English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Glossary of Terms
3+3+4 EDUCATIONAL :
REFORM (3+3+4)
Sector-wide reforms resulting in a four-year
University curriculum commencing AY 2012-2013.
CENTRE FOR HOLISTIC:
TEACHING AND
LEARNING (CHTL)
A University office (including a
University Senate portfolio) dedicated to
ensuring the smooth and orderly transition from
the existing teaching curriculum toward achieving
the educational requirements of the 3+3+4
sector-wide reform.
COMPLEMENTARY
STUDIES
:
This curriculum component complements the
Major Programme by emphasising ? the broader
context of a liberal-arts education. To be replaced
and expanded upon by the GE Course
curriculum AY 2012-2013.
CONCENTRATIONS
:
Specific areas of specialization within the Major
Programme.
COURSE
:
The individual lecturer-led/taught component
within the Major Programme.
DOUBLE DEGREE
PROGRAMME
(ENGED)
:
A partnership between ENG and EDUC
Departments, awarding a B.A. in English Language
and Literature and a B.Ed. in English Language
Teaching across a four-year programme of study.
GENERAL EDUCATION:
(GE) CURRICULUM
Introduced as part of the 3+3+4 reform,
these taught courses taken during the student’s
first and second years of study will eventually
replace (and expand upon) the present role of
Complementary Studies.
HONOURS PROJECT
The final-year independent student project
under faculty guidance.
:
1
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
JUPAS
:
Joint University Programmes Admissions System.
Administered by the government, JUPAS
allocates and distributes undergraduate student
places using a composite of ranked preferences,
examination scores, and other factors.
“Non-JUPAS” entrants into the Programme are
students matriculating outside the JUPAS system,
including by Principal’s Nomination and other
sanctioned routes.
LEVEL 1,2,3,4
:
Indicates the degree of difficulty, analysis or
independent work required in a given course. The
levels do not necessarily correspond to the year in
which a course is taken, e.g. Level 1 = 1000; Level
2 = 2000; Level 3 = 3000; Level 4 = 4000.
MALS
:
The Master of Arts in Language Studies. A
self-funded and self-administered programme,
MALS draws upon faculty from both the English
Department and the Language Center to teach its
taught courses.
PROGRAMME
:
The B.A. (Hons.) in English Language and
Literature, as administered by the English
Programme Management Committee (PMC).
2
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Section 1: Mission, Aims and Objectives, and Goals
1.1 Mission
The English Major Programme of the Department of English Language and
Literature strives to achieve and to maintain excellence in student teaching,
academic research and professional and community service, mindful that these
cornerstones of our work are becoming increasingly more meaningful to a
growing number of stakeholders and partners in the broader Hong Kong
community and greater China.
Even as our Programme and University gain wider recognition on the basis
of top-tier academic research, we value the principles underlying our tradition of
whole-person student education, including the necessity of holding both
international and local community (Hong Kong) contexts of our work equally in
view. We are fully committed to the distinctive and creative dissemination of
knowledge in the areas of English language, literature, and comparative literature,
particularly with regard to the comparative and intercultural dimensions of English
studies in the global context. Closer to home, the Programme also plays an active
and committed role in Hong Kong, by preparing quality English language and
literature teachers for positions and careers in area schools.
1.2 Aims and Objectives
The present aims of the English Language and Literature Major Programme
include:
a)
the presentation of a coherent Programme across a three-year
curriculum which seeks to ensure rigorous training in the English
language and literature in an interdisciplinary framework;
b) the development of students’ independent and critical thinking in the
spirit of whole-person education and service to the community;
c) the instruction of students in English studies in order that their minds
may be broadened through engagement with the literary and linguistic
arts, including exposure to and the expression of humanistic ideals in
broadly comparative and interdisciplinary contexts;
3
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
d) the cultivation of and appreciation for English literary works across a
broad range of significance, as well as the ability to relate the significance
of these works to others by achieving a quality standard of articulation
and argument, both oral and written;
e) the detailed and thoughtful exploration of how the grammar, discourse,
and structures of the English language, in all its variety, function in
theoretical, everyday, and global contexts; and
f)
the fostering of a research culture, for both students and academic staff,
whereby original and creative argument, supported by effective evidence
and reliable data, is acknowledged and rewarded using the most rigorous
international standards.
The present objectives of the English Language and Literature Major
Programme are necessarily student-centred, designed to achieve the education of
students who, upon graduation, are:
a)
sufficiently prepared, as well-rounded scholars, to pursue postgraduate
study requiring academic and theoretical knowledge of English studies,
including literary analysis and/or linguistics;
b) prepared to enter a career in education, whether in academia or
teaching;
c)
suitably equipped for entry into a wide diversity of careers for which
fluency in English, creativity, and critical thinking may be required, in
fields such as the arts & media, cultural affairs, the civil service, banking,
and business;
d) enthusiastic and willing to embrace their roles as citizens of their
community, nation, and world; including the obligation, personal and
collective, to improve the conditions and prospects of those less
fortunate in a spirit of shared responsibility and goodwill.
Note: student-centred “Objectives” are to be superseded under the 3+3+4
curriculum by the Outcomes Based Teaching and Learning (OBTL) framework,
4
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
including our Programme Intended Learning Outcomes (PILOs) as well as the
University’s Graduate Attributes, which may be found in Section 7 below.
1.3 Goals
The present goals of the English Major Programme include:
a)
offering students the interdisciplinary study of English language and
literature in the vibrant and intercultural context of Hong Kong;
b) re-envisioning our present curriculum in view of the needs and projected
learning outcomes of the 3+3+4 (four-year) University curriculum to be
deployed sector-wide after September 2012;
c) enhancing students’ English language proficiency, using measures both
qualitative and quantitative, in the effort to encourage their confidence
and self-esteem when using the English language in personal and
professional contexts;
d) preparing students for postgraduate studies in related disciplines through
rigorous academic training (including the capstone of our B. A.
curriculum, the student-centred Honours Project);
e)
producing well-trained graduates who are both capable of critical
thinking and disposed toward independent life-long learning; and who
can thereby meet the challenges and needs of society positively and
proactively;
f) providing quality teaching in support of our partnering English-language
teaching providers (notably MALS and ENGED) in the Arts and the
Social Sciences faculties, even while maintaining our quality commitment
to the undergraduate English Major Programme as our core enterprise.
5
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Section 2: History
2.1 Programme History
The second-oldest English programme in Hong Kong, the Department of English
Language and Literature of the then newly-established Hong Kong Baptist College
was founded in 1956. The Department was one of the first five founding
academic units of the Faculty of Arts. During its early years, the Department
offered Major courses leading to a Diploma in English Language and Literature.
The Department also offered a number of language-skills courses (in English,
German and French) to non-Major students prior to the founding of the Language
Centre in AY1984-85. The B.A. (Hons.) in English Language and Literature
(hereafter referred to as the English Major Programme) was first introduced in
1988 as part of a multi-disciplinary curriculum entitled the B.A. (Hons.) in Arts
and Social Sciences (B.A.A.S.S.), which operated under a common framework with
the Chinese Language and Literature, Geography, History and Religious Studies
programmes.
Upon successful University accreditation in 1995, the Hong Kong Baptist
University (HKBU) English Department (by then also housing strong, younger
programmes in Humanities and Translation) sought to consolidate its unique
combination of outstanding academic research in the humanities and teaching
excellence, as stipulated in the sector-wide role statement endorsed in February
2004 by the Hong Kong government (Appendix A).
The University Grants Committee’s 2004 Role Statement urges that all HKBU
departments and programmes pursue “the delivery of teaching at an
internationally competitive level”; emphasizing “a broad-based creativity-inspiring
undergraduate education” and inculcating “a sense of human values”; maintaining
“strong links with the community”; and “being internationally competitive in its
areas of research strength, and in particular in support of teaching.” Our English
Major Programme combines research excellence with student choice (among three
concentrations of focused research) that distinguishes us readily from the English
programmes offered by our sister institutions in Hong Kong.
6
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
2.2 Responses to ACP Visit 2003
During the last Academic Consultation Panel visit, specific suggestions were made
as to how we might improve our Programme offerings, structure, and approach
(see Appendix B (i)). In particular, we have made substantial progress with regard
to the following:
2.2.1 Benchmarking Outcomes and Standards in English


under the guidance of the CHTL, and following University requirements,
we are implementing the OBTL (Outcomes-Based Teaching and
Learning) protocol throughout our Programme offerings, linking specific
kinds of course assessment tasks to specific student-centered learning
activities and intended learning outcomes (see Section 7 below).
since 2003, we have gathered non-compulsory IELTS examination
(exit-test) data to monitor our students’ English proficiency more
effectively (see Appendix C). When combined with eventual
compulsory IELTS testing upon entry, compiling such exit-test data
allows us to track and target student improvement in English throughout
their career with us as a specific learning outcome. Encouragingly, the
overall trend of English Programme student performance on IELTS is
upward: 71% of our enrolled students took the exam in 2008, and
among these test-takers over half (53%) scored at 6.5 band or higher;
that is, they scored as ‘competent users’ of English or better.
2.2.2 Structuring/Developing Creative Writing Offerings

building from the Arts Faculty’s successful International Writers’
Workshop (IWW), the Programme has run the campus-wide English
Poetry Competition annually since 2004, using IWW poet-adjudicators
of international reputation. All Programme staff are involved in the
first-round review of student submissions, and we maintain a specific
staff administrative position in support of the University-wide
competition.
7
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document

at the curriculum level, in Spring 2010 the Arts Faculty decided to
establish a steering committee to commit resources to the creation of an
inter-disciplinary Creative Writing minor available to all University
students, with the Programme and the Language Centre being key
stakeholders.
2.2.3 Curricular Expansion of English Campus-wide



in 2006, the Programme co-founded the Double Degree (B. A. (Hons)
in English Language & Literature and B. Ed. (Hons) in ELT), which has
greatly broadened the reach, application, and implementation of the
English language and English language teaching on campus;
in 2005, we successfully bid the University, via the University Grants
Committee, for additional second-year places and received fifteen
additional such places (in recognition of the first-year, first-degree
places we contributed to our new partnership in the Double Degree).
Added places have increased the overall student subscription to our
Programme and more readily allowed for Associate of Arts students,
for example, to transfer into the second year of our curriculum;
between 2006-2009 we implemented a successful co-curricular
programme for high-achieving secondary school learners called “Film
Art and Culture” which broadened our Programme links with local
secondary schools. (see Appendix D).
8
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Section 3: Organization and Administration
3.1 Programme Organization
As reflected in the organizational chart below (Figure 1), shared monitoring and
regular feedback—ranging from the creation and vetting of new course
documentation, obtaining input from colleagues, students and alumni, as well as
eventual permissioning from the Faculty and the University administration—are
crucial elements sustaining the on-going administration of the English Major
Programme.
Feedback
Individual Course
Instructors
Students
Individual Course
Documents (draft)
Feedback
Feedback
Concentration
Coordinators
English Programme
Head
ENG Programme
Management
Committee
Current student
survey
Feedback
Feedback
Exit student survey
Arts Faculty Board
Graduate employer
survey
Dean
Quality Assurance
Committee (QAC)
University Senate
Figure 1. English Programme, Monitoring and Review Process
9
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
The English Major Programme utilizes an existing committee structure (Figure 2)
to address academic issues and to provide colleagues with a forum for discussion
of matters concerning student performance and the delivery and monitoring of
Programme initiatives. Changes are made based on student input and staff
recommendations. Each of these committees has as its goals the upholding of
academic standards and the improvement of teaching and learning procedures for
all English Major students and faculty members.
Annually administered student surveys (present intake, graduating-student exit
surveys, and periodical alumni versions) have been conducted since the early 1990s
so as to gather students’ views about the Programme. (See Appendix E for
sample survey forms.) Data collected through these means enable individual
Programme members and the Programme Management Committee (PMC) to
make further improvements in their teaching and to adjust course and curriculum
design.
Figure 2. English Programme Committee Structure
Honours
Project
Committee
Department
Examination
Advisory
Committee
English
Committee
PMC
Complementary
Concentration
Studies &
Coordinators
Mentoring
Pro
Proposed new portfolio :
B.A. Programme Coordinator
after AY 2012-2013
10
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
With the advent of the new 3+3+4 curriculum commencing AY 2012-2013,
and in light of anticipated consolidation and liberalization of the present
Concentration structure (see Section 4.4 below), we will be proposing
consolidation of the several Concentration roles (along with the Library and
student Mentoring posts) into one full-time administrative portfolio: the B.A.
Programme Coordinator.
3.2
Administration (Terms of Reference and Responsibilities)
3.2.1 Programme Management Committee (English Major)
a) Membership
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
Programme Head (Chairperson)
All other full-time staff teaching the Major Programme
One student representative elected by the English Society
Dean of Arts (ex-officio)
b) Terms of Reference
i) To monitor and assess the operation of the Major Programme.
ii) To ensure that the curriculum of the Major Programme is
effectively implemented, and that existing University standards are
maintained.
iii) To prepare requests for submission to the Dean of Arts for
resources (staffing, funding, library, etc.) required to implement the
Programme.
iv) To oversee the development and preparation of curriculum
proposals for new courses.
v) To submit reports and recommendations to the Faculty of Arts.
vi) To devise procedures for selection, admission and student transfers
between the Programme and partnering units.
vii) To review periodically syllabi for the Major Programme as a whole,
as well as for its specific courses, and to make recommendations
for changes in content or teaching, or examination assessment
strategy to ensure the academic integrity of the Programme.
11
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
viii) To pass the approved graduation list to the Senate for
endorsement.
ix) To formulate appropriate proposals for the Programme and to
bring these to the Faculty Board.
Student representatives serve as regular members on course management
committees. As a general practice, the Programme Head also meets student
representatives at least once every semester to solicit their views on such
course-related issues as:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
curriculum changes
language enhancement opportunities and issues
the Honours Project
student workload
results of student surveys
Complementary Studies subjects
University required courses and
individual course assessment weightings
3.2.2 Honours Project Committee
a) Membership
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
Honours Project Coordinator (Chairperson)
All other full-time staff involved in supervising Honours Projects
Dean of Arts (ex-officio)
Programme Head (ex-officio)
b) Terms of Reference
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
To formulate and review the work schedule of the Honours
Project.
To assign project supervisors to students.
To revise and update the Honours Project Handbook.
To review the Honours Project topics submitted by students.
To approve the final grades of the Honours Project.
To make recommendations to the relevant authority when a student
fails to submit the Honours Project, or as a consequence of other
matters as they might arise.
12
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
3.2.3 Advisory Committee
The Advisory Committee assists the Programme in the planning and review
of its Major. The Advisory Committee consists of Programme colleagues.
and members from the community
a) Membership
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
A member from the community (as Chairperson)
Programme Head (as Convener)
Dean of Arts (ex-officio)
Other members from the community
Head of the Language Centre (by invitation)
b) Terms of Reference
i)
The Advisory Committee shall act as an interface among
industry/commerce/government, the community at large and,
where appropriate, the English Major Programme.
ii) The Advisory Committee shall normally meet at least once every
year, assisting with the review and forward planning of the
Programme with particular regard to:
1) The objectives and content of the taught courses in relation
to perceived community need;
2) The research and consultancy activities in the area(s)/field(s)
related to the Programme;
3) Those aspects that are related to market demand and
placement of graduates as relevant to the Programme;
4) The adequacy of resources in support of the Programme;
5) Other elements of the Programme as requested by the
appointing authority (i.e. the President and Vice-Chancellor).
iii) The Advisory Committee shall send minutes of its regular meetings
to the President and Vice-Chancellor.
13
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
The establishment of the Advisory Committee enables faculty members to
solicit feedback about our courses from experienced educators, potential employers,
and professionals from Hong Kong society. It also provides a forum for academics
and decision-makers in various sectors of society to discuss issues of common
concern.
Members of the AY2010-2011 Advisory Committee include:
A. External Members
Mr. Lincoln Soo, JP (Chairperson), Soo Pei Shao & Co.
Dr. Steven Luk, General Manager, Commercial Press (HK) Limited
Ms. Linda Shu, Senior Hospital Manager (Patient Relations and Communication),
Kwong Wah Hospital
Mr. Abraham Tang, Associate Director, The Hong Kong Academy
for Gifted Education
B. Internal Members
Dr. Stuart Christie (Convener), Acting Head, English Major Programme
Prof. Chung Ling, Dean, Faculty of Arts (ex-officio)
Prof. Kathleen Ahrens, Head, Language Centre
3.2.4 Examination Committee
a) Membership
i)
Programme Head as Chairperson (or other senior member
nominated by the Head)
ii) All full-time staff involved in teaching Major Programme subjects
iii) Dean of Arts (ex-officio)
b) Terms of Reference
i)
To ensure that specific course assessments are in accord with the
learning outcomes, objectives, content and stipulated methods of
14
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
assessment for the Programme as a whole, and applied consistently
to all of its constituent courses.
To assess the performance of students as they progress through the
Programme.
To formulate and approve the examination regulations for the
Programme, and to adjudicate, as necessary, any exceptional cases
which might arise.
To ensure comparability of standards across English Major courses.
To review examination questions prior to their submission to the
Academic Registry.
To classify and approve the final results of individual students’
performance, including Honours Degree classifications upon
graduation from the Programme.
3.2.5 Mentoring Coordinator
The Mentoring Programme is one of the components of the University Life (or
“U-Life”) curriculum. All Year One students (mentees) are required to meet
informally with their assigned mentors within the Programme for at least six hours
during the academic year. The aims of these mentoring sessions are to provide
support, guidance and encouragement to students as they adapt to the challenges,
as well as seek the opportunities, of university life.
The Mentoring Coordinator has the following responsibilities:





to liaise with the Centre for Holistic Teaching and Learning (CHTL)
concerning the overall goals and objectives of the Mentoring
Programme in line with University policy;
to assign student mentees to individual Programme colleagues at the
beginning of each academic year;
to collect the “Student-based Discretionary Fund” and distribute it
to each mentor for the mentoring sessions;
to ensure that colleagues report the grades (Satisfactory or Fail) to
the Academic Registry via the Programme in May of each year; and
to attend “Sharing Sessions for Mentors” organized occasionally by
the Centre for Holistic Teaching and Learning.
15
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
3.2.6 Concentration Coordinators
The Concentration Coordinators have diverse tasks and responsibilities. A
representative, although not exhaustive, list of the duties of Concentration
Coordinators is as follows. In joint consultation or singly, the Concentration
Coordinators are asked by the English Major Programme:








to review annually, or more often if necessary, the course contents
within their respective Concentration, with the assistance of the
teaching team, and to update official course documentation accordingly;
to consult with other colleagues about proposed new course offerings,
Programme structure, and desirable directions for subsequent
curriculum change and design;
to coordinate team teaching, if any, within their respective
Concentration;
to screen applications of non-JUPAS and Associate Degree candidates
and to interview those candidates considered suitable and, as
appropriate, to recommend them for admission to the Programme;
to convene and to address Year Two students at a Concentration
Selection Briefing Session held annually (typically in March) before they
apply to join one of the existing Concentrations;
to review students’ Concentration preferences and to approve their
requests or to suggest alternative Concentrations;
to deliberate upon student appeals when a written request to change
from one Concentration to another is made;
when called upon, to serve on the Advisory Committee, which meets
periodically with local business and civic leaders in the context of
community outreach.
While the regular roll-out of the academic-year schedule to some extent
dictates the pace of specific aspects of on-going administration (as specified
above), the Programme values a flexible approach on the part of individual
Concentration Coordinators in the discharge of their duties, including their ready
availability, as matters arise, to meet with colleagues, advise students, support other
administrators, and field general concerns about their respective Concentration.
16
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
3.2.7 Honours Project Coordinator
The Honours Project Coordinator has, as primary responsibilities, the convening
of meetings and the setting of agendas for the Honours Project Committee, as
well as the on-going management, on behalf of the English Major Programme, of
Honours Project-related (“Project”) matters, including:





Year Two student orientation
establishing (or adjusting as necessary) Project scheduling and deadlines;
on-going revision and annual updating of the Honours Project Handbook;
verifying final Project grades received from colleagues prior to their final
submission to the Academic Registry;
the satisfactory resolution of ad hoc cases arising from the review of
individual Projects, including the appointment of third readers, as
necessary, or the addressing of problems (such as plagiarism) which may
impede an individual student’s satisfactory progress.
In fulfilling the above obligations, the Coordinator acts primarily to ensure
that existing policies governing the supervision and assessment of an individual
project are observed and, where changes to existing policy are viewed as necessary,
to facilitate the deliberation of any proposed changes as they may in turn impact
upon the execution of overall Programme policy (as subject to University
regulations).
3.2.8 Complementary Studies Coordinator
English Major students are required to take 36 total Complementary Studies units
(typically 12 courses) prior to graduation. The work of the Complementary Studies
Coordinator is to offer advice to Year One students on their choices and to
support and liaise with other administrative units such as the Academic Registry
during registration exercises.
The Complementary Studies Coordinator has the following as his/her primary
responsibilities:


to review and update the list of Programme courses offered to other units
as Complementary Studies courses;
to liaise with Complementary Studies Coordinators in other units;
17
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document


to convene a Complementary Studies Briefing Session and to explain the
details concerning the whole exercise to Year One English Major students
annually (usually in mid-February) before they make their choices;to approve
the Complementary Studies area choices of students, to offer alternative
suggestions as necessary and, as needed, to adjust the quotas for each area in
consultation with relevant teaching units;
to inform the Academic Registry of the number of students in each
Complementary Studies area and of any changes arising.
3.2.9 Library Coordinator
The Library Coordinator is responsible for the development of the library
collection in specific subject areas. The primary duties of the Library Coordinator
are as follows:




to liaise among the Programme, the Faculty and the Library;
to discuss, with colleagues, issues related to library collection development,
library policies and services;
to identify library resources required for existing/new courses and related
academic activities;
to transmit the needs and concerns of students and staff members to the
Library or relevant committees via the Faculty Library Committee; and to
identify areas of development within the Programme; and to inform the
Library in advance of any matters with library resources implication.
3.2.10 Programme Head
The duties of the English Major Programme Head are as follows:






day-to-day management of the English Major Programme;
monitoring the teaching of the English Major Programme;
monitoring the student selection/admission process;
seeking to maintain good relations between and among teaching staff,
students, and the University administration;
preparing agendas and accompanying materials for English Major
Programme Management Committee meetings;
reviewing staff performance and development;
18
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document


