A brief
comparative overview of Hong Kong's
principal trade partners and Singapore (graph 17
- new window) suggests that Hong Kongers place an important priority
on education. In 2002 only the Singaporean and South Korean governments
spent more on education as a proportion of their respective total
budgets
than did Hong Kong. Indeed, Hong Kong outperformed the United States,
Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom. This same notion is further
emphasized when one compares the salaries, received by Hong Kong
primary and secondary teachers after 15 years of service, with those of
the primary and secondary school teachers of Hong Kong's principal
trading
partners (graph 79 - new window). Hong Kong teachers are the
best paid of the bunch.
Upon closer examination,
however, the money spent on each Hong Kong child as a proportion of
gross
national product paints a very different picture (graph 18
- new window). In fact,
comparing performance across
these same societies we find Hong Kong at the bottom of the pact just
above the Chinese mainland.1
When one considers that Hong Kong ranks number three among these same
countries in terms of GDP per capita (graph 34
- new window),
there is reason for concern.2
Indeed, as a non-sovereign economy, Hong Kong has never been required
to
maintain a standing army, navy, and air force. Before 1997 this was the
responsibility of the British government; since the reversion in 1997
it has become the
responsibility of the Chinese government. On the other hand, national
defense spending consumes a very large portion of the United States
governmental budget and represents a sizeable proportion of the
governmental
budgets of Hong Kong's other principal trade partners, as well.
Thus,
simply comparing what portion of a government's budget is spent on
education
across societies tells us little about how much money a society
invests in the education of its children relative to other societies.
Certainly the Hong Kong government pays its teachers well. This might
help to explain the generally shabby-looking appearance of many Hong
Kong schools. Should this surprise one, though? Shabby-looking
buildings give Hong Kong citizens the impression that their government
is even poorer than it truly is, thus making it easier for Hong Kong
teachers to spend their extraordinarily high personal incomes
relatively free of complaint from unknowing parents and taxpayers.
Certainly the appearance of most Hong Kong schools is a far cry from
the glittering private-sector skyline and waterfront of Hong Kong
Island as seen from Kowloon.
Of
course, government administrators, teachers and
Hong Kong tax payers are only half of the problem. What about the
children who are served by these false images? What about the
opportunity cost of learning a language that one is likely never to
use, or whose highest return is a false sense
of pride about what one has truly acquired?
If
only there were a market
What a child's English language education might bring to
the Child
Among the
industrially advanced
countries of the world, and even among many that are not so advanced,
there are probably few, if any, that do not forbid child labor. More
importantly, the laws that prohibit this labor are easy to
enforce, because the employment of children is difficult to
hide and most parents prefer that children go to school. That
governments have found it necessary to enact such laws, however,
suggests that many employers would hire children, if the laws were
eliminated. Many probably employ them anyway and incur the risk of
punishment. In effect, there remains a latent market for child labor
with hidden prices that EARTH has sought to estimate. For it is with
these
that one can measure the opportunity cost (new window) to children, who
study English with little or no reward -- likely the majority.
In April
2004 the average entry-level wage offered to secondary form V graduates
was HK$29.6 per hour (see note 6 beneath table
44). Under the assumption that a child's market worth grows at about
the same rate as the expected long term value of the economy in which
he grows up, the hourly wage appropriate for a 1993 Hong Kong
preschooler with three years of kindergarten education would have been
slightly over HK$15 per hour -- the value of about three cans of soda
pop purchased
from an inexpensive Hong Kong vending machine in 2004 (see note
3 and column
2 of table 45). By comparison the value of a child's labor having
just completed his basic
education in 2002 would have been somewhat over H$26 per hour -- the
value of a low-end, full meal at Maxim's, a popular Hong Kong
self-service cafeteria.3
Insofar as Hong Kong's
Education and Manpower Bureau recommends that each school devote
between 17 to 21 percent of its classroom training to the study of
English, the average Hong Kong student spends
between 140 to 190 hours per year (see table 47c) in pursuit
of the English language. In child wages this represents an annual
sacrifice of between HK$2,200 and HK$3,200 for primary students and
between HK$3,300 and HK$6,400 for secondary students (see column 5 table 45).
