Ongoing problems in the implementation of Hong Kong's new secondary school curriculum are a classic illustration of the yawning gap between theory and practice, expectation and realisation.

At the dawn of the 21st century, education reformists embarked on the high-minded goals of enhancing the development of every individual in our society - and hence upward mobility - by introducing reforms aimed at enabling students with different academic abilities to develop their full potential. The Education Commission pledged that academic standards would not be sacrificed in the course of providing "equitable opportunities" for all.

If it is agreed that the basic skills with which every student should be equipped remain "the three Rs" (reading, writing and arithmetic) of 19th-century education theory, the proof of the pudding is in the academic performance of students who took the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education in 2012, 2013 and 2014 in the areas of language proficiency and maths.

A few years back, curriculum development officers in the Education Bureau decided that the study of classical Chinese texts was not relevant to modern Hong Kong society, and radically changed the approach in teaching and testing the Chinese language. It is now taught like a foreign language and students are tested on the ability to read, write, listen and speak Cantonese.

Students are no longer tested on prescribed classical Chinese texts. As the result, in the absence of the study of these and modern literary texts, students' ability to write Chinese characters and to use Chinese proverbs and idioms correctly has declined drastically. Chinese language, one of the four core subjects, became the most feared in the new curriculum, with only slightly over 50 per cent of the students taking the subject achieving at least level 3 in the 2014 examinations.

The decline in proficiency is apparently so worrying that the bureau is reinstating 12 classical Chinese texts in the syllabus from September, with a view to testing students on comprehension of these texts from 2018.

While the study of classical Chinese texts was blamed for encouraging memorisation and rote learning, the removal of this requirement has clearly not helped students to acquire a satisfactory level of proficiency in the use of the Chinese language, let alone their appreciation of Chinese culture.

Likewise, education authorities levelled down the academic requirements of the compulsory maths subject, so it is considered by many to fall below the Form Five standards under the old system. Students who want to learn calculus have to take one of two extended modules, which many maths teachers regard as falling below the previous matriculation level in the old system.

As the result, some university professors in the science, technology, engineering and maths disciplines complain that the mathematical attainment of local students admitted falls short of the standards required. Some local students admitted to such disciplines also found themselves at a disadvantage compared with mainland students, while some who went to Taiwan for college education had to undergo a year's preparatory programme before they could formally start earning their credits.

Under the new senior secondary school system, most students take four core subjects plus two electives. As most students find it hard to think beyond the academic requirements for the most secure and easily available jobs in Hong Kong society, the most popular electives are, in descending order, economics, biology, chemistry, business, accounting, financial studies, physics and geography.

The narrow choices fostered by the new system have resulted in a sharp fall-off in interest in humanities subjects, with the number of day students in 2014 taking the Chinese history exam falling to 6,464; history 6,030; Chinese literature 2,568; and, literature in English, 362. Such a decline in interest in these studies does not augur well for the cultivation of students capable of nuanced thinking and appreciation of the ambiguities of life.

The education authorities' love of introducing "integrated" subjects has also produced adverse results. Combined science has low recognition for university admission to science disciplines. The combined "business, accounting and financial studies" subject has provoked angry protests from teachers concerned.

Many of the "applied learning" subjects, such as environmental engineering and automatic technology, which sound grand but are actually intended for students with poor academic performance, attract 40 or fewer students. The poor attendance for such subjects cannot but raise doubts about the benefits of such studies at secondary level.

Despite the education authorities' wrenching efforts to level down to cope with the masses, exam statistics show that only 40.4 per cent of the day students taking HKDSE in 2014 managed to achieve the "2-2-3-3" requirement of college admission.

Hong Kong is surely going down the primrose path to intellectual self-destruction if our education authorities are not minded to undertake an in-depth review of the new secondary school curriculum and remedy the problems identified.

Source: SCMP