'We don't look just at the ranking in examinations, because the most important thing is how much effort you have put into it. If you have done your best, you are not a failure.'
This is the advice Deputy Judge Ada Yim Shun-yee gave to two underachieving Queen's College students who admitted conspiring to rob a Chinese herbalist. The judge was not alone in offering words of encouragement to those who perform badly in public examinations. Every year, when the results come out, elites and celebrities alike tell students not to give up.
It's sound advice, but many students struggling in Hong Kong's exam-driven education system - especially the 20,000 who scored zero points in this year's HKCEE - may find little comfort.
When this year's results were announced, almost all the media focused on the success of the record 25 straight-A students. But what about those who failed and scored zero points? These so-called underachievers this year accounted for 17 per cent of all students who took the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination, representing a jump of 12 per cent - or 2,500 students - over last year.
Are the zero-point scorers less intelligent? Are they just too lazy to study, so that failing in every subject is simply what they deserve? Is educating them a complete waste of time and money?
Without a more thorough and scientific way to analyse student profiles and results, it is hard to form conclusions. Most likely, it is a combination of these factors that led to such a high number of zero-point scorers. Yet, some students may just be unable to excel under the current, mainstream mode of teaching.
Lazy students choose their own path and should be responsible for their choices; there is a limit to how much the system can do for them. But that does not mean they are all useless. Some excel in other ways - outside the classroom.