Equality in Education: The Missing Issue in the "Quality Education" Debate

Equality in Education: The Missing Issue
in the "Quality Education" Debate

Leslie N.K.Lo

「優質教育」是目前香港政府及教育界人士主要關注的範疇。一連串的教育政策及措施都以鼓勵學校提高教學質素為目標，以証實教育的價值，使香港面向其他國家 ﹝ 尤其是鄰近地區 ﹞ 的競爭力能夠加強。在這些「優質教育」的運動中，「平等教育」這個觀念似乎却被遺忘了。本文嘗試探討「平等教育」的內涵，繼而論及學校教育體制改革及未來的挑戰。
[本文版權屬盧乃桂教授]

Even before the change of sovereignty in 1997, issues related to the quality of school education became the prime concern of the government and its top advisory committees in education (ECR7, 1996; HKSAR, 1997; HKSAR, 1998). Although "quality"is a relative concept which may mean different things to different people at different times, its association with education in Hong Kong has denoted a concerted effort by local educators to discover effective means to improve the conditions of schooling. As in any society, educators in Hong Kong have associated "quality"with that which is good and worthwhile (Harvey and Green, 1993: 11). The on-going campaign for "quality education" therefore, serves to encourage local schools to strive for something better, to prove their worth, and to enhance Hong Kong's competitiveness vis-a-vis other societies, especially those in the same geographic region. Amidst the rhetoric of the "quality education"campaign, however, an essential debate on "equality in education"has been conspicuously missing, thus casting doubt on the policy-makers"understanding of the meaning of educational reform.
    From the perspective of policy-making for educational reform, quality of education and equality in education are actually two sides of the same policy coin. Quality of education is concerned with matters which can enrich the process of education and improve educational outcome. Equality in education is concerned with the fair distribution of resources and opportunities which will eventually affect the life- chances of students and the general well-being of society. What factors affect the quality of what kind of education at what juncture in whose life in what societal context should be the concerns of those policy-makers who are serious about the pursuit of the common good through educational development.

Equality in Education
    Equality in education can be understood from many perspectives. If schooling can be viewed as a continual process that operates as a mechanism for selection, then equality in education can be viewed from the perspectives of access, survival, output, and outcome (Farrell, 1997). Equality of access refers the probabilities of being admitted into school. Equality of survival refers to the probabilities of staying in school to some defined level. Equality of output refers to the probabilities of learning the same thing at the same level. Equality of outcome refers to the probabilities of living similar lives as a result of schooling (Farrell, 1997: 475).
    Equality in education has long been considered along with the principle of equality of educational opportunity which stipulates that "so long as individuals are afforded equal opportunities to obtain an education, inequalities in educational results are morally permissible"(Howe, 1994: 2001). To ensure that the less advantaged members of society can have a fair opportunity of receiving a reasonable amount of education which would enrich their personal and social life, some would argue that inequalities in distribution that favor the less advantaged is justifiable (Rawls, 1972: 60, 101, 107). This forms the basis of 𢖯ositive discrimination"in educational policy and practice.
    In Hong Kong, equality of educational opportunity has been generally ignored in the recent campaign for "quality education" While "quality education"and "equality of educational opportunity"are not mutually exclusive concepts, discussion on the latter has been lacking in major policy reports on educational reform. Vague and indirect reference to equality in education was made in very few policy reports, notably the reports on special education (BoE1, 1996) and on the review of compulsory education (BoE2, 1997). Disparities are tolerated quietly to accommodate the pursuit of "quality education" The search for performance indicators, the establishment of checklists for assessment, the recruitment of officials and professionals into "quality assurance inspection"teams, and the mass shipment of computers into schools for technology-aided instruction have been new phenomena in our school system.