Of course,
there is more to education than simply the opportunity cost
of the moment. As the acquisition of knowledge is a cumulative process,
it is best to view it, as part of a long term investment that draws
interest over time. This is to say, its true value is not simply the
sum of the moments, but the sum of the moments held over one's entire
educational career. By way of example, the value of a moment spent as a
preschooler is worth more in retrospect to a secondary student than it
is to a primary student, because the secondary student has had longer
to build on the same preschool knowledge that both have acquired.
Now,
let's makes sense of this in terms of money
value. Assuming that a child attends kindergarten for three years
before entering into primary school, at 2004 entry-level market rates the money value of a secondary form V school leaver's
English language education comes to nearly HK$57,000 (see column 5 table 46). For a
secondary form VII student who expects to graduate in 2006 the amount
sacrificed in acquisition of the language comes to just over HK$76,000
(see column 3 table
46). Insofar as average form V and VII school leavers only earn between
HK$6,635 and HK$7,462 per month (see column 3 table 45) during
their first year of employment, the total sacrifice in classroom
English language training is between 70% and 85% of their taxable
annual income.4
Insofar as form V and form VII school leavers are not recompensed for
their language proficiency during their first year of employment, the
loss in time and energy for many is substantial (see note 4 table 44).
If only there were a market
What a child's English language education might bring to
the Economy
In 2001
the approximate number of classroom hours spent among Hong Kong
children in pursuit of the English language came to just under one half
billion hours (see row 5
table 47c). The value of that time measured in 2004 secondary form V
entry-level wage rates comes to about HK$3.7 billion (just over US$470
million).5
Neither the time nor the value of that time spent outside of the
classroom performing homework is included in either of these two
figures! By way of comparison, as a fraction of the Hong Kong
government's total recurrent expenditure on education in 2001-2002 this
value, excluding the value of homework time, comes to just shy of 8%.6 This is
obviously nontrivial investment. Unfortunately, the Hong Kong Education
and Manpower Bureau appears to think otherwise.
Hong Kong's English language
distillation and certified waste disposal plant.
Plant Introduction
Passing
in review
Learning
as an
activity can only be enjoyable when we enjoy what we are learning, or
we can anticipate some reward for having learned. In the first instance
we take pleasure in the subject matter of our study, and in the second
we relish the thought of the reward, while we are studying. Of course,
if the reward is simply the avoidance of a penalty, and we take little
pleasure in the subject matter, the joy of learning quickly dissipates.
As a result we learn only what we need in order to avoid the expected
penalty
for having not learned, and wish we were learning something else, or
nothing at all. As the motivation for learning English and language in
general is quite low among Hong Kong children, learning English for
most can be little more than an activity to avoid parental
disappointment, teacher dissatisfaction, and peer humiliation.7
After all, it
is difficult for children and teens to imagine the dire
consequences they will face for having one day failed to pass the
HKCEE.
Trying to imagine the eventual rewards for having passed cannot be all
that easier either. Thus, it is incumbent on parents and educators to
take
responsibility for these acts of faith, on behalf of all Hong Kong
children, and provide them with proper, more immediate incentives to
acquire that which will one day permit them to pass their
examinations. Of course, the incentives that are provided must be
realistic and in tune with the rewards that society can reasonably
provide. Unfortunately, everything we have examined until now strongly
suggests that neither Hong Kong's educational system nor Hong Kong
society in general can provide even the majority of Hong Kong children
with an eventual rate of return worthy of their investment in the
English language. As a result any immediate incentive must either fall
short of what students truly need, or be completely contrived!
