print page
< Back
Menu > About EDB >
Forms & Circulars
-
Forms
-
Circulars
< Back
Menu > About EDB >
Annual Open Data Plans
-
Annual Open Data Plans
-
Public Sector Information
< Back
Menu > Curriculum Development >
Major Levels of Education
-
Kindergarten Education
-
Primary Education
-
Secondary Education
< Back
Menu > Curriculum Development >
Assessment
-
Basic Competency Assessment (BCA)
-
References
< Back
Menu > Students and Parents Related >
Life Planning Education and Career Guidance
-
Life Planning Education
-
Business-School Partnership Programme
< Back
Menu > Students and Parents Related >
Safety Matters
-
Safety of Students
-
School Bus Services
< Back
Menu > Students and Parents Related >
Non-Chinese speaking (NCS) students
-
Education services for non-Chinese speaking (NCS) students
-
What's new
-
Overview
< Back
Menu > Students and Parents Related >
Programs and Services
-
Programs
-
Services
< Back
Menu > Teachers Related >
Qualifications, Training and Development
-
Qualification
-
Training
-
Development
< Back
Menu > School Administration and Management >
Financial Management
-
About Financial Management
-
Information on Subsidy
-
Notes to School Finance
< Back
Menu > School Administration and Management >
School Premises Related Information
-
Allocation of a School
-
Furniture and Equipment List for New Schools
-
School Premises Maintenance
< Back
Menu > Public and Administration Related >
Public Forms and Documents
-
Public Forms
-
Efficiency Office - Guide to Corporate Governance for Subvented Organisations
< Back
Menu > Public and Administration Related >
Tender Notices
-
Tender Notices
-
Works Tender Notice
Main content start

[Archive] Annex

Appendix 1: School Performance (By Area - Primary Schools)

#

 

 

 

Appendix 2: School Performance (By Area - Secondary Schools)

#

 

 

 

Appendix 3: School Performance (By Area - Special Schools)

#

 

 

 

Appendix 4: School Performance (By Aspect - Primary Schools) Domain: Management & Organisation

#

 

Appendix 4: School Performance (By Aspect - Primary Schools) Domain: Learning & Teaching

#

 

Appendix 4: School Performance (By Aspect - Primary Schools) Domain: Support to Children & School Ethos

#

 

Appendix 4: School Performance (By Aspect - Primary Schools) Domain: Attainment & Achievement

#

 

 

 

Appendix 5: School Performance (By Aspect - Secondary Schools) Domain: Management & Organisation

#

 

Appendix 5: School Performance (By Aspect - Secondary Schools) Domain: Learning & Teaching

#

 

Appendix 5: School Performance (By Aspect - Secondary Schools) Domain: Support to Children & School Ethos

#

 

Appendix 5: School Performance (By Aspect - Secondary Schools) Domain: Attainment & Achievement

#

 

 

 

Appendix 6: School Performance (By Aspect - Special Schools) Domain: Management & Organisation

#

 

Appendix 6: School Performance (By Aspect - Special Schools) Domain: Learning & Teaching

#

 

Appendix 6: School Performance (By Aspect - Special Schools) Domain: Support to Children & School Ethos

#

 

Appendix 6: School Performance (By Aspect - Special Schools) Domain: Attainment & Achievement

#

 

 

 

Appendix 7

List of Schools Inspected in 2000/01

A. Primary Schools, Secondary Schools and Special Schools

Primary Schools
Buddhist Bright Pearl Primary School
CCC Kei Wai Primary School (AM)
CNEC Ta Tung School
CUHKFAA Thomas Cheung School
Faith Lutheran School
FDBWA Chow Chin Yau School (AM)
HKSYC & IA Chan Lai So Chun Memorial School
HKTA Shun Yeung Primary School
Holy Carpenter Primary School
Holy Cross Lutheran School (AM)
Jordan Road Government Primary School
King Lam Catholic Primary School
Lee Chi Tat Memorial School (AM)
Lee Chi Tat Memorial School (PM)
Ng Clan' s Association Tai Pak Memorial School
Sa Ann Wyllie Memorial Primary School (AM)
Sa Ann Wyllie Memorial Primary School (PM)
Sam Shui Natives Association Tong Yun Kai School
Shatin Government Primary School (AM)
Shatin Government Primary School (PM)
Sin To School (AM)
Sin To School (PM)
SKH Kei Lok Primary School (AM)
SKH Kei Lok Primary School (PM)
St Antonius Primary School (PM)
St Basil' s Primary School
Tak Sun School (AM)
Tak Sun School (PM)
Tsuen Wan Trade Association Primary School (AM)
Wanchai Church Kei To School (PM)

