|
|
|
|
|
The society’s demand for talents of different professions changes with time, and with the ups and downs of the economic cycle. It is important that our higher education institutions move with the times in offering our younger generation an appropriate teaching and learning environment, and a curriculum that is fit for purpose both in substance and in coverage, such that our public funding is used effectively to support Hong Kong’s innovation and economic development. To this end, the University Grants Committee (UGC) carries out an “Academic Development Proposals” exercise with its eight funded institutions generally once every three years, with a view to formulating recommendations to the Government on the allocation of student places and recurrent funding of various disciplines and levels of study among institutions in the next triennium. Before each planning cycle starts, the UGC will review the evaluation criteria, and the matters that they should cover in their Academic Development Proposals (ADPs), for the next exercise in consultation with the institutions. The objective of such review is to make the fullest out of this key exercise to encourage institutions further to enhance their international competitiveness and pursue excellence. The ADP exercise for the 2012 – 2015 triennium is now underway. In contrast to the past practice of line-by-line scrutiny of individual programmes, the UGC decided to focus on strategic and macro issues of the institutions in the present exercise. “Quality of taught programmes” and development in line with institutions’ agreed role will be a pervasive theme through our evaluation process. We also decided to continue implementing the “Competitive Allocation” mechanism which was introduced in the last planning cycle, to encourage institutions strategically to think through the priorities of their whole academic pursuits, and adjust their internal allocation of student places across various, in the light of their role and current needs. (The UGC Chairman discussed the details of this mechanism in her article of 18 November 2010 on this Blog.) Taking the chance of this exercise, the UGC also hopes to follow-up on institutions’ progress in preparing and coordinating for the implementation of the “3+3+4” new academic structure. In mid-February, institutions submitted to the UGC their ADPs setting out their efforts and achievements on a range of aspects such as strategy, teaching and learning, advanced scholarship and community engagement in the past three years, as well as their relevant plans for the next. The UGC has established a dedicated group, comprising overseas academics and local UGC Members who are not affiliated to any of the eight funded institutions, to take forward the actual evaluation of the ADPs. The Group will carefully consider the proposals submitted by the institutions and give their views along four broad evaluation criteria. The Group has strong expertise and experience in academic accreditation, institutional administration and local education policies. Not only will it assess the merit of institutions’ cases and if they have critically reviewed their status quo, the Group will also determine if institutions have set forth appropriate quantitative or other performance indicators that are relevant and practicable, and on a par with international benchmarks. The ADP exercise is a consensus-building, interactive and transparent process. First, the UGC will convey to institutions the Government’s planning parameters such as their specific manpower requirements and the overall sector-wide limits on student numbers and recurrent grants for their reference. For instance, for the 2012-15 triennium, the number of UGC-funded first-year-first-degree places will be increased from 14 500 to 15 000, and the number of senior year places for articulation by sub-degree graduates even doubled to 8 000 in total. To support Government’s development of healthcare policies, the undergraduate places for training healthcare professionals will increase. Institutions will then draw up their ADPs having regard to such planning parameters and their own circumstances and internal consultation. The UGC will invite each institution to a face-to-dace discussion after receipt of the ADPs, to exchange views. During the months of evaluation process, institutions have ample opportunities to clarify and explain the content of their proposals, and the UGC will set out its reasoning of its eventual views to institutions on their ADPs. Therefore the UGC’s comments on institutions’ academic development are impartial and well-considered, and our past experience tells are accepted by the institutions. For the present exercise, we expect to inform the institutions of the evaluation result in the end of May. 2012-15 Academic Development Proposals Group |
