Glossary of Terms - Hong Kong Baptist Universityarts.hkbu.edu.hk/acp_eng/acp self-evaulation...

English Major Programme: Self-Evaluation Document

Glossary of Terms

3+3+4 EDUCATIONAL : Sector-wide reforms resulting in a four-year REFORM (3+3+4) University curriculum commencing AY 2012-2013.

CENTRE FOR HOLISTIC: A University office (including aTEACHING AND University Senate portfolio)

dedicated to LEARNING (CHTL) ensuring the smooth and orderly

transition fromthe existing teaching curriculum toward achieving the educational requirements of the 3+3+4 sector-wide reform.

COMPLEMENTARY : This curriculum component complements the

STUDIES 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 : A partnership between ENG and EDUC

PROGRAMME Departments, awarding a B.A. in English Language

(ENGED) and Literature and a B.Ed. in English

1


Language Teaching across a four-year programme of study.

GENERAL EDUCATION: Introduced as part of the 3+3+4 reform, (GE) CURRICULUM 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.

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

2


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).

3


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

4


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;

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

5


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, including our Programme Intended Learning Outcomes (PILOs) as well as the University’s Graduate Attributes, which may be found in Section 7 below.1.3Goals

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-

6


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.

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

7


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.

2.2 Responses to ACP Visit 2003

8


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-

9


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.

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

10


broadened our Programme links with local secondary schools. (see Appendix D).

Section 3: Organization and Administration

3.1 Programme Organization

11


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.

The

12

Feedback

Individual Course Instructors

Concentration Coordinators

ENG Programme Management Committee

English Programme Head

Current student survey

Exit student survey

Graduate employer survey

Individual Course Documents (draft)

Quality Assurance Committee (QAC)

University Senate

Students

Feedback

Feedback

Figure 1. English Programme, Monitoring and Review Process

Arts Faculty Board

Dean

Feedback

Feedback


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

13

Department

AdvisoryCommittee

ComplementaryStudies & Mentoring

Concentration

Coordinators

Examination

Committee

HonoursProject

Committee

EnglishPMC


Pro

Proposed new portfolio : B.A. Programme Coordinator after AY 2012-2013

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) Programme Head (Chairperson)ii) All other full-time staff teaching the Major

Programmeiii) One student representative elected by the English

Societyiv) 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

14


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.

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) curriculum changesb) language enhancement opportunities and issuesc) the Honours Projectd) student workloade) results of student surveysf) Complementary Studies subjects g) University required courses andh) individual course assessment weightings

3.2.2 Honours Project Committee

a) Membership

15


i) Honours Project Coordinator (Chairperson)ii) All other full-time staff involved in supervising

Honours Projectsiii) Dean of Arts (ex-officio)iv) Programme Head (ex-officio)


i) To formulate and review the work schedule of the Honours Project.

ii) To assign project supervisors to students.iii) To revise and update the Honours Project

Handbook.iv) To review the Honours Project topics submitted by

students.v) To approve the final grades of the Honours Project.vi) 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.

3.2.3Advisory 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) A member from the community (as Chairperson)ii) Programme Head (as Convener)iii) Dean of Arts (ex-officio) iv) Other members from the community v) Head of the Language Centre (by invitation)


16


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.

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:

17


A. External Members

Mr. Lincoln Soo, JP (Chairperson), Soo Pei Shao & Co.Dr. Steven Luk, General Manager, Commercial Press (HK) LimitedMs. Linda Shu, Senior Hospital Manager (Patient Relations and Communication),

Kwong Wah HospitalMr. Abraham Tang, Associate Director, The Hong Kong Academy

for Gifted Education

B. Internal MembersDr. Stuart Christie (Convener), Acting Head, English Major ProgrammeProf. Chung Ling, Dean, Faculty of Arts (ex-officio)Prof. Kathleen Ahrens, Head, Language Centre 3.2.4Examination 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)


i) To ensure that specific course assessments are in accord with the learning outcomes, objectives, content and stipulated methods of assessment for the Programme as a whole, and applied consistently to all of its constituent courses.

18


ii) To assess the performance of students as they progress through the Programme.

iii) To formulate and approve the examination regulations for the Programme, and to adjudicate, as necessary, any exceptional cases which might arise.

iv) To ensure comparability of standards across English Major courses.

v) To review examination questions prior to their submission to the Academic Registry.

vi) To classify and approve the final results of individual students’ performance, including Honours Degree classifications upon graduation from the Programme.