formulating recommendations concerning the academic and resource needs of
the English Major Programme; and the
overall management and deployment of Department resources as these may
impact on the Programme and partnering units.
3.3 Who We Are and What We Do (Administrative Assignments, as at AY 2010-2011)
The following colleagues have agreed to take on various administrative duties for
the 2010-2011 academic year:
Dr. Stuart Christie
Acting Head, English Major Programme (until 15 January 2011)
2+2 Programme Coordinator
Coordinator for English Minor Programme for Non-Majors
Programme Green Ambassador, Task Force for Sustainable Campus
Member, B.A. ENG & B.Ed. Programme Management Committee
Coordinator, Faculty GRF Incentive Scheme (Literatures in English group)
Dr. Hiroko Itakura
Convenor of Focus Group on Language Enhancement
Member, Scholarship Selection Panels
Honours Project Coordinator
Member, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students
Dr. Magdalen Ki
Representative, Humanities Programme Management Committee Meetings
Member, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students
Member, Scholarship Selection Panels
University Life: Mentoring Coordinator
Literature-in-Depth Concentration Coordinator
Member, Arts Faculty Outreach Committee
Dr. Kenneth Kong
Department Seminar Coordinator
Career Advisor
Task Force on Establishment of Student Learning Portfolio
Department Liaison Officer (with Counselling & Development Centre and
Placement Centre)
Dr. Hans Ladegaard
Programme Director, B.A. ENG & B.Ed. (Double Degree)
Coordinator, Faculty Information Day
Coordinator, English Major Examination Committee
19
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Representative, Faculty Taskforce on 3+3+4 Curriculum
Faculty Representative to Senate
Member, International Advisory Committee
Member, the Programme Management Committee for the M.A. in Language
Studies
Prof. Clayton MacKenzie (on leave until 15 January 2011)
Dr. Jason Polley
Secretary, English Programme Management Committee
Coordinator, Annual English Poetry Writing Competition
Member, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students
Advisor, English Debating Team
Member, Scholarship Selection Panels
Member, International Writers Workshop Planning Committee
Advisor, New Horizons (Faculty newsletter)
Dr. Wee Lian Hee
Cultural Activities Coordinator
Coordinator/Webmaster, Programme Website
Department Representative, Arts Faculty IT Subcommittee
Coordinator, Annual Student and Exit Surveys
Member, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students
Member, Scholarship Selection Panels
Member, Arts Faculty Newsletter Editorial Committee
Arts Faculty Representative, Language Enhancement Programme Advisory
Committee
Language-in-Depth Concentration Coordinator
Dr. Suying Yang
Coordinator, Research Postgraduate Studies Admissions (Linguistics)
Member, B.A. ENG & B.Ed. Programme Management Committee
Member, Arts & Social Sciences Specialist Panel, Research Committee
Member, Undergraduate Admission Committee
Prof. Terry Yip
Convenor of the Research Group in Gender Studies
Library Coordinator
Member, Equal Opportunities Panel
Member, Task Force on Undergraduate Curriculum
Chair, Teaching Development Grant Panel
Representative, Faculty Taskforce on 3+3+4 Curriculum
Faculty Representative, Advisory Committee on Graduate Employment
Member, University Task Force on Quality Assurance Council Audit Report,
20
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
HKBU
Chair, Focus Group on Academic Staff Appraisal and Educational
Development
Advisor, Arts Faculty Newsletter
Section 4: English Major Programme
4.1 What We Offer
In support of the University’s long-standing commitment to “whole person
education,” the English Major Programme anchors its own B. A. curriculum as
well as supports its long-standing cross-unit partnerships in quality
English-language education with other stakeholders in the Faculty of Arts.
Students meet their Major Programme requirements throughout their
undergraduate studies, progressing from introductory courses through to more
advanced levels of study, and culminating in the capstone, guided-research exercise,
the Honours Project undertaken during their final year. The Honours Project (see
Section 4.6 below) plays an important part in the English Major Programme,
providing an invaluable opportunity for our students to exercise initiative as well as
to develop independent research skills alongside the ability to synthesize what has
been learned in different courses, including those outside the English Major.
In view of the importance the University attaches to developing transferable
skills applicable to graduates’ career paths (including building communication skills,
problem-solving, and team-work), a range of student-oriented teaching methods is
employed, including small-group work, presentations and projects. Please also refer
to Section 7.5 below for a matrix mapping our Programme Intended Learning
Outcomes to the University’s Graduate Attributes.
4.2 General Structure of the Major Programme
The English Major Programme curriculum requires students to complete units by
taking a combination of Major required and Major elective courses. All students
must accumulate 21 total Major required units (equivalent in most cases to seven
courses). Students must take an additional minimum 33 Major elective units (or
eleven courses) according to their own interests and subsequent Concentration
21
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
selection.
Including the 6-unit Honours Project, students achieve a total of 60 units in
the Major Programme, combined with an additional 36 units in the Complementary
Studies curriculum. The resulting total of 96 units is required for graduation as
follows:
Major
60 units
 Major Required courses (compulsory)
21 units
 Major Elective courses
33 units
 Honours Project (compulsory)
6 units
Complementary Studies
 Core Requirements
 Distribution Requirements
36 units
15 units
21 units
96 units
Within the core (“Major required”) Programme curriculum, students must
take all of the following courses (including the Honours Project) for a total of
27 units:
Either
Or
ENG 1110 Introduction to the Study of Literature
ENG 1150 English Grammar and Meaning
ENG 1160 Narrative Art
ENG 1190 Introduction to the Study of Language
ENG 1220 Literature and Culture
ENG 1260 Language, Culture and Society
ENG 2240 Research Skills in English Language and Literature
ENG 2680 English Phonetics and Phonology
ENG 3591-2 Honours Project
Within the Complementary Studies curriculum the core required units for
English Programme Majors include: ENG 1211 (Oral Communication and Public
Speaking) and ENG 1212 (Academic and Professional Writing) (6 units); the
Chinese language (3 units); IT Portfolio (3 units); Values and Meaning of Life (3
units, as selected from an approved list of courses); Physical Education (0 units:
marked on a Pass/Fail basis) and University Life (0 units: marked on a Pass/Fail
basis).
22
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Again within Complementary Studies, the distribution requirements for
English Programme Majors include: any 6 total units outside the Humanities
category (i.e. within the Social Sciences, Business and Communication, and Science
categories), of which one course must be a Science course; any 6 total units outside
the English Programme Major; and any 9 total free elective units.
In general, Complementary Studies courses enable students to acquire an
appreciation for cross- or interdisciplinary learning, so that they may be better able
to cope with the challenges of complex socio-economic, cultural, religious and
political aspects of life in the contemporary world.
Note: The existing Complementary Studies curriculum will be incorporated
into—and transformed by—the newly designated “General Education (GE)
Programme” to be implemented with the roll-out of the four-year (3+3+4)
curriculum commencing AY 2012-2013. Students matriculating after September
2012 will achieve the majority (although not necessarily the entirety) of their GE
units in the first (or freshman) year.
As at AY 2012-2013, the aim of the GE Programme curriculum will be to
provide a foundation for each student’s development as a Whole Person.
Accordingly, by the time students have completed the GE Programme, they are
expected to have achieved a number of intended learning outcomes. Broadly
speaking, students should be able to:
1) communicate effectively as speakers and writers in both English and
Chinese;
2) access and manage complex information and problems using
technologically appropriate means;
3) apply appropriate mathematical reasoning to address problems of
everyday life;
4) achieve an active and healthy lifestyle;
5) use historical and cultural perspectives to gain insight into
contemporary issues;
6) apply, as appropriate, various value systems to decision-making in
personal, professional, and social/political situations;
7) make connections among a variety of disciplines in order to gain
insight into contemporary personal, professional, and community
situations.
23
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
In making the transition from the current Complementary Studies Programme
to the GE Programme curriculum ensuing after September 2012, the Programme’s
continuing emphasis will be on developing transferable intellectual and
interpersonal skills necessary for our graduates--as students, as critical thinkers, and
as responsible citizens.
The Programme is predicated on the the knowledge that graduates with a
good command of spoken and written English as well as exposure to (and some
degree of confidence and facility in) intercultural contexts and communications are
sought-after by employers in a wide variety of occupational areas such as teaching,
the civil service, public relations, publishing, business, banking, marketing, and
translation.
4.3 Courses for Non-Majors
Non-Major Course Offerings. Non-Major courses aim to give students a quick and yet
concrete background to Western literature and English-language linguistics, so that
they can take any advanced-level courses, or even ponder an eventual Minor in the
English Programme if they wish. Non-Major students need not have any prior
knowledge or training in literature or linguistics to take our introductory courses:
for example, ENG1110 (Introduction to Literature) introduces the literary
techniques and conventions of literary genres; ENG1130 (Literary Appreciation)
introduces representative works from the Western literary tradition and how great
writers have informed our thinking and writing; ENG 1150 (English Grammar and
Meaning) introduces elementary approaches to English grammar and
methodologies used in its analysis. Other courses popular with non-Majors include
ENG 2720 (Creative Writing) and ENG 2670 (The English Language and
Communication across Cultures). All of these courses are taught in such a way as
to encourage non-Major students to relate what they learn to their own
backgrounds and knowledge as Chinese students in the twenty-first century.
What non-Major Students are Looking For. Non-Major students usually take English
Programme courses because they are curious about our discipline, about which
they know very little. In general, they want a course that can teach the disciplinary
basics while also giving them a broader perspective about literature and the
fundamentals of grammar and phonology. In addition to regular lectures,
innovative teaching strategies designed for non-Major students include:
24
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
small-group teaching (dedicated tutorial sessions apart from Major students),
consultations outside class hours with the lecturer (including prep sessions before
important assignments such as the final examination), targeted comprehension
assignments/quizzes at the non-Major level, and inculcating knowledge about what
are acceptable standards when completing different assignments in English.
Teaching non-Major students requires tremendous dedication and continuous
attention on the part of our teaching staff.
Student Impact and Language Arts. Since literary and language studies seek to
interpret life through the study, respectively, of great literary works and the
contexts and usages of everyday language, students may come to better understand
themselves and the world around them. Their English skills (listening, speaking,
reading & writing) are also enhanced in the process. They improve as learners of
English through critically and creatively thinking about literary and linguistic
approaches to study, including the development of a life-long interest (or habit)
when reading literary works, as well as a greater awareness of the operations of
language. Language enhancement apart, non-Majors come to the English
Programme because they want to learn more, even as they understand that this
might be a unique opportunity for them, never to be repeated. They will most
likely pursue careers in other areas. Students who are interested in becoming
teachers will be introduced, by contrast, to the pedagogical uses of language arts
and linguistics when using literary works and language games (or puzzles) to teach
English as a second language to kindergarten, primary & secondary level students.
Note: As part of the 3+3+4 rollout of the GE curriculum, the Arts Faculty
has invited each degree-conferring programme to propose a semester-long,
interdisciplinary GE course for year-one students. This proposed course should be
a stand-alone course of interest on its own merits, but also a potential feeder into
the Programme for students who may be interested in joining our Major after their
first year.
Accordingly, during spring 2010 we fielded course proposals for the proposed
English Programme course, tentatively entitled “English Creativity, and Cultures,”
and this interdisciplinary course endorsed by colleagues was described as follows:
The course seeks to examine creativity as a process that forms and
transforms diverse cultures in English. Creativity has become an
important topic when exploring a diversity of literary and linguistic
25
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
approaches and perspectives using a range of everyday and literary
texts in everyday life; these include songs, msn, email messages,
SMS, commercials, blogs, poems, plays, fiction, graphic novels,
hypertext novels, short stories and films.
A full course description for this course, our Programme’s contribution to the
Arts Faculty GE curriculum, may be found in the supplementary documentation
tabled, “English Programme: Four-year Curriculum Supplement.”
4.4 The Concentrations
The English Major Programme is designed to offer students a well-structured
curriculum with rigorous training in English studies, including cross-disciplinary
approaches linking literary with linguistic study, as well as effective coverage of the
core disciplinary elements foundational to each. The Major challenges for students
will be to work deliberately and effectively when seeking to achieve a high standard
of English proficiency. Beyond language enhancement, the Programme recognizes
that greater facility in writing and speaking often attends the pleasures of a
structured and carefully monitored learning process. Encouraged by their teachers
to undertake such a process, students in the Programme strive to develop their
analytical and problem-solving skills even as they achieve greater access to the
subtleties and nuances of the English language and its various literatures.
Currently, students may choose to concentrate their study on one of the
following three areas in their second, third and (where applicable) fourth years:
a) Language-in-Depth;
b) Literature-in-Depth; and
c) Stylistics and Comparative Literature.
4.4.1 Language-in-Depth Concentration
The Language-in-Depth Concentration allows students to undertake in-depth
studies in English language and linguistics, with the aim of pursuing either
postgraduate studies or professional careers where expertise pertaining to language
study is required. Students in this concentration must take at least eight among
eighteen available Concentration courses.
26
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
The eighteen courses cover a broad range of linguistic sub-fields—including
the structure of language in relation to the human mind, linguistics as a study of
culture and society, and special/advanced topics—thereby allowing students to
custom-make their own curriculum so as to align their training with their ambitions.
For a complete list of Special/Advanced Topics courses offered since AY
2004-2005, see Appendix F.
Students choosing this Concentration are required to take eight of the
following courses (24 units), plus three other courses from the other
Concentration(s). At least five out of the total eleven courses must be at 3000 level
or above.
ENG2160 Language Acquisition and Language Learning
ENG2190 Language Pragmatics
ENG2260 Text Analysis
ENG2640 Language Change and Language Contact
ENG2650 Topics in English Grammar
ENG2660 Vocabulary in Context
ENG2670 The English Language and Communication Across Cultures
ENG2760 Language and the Humanities
ENG3450 Language and Gender
ENG3610 Bilingualism and Bilingual Education
ENG3640 Special Topic in Linguistics
ENG3650 Special Topic in Language Studies
ENG3660 Language and Education
ENG3670 Discovering Grammars
ENG3680 Discourse Analysis
ENG3740 Functional Approaches to Grammar
ENG4730 Advanced Topic in Linguistics
ENG4740 Advanced Topic in Language Studies
Since 2003, the list of courses has been modified and enriched continually
so as to ensure that students are given up-to-date training. Instructors of the
various courses also update course materials and references regularly, so that
curriculum offerings may keep pace with advances in the field.
4.4.2 Literature-in-Depth Concentration
27
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
The Literature-in-Depth Concentration specializes in the study of texts, contexts,
and writers in American, British, and world literatures written in English. Courses
are organized to provide students broad grounding in literary history and genres
(including fiction, drama, poetry, and prose) as well as to offer students in-depth
knowledge of particular authors and periods.
Students choosing this Concentration are required to take eight of the
following courses (24 units), plus three other courses from the other
Concentration(s). At least five out of the total eleven courses must be at 3000 level
or above:
ENG 2130 Literature and Society
ENG 2140 Literature and Persuasion
ENG 2170 Western Poetry and Poetics
ENG 2270 American Popular Fiction after 1950
ENG 2720 Creative Writing
ENG 2750 Poetry
ENG 2830 Western Critical Approaches to Literature
ENG 3440 Literature and the Nobel Prize
ENG 3710 Single Author Forum: Prose Fiction
ENG 3720 Single Author Forum: Poetry
ENG 3730 Single Author Forum: Drama
ENG 3760 The Child and Literature
ENG 3780 Great Novels in English
ENG 3850 Special Topic in Literature
ENG 3870 American Literature
ENG 3920 Twentieth-Century Literature
ENG 3930 Twentieth-Century Poetry
ENG 3940 Shakespeare and His Contemporaries
ENG 3950 Creative Writing Workshop
ENG 3990 Special Topic in Western Critical Theory
ENG 4720 Advanced Topic in Literatures in English
4.4.3 Stylistics and Comparative Literature Concentration
The Stylistics and Comparative Literature Concentration offers students an
opportunity to study the interrelations of different literatures, especially Chinese
and Western literatures. While the stylistics component enables students to analyze
28
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
literature through its figurative use of language, the comparative literature
component introduces students to common concerns in world literature. The
comparative approach also strengthens students’ cultural awareness and sensitivity,
as well as their abilities in handling cross-cultural issues, allowing them to apply
their knowledge of comparative literary theory to the reading of literary works or
to situations in real life.
Students choosing this Concentration are required to take eight of the
following courses (24 units), plus three other courses from the other
Concentration(s). At least five out of the total eleven courses must be at 3000 level
or above.
ENG 2120 Western Drama
ENG 2310 Literature, the Arts and Media
ENG 2320 Great Works in World Literature
ENG 2820 Comp. Literature: Theory and Methodology
ENG 2830 Western Critical Approaches to Literature
ENG 3280 Major Theme in Literature
ENG 3290 Major Genre in Literature
ENG 3410 Major Movement or Trend in Literature
ENG 3420 Modern Drama
ENG 3430 The Short Story
ENG 3750 Special Topic in Comparative Literature
ENG 3770 Literature and Film
ENG 3820 Chinese-Western Literary Relations
ENG 3830 Literature and Translation
ENG 3860 Styles and Structures
ENG 3990 Special Topic in Western Critical Theory
ENG 4710 Advanced Topic in Comparative Literature
Note: Pending Faculty and University review and endorsement, the
Programme Management Committee has voted to consolidate the existing
Literature-in-Depth and the Stylistics and Comparative Literature concentrations
into one newly re-named concentration, “Literary and Comparative Studies.” We
are also interested in exploring the option of a “General Studies” concentration
whereby students may accumulate the necessary Major elective units, in any
combination, across different Concentrations. See the tabled documentation,
“English Programme: Four-year Curriculum Supplement.”
29
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
4.5 The Three-Year Programme Study Schedule (as revised AY 2003-2004)
_________________________________________________________________________
Course Code & No.
Sem 1 Sem 2
Total
and Title
Units
Units
Units
Year One
ENG 1220
Literature & Culture
or
3
3
ENG 1260
Language, Culture & Society
ENG 1110
Introduction to the Study of Literature
3
3
ENG 1150
English Grammar & Meaning
3
3
ENG 1160
Narrative Art
3
3
ENG 1190
Introduction to the Study of Language
3
3
ENG 1211
Oral Communication and Public Speaking
3
3
ENG 1212
Academic and Professional Writing
3
3
I.T.
1180
Information Management Technology
3
3
LANG 1480
University Chinese
3
3
Values & the Meaning of Life Course
3
3
Complementary Studies Distribution Requirement Courses
3
3
6
U.L. 1121-2
University Life
Physical Education Courses
____
____ ____
18
18
36
Year Two
ENG 2240
Research Skills in English Language & Literature
ENG 2680
English Phonetics & Phonology
Major Elective Courses
Complementary Studies Distribution Requirement Courses
Complementary Studies Free Elective Course
3
3
9
3
____
18
9
3
3
____
15
3
3
18
6
3
____
33
3
6
3
____
12
3
9
3
____
15
6
15
6
____
27
Year Three
ENG 3591-2
Honours Project
Major Elective Courses
Complementary Studies Free Elective Courses
4.6 The Honours Project
The English Programme is an enthusiastic supporter of the University’s Honours
Project requirement, unique among Hong Kong’s tertiary institutions. In their
final year of study, students research and write on a topic selected by them in
30
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
negotiation with their Chief Advisor (and subject to the approval of the Honours
Project Committee) and present a final project of 7,000 to 10,000 words in length.
To achieve a passing grade, this substantial piece of research must demonstrate the
satisfactory study, analysis, and written exposition of an idea, literary concept,
language issue or a defensible combination of these. In general, the Honours
Project provides students with an excellent opportunity to apply the knowledge
and research training accumulated over their previous years of study towards
engagement in their own analyses and research.
Although student-centred and to a great extent motivated by independent
inquiry on the part of the individual student, the Honours Project process and
roll-out also depends upon the close guidance of the student’s Chief Advisor. The
role of the Chief Advisor is to supervise the student’s research from inception to
satisfactory culmination with an eye toward initial feasibility, sustainable scope of
analysis, and breadth of applicable critical work germane to the topic. The Chief
Advisor may also offer advice concerning the style and presentation of the final
product.
While both staff and students would agree that the Honours Project is at
times an arduous undertaking, particularly during the final year of study, its
benefits over the longer-term have been consistently endorsed over the years. The
successful completion of the project can give students a better appreciation of
their research capabilities and potential, and they regularly use the Honours Project,
either in part or in whole, as a postgraduate-application writing sample.
For a full list of Honours Projects topics endorsed by the Honours Project
Committee since AY 2004-2005 (all projects subsequently completed) as well as
this year’s Honours Project Handbook please refer to Appendix G.
4.7 Foreign Exchange/Internship Opportunities
Students in the English Programme are strongly encouraged to go on foreign
exchange so as to extend their learning experience beyond the domain of the
home university. We invite students to participate in exchange for one semester or
an entire academic year at any of the University’s partner institutions in over 30
countries/regions. Moreover, local and non-local summer internships (to places as
near as Guangdong and Macau and as far-flung as Australia and Mexico) are also
available to students wishing to apply acquired knowledge to real-world settings.
31
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Here is what several of our students have had to say about their overseas study
experiences:
“At first . . . I expected [my
overseas experience at Simon
Fraser University] to be obligatory,
rather than a bonus to my college
life. [Yet] this exchange, to me, was
by far the best decision I have ever
made. An intellectually and
culturally fulfilling year it has
been!”
“My semester as an exchange student at
West Virginia University (WVU) was
incredible. . . . Every meal at WVU was like
a United Nations event, with friends from
different countries, like the UK, Morocco,
Japan, Pakistan, and others. This kind of
unique experience continues to instill in me
broader perspectives of the world in terms
of its diversified cultures and belief
systems.”
--Queenie Tsui, B.A. (Hons) English, --Agnes Kwong, B.A. (Hons) English
Class of 2011
Class of 2009
Internships and overseas exchanges offer our students the following
opportunities for academic, professional, and personal development:






studying/working in another setting at minimal extra cost;
living in a different geography and culture;
developing self-confidence and responsibility;
improving language skills;
enhancing career prospects;
becoming more adaptable and dynamic individuals.
Our Programme has a number of students returning to Hong Kong each year
with novel, international insights to share with their classmates. The following
comment is typical of our student returnees, who generally come back
transformed, more mature and hopeful individuals, ready to face not only the
challenges of their final year of study, but also the wider world upon graduation:
32
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
“The focus of my immersion programme at the University of Queensland
[Australia] was on teacher professional development, which incorporated
school visits, a drama workshop, lesson observations & demonstrations,
and much more. The sharing from my Australian counterparts stimulated
me to rethink ways in which to renew or expand pedagogical methods in
Hong Kong. My experience proved to be culturally enriching, too; in
my non-study hours I paid visits to official museums, like South Bank, and
visited small and tasteful art galleries, bookbarns, and flea markets in
surrounding small towns. It was a life-changing experience for a city girl. I
explored nature and the slow-paced, high-quality lifestyle of Australia,
where I learned to filter out unnecessary gratifications and false desires.
Living with a host family and mingling with local and foreign students
allowed for cultural exchange--and I picked up some colloquial
expressions which would have been way less fun if they were gleaned
from a textbook.”
--Queenie Ng, B.A. (Hons), English/English Language Teaching,
Class of 2011
As ever, our own students are the best ambassadors of our Programme,
University, and community. Beyond language enhancement, the overseas study
experience allows our students to legitimately lay claim—beyond rhetoric—to the
whole-person claims and justification underlying our University’s curriculum and
its distinctiveness.
The following chart details the number of our Programme students opting for
overseas study experience, with the number peaking during AY 2009-2010 at eight
students which represents just under one-quarter of our annual first-year,
first-degree intake. One can only hope that with added student interest and
sustainable funding from our University and its partnering overseas institutions,
this number will grow.
Academic Year
2009-10
2008-09
2007-08
2006-07
2005-06
2004-05
No. of Students on Exchange
8
6
5
2
4
3
33
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Following are listed universities where our students have gone on exchange:
Birmingham-Southern College
Swinburne University of Technology
Georg-August Universität (Germany)
University of Nottingham
Kalamazoo College (Michigan, USA)
University of Bergen
Liverpool Hope University
University of British Columbia
McGill University
University of Joensuu (Finland)
Mercer University
University of Leeds
Ohio University
University of Saskatchewan
Pepperdine University
University of Turku (Finland)
Rollins College
West Virginia University
Seinan Gakuin University (Japan)
Simon Fraser University
Section 5: Academic Partnerships
5.1 The Growing Necessity/Impact of Our Partnerships
The decisions we make within the English Major Programme are very likely to
impact upon our broader work and partnerships within and beyond the Faculty of
Arts, as our various roles in the delivery of quality English-language education
diversify and grow.
While we have our own core agenda, our Programme nevertheless strives to
maintain dialogue and to sustain good relations with our other stakeholders, across
units and faculties (Figure 3), as parties to a common enterprise of delivering the
finest quality courses in English literature, language and English-language teaching
possible.
34
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Figure 3. Delivery of English Language Courses Across Units and Faculties
Faculty of Arts
MA in Language
Language
Studies (MALS)
Centre (LC)
ENG Major
Programme
ENG ED
Double Degree
& “2+2”
Programmes
Faculty
of Social
Sciences
In addition to delivering its core undergraduate Major Programme
(culminating in the B.A. (Hons) in English Language and Literature), the
Department of English Language and Literature delivers a wide variety of
undergraduate courses in English via two additional platforms, including:

the ENG/ED “Double Degree” Programme. Offered in partnership
with the HKBU Department of Education Studies since AY 2005-06, this
four-year taught curriculum confers on graduates two quality Honours
degrees: the B. A. (Hons) in English Language and Literature and the B. Ed.
(Hons) in English Language Teaching;

the “2+2” Programme. Offered since AY2001-2002, this four-year
taught undergraduate programme (including student teaching modules and
an overseas immersion experience) confers a B. A. (Hons) in English
Language and Literature along with a government-recognized Diploma in
English Language Teaching.
35
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
English Major Programme staff members are also active mentors, principal
supervisors, and second readers of student research at the postgraduate level,
including both full- and part-time graduate studies leading to the degrees of Master
of Philosophy (M.Phil.) and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degrees for students in
the English Major Programme and the Language Centre. For a list of our current
research postgraduate students and recent graduates please consult (Appendix H).
The respective Heads of the Translation and Humanities programmes, as well
as the Course Director of MALS and the ENGED (“Double Degree”) are
responsible for the administration and monitoring of their own academic units,
while the English Programme Head oversees staffing and resources within its own
Major, including the administration of the B.A. Programme in English Language
and Literature.
5.1.1 The Double Degree (BA ENG/BEd ELT)
The Double Degree in English Language and Literature and English Language
Teaching is a four-year full-time programme jointly offered by the Department of
English Language and Literature and the Department of Education Studies. It
provides thorough preparation over four years in two distinct disciplines: English
Language and Literature, and English Language Teaching and pedagogy. Students
need to take a total of 133 credit units for graduation (51 units of English
Programme courses, 52 units of Education Studies Programme courses, 24 units
of Complementary Studies courses, and 6 units for the Honours Project), and they
are awarded two Honours degrees upon completion. Double Degree students take
most of their courses together with the single-degree students, and there is no
difference in the way courses are assessed for the two groups of students.
The Double Degree programme has an edge over other similar programmes
offered in Hong Kong, as it places equal emphasis upon English Programme and
English Language Education course knowledge, and it allows students to specialize
in either English Literature or Language, or to take a combination of Language
and Literature courses. During the course of their studies, students will undertake
one period of School Experience and two periods of Supervised Teaching Practice
in a local primary or secondary school. Other special features of the Double
Degree include an 8-week Overseas Immersion programme – at present held at the
University of Queensland (UQ) in Brisbane, Australia. During the immersion
36
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
experience, students stay with local families, they study at UQ, and they visit local
schools. The immersion programme is designed to enhance their language learning,
to expand their professional reference points, and to enhance their cultural
sensitivity and awareness.
The Double Degree is designed to prepare graduates for teaching and
teaching-related careers, but other career paths are also possible (such as in
journalism, editing & publishing, communications and public relations). The first
batch of students graduated in 2009, and all nineteen graduates were offered jobs
(some of them received several job offers) by the time they graduated; on this basis,
it is probably fair to say that the Double Degree programme is already establishing
a good reputation among local employers.
5.1.2
The “2+2” Programme (BA ENG/DipEd)
An alternative to the Double Degree is what is referred to as the “2+2”
Programme, also offered in cooperation with the University’s Department of
Education Studies. Culminating in an Honours degree in English Language and
Literature (B.A. Hons), in addition to a government-recognized Diploma in
Education (Dip.Ed.), the “2+2” Programme is similar to the Double Degree in
some respects: it is also a 4-year programme involving intensive training in two
fields; it also requires that students successfully complete School Experience,
Supervised Teaching Practice and overseas immersion elements.
Like Double Degree students, “2+2” Programme students are fully qualified
teachers upon graduation. The clear advantage of the “2+2” Programme is that
students may opt for a teaching career at a later stage of their single-degree
programme. By contrast, Double Degree students study both English and
Education courses throughout the entire length of their tightly structured
curriculum, whereas “2+2” students only begin their Education Studies courses at
the beginning of their second year.
Before the Double Degree programme was introduced in 2005, the 2+2
Programme was fairly popular and about 10 students on average enrolled per year.
However, since most of the students who might be interested in pursuing teaching
careers now join the Double Degree, the 2+2 Programme is attracting a
proportionally smaller number of students every year (about 2-4 students in total
each year), even as the Double Degree is poised to grow.
37
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Perhaps the best ambassadors of the Double Degree and “2+2” Programmes
have been the graduating students themselves, who, in time, have become
inspirational teachers for the next generation of Hong Kong secondary-school
students. As attested by our student-graduates and the wider community, English
Majors are uniquely equipped to offer valuable contributions to primary and
secondary-school education in Hong Kong. Even as we consider our English
Major Programme foremost as an academic center of excellence, we are
nevertheless delighted that the teacher-training curriculum we provide our students
is making a positive impact upon the wider community beyond the liberal arts
philosophy we promulgate.
Additionally, the overseas English-language immersion component of the
“2+2” and Double Degree programmes (cohorts from both programmes have
attended quality immersion experiences at Leeds (UK) and in Brisbane (Australia))
has produced a discernible improvement in language proficiency, both written and
spoken, as well as greater maturity in outlook and disposition for our returning
students.
5.2 Taught Postgraduate Degrees
At the taught postgraduate course level, English Major Programme staff continue
to contribute teaching in support of:
 the M. A. in Language Studies (MALS). With both part-time and
full-time streams, the self-funded MALS programme, benefiting from the
on-going partnership (since 1992) between the Language Centre and the
English Major Programme, represents an important growth area for all
participating units moving forward.
 the Post-graduate Diploma in English Subject Knowledge (PGSK) for
English Language Teachers. With both part-time and full-time streams,
and specifically geared toward active teaching professionals, the part-time
PGSK (offered AY 2004-2007) catered to evening and weekend study,
resulting in a government accreditation for English teachers in local schools.
A full-time, approved PGSK programme is currently inactive, pending
sufficient student enrollment.
38
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
5.2.1
Master of Arts in Language Studies (MALS)
MALS is a taught-degree programme consisting of a full-time study mode (lasting,
under normal circumstances, for one academic year without the dissertation or
one-and-a-half academic years including the dissertation) and a part-time study
mode (normally lasting for two full academic years). All students are required to
take five compulsory core courses. In addition to the five core courses, students
may choose to (i) take two electives and write a dissertation; or (ii) take four
electives (without a dissertation) to fulfill the graduation requirements.
The MALS programme is jointly taught by faculty members of the English
Major Programme and the Language Centre. It provides knowledge about
language and prepares students for special applications of language analysis to
problems arising from the students’ particular interests or work experiences.
Peaking in AY 2007-2008, the teaching contributions of English Programme
staff to MALS are not inconsiderable, year on year, as indicated in the following
table:
ENG Major Programme: Contributions to MALS1
Academic Year
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Total
No. of Teaching Hours
51
118
135
96
75
475
(HK$) Equivalent
102,000
236,000
270,000
192,000
150,000
950,000
billable hours computed on a pro rata basis by academic year
1
We value the MALS partnership and consider it a key focus area for
development and consolidation moving forward. We hope that the planning for the
longer-term development and growth of our Programme’s Language-in-Depth
concentration could hold this partnership squarely in view, particularly as regards
sustaining our on-going commitment to MALS even as we seek to maintain a
high-quality undergraduate curriculum.
39
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
The five English Major Programme staff members currently teaching for
MALS are listed as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
5.2.2
Dr Hiroko Itakura
Dr. Kenneth Kong
Dr. Hans Ladegaard
Dr. Wee Lian Hee
Dr. Suying Yang
Post-Graduate Diploma in English Subject Knowledge (PGSK) for English
Language Teachers
In response to the Education Bureau’s (EDB) new requirement that language
teachers trained in areas other than language and literature should complete a post
diploma programme in the relevant language’s subject knowledge (PGSK), the
Programme ran an EDB-endorsed part-time PGSK programme from 2004 to
2007. The aim of this programme was to provide in-service teachers with
knowledge in English language and literature.
Section 6: Quality Assurance Mechanisms
6.1 Overview
The English Language and Literature Major Programme was designed in AY
1985-86 by staff members of the English Department and offered as one of the
five major programmes under the B.A. (Hons.) degree in Arts and Social Sciences
(B.A.A.S.S.) subsequently accredited in 1986 by the Council for National Academic
Awards (C.N.A.A.) in the United Kingdom. The Programme has accordingly been
degree-granting since 1988.
During the period from 1986-1995, the design, operation and quality assurance
work of the English Major Programme were monitored by the B.A.A.S.S. Course
Board. Proposed modifications to the English Major were scrutinized by the
B.A.A.S.S. Course Board prior to further review by the relevant Faculty Boards and
the Course Accreditation and Review Committee, before being sent to the
University Senate for final approval.
40
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
In 1999, the former B.A.A.S.S. Course management structure was replaced
when individual Majors were given full ownership of their academic programmes.
As the academic programmes have matured, responsibility for quality assurance
processes has devolved to individual departments and programmes with the
introduction of an independent peer review process, known after 2001 as the
on-site Academic Consultation Panel (ACP) visits. The English Major Programme
had its first ACP visit in 2003. For the 2003 ACP Panel Report, our Programme
responses to it at the time and actions taken since then, please refer again to
Appendix B.
6.2 Current Practice
Programmes are normally reviewed once every six years, and the Academic
Consultation Panel is invited to make a holistic assessment of the academic
programme(s) under review. The Panel’s observations, comments and
recommendations will be studied by the programmes concerned by means of a
Response Report, which attempts to address all major issues raised by the Panel
and which is reviewed by the Faculty Board. A three-member Faculty Quality
Assurance Committee, chaired by the Associate Dean of Arts, is then set up to
review the ACP Report as well as the Response Report from the programme
concerned, before a final recommendation is made to the central Quality
Assurance Committee via the Faculty Board.
Members of the English Major Programme work closely with the Academic
Quality Support Section of the Academic Registry and other centrally administered
quality assurance units (such as the Quality Assurance Committee, the Academic
Regulations and Review Committee, the Centre for Holistic Teaching and Learning
and the Graduate Committee) to ensure that all programmes comply with the
rigorous academic standards set by the University. The Programme Head is a
member of the Senate, the highest governing body in charge of academic matters
in the University.
Curriculum design and structure, teaching and learning strategies, and
assessment mechanisms are under annual review so as to ensure that the English
Major Programme offerings are current, including regular input from students,
alumni, and the Advisory Committee. The Programme Head is assisted by the
three Concentration Coordinators, the Honours Project Coordinator and the
41
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Examination Coordinator in the management and monitoring of the overall quality
of teaching and learning. The Programme Head is further responsible for
upholding the academic standards of the English Major Programme.
As a general practice, all Programme-related matters such as curriculum
revision, the setting of examination questions, review and approval of final grades
of individual courses, the assignment of Honours Project advisors, review of
students’ proposed Honours Project topics, assessment of Honours Projects, and
classifications of Honours’ degrees are discussed and approved by the Programme
Management Committee. Regular meetings are held throughout the academic year
to discuss Programme-related issues. Working sub-committees or task forces may
also be formed by the Programme Head to address specific issues such as the
territory-wide 3+3+4 Education Reform and the UGC-initiated Outcome-based
Teaching and Learning regimen.
As the student intake in the English Major Programme now approaches (and
may exceed) sixty every year (including English Programme and Double Degree
students matriculating via JUPAS recruitment, non-JUPAS entrants as well as
Associate Degree holders entering our second-year), it is important that the
Programme Management Committee function effectively, as a quality assurance
unit. Under this system, problems are readily identified and appropriate actions
taken to address teaching needs and the quality of students’ learning. It will be
ideal if small-sized/low-enrollment classes can continue to be offered, so as to
facilitate effective teaching as well as to address students’ individual learning needs.
An on-line Teaching Evaluation (TE) exercise is conducted every semester
by the Academic Registry for all courses with a teaching component, the results
of which are sent to teaching staff, heads of Programmes/Departments and the
relevant Faculty Dean for appropriate follow-up action. The Programme Head is
required to review the Teaching Evaluation results and provides advice for
improvement where appropriate. Colleagues are encouraged to comment on
their teaching performance, as well as to reflect on their teaching strategies in
their Annual Activity Report submitted annually to the Programme Head. Issues
related to teaching quality are discussed formally in the annual consultation
meeting between the Programme Head and individual faculty members, as well
as informally between the Head and the staff concerned throughout the
academic year.
42
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Section 7: Learning Outcomes and Graduate Attributes
7.1 Outcome-based Teaching and Learning (OBTL) Approach
The Outcome-based teaching and learning (OBTL) approach indicates a
shift from an instruction-based pedagogy toward an outcome-driven model in
which instructors define for their students a set of measurable outcomes at the
beginning of each course. Curriculum development, course design, instructional
materials, teaching strategies, and assessment plans are “reverse engineered” so as
to actualize specific designated learning outcomes. Students are expected not just
to perform structured tasks in a given course but also to acquire a set of
transferable skills, demonstrating their ability to create, analyse, critique, research,
organize, write, and present ideas in different environments. With clear goals, clear
instruction, and clear assessments, the OBTL approach enables instructors and
students to “meet or exceed” the exit outcomes.
7.2 Course Intended Learning Outcomes (CILOs)
Individual Course Intended Learning Outcomes (CILOs) refer to a set of
course-specific, learnable, measurable, and assessable outcomes that are designed
to achieve the aims and objectives of each course. All courses are required to map
learning objectives, developed in course assessment plans or other instructional
activities, to the appropriate set of CILOs. Instructors establish clear goals as to
what knowledge, skills and abilities their students are expected to attain as a result
of the learning experience. The entire Programme curriculum utilizes CILOs for
each taught course (see Appendix I for a complete set of Programme course
documents.)
CILOs can be related to five broad categories: (1) knowledge acquisition and
application (to explain, to define, to distinguish, to apply); (2) critical thinking skills
(to compare, to examine, to organize, to analyse); (3) practical skills (to
demonstrate, to execute, to construct, to research); (4) independent, reflective
judgment (to challenge, to question, to persuade, to resolve); (5) presentational
skills (to argue, to write, to present ideas in verbal or written form). The course
syllabus, course materials, instructional methods, and assessments aim at achieving
the CILOs. Teaching and learning activities such as interactive lectures,
student-based discussions, tutorial presentations, case studies, journal keeping,
essays, quizzes, Moodle (internet delivery) postings, portfolios, and examinations
are linked so as to assess students’ fulfillment of designated learning outcomes.
43
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
7.3 Graduate Attributes
The English Programme is committed to producing graduates who demonstrate
the Graduate Attributes of HKBU. The Programme’s curriculum, pedagogy,
assessment criteria and social experiences will ensure that students develop these
attributes during their undergraduate years. As via the CHTL website
(http://chtl.hkbu.edu.hk/ga/) HKBU graduates should:
1) have up-to-date, in-depth knowledge of an academic specialty, as well as a
broad range of cultural and general knowledge;
2) be able to think critically and creatively;
3) be independent, lifelong learners with an open mind and an inquiring spirit;
4) have trilingual and biliterate competence in English and Chinese, and the
ability to articulate ideas clearly and coherently;
5) have the necessary information literacy and IT skills, as well as numerical
and problem-solving skills, to function effectively in work and everyday life;
6) be responsible citizens with an international outlook and a sense of ethics
and civility;
7) be ready to serve, lead, and work in a team, and to pursue a healthy lifestyle.
All in all, the overarching Graduate Attributes—scholarship, lifelong learning,
language and information literacies, global citizenship, and leadership—reflect the
university’s belief in “Whole Person Education.” These attributes are developed
through students’ active participation in the English Programme, through
complementary studies and extra-curricular activities.
7.4 Programme Intended Learning Outcomes (PILOs)
Individual PILOs (Programme Intended Learning Outcomes) refer to a set of
desirable skills, abilities and learning achievements that should be acquired by all
English Major Programme students during their time at HKBU, regardless of their
Concentration areas or the specific courses they will take. The English Major
Programme aims at achieving the following outcomes:
1) Effective Scholarship: English Programme students should demonstrate a good
grasp of linguistic and literary knowledge, with relevant connections to
forefront theories, concepts and schools of thought.
44
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
2) Academic Literacy: English Programme students should be able to analyze
critically and creatively diverse texts and arguments, and to compose
convincing essays, projects and presentations employing appropriate
rhetorical strategies and up-to-date IT tools.
3) English Proficiency: English Programme students should be able to
communicate effectively and competently in English, both orally and in
written form, in a cross-cultural environment.
4) Research Skills: English Programme students should develop the ability to
locate, evaluate and synthesize relevant information in literary and language
studies from a variety of sources and media. They should further be able to
identify and engage with information in literary and language studies using
diverse explanations, interpretations, and theories and to apply these to
specific texts.
5) International and Interdisciplinary Perspectives: English Programme students
should adopt a cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approach to learning so
that knowledge and ideas from different disciplines and cultures may be
combined to yield new insights, to solve problems, to complete projects, and
to accomplish different written and oral tasks. Students should also
demonstrate cross-cultural awareness and value the importance of linguistic,
ethical and cultural diversity.
6) Teamwork and Employability: English Programme students should demonstrate
the capacity to work with people, to handle deadlines and responsibilities, to
address interpersonal conflicts meaningfully, and to acquire social skills of a
calibre that will contribute to their employability and personal growth.
The PILOs are achieved through on-going course approval and review
processes, curriculum design, innovative teaching modes (e.g. team-taught courses
or seminar-based instruction), creative teaching and learning activities, and the
monitoring of student feedback through teaching evaluation and survey
mechanisms.
45
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
7.5 Alignment of PILOs with Graduate Attributes
While the coursework curriculum of the English Programme is designed to
provide opportunities conducive to the development of each and every generic
Graduate Attribute during a student’s undergraduate experience at HKBU, the
Programme PILOs place special emphasis on knowledge acquisition (GA#1),
critical thinking and creativity (GA#2), independent thinking (GA#3), and
language proficiency (GA#4).
The following matrix details how our designated Programme ILOs should
reinforce the University’s GAs:
ENG
PILOs\
HKBUGAs
PILO 1
Effective
Scholarship
GA1
Knowledge
GA 2
Thinking
GA 3
Learning