Secondary Schools
CCC Mong Man Wai College
Chan Sui Ki (La Salle) College
Cheng Chek Chee Secondary School
Christian Alliance S C Chan Memorial College
Gertrude Simon Lutheran College
HK SKH Bishop Hall Secondary School
HKTA Ching Chung Secondary School
Ju Ching Chu Secondary School (Yuen Long)
Lingnan Dr Chung Wing Kwong Memorial Secondary School
Mission Covenant Church Holm Glad College
San Wui Commercial Society Chan Pak Sha School
St Joseph' s College
Tang Shiu Kin Victoria Government School
Toi Shan Association College
True Light Girls' College
TWGH Sun Hoi Directors' College
Sheung Shui Government Secondary School

Special Schools
HK Juvenile Care Centre Chan Nam Cheong Memorial School
Jockey Club Hong Chi School
John F Kennedy Centre

B. Kindergartens Cheung Chau Sacred Heart Kindergarten
Christian Evangelical Centre Lok Fu Kindergarten
Cumberland Presbyterian Church Green Pasture Kindergarten
Fok Loy Estate Kam Chuen Kindergarten
Fu Heng Baptist Lui Kwok Pat Fong Kindergarten
Green Leaves Kindergarten
Jade Kindergarten
James Anglo-Chinese Kindergarten (Sam Shui Po)
Jing Jing Anglo-Chinese Kindergarten (Hung Shui Kiu Branch)
King Lam Catholic Kindergarten
Kowloon City Baptist Church Hay Nien Kindergarten
Lok Fu Rhenish Church Kindergarten
N-M-S' Lutheran Kindergarten
Precious Blood Kindergarten
St. Thomas' Catholic Kindergarten
Sun Island English Kindergarten (Aberdeen Branch)
Tai Po Chiu Chow Natives Association Kwong Fuk Kindergarten
Tsing Yi Trade Association Shek Yam Kindergarten
Tsuen Wan Trade Association Chu Cheong Kindergarten
Tuen Mun Kindergarten (Sheung Shui Branch)

#

 

 

 

Appendix 8

Schools' Responses to QA Inspection


It is an established practice that schools can express their views regarding the main findings and the key issues for action identified in the QA inspection reports. The response of each school inspected in the 2000/01 academic year was appended in its entirety to the respective QA inspection report, and a full set of the inspection reports is kept in the Education Library, 13/F., EDHQs.


Generally, schools' responses were focused and clearly made with reference to the unique circumstances of the schools. The schools made good use of the opportunity to further exchange views with the inspection teams on the observations made and follow up the points and issues raised. In ideas where schools felt there was a difference from the QA inspection team, further elaborations with reasons, fully reflecting the school’s own standpoint were made and included. Owing to the wide variations and the individual contexts of the schools, the remarks that were specific to the schools are not summarised in this report. Other than these remarks, the main points made in the responses are summarised as follows:

A. Primary Schools, Secondary Schools and Special Schools

  • While most schools agreed that QA inspection reports could reflect the actual situations of the schools inspected objectively, some opined that comments and advice in the reports were not specific and insightful enough.
  • Most schools, especially primary schools, were ready to take immediate steps to address the areas of concern identified by the inspection teams, thus stepping up schools' effort in and pace of self-improvement. QA inspections also facilitated self-evaluation in schools.
  • Many schools thanked the QA inspection teams for their appreciation of the schools' good performance. The findings helped affirm the schools' strengths as well as their attainment and achievements. Such recognition was a great encouragement to the staff of the school.
  • Although teachers fully understood the objectives and procedures of QA inspections and were satisfied with the processes, many of them claimed that the workload on documents and classroom observations had affected their daily teaching duties. Some suggested that prior notice for lesson observations should be given.
  • When making judgements on schools' performance, QA inspection teams should give more consideration to contextual factors such as the socioeconomic background of the pupils, pupils' academic abilities and physical constraints of schools.
  • Some schools suggested further professional support to be rendered by ED to help them set appropriate priorities in school development.
  • More specific judgements could be made on pupils' academic performance besides the results of public examinations to reflect the variations in performance arising from pupils' mixed abilities.
  • Some schools admitted that QA inspection could facilitate teachers' reflection on their curriculum planning and pedagogy with a view to keep in line with the recent curriculum reform.
  • QA inspections seemed to be expensive in terms of manpower and resources though the whole process was beneficial to the schools being inspected. It was worthwhile to conduct QA inspections regularly once every three to five years.


B. Kindergartens

  • Most schools appreciated the efforts made by the inspection teams and treasured their professional advice given in the QA inspection reports.
  • QA inspection reports could mostly reflect the actual situations of the schools inspected. The findings and key issues for action identified could facilitate schools' improvement and development.
  • Most schools were ready to take immediate steps to address the areas of concern identified by the inspection teams.

#

 

 

 

Appendix 9 Statistical Analysis of Post-inspection Questionnaires on QA Inspection

A. Primary Schools, Secondary Schools and Special Schools

School Type
Number of Schools Inspected
Number of Questionnaires Issued
Number of Questionnaires Returned
Response Rate (%)
Primary
30
999
675
68
Secondary
17
1071
575
54
Special
3
118
66
68
Overall Response Rate :
60


I Pre-inspection

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
I am clear about the procedure of the QA inspection.
16.0
75.3
4.6
0.4
3.2
0.5
2
I am clear about the scope covered by the performance indicators.
7.0
71.4
12.4
1.1
6.9
0.7
3
The amount of documents and information requested by the QA inspection team is appropriate.
10.0
66.8
9.2
1.0
12.3
0.7
4a
The preparatory visit has increased my understanding of the QA inspection.
13.8
74.4
5.6
0.7
5.0
0.5
4b
The preparatory visit has helped dispel my worries about the QA inspection.
8.3
52.4
24.3
3.2
11.2
0.6


II During Inspection

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
Inspectors observed an appropriate number of the various types of school activity.
7.1
69.3
12.5
1.2
9.1
0.8
6
The frequency of meetings and interviews held by inspectors with me was appropriate.
8.0
71.2
10.9
1.7
7.5
0.7
7
Inspectors chose an adequate sample of students'  assignments for scrutiny.
7.6
65.2
10.8
1.6
13.7
1.1
8
The QA inspection did not affect much my daily teaching duties.
3.9
41.5
34.6
11.5
7.3
1.2


III Post-inspection

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
The QA inspection can identify my school's strengths.
9.0
71.4
11.3
1.4
5.9
1.0
10
I agree with the key issues for action identified in the inspection report.
5.9
64.0
14.0
1.5
12.8
1.8
11
There is adequate time for the school to prepare its written response to the draft inspection report.
4.3
52.4
14.7
3.1
24.0
1.5


IV Overall Evaluation

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
12 
The entire QA inspection processes were open and transparent.
9.7
66.0
12.1
1.4
9.6
1.2
13a
The questionnaires issued were appropriately designed.
3.3
71.2
8.2
0.4
16.0
0.9
13b
The questionnaires issued could effectively collect teachers' views about the school.
60.3
3.3
14.7
2.2
18.7
0.8
14
Inspectors'  attitudes were sincere and friendly.
27.1
63.1
4.7
0.3
4.3
0.5
15
Inspectors were professional in their work.
16.2
57.1
10.7
1.5
13.8
0.7
16
Inspectors could objectively listen to views expressed by school staff in interviews.
11.1
65.2
11.5
1.4
9.8
1.0
17
I had adequate opportunities to express and exchange views with inspectors.
8.4
58.6
19.2
3.3
9.7
0.8
18
The QA inspection did not exert much pressure on me.
3.9
34.1
41.0
13.9
6.5
0.6
19
The scope covered by the performance indicators was adequate.
2.2
53.3
16.3
2.3
24.5
1.4
20a
I think that the QA inspection can point out our school's strengths and key issues for action.
8.8
71.2
11.0
1.4
6.5
1.1
20b
I think that the QA inspection can facilitate our school's formulation of its future goals and plans.
9.3
67.3
11.0
1.3
10.3
0.8
21
I am satisfied with the operation of the QA inspection.
5.9
62.7
10.5
2.0
17.9
1.0