3.2.5Mentoring 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;

19


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.

3.2.6Concentration 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;

20


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.

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

21


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;

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;

22


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;

23


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.

3.3Who 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-MajorsProgramme Green Ambassador, Task Force for Sustainable

CampusMember, B.A. ENG & B.Ed. Programme Management

CommitteeCoordinator, Faculty GRF Incentive Scheme (Literatures in

English group)

Dr. Hiroko ItakuraConvenor of Focus Group on Language Enhancement Member, Scholarship Selection PanelsHonours Project CoordinatorMember, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students

Dr. Magdalen KiRepresentative, Humanities Programme Management

Committee MeetingsMember, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students Member, Scholarship Selection PanelsUniversity Life: Mentoring Coordinator Literature-in-Depth Concentration CoordinatorMember, Arts Faculty Outreach Committee

24


Dr. Kenneth Kong Department Seminar CoordinatorCareer Advisor Task Force on Establishment of Student Learning PortfolioDepartment Liaison Officer (with Counselling &

Development Centre and Placement Centre)

Dr. Hans LadegaardProgramme Director, B.A. ENG & B.Ed. (Double Degree)Coordinator, Faculty Information Day Coordinator, English Major Examination Committee Representative, Faculty Taskforce on 3+3+4 Curriculum Faculty Representative to SenateMember, International Advisory CommitteeMember, the Programme Management Committee for the

M.A. in Language Studies

Prof. Clayton MacKenzie (on leave until 15 January 2011)

Dr. Jason PolleySecretary, English Programme Management Committee Coordinator, Annual English Poetry Writing CompetitionMember, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students Advisor, English Debating TeamMember, Scholarship Selection PanelsMember, International Writers Workshop Planning

CommitteeAdvisor, New Horizons (Faculty newsletter)

Dr. Wee Lian HeeCultural Activities Coordinator Coordinator/Webmaster, Programme Website Department Representative, Arts Faculty IT SubcommitteeCoordinator, Annual Student and Exit SurveysMember, Admissions Committee for Non-JUPAS Students Member, Scholarship Selection PanelsMember, Arts Faculty Newsletter Editorial Committee Arts Faculty Representative, Language Enhancement

Programme Advisory CommitteeLanguage-in-Depth Concentration Coordinator

25


Dr. Suying YangCoordinator, Research Postgraduate Studies Admissions

(Linguistics)Member, B.A. ENG & B.Ed. Programme Management CommitteeMember, Arts & Social Sciences Specialist Panel, Research

CommitteeMember, Undergraduate Admission Committee

Prof. Terry YipConvenor of the Research Group in Gender StudiesLibrary Coordinator Member, Equal Opportunities PanelMember, Task Force on Undergraduate CurriculumChair, Teaching Development Grant PanelRepresentative, Faculty Taskforce on 3+3+4 Curriculum Faculty Representative, Advisory Committee on Graduate

EmploymentMember, University Task Force on Quality Assurance

Council Audit Report, HKBUChair, 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

26


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 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

27


Honours Project (compulsory) 6 units

Complementary Studies 36 units Core Requirements 15 units

Distribution Requirements 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:

ENG 1110 Introduction to the Study of LiteratureENG 1150 English Grammar and MeaningENG 1160 Narrative ArtENG 1190 Introduction to the Study of Language

Either ENG 1220 Literature and Culture Or ENG 1260 Language, Culture and Society

ENG 2240 Research Skills in English Language and LiteratureENG 2680 English Phonetics and PhonologyENG 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).

Again within Complementary Studies, the distribution requirements for English Programme Majors include: any 6 total units outside the Humanities category (i.e. within the

28


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;

29


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.

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

30


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: 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

31


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 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.”

32


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; andc) 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.