GA 4
Communication
GA5
Skills
GA 6
Citizenship
GA 7
Teamwork
PILO 2
Academic
Literacy
PILO 3
English
Proficiency
PILO 4
Research Skills
PILO 5
International &
Interdisciplinary
Perspectives
PILO 6
Teamwork and
Employability

















46

English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
You will note from the matrix that, given the academic focus of our
curriculum, PILOs 5 and 6, international and interdisciplinary perspectives and
teamwork, respectively, match with no less than five University GAs whereas PILO
3 (English proficiency), while still constitutive, matches with only three GAs.
From our perspective, this mapping is not coincidental: the ultimate challenge
for integrated English Studies (see Section 10) is to integrate the academic and
skills-based study of English as unique to the Hong Kong context. As with PILOs
5 and 6, we seek to integrate the academic study of the English language and its
literatures with an international perspective for our students. This integrated
approach, across English disciplines and in tandem with our partnering Faculty
units, can inform student experiences and research beyond disciplinary boundaries,
as well as broaden their consciousness with the goal of communicating more
effectively with others, whether as part of a team assigned to a specific task, or as
part of a wider community facing complex social problems requiring creative
solutions.
We believe in measurable English proficiency as a legitimate aim and target for
the students of our curriculum. Beyond the target of proficiency, however, we also
believe in our Programme as providing an academic foundation (in the ethos of
the “whole person”) that educates young citizens holistically. We believe that, upon
successful completion of our Programme, our graduates will be able to use English
not only proficiently but creatively, and subsequently throughout their lives,
communicating in service to their families, future careers, and community.
Section 8: Student and Graduate Profiles
8.1 Student Profile
Including second-year placements, Double Degree students, and the occasional
non-JUPAS candidate (e.g. Principal’s Nomination, Advanced Form Six or other
recognized scheme entrants), the English Major Programme teaches at or near 60
students annually as per the detailed chart (including per Concentration
breakdown) below.
47
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
English Programme: Student Enrollments (Year on Year), 2004-2009
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
43 (5%)
31 (3%)
28 (3%)
28 (2%)
29 (2%)
25 (1%)
917
1,033
963
1,122
1,362
1,932
Yr 1
0
0
0
0
1
4
Yr 2
2
11
12
17
17
15
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
Yr 1
0
0
4
2
2
2
Transfer Student
1
0
0
0
0
0
(0)
(0)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
No. of Students Admitted
Yr 1 (%)
JUPAS
Non-JUPAS
Mainland
Others
Total No. of
Qualified
Applications
(Foundation Yr)
(Yr 1)
Foundation Yr
Total
Concentration

Yr 1
44
Yr 2
2
Language
17
Literature
12
CompLit
14
46
31
11
42
22
43*
12
8
32
12
44
24
42
10
30
17
47
18
44
10
13
16
32
17
49
21
47
15
12
31
15
24
48*
8
12
Foundation Year precedes Year One of the regular Programme curriculum.
* lower number indicates student attrition (drop-out) cases.
When expressed solely in terms of the percentage of total applications, our
matriculating students are truly outstanding and increasingly so: six years ago, we
admitted the top 5% of all JUPAS Band A applicants; this past year, the top 1%.
During AY 2009-2010, for example, we welcomed applications from 1932
applicants for the English Major Programme and 46 students (25 JUPAS Year
One students, 19 non-JUPAS students in both Years One and Two, and 2
Foundation Year/Mainland students) were admitted. As with previous years, the
majority of Year One students are admitted through JUPAS Band A (i.e. students
select our Programme as one of their top three choices out of a possible 25
choices).
48
46
44*
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
You can readily note the impact, after AY 2005-2006, of the second-year
placement students whose numbers have grown steadily—peaking at seventeen
across AY 2007-2009, before falling back to fifteen this past year. So, too, the
carefully regulated emergence of mainland Chinese students on the stat sheet is
noteworthy—high achievers from the Mainland have been entering our
Programme via the University’s merit-based Foundation Programme at the rate of
two per year since 2006. As a longer-term initiative (see Section 11.2), we are
interested in exploring the possibility of capturing both of these student
niches—the second-year placement (non-JUPAS) students as well as
high-achieving Mainland students—in self-funded programme (or other modular
summer session) offerings.
Overall, the statistics offer a strong endorsement of our students’ profile upon
entry to our Progamme: as selective, talented, and among the top achievers in their
secondary schools.
8.2 Annual Survey and Exit Survey
As a Programme, we recognize that the strongest evidence for the success of our
teaching and guidance is the value our graduating students will attribute to their
experiences while under our supervision.
Accordingly, we feel that it is appropriate to sound both our current students’
and recent graduates’ opinions periodically, in order to secure their input when
assessing our existing offerings, policies, and practices. We also seek to solicit
their feedback when considering new areas of possible curriculum development.
Specifically, we ask all English Major Programme students to complete an “Annual
Student Survey.” We also request that recent alumni complete an “Exit Survey for
Recent Graduates” (again, please refer to Appendix E).
A blend of qualitative and quantitative findings, the Annual Survey
questionnaires are not designed to be intrusive; nor do their results claim any
absolute or entirely prescriptive authority about our students’ often subjective
responses across a variety of individualized experiences. Rather, the surveys have
a descriptive purpose when assessing the efficacy of our existing Programme
offerings in a holistic sense. Are we meeting, to a reasonable extent, the
expectations of our students? If not, what modifications need to be made?
49
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
The chart on the following page presents the data in response to specific
questions selected from the Annual Survey. In making their responses, students
were asked to indicate their opinion of Programme relevance using a five-point
scale, from A to E, with A representing “not at all” relevant and E representing
“greatly” relevant. While an overall composite of all data findings from the Annual
Surveys falls beyond the scope of this document, we have extracted data in
response to the following four questions:
A3. How well did the Major (required) courses in the English Major
Programme strengthen your skills in the English language?
A10. How well did the Major (required) courses in the English Major
Programme prepare you for your career?
B13. How well did the Concentration (Major elective) courses and the
Honours Project strengthen your English language skills?
B16. How well did the Concentration (Major elective) courses and the
Honours Project prepare you for your career?
50
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
English Programme: Annual Student Survey Result (Specific Questions), AY 2005-2009
Total No.
Students
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
A3 D
A3 E
A10 D
A10 E
B13 D
B13 E
B16 D
B16 E
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
30
13 (43.3%)
10 (33.3%)
14 (46.7%)
10 (33.3%)
2 (6.7%)
0 (0%)
1 (3.3%)
1 (3.3%)
43
23 (53.5%)
9 (20.9%)
18 (41.9%)
10 (23.3%)
19 (44.2%)
10 (23.3%)
15 (34.9)
2 (4.7%)
43
12 (27.9%)
18 (41.9%)
17 (39.5%)
8 (18.6%)
22 (51.2%)
11 (25.6%)
17 (39.5%)
9 (20.9%)
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
30
15 (50%)
7 (23.3%)
10 (33.3%)
7 (23.3%)
8 (26.7%)
2 (6.7%)
3 (10%)
4 (13.3%)
45
25 (55.6%)
7 (15.6%)
24 (53.3%)
9 (20%)
20 (44.4%)
9 (20%)
21 (46.7%)
6 (13.3%)
48
26 (54.2%)
9 (18.8%)
22 (45.8%)
8 (16.7%)
24 (50%)
11 (22.9%)
12 (25%)
9 (18.8%)
2
0 (0%)
1 (50%)
0 (0%)
1 (50%)
0 (0%)
1 (50%)
0 (0%)
1 (50%)
29
16 (55.2%)
1 (3.4%)
15 (51.7%)
3 (10.3%)
6 (20.7%)
0 (0%)
4 (13.8%)
0 (0%)
47
30 (63.8%)
4 (8.5%)
22 (46.8%)
5 (10.6%)
26 (55.3%)
5 (10.6%)
19 (40.4%)
6 (12.8%)
40
16 (40%)
11 (27.5%)
13 (32.5%)
9 (22.5%)
16 (40%)
12 (30%)
13 (32.5%)
9 (22.5%)
Year 4
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 1
Year 2
6
1 (16.7%)
2 (33.3%)
2 (33.3%)
1 (16.7%)
3 (50%)
2 (33.3%)
3 (50%)
1 (16.7%)
32
16 (50%)
3 (9%)
17 (53%)
3 (9%)
8 (25%)
0 (0%)
4 (13%)
0 (0%)
41
24 (59%)
6 (15%)
22 (54%)
3 (7%)
26 (63%)
5 (12%)
20 (49%)
4 (10%)
53
24 (45%)
11 (21%)
24 (45%)
8 (15%)
27 (51%)
8 (15%)
18 (34%)
6 (11%)
13
6 (46%)
3 (23%)
7 (54%)
2 (15%)
9 (69%)
2 (15%)
6 (46%)
2 (15%)
32
11 (34.4%)
9 (28.1%)
16 (50%)
5 (15.6%)
11 (34.4%)
3 (9.4%)
8 (25%)
1 (3.1%)
51
20 (39.2%)
13 (25.5%)
19 (37.3%)
10 (19.6%)
22 (43.1%)
10 (19.6%)
17 (33.3%)
9 (17.7%)
43
24 (55.8%)
16 (37.2%)
19 (44.2%)
11 (25.6%)
23 (53.5%)
17 (39.5%)
13 (30.2%)
3 (7%)
4
0 (0%)
2 (50%)
2 (50%)
1 (25%)
3 (75%)
1 (25%)
1 (25%)
0 (0%)
Year 3
Year 4
51
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
The great majority of the student-respondents indicated either “D” or “E”
when answering the first three questions—which values, once combined, total at
or near 50% of all students (and in some years a considerably higher percentage
of students). Respondents to these three questions generally found the Major
Programme, with regard to both core and elective elements, was at least “relevant”
or “greatly relevant” to their subsequent careers.
Note: for Questions B13 and B16, Year One responses should be considered
as anomalous, since these students do not take Major elective credits, nor have they
yet begun their Honours Projects.
As below, we have also extracted specific data from Exit Surveys (as
distinguished from the Annual Surveys given to enrolled students) submitted by
our recent graduates. The first chart indicates that across the past five years, a
statistically significant sample of Programme graduates not only secured
employment (94% as per the 2008 survey) but also that between 38-52% of our
graduates viewed the English Programme undergraduate curriculum as “very
relevant” (the highest score) to the job they were presently holding.
English Programme: Exit Survey (Selected Findings), 2007-2009
Percentage Employed/Programme
2009
2008
2007
Total No. of Graduates
48
45
60
No. Surveys Received
(% total)
18 (38%)
32 (71%)
25 (42%)
Already Secured Employment
12 (67%)
30 (94%)
21 (84%)
ENG “Very Relevant” to Career
9 (50%)
12 (38%)
13 (52%)
“Very Relevant” to Present
Employment
As in the next chart, moreover, we can extract from the Exit Survey
qualitative data which addresses how and to what extent the Programme
curriculum impacted graduates’ subsequent employment experience.
52
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
English Programme: Students Marking E (“Greatly”) in Response to
Specific Questions, AY 2007-2009
How has your training in English Language and
Literature contributed to your employment 2009
experience?
2008
2007
25
17
(78%)
(68%)
10
19
14
(56%)
(59%)
(56%)
9
7
(28%)
(28%)
4
13
7
(22%)
(41%)
(28%)
1
3
2
(6%)
(9%)
(8%)
10
It has given me more confidence when communicating
in English
(56%)
I can apply what I have learnt to fulfill the requirements
for my present job
2
It has enabled me to develop good working relationships
with people
(11%)
I have developed good problem-solving skills necessary
for my present job
The Programme has not made significant contributions
to my overall job satisfaction
As the above figures relate, there is clearly room for improvement; particularly
with regard to linking our curriculum outcomes to improving students’ use of
English when problem-solving, as well as developing better working relationships
with co-workers on the job. The overall trend of the survey data, however,
endorses the Programme’s efforts to create a knowledge base for students which,
after they graduate, may (1) be applied on the job and (2) give them added
confidence as they pursue their careers.
We can also use the current and Exit Survey data to gauge more effectively
those fields, industries, and sectors where our graduates succeed in finding
employment:
53
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
English Programme: Graduate Employment (by Job Category, 2005-2009)
Clearly, the link between the Programme curriculum and English-language
teaching, as perceived both by individual students and the community at large, is
demonstrated. In 2007, 21 students (or 35% of all respondents) secured
employment in the teaching sector. Notice, however, that as many as 60% of all
respondents to the 2005 survey went not into teaching but media &
communications careers.
Or, again, we may note the ever elusive (yet still statistically significant)
“Other” category, as indicated by 60% of respondents to the 2007 survey. Given
the relatively small response rates, such shifts are hard to interpret with any
absolute statistical certainty. (See the discussion of monthly salary data below for
further clarification about members of this group, who are entering business and
commerce fields by and large.) The overall trend seems nevertheless significant,
insofar as graduates were able to parlay effective communications skills into a
variety of jobs beyond teaching and, where not specifically specified, other jobs
54
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
which might presume a general (rather than vocational) communicative
competence at the point of hire.
And once we can track employment trends, we may also be able to devise links
between specific pedagogies and teaching/learning activities in specific English
Programme courses (such as ENG 1211 Oral Communication and Public Speaking
and ENG 1212 Academic and Professional Writing) helpful to students who have
identified such career paths as particularly promising. It follows that the Double
Degree, in particular, has helped to address the teaching and learning requirements
of a core constituency of our Programme since AY 2005-06.
On the following page, you’ll find a series of charts detailing the monthly basic
salaries as reported by our graduates by sector/industry (expressed as a mean, on
average, and high-low figures). Across the 2004-2009 span, the average monthly
salary of our full-time employed graduates increased overall by 22%, rising from
$HK 11,201 in 2004 to $HK 13,620 in 2008. This is a robust increase, indicating
the marketability of our graduates, as well as the sustainability and growth of the
industries where they are finding work. Year-on-year, the upward salary trend peaks
in 2007 and then drops back slightly in 2008, probably attributed to
macroeconomic factors which caused a slow-down in the Hong Kong economy
overall, rather than any underlying fundamentals concerning our graduates or the
work they are performing.
Of even greater interest are the statistics (only indirectly alluded to in the Exit
Survey data above) indicating that 50% or higher of our graduates entered
commerce and industry professions rather than pursuing careers in education
or community/social services. This fact underscores the marketability and success
of our graduates in fields and professions reaching well beyond the mandate of
HKBU graduates as primarily bound for the teaching/education sector. We are
doing a good job, therefore, of producing quality graduates who possess solid
general skills, using professional English, which they can readily apply across a
variety of industry and commercial roles.
55
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
56
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Finally, a word as to the overall salary mean. Based on the data reported by our
Programme graduates, the mean salary across AY 2004-2008 rose from $HK
10,324 to $HK 13,460, or a rise of 30% in relative terms. Taken out of context,
this is a very large increase, probably attributable to the overall growth of the
Hong Kong economy since the downturn of the SARS pandemic and the
stratospheric rise of Chinese red chip stocks (equities) in the broader Asian region
since that period. But what does this relative rise in mean income actually
signify for our students? Citing comparative data from World Salaries.org
(http://www.worldsalaries.org/hongkong.shtml), which compiles data reported by
the Hong Kong government, the 2008 salary mean places our students squarely
between the gross monthly income reported for entry-level General Office Clerks
($HK 10,175/month) and entry-level Electronic Engineering Technicians ($HK
15,200/month). So, on this basis the salary mean would seem to indicate that our
students are arriving at solid entry-level incomes even at the lower white-collar,
entry level.
We should also point out, however, that the low-high salary spreads across all
five years reported are extreme—that is, top earners are in some cases earning
double or triple of what the low-earners are making. This suggests that while some
number of our graduates are doing very well indeed, another subset of graduates
are barely scraping by in careers where their knowledge of English either is of little
relevance or is not increasing their earning power. Such wide spreads may suggest
that while the vast majority of our students do find employment, many do not earn
income for their own households, but are still living at home and contributing to
family household incomes. They may also be reporting as “full-time” income what
are actually aggregate part-time or hourly-wage rates (when teaching English at
tutorial schools, for example).
Accordingly, the English Programme summarizes the findings of the Annual
and Exit/Employment survey data our students and recent graduates provide us as
follows:

the majority of students surveyed find our curriculum and courses at
least relevant to their overall marketability and, more often, “greatly”
relevant;
57
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document


our Programme produces graduates who are sound academic
generalists who find subsequent employment outside English-language
teaching and education just as often as they pursue teaching careers;
the provision and delivery of holistic and foundational knowledge, via a
broad and enriching curriculum in English language and literature, meets
our mandate from the University and wider society to produce “whole
persons” ready for subsequent training and personal development
beyond the B. A. level.
Section 9: Research Strengths and Student-Centered Learning
The English Major Programme is committed to academic research excellence
(including quality publication outputs benchmarked to international standards) in
support of our mission commitment to quality teaching. All of our colleagues are
research-active and all are committed teaching practitioners who believe that
effective teaching pedagogy in the classroom is intimately connected to research
innovation, originality, and quality output.
9.1 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), 2001-2006
In the most recent RAE exercise, in 2006, the English Programme vaulted over its
traditional (and significantly better resourced) competitor English Departments in
Hong Kong, achieving the first (or highest) score in the field relative to the overall
ratings of other English cost centres.
As indicated in the following chart, the English Programme’s progress in
developing research excellence, and measured against HKBU’s overall progress, has
been steady and significant
58
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Onward and Upward: RAE Performance since 1993
To what may we attribute this upward trend toward research success since our
last ACP visit in 2003? First, the result may be attributed to our developing
maturity as a Programme; and second, to our institution’s unique culture, including
a primary commitment to teaching as the primary driver for our research. To the
extent our research succeeds, we believe that it must follow from the work we do
in the classroom, with the latter serving as laboratories for the ideas and concepts
we propose, hypothesize and (when sufficiently rigorous and plausible) eventually
publish.
Notably, our 91.67% overall rating, which indicates the overall percentage of
staff members in our Cost Centre who are research active (including meeting
international standards for publication quality and output), is tracking the
performance of the physical, theoretical, and applied sciences at HKBU:
59
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
RAE 2006: On Par with the Sciences
Biological Sciences
Physics & Astronomy
Chemistry
English Language
92.50%
97.50%
94.64%
91.67%
& Literature
Chemistry
Maths
94.64%
Benchmarking English Programme outputs against the hard- and physical
sciences would not be relevant in and of itself, but for the fact that the Sciences on
our campus—as with most other institutes of higher learning globally—are widely
perceived as being much better funded than the Arts in general. From this
perception follows the mistaken assumption that Arts programmes are justifiably
underfunded because they do not publish on par with the Sciences. Clearly, the
English Programme’s performance during the 2006 RAE disproves this casual
assumption.
This context underlies the 2 March 2007 press release (next page) which was
released in the months following HKBU’s successful RAE 2006 exercise. The press
release does not mention specific HKBU cost centres by name, nor the fact that
the HKBU English Programme was the only non-Science unit in the University to
have achieved higher than 90% in its relevant research index (of perceived quality,
benchmarked to international standards). The English Programme was the fourth
60
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
highest-ranking unit overall, in fact, throughout the entire University. And of this
fact we are justifiably proud.
“Of the 10 areas in which HKBU was
reviewed under the assessment, seven
scored higher than the average of all
institutions; among these, four areas
ranked within the top three, and three
areas scored over 90 percent in their
research indices. The result demonstrates
that although the allocation of research
resources is less endowed, HKBU’s
research performance is nonetheless of a
very high standard…”
--University press release (2 March 2007)
-Prof Ng Ching Fai (President, HKBU)
9.2 Staff Research Strengths by Area
At present, the following areas of research strength may be found within the
English Major Programme:
a) language studies and/or linguistics (including specializations in
multimodal/discourse
analysis,
intercultural
pragmatics
and
communications, language and gender, theoretical linguistics and optimality
theory);
b) comparative literature (notably, Chinese-Western literary relations and
gender studies);
c) literary studies (including specializations in English Renaissance emblems
and iconography, the Modernist novel, psychoanalysis, and contemporary
literature).
These areas of research strength, we should add, are also of primary interest to
us as areas for future Programme specialization—whether in the form of
requesting additional funding to provide dedicated resources in these areas (e.g.
establishing research centres or more concentrated staffing levels) or attempting
further initiatives at international collaboration in these areas (see Section 9.2.2
below).
61
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
9.2.1 Hong Kong Government Grants Awarded
The RAE apart, the English Programme has also been among the leaders in the
Faculty in receiving government funding for research across the past five years. We
have been particularly strong in receiving seed funding via the Faculty Research
Grant (FRG) committee, which reviews applications for funding via two categories
with different funding ceilings: Category One (grants up to $HK 60,000) and
Category Two (up to $HK 120,000).
The two-year period 2006-2008 was particularly productive for our team, with
fifteen FRGs awarded as well as five Teaching Development Grants (TDGs),
which latter involve funding individual colleagues’ pedagogical initiatives
conforming to the University’s longer-term commitment to teaching, e.g. by
enhancing individual course pedagogy or expanding the University library collection
in new areas of research excellence.
ENG Programme: Grants Received ($HK), AY 2004-2010
Grant
2009/10
FRG
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
2005/06
2004/05
Sub-total
2 ($160,860)
7 ($487,725)
8 ($516,022)
4($285,750)
1($48,300)
22 ($1,498,657)
GRF
1 ($176,730)
2 ($853,120)
-
1 ($531,520)
1($308,352)
-
5 ($1,869,722)
TDG
1 ($187,010)
-
5 ($629,020)
2 ($102,800)
-
-
8 ($918,830)
Subtotal
2 ($363,740)
4($1,013,980)
12($1,116,745)
11($1,150,342)
5($594,102)
1($48,300)
35 ($4,287,209)
62
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
English Programme: Total No. of Grants Received (by distribution), AY 2004-2010
5
FRG
5
TDG
GRF
22
As defined by our University’s role statement, our mission as a Programme is
to emphasize quality teaching as integral to the “whole-person” educational ethos.
Accordingly, the strong showing of our colleagues in achieving Teaching
Devlopment Grant funding, as indicated in the following chart, is also
encouraging:
English Programme: Teaching Development Grants Awarded, AY 2007-2008
Project No.
Name of PI
Award ($HK)
Duration
Project Title
Short Stories on Film
0708/IV/01
Dr. Magdalen Ki
75,000
6/08-6/09
0708/IV/02
Dr. Jason Polley
297,200
9/08-9/09
Adding to HKBU's Library
Collection: Contemporary
American Fiction, Film and
Theory
0708/IV/04
Dr. Wee Lian Hee &
169,720
9/08-8/09
Animated Glossary of
Rudimentary Linguistic
Concepts
Ms Dianne Cmor
(LIB)
0708/IV/06
Dr. Linda Wong
43,100
9/08-6/09
Compilation of Teaching
Materials for ENG 2330
'Great Works in World
Literature'
0708/IV/07
Dr. Linda Wong
44,000
1/09-12/09
Compilation of Teaching
Materials for ENG 3750
'Special Topic in
Comparative Literature:
Literature and Paintings'
63
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Perhaps the strongest indicator of our Programme’s healthy research climate is
that our researchers have continued to receive funding, locally as well as
internationally, from government bodies. Locally, the Hong Kong government’s
highest educational research authority, the University Grants Committee (UGC)
has awarded our staff research grants via the General Research Fund (GRF). GRF
grants are internationally refereed and require unanimous support from all external
referees in order to be funded; hence they are a positive indicator of our overall
research quality and strength. One staff member, Dr Hans Ladegaard, has also
been awarded a prestigious five-year research grant funded by the European
Language Council, again internationally refereed, which again speaks to the
significance and broad reach of our colleagues’ work both within and beyond the
Hong Kong context.
As in the following table, GRF Projects funded since 2004 include:
English Prgramme: General Research Fund (GRF) Grants Awarded, 2004 to present
AY
Project
Funded
No.
2009-10
243110
2008-09
241008
2008-09
Name of PI
Award
Duration
Project Title
176,730
24
The Danse Macabre in the
Drama of the Elizabethan Age
Dr. S. Christie
287,040
24
English Modernist Writers and
the Public Domain: E.M.
Forster as a Case Study
242308
Dr. K. Kong
566,080
24
Mediated Language Use:
Building the First Bilingual and
Multimodal Corpus in Hong
Kong
2006-07
2424/06H
Dr. Suying Yang
531,520
24
A Corpus-based Study of the
Chinese Aspectual System at
the Verbal Level, the Sentential
Level and the Discoursal Level
2005-06
2416-05H
Dr. S. Christie
308,352
24
Contemporary Mixedblood
American Indian Literature
2002-03
2087-02H
Prof. C. MacKenzie
208,220
18
The Drama of Christopher
Marlowe
($HK)
Prof. C. MacKenzie
64
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
It may also be useful to provide some basic comparative data on
government-funded research, so as to place the achievements of our specific
Programme within the broader context. Within our Faculty, sister Departments A
& B have achieved more or less equivalent funding in GRF grants to the English
Programme across the past three years, with the English Programme and Dept A
receiving three GRFs and Dept B receiving two.
However, with regard to FRG funding, the English Programme has achieved
more than double that of Department A and is on par with Department B, even
though Department B is a much larger unit than the English Programme with 45%
more staffing.
English Programme: FRG/GRF Output Relative to Other ARTD
Academic Units, 2006-2009
Grant
FRG
GRF
2008/09
2007/08
2006/07
Sub-total
ENG
2
ENG
7
ENG
8
17
A
2
A
2
A
4
8
B
3
B
8
B
5
16
ENG
2 ($853,120)
ENG
0
ENG
1 ($531,520)
3 ($1,384,640)
A
2 ($675,950)
A
1 ($417,107)
A
0
3 (1,093,057)
B
0
B
1 ($745,720)
B
1 ($664,752)
2 (1,410,472)
Putting statistics aside for the moment, it is also important to recognize senior
colleagues in the Programme who have been awarded the University’s highest
recognition for outstanding performance in scholarly research, teaching, or
administration (or some combination of these): the University Outstanding
Achievement Award. Prof Clayton MacKenzie has won two awards: for
outstanding achievement in Scholarly Research and Teaching (2001). Prof Terry
Yip has also won three awards: for Teaching and Service (2002) and Service (2009).
9.2.2 Research Initiatives and Collaboration
Our colleagues also recognize that, in order to be effective, our research must
engage with broader currents in the field, keep abreast of latest findings, and
embrace the scholarly climate beyond Hong Kong. Accordingly, colleagues have
embarked upon projects requiring significant inter-institutional collaboration, many
of which have met with success, usually in the form of jointly sponsored
65
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
conferences and/or research output.
ENG Programme Staff
2008-2009
Dr. Hans J. Ladegaard
(table continues from
previous page)
Prof. Terry Yip
2006-2007
Dr. Hans J. Ladegaard
2005-2006
Dr. Hiroko Itakura
Dr. Wee Lian Hee
2003-2004
Prof. Terry Yip
Outside Collaborator(s)
Name of Collaborator(s)
Department/Institution/
Country
Dr. Dennis Day, Dr. Sharon Millar,
Dr. Astrid Jensen, Dr. Teresa
Cadierno (USD), and Dr. Alan Firth
(Newcastle)
(Project : ‘Global Communication in
Business Organizations’ & ‘Language
Dynamics and Management of
Diversity’)
Prof. Itesh Sachdev
(Project: ‘Attitudes and Motivation in
Second Language Learning’)
Institute of Language &
Communication, University of
Southern Denmark, and School
of Education, Communication
and Language Sciences,
Newcastle University
Dr. James Green and 22 colleagues
from 19 different countries(Project:
‘Evaluating English Accents
Worldwide’)
Professor Kwok-kan Tam &
Professor Frode Helland (Project:
Ibsen and the Modern Self)
University of Otago, Dunedin,
New Zealand
Department of Linguistics,
School of Oriental and African
Studies, University of London
Faculty of Arts and Social
Sciences, Open University of
Hong Kong & Center for Ibsen
Studies, University of Oslo,
Norway
Dr. Teresa Cadierno, Dr. Dennis Day, The University of Southern
Dr. Allan Firth, Dr. Astrid Jensen,
Denmark; The University of
Dr. Sharon Millar
Aalborg, Denmark
(Project: ‘Global Communication in
Business Organizations’)
Gillian Humphreys
(Project title: Multilingual Identity of
Hong Kong University students.)
Wang Hui and Lee Cher Leng
(Project: (Project: Frequently-used
Chinese Characters/Words in
Singapore)
Department of English,
Hong Kong Polytechnic
University
National University of
Singapore (Chinese Studies)
Prof. Kwok-kan Tam
(Project: Gender and Contemporary
Literature)
The Chinese University of Hong
Kong (Department of English)
9.3 Student-Centered Pedagogy and Learning
The goal of education is not to teach, but to enable learning. To this end, the
Programme has followed University guidelines in t adoption of the
Outcome-Based Teaching and Learning (OBTL, see Section 7 above) framework.
66
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
This is reflected in the clearly stated learning outcomes in our undergraduate and
taught post-graduate course documents. Further, significant weight is attached to
continuous assessment so as to encourage on-going student engagement.
Throughout their academic careers, at both the undergraduate and the taught
post-graduate levels, students also have ample group project opportunities where
they can take charge of the direction of their learning.
The Programme’s commitment to student-centered pedagogy and learning is
manifested in how the curriculum balances a stable set of core and elective courses
with a dynamic set of special topics across a broad range of subject and research
areas. As detailed in Appendix F, Programme Special and Advanced Topics
courses allow students to explore areas of interest that are otherwise not available
in the core and elective courses. Through these courses, students can choose to
customize their training in such a way that would best enhance their career
opportunities.
For example, students of the
recent ENG4730 Advanced
Topic in Linguistics: Linguistics
through Theatric Comedy (2010),
gave a public performance,
taking full responsibility for
all aspects of the production,
ranging from promotion to
actual acting. It was the
first-ever
Improvised
Comedy Show to be staged
by local university students
and was a great success.
To allow further tailoring and development of their own research interests, all
undergraduates undertake an Honours Project of their own devising (including
preliminary topic selection and background research) under the guidance and
supervision of an appropriate faculty member (see Section 4.6). Students extend
learning beyond the university through foreign exchange as well as local and
non-local summer internships (see Section 4.7).
67
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
9.3.1 Teaching Modes
So, too, the English Major Programme recognizes that individual students possess
differing intellectual strengths and aptitudes, and that no single teaching approach
is suitable for all. And while the basic structure of our weekly teaching schedule
remains defined by University policy (typically, a “lecture” slot of two hours for all
enrolled students, supplemented by 1-3 smaller tutorial classes generally capped at
a maximum of twenty-five students each), staff employ a variety of teaching
strategies within these parameters.
As recently codified in our OBTL documentation, such teaching and learning
strategies (including specific activities aligned with assessment weightings) may
include, for example, group work, individual presentations, resource and internet
based learning, debates and quizzes, multimedia approaches, and problem-solving
activities. For a complete catalog of our current course documentation, including
Teaching and Learning Activities as well as Assessment methods, again refer to
Appendix I. And while certainly no longer the solely sanctioned teaching and
learning activity in the classroom, student-directed lecturing remains a fundamental
element undergirding the Programme’s overall pedagogy. Student-centred lecturing
is valuable because it provides opportunities for students to pose informed
questions, stimulates interest in new areas of interest, and elaborates upon and/or
challenges conventional views on linguistic, literary and other matters. Such a spirit
of independent inquiry in class typically finds its way into the research that
students undertake outside the classroom and, in particular, finds useful outlet
during the year-long supervised Honours Project, which remains the capstone
undergraduate achievement for the majority of our students.
Lecture sizes do vary considerably, particularly within the Major elective
curriculum. During any given semester, class sizes may range from less than 15
students to more than 60. This, of course, presents challenges for Programme
planning, with regard to the overall balancing of workload as well as to the specific
pedagogies individual instructors employ. Yet our colleagues address such
fluctuation in class enrollments constructively by using e-Learning technology, for
example, to create on-line activities for more passive learners (see Section 9.3.3).
Also, our classrooms are slowly becoming more diverse as student constituencies
change. For example, international (including mainland Chinese) students have
already played a part in enhancing the interpersonal skills and cross-cultural
sensitivities of our Programme students, and their presence has helped to
68
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
encourage some students to opt for overseas exchange. The University policy in
support of internalization of the campus is emerging as a welcome cross-cultural
dynamic in our classrooms, and helps to make larger classes less monolithic.
9.3.2 University Student Assessment Guidelines
At the individual course level, students’ academic performance is subject to a
continuous process of assessment. For undergraduate students, the assessment
methods include examinations, course assignments and project work. The
assessment and weighting schemes are specified in the course syllabus of the
relevant Programme document.
In line with these more general parameters, the OBTL framework has
transformed the way we design and implement our pedagogy at the level of the
individual course; it also requires us to clearly specify (so as to link) teaching and
learning activities to concrete and measurable student assessment mechanisms
(again, please refer to specific course documents in Appendix I).
The established OBTL parameters for a given course apart, the University also
obliges all staff members to conform to specific guidelines regulating the spread
of grades awarded in a particular course. The normative distributions are as
follows:
A range grades
= 0-20%
B range grades
= 40-75%
C/D/F range grades = 100% [is this right?]
These ranges are intended to act as a check on grade inflation. Second
marking is likewise utilized for the Honours Project—effectively blind review, since
the Second Examiner is not directly involved in advising the student—and helps to
ensure its overall quality. Any differences of view arising between Advisor and
Second Examiner are resolved in accordance with the procedures of the Honours
Project Committee. Students have a right of appeal—initially to the course
instructor and thereafter to the Programme Head.
69
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
9.3.3 E-Learning
Increasingly colleagues’ teaching is incorporating the internet, which routinely
complements traditional lecturing strategies with multimedia resources such as
images (photographs as well as portraiture/painting), on-line dedicated content or
archives (ranging from Wiki to for-fee subscribed resources accessible via the
University Library such as JSTOR and Project MUSE) and film (ranging from
documentaries on Botticelli to the Pre-Raphaelites, and from the BBC’s The Story
of English to film adaptations of Jane Austen’s novels) in order to increase student
access to and enjoyment of English language and literature.
To enhance this accessibility and convenience in learning for students,
colleagues are also increasingly utilizing e-tools (accessible via University licensing
agreements) such as the BU Moodle, which offers teachers and students interactive
opportunities outside the traditional classroom, including on-line response
exercises, “chat”-style fora, and/or downloading of lecture notes. Here, as
elsewhere, the internet is dramatically changing the way our teachers seek to
engage increasingly technology-oriented students as enrolments grow and more
opportunities for cross-disciplinary pedagogy present themselves.
Overall, we are proud of our Programme’s advances in implementing
e-Learning technology throughout our curriculum, which was identified as an area
for further development during the 2003 ACP visit (see Appendix B (i)).
The following table provides a basic accounting of our colleagues’ use of
e-learning tools and approaches, including use of the internet and other on-line
resources as ways of communicating with students outside the classroom:
70
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Work time
Moodle/
WebCT course
delivery
E-mail
communication
with students
Multimedia
lecture/tutorial
presentations
(%) spent
on-line for
teaching-relat
ed activities
Dr. Stuart Christie



