6. The number of scholars attending the foregoing two classes of Schools, Government Schools and Grant-in-Aid Schools, are well worth comparing, as a practical illustration of the comparative favour the two classes of Schools meet with on the part of the general public of the Colony. The attendance of a School is generally a reliable indicator of the extent to which that School meets a public want.
7. Referring then, in the first instance, to the Government Schools, or so-called secular Schools, I find we had in the year 1883 in 39 such Schools 2080 scholars, as compared with 30 such Schools and 2101 scholars in the year 1878, and 30 such Schools and 1888 scholars in the year 1873. The present attendance of these secular Government Schools is, therefore, less now than what it was five years ago, and, although since then 9 additional Schools of this class were opened, the present attendance exceeds that of ten years ago merely by 192 scholars. Yet many of these Government Schools have plenty of room to spare, while the Grant-in-Aid Schools are all over-crowded. If the proposed new Central School building had by this time been completed, some 300 scholars would have been added to the number now attending Government Schools. But even this contingency would not have materially altered the aspect of the case as compared with the case of the Grant-in-Aid Schools.
8. The denominational Grant-in-Aid Schools had, in the year 1883, an attendance of 3517 scholars in 48 Schools, as compared with 1021 scholars in 17 Schools in the year 1878, and with 442 scholars in 6 Schools in the year 1873. There was, in fact, from year to year, a steady increase of scholars attending these denominational Grant-in-Aid Schools during the last ten years, whilst the Government Schools, though increased in number, have made but little progress as far as the attendance is concerned. I mentioned above, that the number of scholars attending Schools under Government supervision has been more than doubled during the last ten years. I may now add, that this important result is entirely due to the working of the Grant-in-Aid system.
9. It is a patent fact that this Grant-in-Aid scheme, which was originally devised by Mr. F. STEWART, on the basis of the Education Act of 1871, has met with a most remarkable success, and has practically proved itself peculiarly well adapted, in many respects, to the educational requirements of both the European and Chinese communities of Hongkong. But, such being the case, the question naturally suggests itself, whether the system of subsidizing Schools on the basis of definite results, as it is more acceptable to the people, is also less expensive to the Government than the system of providing all the expenses as in the case of Government Schools. This is an important question, for, if the Grant-in-Aid system should prove to be cheaper, the further question would at once arise, whether the system of Grants-in-Aid might not be extended so as to apply it to the so-called secular Schools as well as to the denominational Schools.
10. The expenditure involved in the maintenance of our 39 Government Schools with 2080 scholars amounted, in the year 1883, to $18,680, or $8.98 per scholar. This amount does not include the original cost or annual repairs of School-buildings, nor does it include any extraordinary expenditure, nor the cost of the Inspectorate of Schools, the latter being provided for the inspection of both secular and denominational Schools.
11. In the 48 denominational Schools we had, in the year 1883, a number of 3517 scholars under instruction, at a cost, to the Government, of $13,754.88, or at the rate of $3.91 per scholar. This amount does not include the cost of the Inspectorate of Schools, nor an extraordinary building-grant of $6,000 given to one of these Schools, nor does it include the money spent on these Schools by the various Missionary Societies supported by contributions from Europe.
12. It is evident, therefore, that the Grant-in-Aid system is considerably cheaper for the Government, and we have therefore to face the question, sooner or later, whether the application of the system of payment for definite results might not be extended to the Government Schools and Government Aided Schools. As regards those Government Schools and Government Aided Schools which give a purely Chinese education in the Chinese language, the Grant-in-Aid system might be applied to those of this class of Schools which are situated in town or in some of the largest villages, but it could not be applied, without injury to the educational interests of the poorer classes, to the small village schools where the daily attendance is too small and too irregular to admit of a system of payment by results. As regards those Government Schools, however, which give an English education there are far more difficulties in the way. English teaching, to be thorough, requires a staff of trained English masters, who have to be imported and kept at a great cost. English teaching also requires a comparatively larger staff, more expensive materials and larger house-accommodation than Chinese teaching. Owing to this inherent costliness of English teaching, all Schools in the Colony, which teach English or which, like the Central School and five other Government Schools, or like the Hongkong Public School, give an English education with Chinese teaching in addition, are far too expensive to derive much benefit from the Grant-in-Aid system at its present rates of payment.