B. Kindergartens

Number of Schools Inspected
Number of Questionnaires Issued
Number of Questionnaires Returned
Response Rate (%)
20
263
181
69
Overall Response Rate :
69


I Pre-inspection

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
I am clear about the procedure of the QA inspection.
17.1
70.2
5.5
0.0
6.6
0.6
2
I am clear about the scope covered by the performance indicators.
18.2
68.5
5.5
0.0
7.2
0.6
3
The amount of documents and information requested by the QA inspection team is appropriate.
18.2
64.1
2.2
0.0
14.9
0.6
4a*
The preparatory visit has increased my understanding of the QA inspection.
27.1
68.6
2.5
0.0
1.8
0.0
4b*
The preparatory visit has helped dispel my worries about the QA inspection.
23.5
61.3
7.6
0.0
7.6
0.0
5
I am clear about the scope covered by the performance indicators.
18.2
68.5
5.5
0.0
7.2
0.6
*Teachers who did not attend the briefing session during the preparatory visit are not required to answer Questions 4a and 4b.


II During Inspection

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
Inspectors observed an appropriate number of the various types of school activity.
13.3
76.8
2.8
0.0
4.9
2.2
6
The frequency of meetings and interviews held by inspectors with me was appropriate.
14.4
64.6
7.7
1.1
8.9
3.3
7
Inspectors chose an adequate sample of students' assignments for scrutiny.
16.0
68.0
2.8
0.0
11.0
2.2
8
The QA inspection did not affect much my daily teaching duties.
11.6
61.9
17.7
3.3
3.3
2.2


III Post-inspection

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
9
The QA inspection can identify my school's strengths.
22.7
67.4
2.2
1.1
4.9
1.7
10
I agree with the key issues for action identified in the inspection report.
16.0
73.0
1.1
0.0
8.2
1.7
11
There is adequate time for the school to prepare its written response to the draft inspection report.
13.3
58.0
6.6
2.2
17.7
2.2


IV Overall Evaluation

 
Strongly agree (%)
Agree (%)
Disagree (%)
Strongly disagree (%)
No opinion/ not applicable (%)
Void (%)
12 
The entire QA inspection processes were open and transparent.
26.5
57.5
3.9
0.6
8.7
2.8
13a
The questionnaires issued were appropriately designed.
14.9
72.9
2.2
0.0
8.3
1.7
13b
The questionnaires issued could effectively collect teachers'  views about the school.
11.6
66.9
7.2
0.6
11.5
2.2
14
Inspectors' attitudes were sincere and friendly.
40.9
47.0
2.8
0.0
8.2
1.1
15
Inspectors were professional in their work.
37.6
51.9
0.0
0.6
8.8
1.1
16
Inspectors could objectively listen to views expressed by school staff in interviews.
27.6
56.9
6.1
1.1
6.1
2.2
17
II had adequate opportunities to express and exchange views with inspectors.
17.7
55.8
15.5
1.1
8.2
1.7
18
The QA inspection did not exert much pressure on me.
4.4
39.2
39.8
12.3
3.2
1.1
19
The scope covered by the performance indicators was adequate.
5.5
66.3
6.1
0.0
19.9
2.2
20a
I think that the QA inspection can point out our school's strengths and key issues for action.
29.8
64.1
2.2
0.0
2.8
1.1
20b
I think that the QA inspection can facilitate our school's formulation of its future goals and plans.
27.1
65.8
1.1
0.0
4.9
1.1
21
I am satisfied with the operation of the QA inspection.
15.5
65.7
2.8
0.6
14.8
1.1

 

 

#