20-30%
Dr. Hiroko Itakura



25%
Dr. Magdalen Ki



30%


10%


20-30%


20%
E-Learning/
Utilization
Dr. Kenneth Kong
Dr. Hans Ladegaard

Dr. Jason Polley
Dr. Wee Lian Hee



20%
Mrs. Julia Wan (Part-time)



25%
Dr. Suying Yang



20%


20%
Prof. Terry Yip
Clearly, while teaching-related technology is only one among various tools used by
an effective teacher, it cannot of itself make a given lecture a success, nor can it
ever be a substitute for good teaching in an interactive “live” classroom. When
used effectively, however, internet-based contact hours can offer an effective and
enjoyable supplement to classroom-based pedagogies.
9.3.4 English Language and Literature Society
Beyond the classroom, students engage in various co-curricular activities that
serve to enrich their campus learning experiences. Specifically, all students enrolled
in the English Major and Double Degree programmes automatically acquire full
membership in the English Language and Literature Society. The Society organizes
a number of events annually as detailed in the box below. Students often invite
faculty members to give talks or to conduct ad hoc seminars throughout the course
of such activities.
71
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Major Activities of the English Language and
Literature Society
Inauguration
Registration Day
Orientation Camp*
Orientation Day*
Orientation Night
Publication – Phonebook
Cabinet Briefing
Joint Society Sales Week
Internal Singing Contest
Christmas Party
Academic Week
Election General Meeting
Joint Society Singing Contest
Annual Dinner
Annual General Meeting
Publication – Newsletter
*in collaboration with other student bodies.
Some events, such as the Society newsletter and Academic Week are academically
inspired, focusing on a particular linguistic or literary theme via seminars, poster
display and book sales. Academic Week themes since 2006 are listed below.
Academic Week Themes
2009-10 Love to Read
2008-09 Myth
2007-08 Language and Gender
2006-07 Love with No Boundaries
72
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
9.4 Research Postgraduate (RPg) Student Achievements and Alumni Accomplishments
9.4.1 RPg Student Applications and Achievements
A primary role of the Programme Management Committee is to review an
increasing number of research-postgraduate (RPg) applications, to short-list these
applications and interview qualified candidates, as well as eventually to allocate
research-postgraduate studies places to appropriate staff members for research
supervision. Because of anticipated growth in RPg placement sector-wide, we
anticipate that we will need to dedicate specific administrative appointments
(Postgraduate Coordinator positions) for both linguistics and literary studies.
With reference to the chart, one can readily note the marked growth, during
AY 2009-2010, in total numbers of RPg applications drawing upon our Language
colleagues’ expertise at both MPhil and PhD levels. During the same period,
submissions for review by Literature colleagues remained constant. Part of the
imbalance may be attributed to the current practice of MALS and Language
Centre programmes being required by the University to route RPg applicants (who
eventually end up under the supervision of colleagues in these other programmes)
through the English Programme first. Even so, this upward trend bears careful
monitoring, because the review of greater numbers of RPg applications, in
addition to the ultimate matriculation of quality RPg students under our full-time
supervision, are time-intensive and have an inevitable impact on the ability to
sustain quality teaching and research output, particularly for our Language
colleagues.
73
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
We are also extremely proud of our B. A. Programme alumni, many of whom
have gone on to achieve notable successes as postgraduate researchers. In fact,
many of our Programme graduates have gone on to pursue quality degrees and
better life opportunities, locally as well as overseas. Below are several of their
testimonies.
Loretta Ho, PhD (English, Class of 1999)
Academic, University of Western Australia
“The English Programme gave me a fair go, enrolling me as a ‘mature-age’
student. I was challenged to study areas like aesthetics or cinema as well as English
literature. Among other things, I learned about cultural diversity and with the
Department’s encouragement became a student representative in the Philippines,
and then went on to receive a Rotary Ambassadorial Scholarship to study
overseas. My studies and experiences helped increase my life choices. More
importantly, they enhanced self-awareness and allowed me to better appreciate the
complexities in this increasingly diverse world.”
74
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Raymond Leung (English, Class of 2006)
MPhil in Linguistics, Cambridge University
Secondary school teacher, Singapore
“Balancing the study of the English language and literary works written in English,
the English Programme not only equipped me with strong subject knowledge to
undertake graduate studies at the University of Cambridge, but it also developed
my critical-thinking skills, cross-cultural sensitivity and independent learning ability,
all essential for success in a globalized world. The knowledge and the skills gained
from the department enabled me to seek and find a rewarding career beyond
national boundaries.”
Avis Chan Ting Ting (English, Class of 2003)
Master of Social Work, M.A. in Linguistics
Therapist/leadership trainer, St Louis, Missouri (USA)
“My life in the English Programme at HKBU helped me tremendously in
achieving what I have now. My professors were always encouraging and helpful.
They not only challenged me to think critically and to strive for better
performance, they also gave me guidance and direction in life. I was also given
many opportunities to exercise and sharpen my leadership and creativity skills.
Because of all these valuable experiences, I went on to receive Masters degrees in
Linguistics and Social Work. I am now a licensed therapist for psychiatric patients
with severe mental illness and substance abuse problems. I am also taking on
leadership roles in my organization and beginning my third Masters degree in
Health Care Business Administration.”
Shen Xianmin (MPhil in English Literature, Class of 2010)
PhD student, South Carolina University, USA
“My studies in the English Programme at HKBU marked an
important phase in my post-graduate life. Hong Kong is a fascinating city, where
various ideas and civilizations meet and blend. . . . the enlightening instructions I
was exposed to promoted my comprehension of English literature as my field of
study. On the other hand, the diverse cultures aroused my interest in the
comparative study of literatures written in different languages.”
75
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
9.4.2 Alumni Accomplishments
Apart from pursuing distinguished careers in academic work or secondary school
teaching, other alumni/ae of the Department of English Language and Literature,
and more recently the English Major Programme, have gone on to distinguish
themselves in the broader contexts of community service, business, and
philanthropy.
Mr. William Leung (HKBU, English ‘78) is currently
Executive Director and Head of Personal Banking at Hang
Seng Bank. He is also Treasurer of the Council and Court
of Hong Kong Baptist University and involved with a
number of Government and industry committees and
non-profit organizations in Hong Kong.
At a “3+3+4” Symposium held on the HKBU campus in
January 2010, Mr. Leung offered a comprehensive overview of the role of English
and English-language teaching in Hong Kong, arguing that English language skills,
intercultural understanding, critical thinking, as well as the need for enquiry-based
studies are crucial for all Hong Kong students, given the international position of
Hong Kong and its intermediate position between China and the wider world.
Clearly, our Programme has developed talent within the community whose
impact has far exceeded its role as the provider of a teacher-training curriculum, as
laudable and significant as that role remains today. The calibre ? of our
alumni/ae confirms that a continuing imperative for “integrated English”—the
focused study of English as one key language interacting with Hong Kong’s other
local languages—exists for Hong Kong citizens in an increasingly pluralistic,
diverse, and multilingual society.
Beyond a skills orientation, then, the academic training in English language
and literature allows our graduates to meld English to core competencies in second
and third languages. This integrated approach enhances their overall
communicative competence in a variety of fields, as indicated in the several brief
biographies of additional distinguished alumni/ae on the following page.
76
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Mr. Dominic Cheung (HKBU, English ’82) joined the
Chung Ying Theatre Company upon his graduation. He
has translated and directed numerous plays, receiving
many prizes for his directorship. He took part in the
establishment of Theatre Space in 1998 and is currently
Artistic Director of Theatre Space. Other titles include
Vice Chairman of the Hong Kong Federation of Drama
Societies, Examiner of the Hong Kong Arts
Development Council, and Executive Committee
Member of the Arts with the Disabled Association Hong
Kong.
Ms. Diana Chan (HKBU, English ’87) is Managing Partner
and Founder of Solveigh Greater China. A seasoned
professional in international project financing, project
development, and cross border investment, she is well-known
regionally and internationally in commercial, governmental
and non-profit sectors. Among her positions are Project
Director of Turnmile (Overseas) Ltd., Director of the San
Diego City Office of California in Hong Kong, Industrial
Attaché of the Consulate General of the Republic of Cape
Verde, Hong Kong and General Manager of Chamber
Services Limited of the Hong Kong General Chamber of
Commerce.
Dr. Ronald Tang Wai Yan (HKBU, English ’79) is currently Assistant
Professor of the Department of International Education and Lifelong
Learning at The Hong Kong Institute of Education. Having experience in
both the mass media and the educational sector, Dr. Tang explores the
links between teaching pedagogies and the performing arts, and is
especially interested in exploring the use of music in language learning in
the Hong Kong context.
Dr. Helen Yeh (HKBU, English ’96) has taught in various secondary
schools and tertiary institutions in Hong Kong. Since 1999, she has
been a consultant for language teachers, educational centres, and the
Hong Kong government regarding language curriculum design and
development, educational management, and the use of information
and communication technology. She has done research on effective
language teaching and learning methodologies, and is the inventor of
the "Reflective Communication Approach” for which she was
awarded a doctoral degree by the University of Bristol.
77
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
Section 10: Consultancy / Professional / Community Services
In order to become more effective academics and teachers, we also aspire to serve
our broader professions as well as the local community, reaching out from within
our areas of expertise. In the following roles, members of the English Programme
continue to render professional service across the diverse and various subfields of
English language and literature:
Dr. Stuart Christie
Advisor, HKSAR Arts Development Council, (English Literary Studies)