13. The only way to apply the Grant-in-Aid system to such English-teaching Schools like the Government Central School or the Hongkong Public School, appears to me to be as follows. Let the Government supply first of all solid and commodious new School-buildings. Next, let the fees at...
very
6. The number of scholars attending the foregoing two classes of Schools, Government Schools and Grant-in-Aid Schools, are well worth comparing, as a practical illustration of the comparative favour the two classes of Schools meet with on the part of the general public of the Colony. The attendance of a School is generally a reliable indicator of the extent to which that School meets a public want.
7. Referring then, in the first instance, to the Government Schools, or so-called secular Schools, I find we had in the year 1883 in 39 such Schools 2080 scholars, as compared with 30 such Schools and 2101 scholars in the year 1878, and 30 such Schools and 1888 scholars in the year 1873. The present attendance of these secular Government Schools is, therefore, less now than what it was five years ago, and, although since then 9 additional Schools of this class were opened, the present attendance exceeds that of ten years ago merely by 342 scholars. Yet many of these Government Schools have plenty of room to spare, while the Grant-in-Aid Schools are all over-crowded. If the proposed new Central School building had by this time been completed, some 300 scholars would have been added to the number now attending Government Schools. But even this contingency would not have materially altered the aspect of the case as compared with the case of the Grant-in-Aid Schools.
8. The denominational Grant-in-Aid Schools had, in the year 1883, an attendance of 3517 scholars in 48 Schools, as compared with 1021 scholars in 17 Schools in the year 1878, and with 442 scholars in 6 Schools in the year 1873. There was, in fact, from year to year, a steady increase of scholars attending these denominational Grant-in-Aid Schools during the last ten years, whilst the Government Schools, though increased in number, have made but little progress as far as the attend- ance is concerned. I mentioned above, that the number of scholars attending Schools under Govern- ment supervision has been more than doubled during the last ten years. I may now add, that this important result is entirely due to the working of the Grant-in-Aid system.
9. It is a patent fact that this Grant-in-Aid scheme, which was originally devised by Mr. F. STEWART, on the basis of the Education Act of 1871, has met with a most remarkable success, and has practically proved itself peculiarly well adapted, in many respects, to the educational requirements of both the European and Chinese communities of Hongkong. But, such being the case, the question naturally suggests itself, whether the system of subsidizing Schools on the basis of definite results, as it is more acceptable to the people, is also less expensive to the Government than the system of provid- ing all the expenses as in the case of Government Schools. This is an important question, for, if the Grant-in-Aid system should prove to be cheaper, the further question would at once arise, whether the system of Grants-in-Aid might not be extended so as to apply it to the so-called secular Schools as well as to the denominational Schools.
10. The expenditure involved in the maintenance of our 39 Government Schools with 2080 scholars amounted, in the year 1883, to $18,680., or $8.88 per scholar. This amount does not include the original cost or annual repairs of School-buildings, nor does it include any extraordinary expenditure, nor the cost of the Inspectorate of Schools, the latter being provided for the inspection of both secular and denominational Schools.
11. In the 48 denominational Schools we had, in the year 1883, a number of 3517 scholars under instruction, at a cost, to the Government, of $13,754.88, or at the rate of $3.34 per scholar. This amount does not include the cost of the Inspectorate of Schools, nor an extraordinary building-grant of $6,000 given to one of these Schools, nor does it include the money spent on these Schools by the various Missionary Societies supported by contributions from Europe.
12. It is evident, therefore, that the Grant-in-Aid system is considerably cheaper for the Govern- ment, and we have therefore to face the question, sooner or later, whether the application of the system of payment for definite results might not be extended to the Government Schools and Government Aided Schools. As regards those Government Schools and Government Aided Schools which give a purely Chinese education in the Chinese language, the Grant-in-Aid system might be applied to those of this class of Schools which are situated in town or in some of the largest villages, but it could not be applied, without injury to the educational interests of the poorer classes, to the small village schools where the daily attendance is too small and too irregular to admit of a system of payment by results. As regards those Government Schools, however, which give an English education there are far more difficulties in the way. English teaching, to be thorough, requires a staff of trained English masters, who have to be imported and kept at a great cost. English teaching also requires a comparatively larger staff, more expensive materials and larger house-accommodation than Chinese teaching. Owing to this inherent costliness of English teaching, all Schools in the Colony, which teach English or which, like the Central School and five other Government Schools, or like the Hongkong Public School, give an English education with Chinese teaching in addition, are far too expensive, to derive
much benefit from the Grant-in-Aid system at its present rates of payment.
very
13. The only way to apply the Grant-in-Aid system to such English-teaching Schools like the Government Central School or the Hongkong Public School, appears to me to be as follows. Let the Government supply first of all solid and commodious new School-buildings. Next, let the fees at
f
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.