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

33


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 LearningENG2190 Language PragmaticsENG2260 Text AnalysisENG2640 Language Change and Language ContactENG2650 Topics in English GrammarENG2660 Vocabulary in ContextENG2670 The English Language and Communication Across CulturesENG2760 Language and the HumanitiesENG3450 Language and GenderENG3610 Bilingualism and Bilingual EducationENG3640 Special Topic in LinguisticsENG3650 Special Topic in Language StudiesENG3660 Language and EducationENG3670 Discovering GrammarsENG3680 Discourse AnalysisENG3740 Functional Approaches to GrammarENG4730 Advanced Topic in LinguisticsENG4740 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

34


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 SocietyENG 2140 Literature and PersuasionENG 2170 Western Poetry and PoeticsENG 2270 American Popular Fiction after 1950ENG 2720 Creative WritingENG 2750 PoetryENG 2830 Western Critical Approaches to LiteratureENG 3440 Literature and the Nobel PrizeENG 3710 Single Author Forum: Prose FictionENG 3720 Single Author Forum: PoetryENG 3730 Single Author Forum: DramaENG 3760 The Child and LiteratureENG 3780 Great Novels in EnglishENG 3850 Special Topic in LiteratureENG 3870 American LiteratureENG 3920 Twentieth-Century LiteratureENG 3930 Twentieth-Century PoetryENG 3940 Shakespeare and His ContemporariesENG 3950 Creative Writing WorkshopENG 3990 Special Topic in Western Critical TheoryENG 4720 Advanced Topic in Literatures in English

4.4.3 Stylistics and Comparative Literature Concentration

The Stylistics and Comparative Literature Concentration

35


offers students an opportunity to study the interrelations of different literatures, especially Chinese and Western literatures. While the stylistics component enables students to analyze 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 DramaENG 2310 Literature, the Arts and MediaENG 2320 Great Works in World LiteratureENG 2820 Comp. Literature: Theory and MethodologyENG 2830 Western Critical Approaches to LiteratureENG 3280 Major Theme in LiteratureENG 3290 Major Genre in LiteratureENG 3410 Major Movement or Trend in LiteratureENG 3420 Modern DramaENG 3430 The Short StoryENG 3750 Special Topic in Comparative LiteratureENG 3770 Literature and FilmENG 3820 Chinese-Western Literary RelationsENG 3830 Literature and TranslationENG 3860 Styles and StructuresENG 3990 Special Topic in Western Critical TheoryENG 4710 Advanced Topic in Comparative Literature

Note: Pending Faculty and University review and endorsement, the Programme Management Committee has

36


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.”

37


4.5 The Three-Year Programme Study Schedule (as revised AY 2003-2004)_________________________________________________________________________Course Code & No. Sem 1 Sem 2 Totaland Title Units Units Units

Year OneENG 1220 Literature & Culture or - 3 3 ENG 1260 Language, Culture & SocietyENG 1110 Introduction to the Study of Literature 3 - 3ENG 1150 English Grammar & Meaning 3 - 3ENG 1160 Narrative Art - 3 3ENG 1190 Introduction to the Study of Language 3 - 3ENG 1211 Oral Communication and Public Speaking 3 - 3ENG 1212 Academic and Professional Writing - 3 3I.T. 1180 Information Management Technology 3 - 3LANG 1480 University Chinese - 3 3Values & the Meaning of Life Course - 3 3Complementary Studies Distribution Requirement Courses 3 3 6U.L. 1121-2 University Life - - -Physical Education Courses - - - ____ ____ ____

18 18 36

Year Two

ENG 2240 Research Skills in English Language & Literature 3- 3

ENG 2680 English Phonetics & Phonology 3 - 3Major Elective Courses 9 9 18Complementary Studies Distribution Requirement Courses 3 3 6Complementary Studies Free Elective Course - 3 3

____ ____ ____ 18 15 33

Year Three

ENG 3591-2 Honours Project 3 3 6

38


Major Elective Courses 6 9 15Complementary Studies Free Elective Courses 3 3 6

____ ____ ____ 12 15 27

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 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

39


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.

Here is what several of our students have had to say about their overseas study experiences:

“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

40

“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!”

--Queenie Tsui, B.A. (Hons) English,Class of 2011


diversified cultures and belief systems.”--Agnes Kwong, B.A. (Hons) EnglishClass 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:

41


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

No. of Students on Exchange

2009-10 82008-09 6

42

“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


2007-08 52006-07 22005-06 42004-05 3

Following are listed universities where our students have gone on exchange:

Birmingham-Southern CollegeGeorg-August Universität

(Germany)Kalamazoo College (Michigan,

USA)Liverpool Hope University

McGill University Mercer University

Ohio UniversityPepperdine University

Rollins CollegeSeinan Gakuin University

(Japan)

Swinburne University of Technology

University of NottinghamUniversity of Bergen

University of British ColumbiaUniversity of Joensuu (Finland)

University of LeedsUniversity of Saskatchewan

University of Turku (Finland)

West Virginia University

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.