External Examiner (Lingnan University, Chinese University of Hong Kong,
HKBU College of International Education, Community College of City
University, University of Hong Kong)
Referee for international journals (including American Indian Quarterly,
Contemporary Literature, Criticism, PMLA, Studies in the Novel)
Dr. Magdalen Ki
External Examiner (Open University of Hong Kong)

Dr. Kenneth Kong
Referee for international journals (including Text, Information Design Journal and
Document Design (IDJ + DD), Language in Society, Hong Kong Journal of Applied
Linguistics, Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, and Journal of Asian Pacific
Communication)


External Examiner, International English Language Testing System, IELTS
CEPA Management Unit (University Grants Committee, HKSAR)
Dr. Hans Ladegaard
Referee for international publishers (including John Benjamins, Polity Press,
and Sage)


Referee for international journals (including Asian Journal of English Language
Teaching, Journal of Sociolinguistics, Journal of Pragmatics, Language Awareness, Journal
of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, Journal of Child Language, Journal of
Language and Social Psychology, and Language and Intercultural Communication)

Editorial board, RASK International Journal of Language and Communication

Editorial board, Journal of English Language Studies
78
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document

Review Editor, Pragmatics & Society (published by John Benjamins)
Prof. Clayton MacKenzie
External Examiner (Chinese University of Hong Kong, University of Surrey,
England)



Panel Member, Sir Edward Youde Memorial Fund Scholarship
Referee for international journals (including Comparative Education, Journal of
Community Education, Journal of Curriculum Studies)
Dr. Wee Lian Hee

Referee, Research Grants Council (HKSAR); Academic Research Fund,
(Ministry of Education, Singapore)

Referee for international journals (Asian Journal of English Language Teaching,
Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, International Journal of Linguistics, Journal of Chinese
Linguistics, Journal of the International Phonetic Association, Journal of Linguistics
Language and Linguistics, Lingua, Modern Foreign Languages, World Englishes)
Dr. Suying Yang
Referee, Asian Journal of English Language Teaching



Member, Quality Education Fund Assessment and Monitoring
Sub-Committee, HKSAR
External Examiner (City University of Hong Kong, Guangdong University of
Foreign Studies, Luoyang Foreign Languages Institute)
Prof. Terry Yip
Auditor, Quality Assurance Council of the University Grants Committee,
HKSAR




Non-Institutional Board Member, Board of Asia Pacific New Writing
Partnership (APNWP)
Academic Adviser, Centre for Comparative Literature, Chinese Academy of
Social Sciences (Beijing, China)
International Advisory Board Member, Feminism in China (Guangxi Normal
University Press)
79
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document




Referee for international journals (including Comparative Literature and Culture,
Modern Chinese Literature, Tamkang Review, Journal of Asian Pacific Communication,
Journal of Modern Literature in Chinese, China Review)
Referee for international publishers (including Hong Kong University Press,
Chinese University Press, Yale University Press, Hong Kong Commercial Press)
External Examiner (The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
University of Science and Technology)
Secretary, Hong Kong Shakespeare Society
More detailed data on individual colleagues’ achievements in their various roles
as administrators, teachers, and researchers may be found in Appendix J where full
curriculum vitae of all Programme staff may be found.
Section 11: Challenges and Opportunities
Because of its unique history, the rationale for the English Major Programme is
rapidly evolving, away from its traditional role occupying the cornerstone of a
colonial-era Hong Kong language policy and discipline, toward an interdisciplinary
platform for students working within a global variety of linguistic and cultural
contexts. Compared with the past, our students now consider and pursue careers
and professions using English in countries throughout Asia, as well as in Europe,
and not solely limited to traditional English-language centers in the United
Kingdom, Australia and North America.
We see this increasing diversity of opportunity, like the diversity of the
English language in a world context, as an emerging strength upon which to build
our Programme. Accordingly, we seek to train our students to both use and
“think in” English effectively and creatively, mindful that the effects of such an
education may be compounded in fruitful ways precisely because fluency and
proficiency in English as a second or third language will achieve further knock-on
professional and personal benefits beyond the (typically, Chinese) mother-tongue.
11.1 Integrated English Studies: The Way Forward
The way forward for the English Programme is to continuously reinvent itself This
can be achieved by positively embracing an integrated English Studies framework,
as the living artifact of a plurality of global English language systems, the colonial
80
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
legacy apart, and by further equipping our students with the language skills and
worldview necessary to more effectively use the English language sets and
literatures so much a part of Hong Kong’s great cultural diversity. English Studies
remain central to contemporary Hong Kong life and society, even as they are
distinctly and historically different from Chinese philosophies, concepts, and truths.
In its proper Hong Kong context, then, the strength and future flexibility of our
Programme resides in the fact that contemporary English, in the plurality of its
linguistic and literary forms, may effectively address the vitality of local values and
attitudes even while laying claim to an international history and dialogue beyond
Chinese borders.
In practical terms, addressing this local-global reality of integrated English
Studies requires that our Programme increase and enhance its efforts toward
structural integration of existing Programme offerings with our various Faculty
and cross-Faculty partners when delivering English-language curricula to the
broader University community. This includes embracing the increasing likelihood
of (and necessity for) multiple platforms for delivering English Studies at
undergraduate, research postgraduate, and taught postgraduate levels.
In order to achieve this, however, we must be more creative in developing
programmes that can attract private funding. In full view of the work that
Language colleagues are already engaged in by delivering quality courses in support
of the MALS partnership, we can no longer rely solely on the UGC-funded
(first-year, first-degree government funded) programmes to conduct our core
business, which is rapidly evolving as Hong Kong itself changes.
11.2 Developing Income-Generating (Self-funded) Programmes
Accordingly, we must give greater urgency to the development of one, some, or all
of the following income generating initiatives:


a self-funded “top-up” programme targeting (and expanding from) the
perceived market demand for our fifteen second year places on the part of
Associate Degree holders who will seek to complete the B. A. within a four-year
normative duration;
a self-funded, taught Master’s programme in Literary Studies, whereby
81
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
the literary elements of the English Studies B. A. curriculum can be refined and
developed at the postgraduate level. Beyond this, achieving independent
funding for literary studies will more effectively enable literature colleagues to
be rightly perceived as carrying their own weight and, indeed, paying their own
way, as Language colleagues currently bear the added weight of supporting
MALS;

greater integration with other quality providers of English Studies at our sister
institutions in Guangdong province generally, and the sister unit, HKBU United
International College (UIC)-Zhuhai in particular, in the form of self-funded,
credit-bearing summer (or other modular) courses whereby local and Mainland
students could engage in reciprocal, credit-bearing study exchanges.
11.3 3+3+4 Educational Reform (Four-Year Curriculum)
As one of the recurring subtexts of this Programme self-evaluation document, a
great challenge—and also an exciting opportunity—facing our Programme is the
roll-out of the historic educational reform currently facing all Hong Kong
institutions of tertiary education: the shift from a three-year (British-styled)
curriculum to a four-year (American-styled) curriculum. The impacts of this
reform are profound at all levels of the University; with regard to our specific
Programme, we have tried to introduce as few (but still meaningful) changes as
possible, in response to the addition of an additional year to our undergraduate
student’s career with us (see the tabled document, “English Programme: Four-year
Curriculum Supplement”).
As detailed in the supplement, our contributions to the Faculty’s rollout of the
3+3+4 may be summarized briefly as follows: a proposed year-one course for
non-Majors (“English, Creativity, and Cultures”); the streamlining of our existing
Concentration structure (including a flexible option allowing students to
accumulate units across existing Concentrations); the re-envisioning of our core
curriculum (including new titles, pedagogies, and teaching and learning activities).
In line with all sectors of Hong Kong education and government, we welcome
this change, even as we recognize that it will introduce new challenges in
implementation, including the arrival of a “double-cohort” of students during AY
2012-2013. (Year One students in the first cohort of the new four-year curriculum
82
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
will overlap for one year with the final cohort of Year One students from the
out-going three-year curriculum.) And, with regard to progressively increasing class
sizes (attributed not only to such an historical policy change, but also to
sector-wide growth of a generational nature) greater emphasis must be placed on
forward planning, specifically as regards our existing Programme resources and the
attempt to maintain a quality balance between our research and teaching
commitments.
11.4 Programme Resources
During the interim since the ACP 2003 visit, English Programme colleagues have
succeeded in securing various types of grants in support of their teaching,
scholarly and professional activities. A conference matching grant has been set up
in the Department to top up the Short Term Staff Development grants they
received from the Faculty for presenting papers at conferences.
The Prgramme has also received generous grant support for developing core
collections of library materials in the areas of Irish literature, new literatures in
English, and contemporary American literature.
However, with the rise in student intake and the development of new
programmes (such as the Double Degree) in recent years, it is anticipated that
more resources in the form of print and non-print materials are needed to ensure
the quality of teaching and learning. At present, the library holdings under English
language and Literature are around 75,000 volumes or 65,500 titles. The increasing
trend, integrating the use of audio-visual materials and e-Learning resources with
classroom-based pedagogies, alongside the gradual shift toward outcome-based
teaching and learning, will require additional library funding for the further
acquisition of various types of teaching and learning materials and in support of
the on-going development of innovative teaching strategies.
Facilities/resources presently made available to the Programme include:


a multi-function room with LCD projector, television, DVD player,
video cassette recorder and overhead projector, a venue for
seminars, meetings and tutorials;
a meeting room with sofas for staff members to meet students or
83
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
guests in a relaxing environment;

office equipment available for use in the General Office:photocopier,
colour LaserJet printer, paper shredder, fax machine, a electric
typewriter, digital camera,
low-speed scanner, and
laptop
computer.

Over the longer term, the English Programme may need to acquire the
following facilities (or additional resources) in order to support its various
academic activities:




phonetics laboratory (with seating capacity for 30-40 and necessary
equipment) enhancing the teaching effectiveness of the Major
required (core) course, Phonetics and Phonology;
increased office space for teaching staff, including part-time
instructors and teaching assistants, under the 3+3+4 education
reform. As our institutional role expands under the four-year
curriculum to come, so should our physical space;
common room specifically for students promoting collegiality, project
work and collaboration;
new high-speed scanner in the general office for staff use in
support of teaching and research activities, in line with overall
University and Programme initiatives to reduce reliance on paper,
including the introduction of greater technological efficiencies.
11.5 Research and Teaching
One of our greatest strengths as a Programme is our small size. Teachers and
students know one other well, many teachers attend social events organized by the
students, and we take great pride in providing a caring learning environment for
our students in the best liberal-arts tradition. However, our small size and our
commitment to the students probably also make for one of our greatest challenges
84
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
as administrators and researchers: we may have less time for dedicated research,
because we spend more time with the students, and many (if not most) colleagues
have several very time-consuming senior administrative roles.
All in all, the Programme is at a critical juncture as it seeks to expand upon
existing research quality and at the same time to sustain growing teaching
(including RPg supervision) commitments. In order to sustain, let alone further,
our research, we cannot continue to shoulder heavy administrative appointments
and growing class sizes without achieving further staffing. However, we also
recognize that even if the Programme does continue to grow under the four-year
(3+3+4) curriculum, some increase in class size (including some decrease in quality
contact hours with students) is inevitable and even desirable.
One additional difficulty Programme researchers encounter is with regard to
equitable access to research funding. By and large, research funding is probably
limited in most countries in the world, but in Hong Kong there is only one source
for external (government) research funding: the University Grants Committee
(UGC). Competition for UGC grants is always fierce, but in our case uniquely so
because of relatively less teaching support (e.g. teaching assistants, research
assistants and RPg student quota) which limits our ability to compete with local
Universities who are not so designated. (i.e.,. we have out-performed so-called
“research” universities, even though they have tutors to teach tutorials, whereas we
pride ourselves on having PhDs teach our tutorials. More time in class drives
research interests, but also may decrease time for research.) This is de-motivating
for English Programme staff and poses a serious problem when seeking to achieve
greater recognition for our overall research profile, which is very robust, and when
viewing our historical role as a teaching institution apart.
Another challenge at the Programme level is how to achieve a more equal
distribution of workload from course to course and from colleague to colleague.
When it comes to teaching, for example, some colleagues carry a heavier load,
because relatively small classes and relatively large classes are weighted comparably.
For example, courses with five and thirty students, respectively, are viewed as
equivalent (as a value 1.0 class); courses with thirty-one and sixty students,
respectively, are similarly viewed as equivalent (as a value 1.25 class). We would
suggest therefore that a more detailed calculation of actual class sizes could lead to
a more equal distribution of the workload. This on-going question of our division
85
English Major Programme:
Self-Evaluation Document
of labor, between our core commitments and our growing commitments to
partnering units, remains pressing and should be taken into consideration when the
question of future staffing levels is revisited.
Finally, in terms of our management chain, the Faculty and University prefer
colleagues at full-Professor rank to sit on research-funding and staff-appointment
review committees, and thus to steer the formulation of policy. We feel that this
reliance on the most experienced and knowledgeable staff to lead, fund, and
promote is entirely appropriate. However, there has not been any promotion from
within the Programme to full-Professor rank for a substantiated (tenured) (cf.
contract-based) member of staff since 2002, and this promotion was the first of
its kind since 1998. Accordingly, we have not had more than one promotion to
full-Professor rank for substantiated staff in over twelve years. And despite our
Programme’s outstanding performance in research, teaching, and service since
2003, our relative lack of seniority contrasted with other Departments hampers
our ability to effectively pursue Programme policy at a senior level within the
broader Faculty and University.
86