Prof Poon, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to thank the Organising Committee for holding this conference and inviting me to attend. It is a pleasure to see so many colleagues from different education sectors, as well as from different higher education institutions in Hong Kong and the mainland, coming together to share their experiences in teaching and learning in higher education.

As you know, after a period of rapid expansion in the past decade, higher education in Hong Kong is now in a period of consolidation. The emphasis in the development of higher education has rightly shifted from achieving quantitative growth targets to maintaining and improving quality. The University Grants Committee, as the Government's principal advisor on the development and funding of higher education, takes the maintenance of academic standards in our institutions, including the quality of teaching and learning, as a major focus of attention.

The UGC has in recent years launched a number of quality assurance initiatives to assure the quality of higher education in our funded institutions. These include the Teaching and Learning Quality Process Reviews (TLQPRs) and the provision of additional funding to encourage a range of activities in institutions that contribute to improvements in teaching and learning. I would like to say a bit about each of these initiatives.

Teaching and Learning Quality Process Reviews

As colleagues from the UGC-funded institutions well know, we undertook a series of Teaching and Learning Quality Process Reviews (TLQPRs) during 1996-97. Rather than assessing the quality of the institutions' teaching and learning activities per se, the UGC chose to assess, in a collegial and supportive way through a panel of academic peers and experts, the effectiveness of the various mechanisms existing in the institutions for maintaining and improving teaching and learning quality. The objectives of the TLQPRs were to focus attention on teaching and learning as the primary mission of the UGC-funded institutions, to assist institutions in their efforts to improve teaching and learning quality, and to enable the UGC and the institutions to discharge their obligation to be accountable for quality.

The first round of TLQPRs was completed in April 1997, and the resultant reports, together with the initial responses of the institutions concerned on the identified areas for improvement, have all been published. The UGC has now, some two years after the first TLQPRs were undertaken, received progress reports from all of the institutions on the measures taken by them to address the areas for improvement identified in their TLQPR reports. In response, the UGC has provided or will be providing feedback to the institutions.

Teaching Development Grants and Language Enhancement Grants

Prior to the inauguration of the TLQPRs, the UGC had also initiated three other programmes aimed at encouraging quality and new approaches to teaching and learning in our institutions. These programmes, which are still continuing today, provide:

• Teaching Development Grants to promote and encourage innovative approaches to teaching and learning;

• Central Allocation Vote project grants, some of which are focused on encouraging collaboration in teaching and learning improvement; and

• Language Enhancement Grants as supplements to institutions' own funds to support language enhancement courses or programmes for their students.

In all, during the 1995-98 triennium, we have allocated some $260 million in grants under these various programmes. I am delighted to see some of the products of these projects on display here today.

The UGC will soon be considering the method of allocation for the bulk of the funding for Teaching Development Grants in the current triennium to decide whether we should allocate the $115 million available competitively or on an institutional basis.

I am sure that this is an issue on which representatives of institutions sitting here will have strong views. Indeed the UGC itself has had regular and prolonged debates about the merits of both approaches. The philosophy behind the institutional allocation methodology is that the institutions will have centrally administered resources to finance not only institutional initiatives, but also individual teaching staff's innovative ways to enhance teaching quality. On the other hand, competitively awarded project grants may bring about some healthy competition and even collaboration to make the best bid. One can never win in this area!! There are dangers in unhealthy competition leading to waste of resources and yet forced collaborations, or 'shotgun marriages', are normally not successful either. The UGC would welcome suggestions from participants at this Conference on how best such resources could be allocated in the most cost effective and productive way.

In providing additional grants for individual projects and initiatives in teaching and learning, however they are allocated, the UGC hopes to send a strong signal to the institutions regarding the importance of responding adequately to the community's high expectations of quality performance on the part of the higher education sector in this area.

Sharing of Experiences

Although the first round of TLQPRs has just been completed and we have yet to review the effectiveness of the TLQPR process itself (see below), I am glad to say we are already seeing some positive outcome from this exercise.

To embody the spirit of cooperation and collaboration with the institutions in the planning and design of TLQPRs, a Consultative Committee comprising representatives from the then seven UGC-funded institutions was set up to act as a focal point for the exchange of views with the UGC regarding the review. I am pleased to see that the Consultative Committee has continued to provide a forum for the sharing of information about teaching and learning, and to disseminate good practice. As evidence of this, the Consultative Committee organized a TLQPR seminar in April last year to provide an opportunity for institutions and the TLQPR Panel to share experiences and examples of best practices, and for the UGC and the Panel to obtain feedback on the TLQPR process from institutions. I understand the seminar was well-attended by representatives from the institutions and other higher education bodies, with a wide range of constructive views expressed on the TLQPRs. We would not be here today without the further efforts of the Consultative Committee in organizing this conference.

The Conference

I know that this conference is targeted at all teachers in the higher education institutions of Hong Kong, and aims to showcase and celebrate best practice in teaching; to provide a forum for discussing the outcomes of successful Learning and Teaching Development projects - including those funded by the UGC Teaching Development Grants; to recognise the efforts of teachers who have been energetic and proactive in developing teaching and learning; and to stimulate the further development of quality teaching and learning. There will be invited and refereed presentations from the higher education sector of Hong Kong, as well as symposiums on a variety of topics, all centred at teaching and learning. I understand that the Conference Organising Committee has also invited renowned scholars from universities and educational institutes of mainland China to this Conference, and Dr John Hinchcliff from the Auckland Institute of Technology will be invited to deliver a keynote address to all participants.

I applaud the Organizing Committee for having the vision to choose such an apt theme for this conference, and picking the right time to do so. Indeed our institutions have many good practices in teaching and learning which should rightly be showcased to both our local and overseas colleagues. By bringing together peers locally and overseas, we also demonstrate that teaching and learning quality processes require a significant degree of interaction among academic staff, and that good teaching does not only stem from individual performance. The efforts put into the planning and organising of this conference, and the production of an impressive series of workshops, presentations and displays for teachers will, I am sure, all help to focus attention on, and bring about improvements in, the quality of teaching and learning in our institutions.

Way Ahead

The UGC has recently decided, following a recommendation of the TLQPR Consultative Committee and the institutions, that an independent review of the TLQPR process itself should be undertaken to assess whether the TLQPRs have achieved their intended objectives. To this end, the UGC has recently appointed a team headed by the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies of the University of Twente in the Netherlands to conduct such a review.

The review will also, incidentally, take a general look at the effectiveness of the initiatives supported by way of Teaching Development Grants and Central Allocation Vote project grants. The consultancy team have just started work, and we expect the review to be completed by the middle of 1999, with findings to be published around August 1999. In carrying out the review, the consultants will meet with key persons from the institutions as well as the TLQPR Consultative Committee to hear their views on the TLQPRs.

Going forward, the UGC will continue to work closely with our funded institutions in the further development of mechanisms and processes to assure the quality of teaching and learning and to ensure that a quality education is delivered by the higher education sector in Hong Kong. I am certain that these ideals are shared by all who are present today.

Lastly, I would like to thank the Conference Organising Committee once again for arranging this conference, and wish all of you many fruitful discussions in the sessions to come.

Thank you.