43


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.

Figure 3. Delivery of English Language Courses Across Units and Faculties

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

44

MA in Language Studies (MALS)

Language Centre (LC)

ENG MajorProgramme

Faculty of Social Sciences

Faculty of Arts

ENG ED Double Degree

& “2+2” Programmes


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.

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.

45


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 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.

46


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

47


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.

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

48


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.

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

49


Academic Year No. of Teaching Hours

(HK$) Equivalent

2005-06 51 102,0002006-07 118 236,0002007-08 135 270,0002008-09 96 192,0002009-10 75 150,000

Total 475 950,000

1billable hours computed on a pro rata basis by academic year

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.

The five English Major Programme staff members currently teaching for MALS are listed as follows:

1. Dr Hiroko Itakura2. Dr. Kenneth Kong3. Dr. Hans Ladegaard4. Dr. Wee Lian Hee5. Dr. Suying Yang

5.2.2 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

50


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

6.1OverviewThe 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.

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

51


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 Examination Coordinator in the management and monitoring of the overall quality of teaching and learning. The Programme Head is further responsible for

52


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

53


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.

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

54


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.

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;

55

http://chtl.hkbu.edu.hk/ga/


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.

7.4Programme 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.

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

56


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

57


and survey mechanisms.

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

GA1Knowle

dge

GA 2Thinkin

g

GA 3Learni

ng

GA 4Communic

ation

GA5Skill

s

GA 6Citizenship

GA 7Teamw

ork

PILO 1EffectiveScholarship

PILO 2AcademicLiteracy

PILO 3English Proficiency

PILO 4

58


Research Skills

PILO 5International & Interdisciplinary Perspectives

PILO 6Teamwork and Employability

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

59


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

8.1Student 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.

English Programme: Student Enrollments (Year on Year), 2004-2009

No. of Students Admitted2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

JUPAS

Yr 1 (%) 43 (5%) 31 (3%) 28 (3%) 28 (2%) 29 (2%) 25 (1%)Total No. of Qualified Applications

917 1,033 963 1,122 1,362 1,932

60


Non-JUPASYr 1 0 0 0 0 1 4Yr 2 2 11 12 17 17 15

Mainland(Foundation Yr) (0) (0) (2) (2) (2) (2)Yr 1 0 0 4 2 2 2

OthersTransfer Student

(Yr 1)

1 0 0 0 0 0

TotalFoundation Yr (0) (0) (2) (2) (2) (2)Yr 1 44

4631

4232

4430

4732

4931

46Yr 2 2 11 12 17 17 15

Concentration

Language 17

43*

22

42

24

44

18

47

21

48*

24

44*Literature 12 12 10 13 15 8CompLit 14 8 10 16 12 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).

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

61


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

62


sense. Are we meeting, to a reasonable extent, the expectations of our students? If not, what modifications need to be made?

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?

63

English Programme: Annual Student Survey Result (Specific Questions), AY 2005-2009

Total No. Students A3 D A3 E A10 D A10 E B13 D B13 E B16 D B16 E

2009 Year 130

13

(43.3%)

10

(33.3%)14 (46.7%)

10

(33.3%)2 (6.7%) 0 (0%) 1 (3.3%) 1 (3.3%)

Year 243

23

(53.5%)9 (20.9%) 18 (41.9%)

10

(23.3%)

19

(44.2%)10 (23.3%) 15 (34.9) 2 (4.7%)

Year 343

12

(27.9%)

18

(41.9%)17 (39.5%)

8

(18.6%)

22

(51.2%)11 (25.6%)

17

(39.5%)9 (20.9%)

2008 Year 130 15 (50%) 7 (23.3%) 10 (33.3%)

7

(23.3%)8 (26.7%) 2 (6.7%) 3 (10%) 4 (13.3%)

Year 245

25

(55.6%)7 (15.6%) 24 (53.3%) 9 (20%)

20

(44.4%)9 (20%)

21

(46.7%)6 (13.3%)

Year 348

26

(54.2%)9 (18.8%) 22 (45.8%)

8

(16.7%)24 (50%) 11 (22.9%) 12 (25%) 9 (18.8%)

Year 4 2 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (50%)

