Legco 'misled' on ethnic issue

Universities say there has been little or no discussion with the EMB over the acceptability of Chinese language GCSE for entry A senior education official has been accused of misleading the Legislative Council after it was revealed her reports to this week's meeting of the education panel appeared to exaggerate the extent of the government's effort to improve education opportunities for non-Chinese-speaking students. Deputy Secretary for Education and Manpower Bernadette Linn Hon-ho told Monday's panel meeting that the Education and Manpower Bureau was conducting a discussion with universities to gauge whether they would accept the GCSE Chinese exam as an entrance qualification for second-language students. 'We have contacted universities but their responses varied. Some would rather these students didn't study Chinese at all but learned other subjects,' Ms Linn said, but declined to give further details of the responses. 'We have been discussing this subject with the universities all along' she said. 'We want universities to be specific about what subjects and faculties would be able to accept this qualification.' However, admissions chiefs at a number of universities told Education Post they were unaware of any discussion with the EMB specifically about the suitability of GCSE Chinese. 'I only know about this from the newspapers,' said Annie Kung Hing-ha, assistant registrar of Lingnan University. 'We have not discussed this specific issue.' Ms Kung said the University Grants Committee had raised the issue of opportunities for non-Chinese-speaking students 'on and off', but only as a side issue at meetings on other subjects. So Kwok-sang, registrar of Hong Kong Institute of Education, said that although there had been talk about accepting more non-Chinese-speaking students, the finer details had not been discussed. 'The GCSE was not mentioned specifically,' Dr So said. 'I think over a year ago we were asked if our Chinese language requirements could be substituted for another language.' Ada Chan Mak Wai-chan, senior assistant academic secretary for Hong Kong Polytechnic University, said the university 'would be open' to accepting the GCSE as an entry requirement, but still had some reservations. 'We have not yet considered all the consequences of our decision,' she said. Although GCSE Chinese had been raised at meetings with the UGC about admissions under '3+3+4', she said it had not been clear that the request had come from the EMB. 'I thought the UGC was responding to queries from a parent,' she said. Robert Lam But, academic registrar at Baptist University, said the university looked 'very sympathetically' at the needs of non-Chinese-speaking applicants, but he was unaware of a discussion about the acceptability of the GCSE. 'As far as I am aware, there is no such dialogue,' Dr Lam said. Legislators reacted angrily to the news, calling for an investigation into the situation and clarification from the EMB. Education legislator and president of the Professional Teachers' Union Cheung Man-kwong said he was 'shocked that a government official's words could be so far from the reality'. 'We have to be able to trust what government officials tell us in Legco. In the past I would never have believed that EMB officials would present untruths to legislators,' Mr Cheung said. 'If the universities have not received anything directly from the EMB, then this is not what Ms Linn told the panel.' Deputy chairman of the education panel Yeung Sum said he was disappointed that the EMB had not yet contacted universities to encourage them to accept the GCSE Chinese qualification. 'I am very concerned about this. Just having the exam is far from enough,' Dr Yeung said. 'The qualification has to be recognised academically and endorsed as a valid entry requirement.' Lee Cheuk-yan, legislator for New Territories West, said he would demand an explanation at the next meeting of the panel. 'When Ms Linn said there was a discussion, I thought she meant they were talking directly to each other.' Social welfare legislator Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung said he was 'not at all surprised' the EMB had not been giving legislators the whole truth. 'I think they are just trying to make some excuses to make it look like they are doing something about this issue,' Dr Cheung said. 'I don't think they are really taking this seriously.' Ms Linn was not available to comment, but an EMB spokesman said the bureau had 'made initial contacts with the universities over the issue through UGC'. 'There is no question of our initiation to put up the issue to universities for deliberation. We have indeed approached the universities for their initial feedback and have done so through the UGC, which is our established point of contact with the universities on a lot of general issues,' he said. 'The EMB's standard practice is to communicate with different sectors via the most convenient channels. The UGC would be the most convenient channel for us to communicate with universities.' However, he was unable to clarify the apparent disparity between the extent of that comunication and Ms Linn's statements in Legco.