitoring NLPs; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(23) whether it has assessed if the aforesaid incidents will undermine the confidence of mainland and overseas students in furthering their studies in Hong Kong and dampen their incentive to do so; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

(1) Under the existing Non-local Higher and Professional Education (Regulation) Ordinance (the Ordinance), there is a mechanism for handling cases involving course operators who contravene the requirements of the Ordinance. For example, according to section 33(1) of the Ordinance, any person who in purported compliance with the provisions of the Ordinance or a requirement under the Ordinance makes any statement or representation of facts which is false in a material particular and which -
(a) he knows to be false in such particular; or
(b) he has no reasonable ground to believe to be true in such particular,
commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine at level 4 (currently HK$25,000) and to imprisonment for 2 years.

     Suspected cases of any contravention of the requirements of the Ordinance, if found, will be handled by the Education Bureau (EDB) in accordance with the established procedures. If necessary, such cases will be referred to the law enforcement agencies for follow-up action.

(2) to (5) and (17) All institutions funded by the University Grants Committee (UGC) are independent and autonomous bodies established pursuant to their own ordinances. They all enjoy autonomy in handling staff matters. To our understanding, all UGC-funded institutions have put in place mechanisms for assessing the academic qualifications of job applicants to ensure that they meet the entry requirements for appointment. As for serving staff members, there are also independent mechanisms and procedures in all UGC-funded institutions for handling cases involving plagiarism and other misconduct. Where a case is found substantiated, the institution will determine the appropriate disciplinary action in the light of the severity of the case.

(6) to (8) The Government makes appointments according to an established mechanism, including making reference to information drawn from the Central Personality Index maintained by the Home Affairs Bureau to identify suitable candidates. The database contains the membership records of non-official members serving on advisory and statutory bodies as well as the personal data of interested individuals. Besides, there are provisions under the ordinances of respective institutions that a certain number of Council members of individual institutions shall be nominated by designated organisations before being appointed by the Government or the Chancellor. These designated nominating bodies have the responsibility to nominate suitable persons for appointment by the Government or the Chancellor.

     The Council serves as the supreme governing body of a UGC-funded institution. All Council members are expected to perform their duties under the law and act in the best long-term interests of the institution. As far as we understand, the Councils of UGC-funded institutions have put in place their own systems for declaration of interests as well as related mechanisms and procedures to handle cases with actual or potential conflict of interests.

(9) to (11) Since the Ordinance came into effect, 15 non-local courses offered by the Lifelong College have been successfully registered, with 13 of which still in operation and the registration of the remaining 2 cancelled in 2013 upon request by the Lifelong College.

     According to the information available, the Lifelong College has never applied to the Hong Kong Council for Accreditation of Academic and Vocational Qualifications (HKCAAVQ) for accreditation of the courses it offers. Under the existing Ordinance, operators who intend to have their non-local courses registered are not required to obtain recognition from relevant local academic or professional organisations for the academic or professional qualifications of the courses concerned, or to apply to the HKCAAVQ for programme accreditation. Seeking programme accreditation is entirely voluntary, and it is up to individual operators to decide whether to do so or not.

(12) To follow up on the incident, the EDB has asked the Lifelong College for information pursuant to the Ordinance. Actions taken include issuing a letter to the Lifelong College and sending inspection officers to the College for inspection. The EDB is studying the relevant materials. Suspected contraventions of the requirements of the Ordinance, if found, will be handled by the EDB in accordance with the established procedures. If necessary, such cases will be referred to the law enforcement agencies for follow-up action.

(13) to (16) As at the end of October 2015, there are 108 operators of registered courses, including 69 registered companies, 15 registered schools, 9 non-local institutions, 6 locally-accredited self-financing post-secondary institutions, 4 professional bodies, 2 statutory organisations and 3 operators under other categories. Details of the registered courses and operators are available on the EDB's website.

     The Government has, under the Accreditation of Academic and Vocational Qualifications Ordinance (AAVQ Ordinance), established the Qualifications Register (QR), which sets out both local and non-local qualifications recognised under the Qualification Framework (QF). All qualifications listed on the QR are quality-assured and recognised under the QF.

     Registration/exemption from registration of a non-local course under the Ordinance does not mean that the course can be placed on the QR automatically or is conferred comparability to a local degree programme. As mentioned above, under the existing Ordinance, operators who intend to have their non-local courses registered are not required to obtain recognition from relevant local academic or professional organisations for the academic or professional qualifications of the courses concerned, or to apply to the HKCAAVQ for programme accreditation. It is up to individual employers to decide whether such qualifications should be accepted for employment purpose.

     Operators of non-local courses can seek accreditation by the HKCAAVQ pursuant to the AAVQ Ordinance. A non-local course accredited by the HKCAAVQ shall have a recognised status equivalent to locally-accredited programmes and can be placed on the QR. As at the end of October 2015, of the 1 198 registered and exempted non-local courses, 143 have been accredited by the HKCAAVQ and placed on the QR.

(18) to (20) The Ordinance has provided for a clear monitoring mechanism, under which the HKCAAVQ provides professional advice to ensure that the standard of a course offered locally is maintained at a level comparable to the one leading to the same award conducted by the institution in its home country. Besides, the operator is required to submit an annual return to ensure that compliance of the course with the requirements of the Ordinance is maintained. Furthermore, the Ordinance provides that the EDB may request information from course operators and appoint inspection officers to conduct inspection.

     Regarding monitoring, in addition to verifying the information supplied by course operators, the EDB keeps in view overseas reports concerning non-local institutions, and will take investigation and follow-up action upon receipt of public complaints about such courses.
Bearing in mind the public's concern about the quality and operation of non-local courses, we will review the existing mode of monitoring to see if there is room for improvement. We will also maintain communication with the HKCAAQ to explore whether the existing processes for approval of registration of non-local courses and submission of annual returns can be enhanced.

(21) The Government has not collected statistical information regarding the non-local qualifications (including the non-local institutions awarding those qualifications) held by individual civil servants or staff of subvented organisations.

(22) to (23) The EDB is aware of public concerns and believes that this is an isolated case. The well-established reputation of Hong Kong in the academic sector will not be affected by individual incidents. In fact, the number of non-local students pursuing studies in UGC-funded institutions in Hong Kong has been on the increase over the past years. In the 2014/15 academic year, about 15 000 non-local students were admitted to UGC-funded institutions, nearly doubling the figure for the 2007/08 academic year. We believe that the above incident will not undermine the confidence of non-local students in furthering their studies in Hong Kong or dampen their incentive to do so.

Ends/Wednesday, December 2, 2015
Issued at HKT 15:19

NNNN