Before
seeking to estimate the true cost of this seemingly collosal failure
in mismatched investment and opportunity it may be useful to review a
few important facts. In 2001 Hong Kong's export-related gross domestic
product amounted to only 38% of the total economy (graph
57 - new window). As a very large proportion of Hong Kong's
external trade takes place between Chinese, the English language is
simply not needed in about half of all transactions (graph
58 -
new window).8
Moreover, Hong Kong is not a particularly
diverse society; nearly 95% of its entire population claimed Chinese
ethnicity in 2001. Although there was a sudden surge in the need for
the English language between 1991 and 1996, after the reversion this
sudden increase quickly dissipated (graph
54 - new window).9
Furthermore, those Hong Kongers that are able to make good use of the
English language in the pursuit of overseas pleasure represent only a
minority of the entire population (graph 35a
- new window).10
Finally, it is important to keep in mind that Hong Kong's leadership
clearly reflects that of a former British colony that discovered world
prominence in the shadows of the Korean War and is now subject to the
political dictates of Beijing's one-party rule.11
We are now
ready to examine Hong
Kong's English language distillation and certified waste disposal plant
in detail. Please open to graph
78 (new window), if you have not already done so.
This
illustration is part cartoon, but mostly illustrated fact. So, you
are invited to laugh at, but not gloss over its contents, for it is a
generally accurate representation of the way in which Hong Kong
academia
is structured. It also contains a healthy dose of factually based
conjecture, that is derived directly from the results just outlined
above. Let us examine the illustration's factual basis first.
Plant
distillation
Fact
Each layer of
the
multi-layered structure consists of two dimensions and an area that
closely reflects total enrolment numbers at each level of education.
With the exception of the flag pole, that should be many times higher,
and the graduate levels G3 and G4, the
height of each layer represents the number of years that a student is
likely to spend at each stage of his school career. With the exception
of the HKCEE, HKALE and Professor labels, each of the numbered acronyms
to the right of the illustration describes one year of education at a
particular level within the corresponding stage.
The width of
each layer represents the number of students enrolled in a
given stage as a proportion of the stage in which the largest number of
students were enrolled during the year for which the plant was
constructed -- in this case, the academic year 2001-2002. The shape of
the plant varies slightly from year to year. Although the number of
students enrolled in each layer is accurately represented by the
respective area of each layer, a more accurate drawing
would leave the edges of the plant far more ragged. For the purpose of
illustration and estimation it was convenient to assume that enrolment
numbers for each year of the same stage (layer) were the same.
It should be
apparent that not all Hong Kong children attend
kindergarten (K1-K3) and most children remain in school from primary
form I (P1) to secondary form V (S5) in order to receive their basic
education, whereafter significant numbers begin falling out of
the system.
The
distillation process becomes manifest with the
results of the senior secondary (HKCEE) and university (HKALE) entrance
examinations. The HKCEE and HKALE filters are illustrated by two sets
of vertically drawn, thick, parallel lines. Most students sit for the
HKCEE while they are still in attendance in secondary form V (S5). One
typically sits for the HKALE while still in attendance in secondary
form VII (S7). Thus, the HKCEE and HKALE filters pass through the
layers containing grade levels K1 to S5 and K1 to S7, respectively.
Notice that not everyone who meets the minimum requirements for entry
into a senior secondary program (form VI and VII) enters. Entry is a
competitive process that often requires higher scores. In contrast,
there are more people enrolled in their first year at the university,
than there are those who pass the HKALE. This is because not everyone
enrolled in his first year at the university is enrolled in a
three-year degree
program. Many are enrolled in sub-degree programs that are offered to
the general public as part of Hong Kong's lifelong learning program.12
The graduate
levels (G1-G4) have been divided into two separate layers
in an effort to distinguish between those who obtain only a master's
degree and those who go on to complete their doctorate. As university
professors typically spend their entire lives in their profession --
many at the same institution; the flag pole should be drawn far higher
and thinner.
Clicking on the illustration reveals a table containing
the actual numbers employed in constructing the graph.
