In April 1996 the TLQPR Panel, appointed by the University Grants Committee (UGC), visited the University for the purpose of reviewing the mechanisms, processes, provisions, and staff/student views in regard to teaching and learning quality within the Institution. In January 1997 the present TLQPR Report was released to the University in English. The Chinese translation enclosed has been prepared by the University and approved for release by the UGC. The University is pleased to release this TLQPR Report to the public in both English and Chinese, along with the brief institutional response statements that follow.

The University wishes to express its appreciation of and support for the TLQPR concept of monitoring the extent to which institutions are fulfilling well their teaching and learning missions. This collaborative effort of the UGC and the higher education institutions is an important undertaking that benefits the institutions' efforts towards constantly improving the quality of their teaching and learning processes, as well as providing assurance to the public that appropriate quality measures exist within the institutions that they support.

Hong Kong Baptist University through the years has been recognised as an institution that is committed to teaching excellence and to creating an environment in which teaching and learning experiences are positively nurtured. These important activities are supported and enhanced by research and other forms of scholarship, but they never yield their pre-eminent position in the life of the University.

It is, therefore, with considerable satisfaction and appreciation that the University takes note of the TLQPR Panel's views in the Report that they:

(i)

"were impressed with the Hong Kong Baptist University's goal of educating the whole person and with its success in achieving this goal";

(ii)

concluded that "small size provides significant quality-process benefits, which the University is utilising to good advantage";

(iii)

are "satisfied that sufficient improvement and assurance processes are in place and in prospect to warrant enthusiasm about the University's delivered quality of teaching and learning";

(iv)

noted the University's "initiatives as enhancing teaching and learning quality";

(v)

hold a "general impression about teaching and learning quality in the Baptist University (that) is positive";

(vi)

were further impressed that "Staff appear to be enthusiastic about their teaching job and care about the quality of education their students are getting. The students we met were articulate and thoughtful. Feedback between students and staff appeared good, and it is taken seriously by staff"; and

(vii)

observed that "Staff are committed to teaching", noting that "many creative and innovative teaching and learning methods have been introduced".

The University is equally pleased to learn that the TLQPR Panel has highlighted some areas in which further attention will lead to the enhancement of the qualities cited above. Baptist University is committed to the principle of continuous improvement through self-review and assessment and, accordingly, had identified some of the same areas for improvement that have now been called to the Institution's attention by the visiting Panel.

Particular areas requiring attention are:

(i)

the need to make more systematic the existing informal discussions on pedagogical issues, teaching and learning methods, implementation quality and assessment. The Panel advises that the "new processes need not be particularly formal" and that their expression for this approach is captured by the term "systematic informality". The University considers this to be sound advice and has already set in motion some improvements in what is already a generally good dialogue on pedagogical issues to ensure that they are pursued in a more systematic manner;

(ii)

the need to enhance further the effectiveness of the student evaluation of teaching that is conducted each semester by providing feedback "to students about the uses to which the questionnaires are put". Again, the University considers this sound advice and the issue had been under review for some time prior to the TLQPR Panel visit. The approach that is emerging is that a computer on-line information network is being created to meet this need and to extend the student evaluation of teaching even further than the present system;

(iii)

the need to take steps in the provision of external examiners with some detailed guidelines and in their selection to "ensure (that) uniform high quality and comparability across subjects" is achieved; alternatively, to introduce the use of departmental visiting committees as a replacement of the "single person external examiner system". The University is in concurrence with both of these recommendations. It has for some time been recognised that not all external examiners were providing equally valuable advice and that some courses/departments have reached a stage of maturity wherein a regular academic visiting committee, advising on wider issues than just assessment matters, would be of greater benefit. These improvements and alternative system are being introduced from the 1997/98 academic year; and

(iv)

the need to more fully engage the University's Centre for Educational Development (CED) in teaching and learning diagnostic services for academics throughout the Institution, and to enhance CED's provision of both direct and indirect stimulation and facilitation of departmental activities in the area of quality teaching and learning. As the Panel stated, this could "encourage good teachers to use the Centre (CED) in order to become great teachers". This is also sound advice. Indeed, the University has just concluded a six-month review of CED operations and extensive changes in emphases are forthcoming, in order to achieve the objectives highlighted in the TLQPR Report and to make improvements in the areas of diagnostic services, stimulation and facilitation of departmental activities, and enhance the unit's visibility throughout the University.

The University would wish to close its response to the TLQPR Report that follows in full in both English and Chinese by re-iterating its commitment to continual improvement processes, which are greatly aided by exercises such as the one reported here, and to cite the concluding comments of the TLQPR Panel:

"We believe that the University's current processes deliver a high-quality whole-person education. We also believe that becoming more self-conscious and systematic with regard to quality can lead to even better quality. We offer these suggestions in the spirit of helping Baptist to be the best it can be."

No expression - being the best we can be - could more thoroughly describe the philosophy and commitment of this University.