Disparity and Segregation in the School System
    Disparity among Hong Kong's schools should be understood in terms of their geographic locations (what kind of neighborhood are they situated in"), socio-economic status of parents, prestige of school, and perceived educational outcome (life chances of graduates as influenced by peers and alumni network). By choice, parents send their children to a school because of its good reputation. By official design, parents have to send their children to a school that is situated closely to their residence, if they do not have the wherewithal to get their children admitted into the preferred schools. The truth of the matter is that most desirable schools are situated in desirable neighborhoods. The least desirable schools are situated in the poor neighborhoods of the city and in newly constructed towns where public housing projects are built. [1]
    Another source of inequality in education is the clear demarcation between secondary schools which use Chinese (Cantonese or putonghua) as the medium of instruction, on the one hand, and English as the medium of instruction, on the other. As the preferred language, English is not only valued in the business and official circles, but is also a reflection of the academic strengths of schools which are allowed to retain it as the medium of instruction.
    The 1997 policy which required the majority of subsidized secondary schools to use Cantonese as a medium of instruction naturally led to an outburst of criticisms. Findings of a recent opinion poll reveals that the medium of instruction policy is the least desirable educational policy of all, with a strong majority of respondents objecting to its implementation (Lo and Tsang, 1998: 1, 6). In retrospect, problems in the medium of instruction policy rest not with its nature but with its clumsy execution. After all, few can argue that teaching and learning through the mother-tongue is inferior to doing so through a foreign language. However, by allowing 114 of Hong Kong's better secondary schools to retain English as a medium of instruction, the government was actually implementing a policy that would cause further segregation within the school system. In a society where English is a language of mobility, academic high achievers will naturally seek entrance into the 114 schools. Students are keenly aware of the utility of English. They know that their life-chances are dependent on it. It is not surprising, therefore, that many parents viewed Cantonese as a medium of instruction more suitable for others"children in other schools. (YZZK, 1997:10) An analysis of opportunities of enrollment in schools which adopt English as a medium of instruction reveals that there are significant disparities among school districts, and the farther away one lives from the desirable neighborhood (where some of Hong Kong's best schools are situated), the lesser is one's chance of enrolling in such schools (Tsang, 1998: 14-15).
    Geography of residence and opportunity in receiving instruction in English are not the only sources of disparity in local schooling. As a matter of fact, the structural segregation of academic achievement among students and schools remains a salient problem because no remedial measure has been applied effectively.
    The structural segregation of student achievement is manifested mainly in the differences in test scores among students. The difference between the academic achievement of students in various types of secondary schools in Hong Kong is significant. A research project on the effectiveness of secondary schools (school N = 50, and student N = 30,000) found that the difference in academic achievement of students between the academically strongest and weakest schools has become larger. [2] Moreover, ability segregation among students in the schools surveyed is significantly higher than in such societies as the US, UK, Canada, and Singapore (Lo et al., 1997b: 247; Tsang, 1997: 22-23; Ho and Willms, 1996). For a school system that has accommodated compulsory schooling for two decades, the findings signal a warning that equality has only been achieved in quantitative terms. As far as its capability of offering quality education is concerned, Hong Kong has scored poorly in availing equal opportunities (in terms of quality of education) to all; and when inequality becomes apparent, it has done very little in initiating significant positive discriminatory measures to rectify the situation. [3]

Relevance of Education
    The advent of the information age changes the traditional work patterns and affects people's life-chances in a new way. Hong Kong will do well to accommodate the numerous kinds of change that it brings on. In an information society, a status of which Hong Kong is fast approaching, production becomes information intensive, and workers are expected to be competent in information processing. The workplace requires adaptability, flexibility, and cooperativeness from its workers (Levin, 1998). Productivity is knowledge based; and to enhance one's life chances, individuals can exploit an abundance of information available to advance their interests and to improve their competencies.
    As the landscape of the economy and workplace changes in the age of information, education has to respond to this change to remain relevant to the needs of the information society. As the development of the information society depends on a much broader participation from an educated citizenry, the elitist approach of old has become irrelevant to its manpower needs. The production, accumulation, transmission, consumption and management of knowledge are tasks too vast and diverse to be left in the hands of a selected few. Competitiveness, especially competitiveness in the global economy, is dependent on the competence and depth of a workforce that can support a great variety of pursuits of the information society. Surely, a workforce constituted by tired, bookish, and uncreative school and university graduates cannot enhance her competitiveness.
    If our future workforce were to be constituted by adaptable, flexible, creative and cooperative people, then their nurturing has to begin now, in the kindergartens and schools. Without the appropriate preparation in school, it would be difficult for any university student to suddenly become innovative. Creativity cannot be taught. It is a habit of thinking and problem-solving that needs to be developed in an early age.

Need for Compensatory Action
    The challenges of the new information age require educators and policy-makers in Hong Kong to reflect deeply into the manpower needs of our societies. While an adjustment of strategy in curriculum design and teaching and learning should help nurture 忛ew"educated persons for the new era more competently, the nature of work in an information society requires broader participation of an educated citizenry, in the production, accumulation, renewal and management of knowledge. In order to foster broader participation of her citizens in developmental endeavors, Hong Kong should dig deep into its pool of potential talents comprising, in fact, all of those children and youths who are studying in our schools. It follows that if, as potential talents of the society, some of them need extra help from the community, then it is entirely justifiable to invest a little more in their education. In order to guarantee the competence and depth of our workforce, therefore, Hong Kong can justly adopt positive discrimination measures in education. Only through this can we avail opportunity to all children and youths so that they can develop their potential to the fullest. This is an important equality issue in education that has long been ignored by educators and policy-makers.