2007 Year 129

16

(55.2%)1 (3.4%) 15 (51.7%)

3

(10.3%)6 (20.7%) 0 (0%)

4

(13.8%)0 (0%)

Year 247

30

(63.8%)4 (8.5%) 22 (46.8%)

5

(10.6%)

26

(55.3%)5 (10.6%)

19

(40.4%)6 (12.8%)

Year 340 16 (40%)

11

(27.5%)13 (32.5%)

9

(22.5%)16 (40%) 12 (30%)

13

(32.5%)9 (22.5%)

Year 46

1

(16.7%)2 (33.3%) 2 (33.3%)

1

(16.7%)3 (50%) 2 (33.3%) 3 (50%) 1 (16.7%)

2006 Year 1 32 16 (50%) 3 (9%) 17 (53%) 3 (9%) 8 (25%) 0 (0%) 4 (13%) 0 (0%)

Year 2 41 24 (59%) 6 (15%) 22 (54%) 3 (7%) 26 (63%) 5 (12%) 20 (49%) 4 (10%)

Year 3 53 24 (45%) 11 (21%) 24 (45%) 8 (15%) 27 (51%) 8 (15%) 18 (34%) 6 (11%)

Year 4 13 6 (46%) 3 (23%) 7 (54%) 2 (15%) 9 (69%) 2 (15%) 6 (46%) 2 (15%)

2005 Year 132

11

(34.4%)9 (28.1%) 16 (50%)

5

(15.6%)

11

(34.4%)3 (9.4%) 8 (25%) 1 (3.1%)

Year 251

20

(39.2%)

13

(25.5%)19 (37.3%)

10

(19.6%)

22

(43.1%)10 (19.6%)

17

(33.3%)9 (17.7%)

Year 343

24

(55.8%)

16

(37.2%)19 (44.2%)

11

(25.6%)

23

(53.5%)17 (39.5%)

13

(30.2%)3 (7%)

Year 4 4 0 (0%) 2 (50%) 2 (50%) 1 (25%) 3 (75%) 1 (25%) 1 (25%) 0 (0%)

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

“Very Relevant” to Present Employment

2009 2008 2007

Total No. of Graduates 48 45 60

No. Surveys Received(% total) 18 (38%) 32 (71%) 25 (42%)

Already Secured 12 (67%) 30 (94%) 21 (84%)

Employment

ENG “Very Relevant” to Career 9 (50%) 12 (38%) 13 (52%)

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.

English Programme: Students Marking E (“Greatly”) in Response toSpecific Questions, AY 2007-2009

How has your training in English Language and Literature contributed to your employment experience?

2009 2008 2007

It has given me more confidence when communicating in English

10(56%)

25(78%)

17(68%)

I can apply what I have learnt to fulfill the requirements for my present job

10(56%)

19(59%)

14(56%)

It has enabled me to develop good working relationships with people

2(11%)

9(28%)

7(28%)

I have developed good problem-solving skills necessary for my present job

4(22%)

13(41%)

7(28%)

The Programme has not made significant contributions to my overall job satisfaction

1(6%)

3(9%)

2(8%)

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:

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 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.

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

http://www.worldsalaries.org/hongkong.shtml

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;

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

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:

RAE 2006: On Par with the Sciences

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

Biological Sciences 92.50%Physics & Astronomy 97.50%Chemistry 94.64%

English Language & Literature

91.67%

international standards). The English Programme was the fourth highest-ranking unit overall, in fact, throughout the entire University. And of this fact we are justifiably proud.

9.2Staff 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

“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

levels) or attempting further initiatives at international collaboration in these areas (see Section 9.2.2 below).

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 2008/09 2007/08 2006/07 2005/06 2004/05

Sub-total

FRG 2 ($160,86

0)

7 ($487,725)

8 ($516,02

2)

4($285,750)

1($48,300)

22 ($1,498,65

7)GRF 1

($176,730)

2 ($853,12

0)

- 1 ($531,52

0)

1($308,352)

- 5 ($1,869,72

2)TDG 1

($187,010)

- 5 ($629,020)

2 ($102,80

0)

- - 8 ($918,830)

Subtota

l

2 ($363,74

0)

4($1,013,980)

12($1,116,745)

11($1,150,342)

5($594,102)

1($48,300)

35 ($4,287,209

)

English Programme: Total No. of Grants Received (by distribution), AY 2004-2010

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

22

5

5

FRG

TDG

GRF

Project No. Name of PI Award ($HK)

Duration

Project Title

0708/IV/01 Dr. Magdalen Ki 75,000 6/08-6/09 Short Stories on Film

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 &Ms Dianne Cmor (LIB)

169,720 9/08-8/09 Animated Glossary of Rudimentary Linguistic Concepts

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'

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

AYFunded

Project No.