Disposal
Conjecture with fact
Based
upon the information provided in the plant introduction it has been
estimated, but not yet empirically demonstrated, that 60 percent of all
Hong Kongers make either no or only inconsequent use of their English
language training after they graduate from secondary form V.13 In order
to understand how this certified waste is generated certain important
assumptions are made with regard to the diagram and Hong Kong's
educational system in general.
-
-
Post
secondary nonincentive
- Once a child leaves school the punitive incentive for not studying
the language disappears and what little was learned is gradually
forgotten due to lack of use (see Plant
introduction above).
-
Rising
potential damage - The
longer one remains within the
educational system, the longer one must devote time to the study of
English. As a result, both
the potential benefit and damage to students (sacrificed opportunity)
increase the longer that the child remains in the system. (see If only there
were
a market and Language and
social status).
-
Hermetique
and
self-perpetuating system - Only those who master English and
make it to the top are in a position to bring about change within the
system. Unfortunately,
once having arrived these
social climbers have little
personal incentive to do so. The system is largely self-perpetuating
(see Students, teachers, and textbooks).
In the top
left-hand corner of the diagram
(new window) is a key entitled Waste Density. Each of the
shaded boxes corresponds to a pair of numbers (weighted and unweighted)
expressed by the shading in the diagram. The first number of each pair
is defined in the bulleted list below. The numbers associated with each
area for each layer of the
diagram are found in the numbered columns 2, 3, and 4 (weighted) and 5,
6, and 7 (weighted) of table
48. Further clarification with regard to these numbers can also be
found in the notes corresponding to each column.
-
Low:
Number of students
enrolled in a secondary
form VI
(or VII) program less the number of students who meet the
qualifications
necessary for entry into a Hong Kong university.
-
Medium:
Number of
students who meet the minimum
qualifications for entry into a secondary form VI (or VII) program less
the number of students enrolled in a secondary form VI
program.
-
High:
Number of
students at each level less the number of students who meet the
minimum
qualifications for entry into a secondary form VI (or VII) program.
The
first number
of each pair of numbers is weighted according to the scheme provided at
the top of table 48.
Specifically, the numbers corresponding to the shaded areas entitled
high (column 2), medium (column 3), and low (column 4) are weighted by
the proportions 0.95, 0.80, and 0.70, respectively. As each pair of
numbers corresponds to at least one of Hong Kong's two most important
rights of passage (the HKCEE and/or the HKALE) each shaded area of the
diagram represents an important structural element of Hong Kong's
educational system. The
weights assigned to each area
were selected, so as to insure that approximately 60% of the student
population was included (see graph 35a
- new window). This is not
to say that waste does not occur elsewhere (unshaded areas) in the
system, because it surely does.14 By ignoring the waste in the unshaded
areas both the amount of calculation and the level of estimated waste
are reduced (see item #3 above).
Primary
sources of waste
Certified waste with a price tag
Probably the
two largest sources of
waste include salaries paid to those who produce the waste and the
opportunity loss to students who carry the waste with them after they
have graduated. The probable third and fourth largest sources of waste
are the private sector's attempt to compensate for the egregious
shortcomings of the public sector in the provision of truly competent
English language users. The first of these two
next important sources of waste include the private language and
tutorial schools that cater to the language needs of promising
bilingual toddlers, aspiring middle-managers, and everyone else caught
in between. The second of these are English language textbook
publishers forever looking for better ways to create an atmosphere of
"being there". The idea is to make what is obvious a foreign language
to most everyone who studies it, appear as if it were an important
second language to
those who must learn and teach it. The end effect is to provide Hong Kong's English
language teachers with a permanent excuse for not being able to meet
expectations placed on them by talented elite -- elite who have
understood from an early age that appearance, deceit, and good
connections go hand-in-hand with substance, fidelity, and industry, and
who have managed as a result to find their way to the top of the
distillation and certified waste disposal plant over which they now
command.
Let us first turn to teachers' salaries -- what appears to be
the single largest source of waste.
Teachers salaries
Those who would, if they only could
EARTH estimates that annual government expenditure on
day school teachers' salaries in 2001-02 amounted to just over HK$20
billion (see column
4 and note
3 table 50).15 Of this
total, somewhat under HK$4 billion were likely spent on English
language classroom instruction (see column 6 table 50).