Concluding Remarks
    To engage education in the simultaneous pursuit of excellence and equity can be confusing to some as the two concepts appear, at least on the surface, not to be in congruence with each another. Recent educational policies and practices show that our society is actively engaged in the pursuit of "quality education" which amounts to an euphemistic expression of dissatisfaction with the status quo. "Quality education"is seen as an instrument to enhance our global competitiveness. The search for "quality education"is being backed by policies, lots of money, and bureaucratic support.
    The problem with schooling in Hong Kong rests not with her recent emphasis on quality education. After all, few can argue convincingly for the perpetuation of mediocrity. It is the lack of attention to equity issues that presents a glaring contrast to the promises of "quality education" Among the many manifestations of inequality, the most prevalent one is the neglect of academically low achievers. Structural segregation in our education system has caused an uneven distribution of educational opportunities which in turn affect students"chances in mobility. Perhaps unbeknown to both the policy-makers and stake-holders, it is a society's ability to avail "quality education"to all that will eventually determine its competitiveness in international affairs. In educational reform, equality issues are just as important as quality issues. Let us start addressing them.

Notes:

[1]    According to the latest report on school drop-outs in Hong Kong, a high percentage of drop-outs occurred in schools situated in the newly constructed town. The 1997-98 figure of 1,999 drop-outs represents an 8% increase from the previous academic year (Ming Pao Daily, 12 November 1998: B14).

[2]    In this research project, tests in Chinese, English and Mathematics were administered to Form 2 (8th grade) and Form 3 (9th grade) students of the sampled schools in 2 consecutive academic years (1993, 1994). Scores in the two consecutive tests were compared. The same was done for Form 4 (10th grade) students of the sampled schools. Their public examination (HKCEE) results were secured a year later, and scores were used for comparison (Lo et al., 1997).

[3]    Before the change of sovereignty in 1997, the Hong Kong government had attempted to help secondary schools of low     achievers by allowing for additional provision. A program to streamline the content of school curriculum for low achievers had also been introduced. However, such efforts were dwarfed      by the problems of structural segregation. When it has become increasingly clear that students experience learning difficulties in very early years of schooling, usually from primary 3 and 4 onward, the present lack of professional support in special needs education in the primary and secondary schools has rendered piecemeal remedial efforts ineffective (for example, Wong, et al., 1996: 5-8, 5-37).

References:

[BoE1] Board of Education. (1996). Report of the Sub-committee on Special Education. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
[BoE2] Board of Education, Sub-committee on Review of School Education. (1997). Report on Review of 9-year Compulsory Education. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
[ECR7] Education Commission. (1996). Education Commission Report No.7: Quality School Education. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Farrell, J.P. (1997). "Social Equality and Educational Planning in Developing Nations" in Lawrence J. Saha (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Sociology of Education, Oxford: Pergamon, (pp.473-479)

Harvey, Lee and Green, Diana. (1993). "Defining Quality". Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9-34.
[HKSAR] The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. (1997). Address by the Chief Executive The Honorable Tung Chee Hwa at the Provisional Legislative Council meeting on 8 Ooctober 1997. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.
[HKSAR] The Hong Kong Special Administration Region of the People's Republic of China. (1998). Address by the Chief Executive The Honorable Tung Chee Hwa at the Legislative Council meeting on 7 October 1998. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China.
Ho, S.C. and Willms, D.J. (1996). "The effect of parental involvement on the achievement of eighth grade students," Sociology of Education, 69, 126-141.
Howe, K.R. (1994). "Equality of Educational Opportunity: Philosophical Issues" in Torsten Husen and T.N. Postlethwaite
Levin, Henry M. (1998). "Education and the Ability to Deal with Change". Occasional paper No.15, Education Policy Studies Series. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Forthcoming.
Lo, Leslie N.K., Tsang, Wing-kwong, Chung, Choi-man, Chung, Yue-ping, Cheng, Yin-cheong, Sze, Man-man P., Ho, Sui-chu E., Ho, Man-koon. (1997). A Survey of the Effectiveness of Hong Kong Secondary School System. Hong Kong: Faculty of Education, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, unpublished research monograph.
Lo, Leslie N.K. and Tsang Wing-kwong. (1998). "Shimin dui xianggang jiaoyu zhengce de taidu"['Attitude of citizens toward educational policies in Hong Kong']. Report on a telephone survey. Hong Kong: Faculty of Social Science and Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Mimeo.
Rawls, John. (1972). A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tsang, Wing Kwong. (1997). "Cong paichixing jingying zhuyidao fengexing jingying zhuyi "xianggang jiunian qiangpo jiaoyu fazhan de shenceng jiegou" ['From exclusionary elitism to segregated elitism: the latent structure of the development of 9-year compulsory education in Hong Kong']. Occasional paper No.11, Education Policy Studies Series. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Instituteof Educational Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Tsang, Wing Kwong. (1998). "Yinzhong xuee fenpei zhengce de guifa yu bujundeng: xianggang zhongxue jiaoxue yuyan zhrngce de zaisi" ['The poverty and inequality in the policy of English-medium secondary school allocation: Re-contemplating the policy of medium of instruction in Hong Kong secondary schools']. Occasional paper No.13, Education Policy Studies Series. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
[YZZK] Yazhou zhoukan ['Asiaweek'], 7-13 April 1997.

Prof. Leslie N.K. Lo is the Director of the Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. He retains the copyright of this article.