Name of PI Award ($HK)

Duration

Project Title

2009-10 243110 Prof. C. MacKenzie 176,730

24 The Danse Macabre in the Drama of the Elizabethan Age

2008-09 241008 Dr. S. Christie 287,040

24 English Modernist Writers and the Public Domain: E.M. Forster as a Case Study

2008-09 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

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 ARTDAcademic Units, 2006-2009

Grant

2008/09 2007/08 2006/07 Sub-total

FRG ENG

2 ENG 7 ENG 8 17

A 2 A 2 A 4 8B 3 B 8 B 5 16

GRF ENG

2 ($853,12

0)

ENG 0 ENG 1 ($531,520

)

3 ($1,384,64

0)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 conferences and/or research output.

ENG Programme Staff

Outside Collaborator(s)Name of

Collaborator(s)Department/

Institution/Country2008-2009

Dr. Hans J. Ladegaard

(table continues fromprevious page)

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’)

Institute of Language & Communication, University of Southern Denmark, and School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, Newcastle University

Prof. Itesh Sachdev(Project: ‘Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning’)

Department of Linguistics, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London

Dr. James Green and 22 colleagues from 19 different countries(Project: ‘Evaluating English Accents Worldwide’)

University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

Prof. Terry YipProfessor Kwok-kan Tam & Professor Frode Helland (Project: Ibsen and the Modern Self)

Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Open University of Hong Kong & Center for Ibsen Studies, University of Oslo, Norway

2006-2007

Dr. Hans J. Ladegaard

Dr. Teresa Cadierno, Dr. Dennis Day, Dr. Allan Firth, Dr. Astrid Jensen, Dr. Sharon Millar(Project: ‘Global Communication in Business Organizations’)

The University of Southern Denmark; The University of Aalborg, Denmark

2005-2006

Dr. Hiroko Itakura

Gillian Humphreys(Project title: Multilingual Identity of Hong Kong University students.)

Department of English, Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Dr. Wee Lian HeeWang Hui and Lee Cher Leng(Project: (Project: Frequently-used Chinese Characters/Words in Singapore)

National University of Singapore (Chinese Studies)

2003-2004

Prof. Terry YipProf. Kwok-kan Tam (Project: Gender and Contemporary Literature)

The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Department of English)

9.3Student-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. 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).

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 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.

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:

E-Learning/Utilization

Moodle/ WebCT course

delivery

E-mail communicat

ion with students

Multimedia lecture/tutor

ial presentation

s

Work time (%) spent on-line for teaching-related

activitiesDr. Stuart Christie 20-30%

Dr. Hiroko Itakura 25%

Dr. Magdalen Ki 30%

Dr. Kenneth Kong 10%Dr. Hans Ladegaard

20-30%

Dr. Jason Polley 20%

Dr. Wee Lian Hee 20%Mrs. Julia Wan (Part-time)

25%

Dr. Suying Yang 20%

Prof. Terry Yip 20%

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.

Major Activities of the English Language and Literature Society

InaugurationRegistration Day

Orientation Camp*Orientation Day*Orientation Night

Publication – PhonebookCabinet Briefing

Joint Society Sales WeekInternal Singing Contest

Christmas PartyAcademic Week

Election General MeetingJoint Society Singing Contest

Annual DinnerAnnual General MeetingPublication – 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 Themes2009-10 Love to Read

2008-09 Myth2007-08 Language and Gender

2006-07 Love with No Boundaries

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.

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.”

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 LinguisticsTherapist/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.”

“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.”

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.

Shen Xianmin (MPhil in English Literature, Class of 2010)PhD student, South Carolina University, USA

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.

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

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)

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 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 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 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 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 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 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.

Glossary of Terms - Hong Kong Baptist Universityarts.hkbu.edu.hk/acp_eng/acp self-evaulation...

Documents

Transcript of Glossary of Terms - Hong Kong Baptist Universityarts.hkbu.edu.hk/acp_eng/acp self-evaulation...