Employing the data found in table
48 and calculating a corresponding fraction of waste for each level
of education (column 3
table 50) yields an annual estimate of total wasted expenditure on low
quality, oversupplied English language instruction equal to HK$2.4
billion. This represents exactly
5.2% of Hong Kong's total recurrent government expenditure on all
levels of education including tertiary teaching and research (see table 52c). As a
fraction of only pre-primary, primary, and secondary education the
percentage of waste is much higher at 7.5%.16 In short, elimination of this waste
could represent an important source of savings to Hong Kong tax payers,
or alternatively an important opportunity for the Hong Kong government
to provide better quality English language education to those who will
someday make good use of it.
Opportunity cost to children
Hong Kong's waste bearers
Of course, the
story does not end with Hong Kong's democratically
deprived taxpayers. Children are the easiest exploited citizens of any
society, and Hong Kong is no exception. One of the most important
refrains coming from the Hong Kong government with regard to the
universal English language (UEL) requirement is equal opportunity.
According to the government it would be unfair, if all Hong Kong
children were not provided with the same opportunity to master
English. What the government does not say, is at what point in a
child's school career does equal opportunity become an excuse for
government negligence with regard to educational waste.
Column 5
table 49 provides us with a probable accurate estimate of the
opportunity cost to Hong Kong children who receive no or only
negligible return after they graduate from their many years of
classroom English language training. The loss is phenomenal -- only
slightly less than that to Hong Kong taxpayers who pay the salaries of
teachers who provide the training that leads to no reward. In terms of
government recurrent expenditure on all levels of education this
HK$2.37 billion (US$394 million) of wasted time and energy comes to
about 5.1% (table 52c).
As a fraction of government recurrent expenditure on only pre-primary,
primary, and secondary education this same amount tallies in at 7.4%.17
Those, who would argue that Hong Kong employers
require English to run their businesses had better take a closer look
at what the market demands under conditions of free certified waste. In
April 2004 eighteen out of 40 employers required either no English or
just enough to write the English alphabet -- so-called little fluency
(see table 44). Of the
remaining 22 employers who required nominal fluency -- say, grade E or
better on the HKCEE no one was willing to pay for it (see note 4 table 44)!
Now,
try to imagine what demand would be like under market conditions
(new window) where employers were required to compensate Hong Kong
school leavers for their lost opportunity and were required to
reimburse Hong Kong taxpayers for the amount their government spends on
English language teachers to insure that Hong Kong children suffer this
loss. Perhaps then, you might be better able to entertain the targeted
60% that this diagram has sought to identify and that Hong Kong
managers and government education
administrators (pdf document 40KB) refuse to consider.18
Other sources of waste
Of course,
neither
of EARTH's estimates with regard to teachers' salaries and the
opportunity cost to Hong Kong children even touch upon the two other
primary sources of waste mentioned at the beginning of this section --
namely, the cost of private
language and tutorial schools and the profligate waste undertaken by
the English language
textbook industry. A brief
review of the number of
Singaporean children enrolled in private language and tutorial schools
should be enough to wetten your appetite for understanding about what
is likely occurring in Hong Kong's private sector. Of course, for small
economies like Hong Kong and Singapore we are probably looking at only
a couple hundred million US dollars. For larger economies such as South
Korea and Taiwan we are looking at many more hundreds of millions. By
the time we get to Japan the US dollar value of private sector waste
must be in the low billions. Will what is surely not yet true on the
Chinese mainland someday be worth at least what the United States is
currently spending in the Middle East and Central Asia each year on
war? Add
to this what is expended in the English language textbook industry and
the number of wasted hours spent at home by children in preparation for
the additional time they spend wasted in classrooms across Asia and
we can likely fund a new world government!
Conclusion
There is a very
important need for reassessment on the part of the Hong Kong and other
East Asian governments with regard to their current language policies.