二零一三科大大事回顧
UST Review 2013
一年來，科大不算平靜，上半年更是鬧哄哄，可惜好消息少之又少。下面枚舉的大事，都引起同學共鳴，攸關同學權益，近乎全部都經校內外傳媒報道過。
It was not a peaceful
year for UST. The former half of the year was even in hustle and bustle, yet
good news was few. The events below aroused sympathy and were related to
students' rights and benefits. Nearly all of them were reported by media inside
or outside our university.
SAO干預Pro P規則制訂和執法
SAO's Intervention into Pro P Regulation Legislation and Enforcement
SAO's Intervention into Pro P Regulation Legislation and Enforcement
學生事務處（SAO）於籌備會社宣傳期（Pro P）之始提議限制叫莊（Chanting）、取締大型宣傳品（大Dec），期間派駐SAO職員睇場管理，盡顯短視安排和鐵腕手段。
Student Affairs Office
(SAO) suggested restrictions on chanting and a ban on big decorations at the
beginning of preparation of Promotion Period (Pro P) and sent its staff to
supervise and manage during Pro P, showing its short-sighted arrangements and
strong hand.
修憲草案獲通過
Proposed Amendments of HKUSTSU Constitution
Carried
所有修憲草案於學生會第二十一次周年大會（AGM），獲得通過。當中包括仲裁委員會、公投程序、評議會主席罷免程序、迎新事務委員會（Orientation Affairs Committee）席位、修憲程序之改革。仲委會現已常設；五月已選出五位仲裁員（Judge）。
All proposed amendments
of the Constitution were carried in the Students' Union 21st Annual General
Meeting (AGM). They included reforms of the Court, the Referendum procedures,
the procedures of removing the Council Chairperson from office, seats of
Orientation Affairs Committee and the procedures of amending the Constitution.
The Court has been permanent. Five Judges were elected in May.
SAO處長遴選黑箱作業
Backroom Selection of Director of Student
Affairs
校方於校內招募SAO處長，本只諮詢學生會時任及候任會長，後延遲決定，但無意公開諮詢。候任幹事會自為之，惟僅五天，且校方不予公開細節。同學批評遴選為假諮詢，擔心若新處長作風強硬，會對學生活動造成掣肘。科大學生事務關注小組就此發起聯署聲明。
In the internal recruitment of Director of Student Affairs, the
University initially only consulted the and Elected SU Presidents. It delayed the decision later but did not intend
to consult in public. The Elected Executive Committee did it itself, only for
five days and without permission from the University to expose the details
though. Students criticized it as a false consultation and worried that
students' activities would be impeded if the style of the new Director of
Student Affairs was tough. UST Student Affairs Concern Group initiated a joint signature
declaration for that.
宿分調整受質疑 宿位分配沿用舊制
Hall Score Adjustments Questioned, Hall Place
Allocation System Continuously in Use
學生宿位分配政策檢討組（Task Force on UG Hall Allocation Policy Review）曾公佈宿分調整方案，部分地區之分數引起爭議。同學在公開論壇亦質疑交通時間計算準則，校方表示會修改方案。校方後來決定本年度繼續沿用舊制。
Task Force on UG Hall Allocation Policy Review had announced hall score
adjustments. Scores for some districts sparked disputes. Students questioned the principle of counting
the travelling time in the open forum and the University claimed that the proposal
would be amended. It then decided to continue using the system in this academic
year.
四‧二九「捍衛學生權益 實踐校園共治」請願集會
April 29th Petition
Assembly
學生會及科大學生事務關注小組合辦請願集會，邀請學務長、SAO署理處長和副處長出席。校方承諾：一、每月向全體學生發電郵，就校政修改或制訂、及未達成的承諾交代；二、兩週內與有關部門及學生代表商討閉路電視事宜；三、由學生會全權制訂Pro P規則和執法；四、該週內向全體學生交代首席副校長五月十日前何時可與學生會晤。第一、二、四項已兌現，第三項有望不變。
SU and UST Student Affairs Concern Group co-organized a petition
assembly and invited Dean of Students, Acting Director of Student Affairs and
Associate Director. The University promised:
i.) that it would send all students emails monthly to account for the
amendments or formulation of university policies and promises that have not
been fulfiled; ii.) that its staff would discuss CCTVs with related departments
and student representatives within two weeks; iii.) that SU owns full authority
of regualtion legisslation and enforcement of Pro P; iv.) that within that week
it would inform all students when Executive Vice-President & Provost could
meet with students before 10th May. The first, second and fourth items were
fulfiled; it is hoped that the third would not change.
「校園電視」修憲議案不獲通過
"Campus TV" Resolution Not Carried
有學生會基本會員提出逾十頁的憲章修訂條文，蒐集逾一百八十名基本會員簽署，發動公投，倡議成立「校園電視」並將之列為學生會架構。因投票票數僅343，不足會員人數18%（即1395人），議案不獲通過。
An SU Full Member
proposed a written requisition signed by not less than 180 Full Members with
the proposed amendment of the SU Constitution with more than ten pages, calling
for a Referendum for establishment of "Campus TV" and listing it as the
SU's fifth body, and submitted it to the Executive Committee. Since only 343
votes were casted, less than 18% of the total Full Membership of the Union
(1395 persons), the resolution was not carried.
六四道具坦克遭毀
June Fourth Prop Tank Destroyed
有學生組織於校內展出道具坦克，欲使同學更關注和了解八九民運，秉承民運精神，堅持平反。六四當日，一名青年踢毀坦克炮管及頂部，將頂部擲到下層，隨即離開。警方列作刑事毀壞案處理。有人深夜於科大偶遇疑犯，因此極有可能是科大學生。
A student organization
showed a prop tank on campus in order to let students care and know more about
1989 democracy movement, pass on its spirit and insist on its rectification. On
4th June, a youth kicked and smashed its barrel and top, threw the top to the
lower floor and left soon. The police listed it as criminal damage. Seen in UST
at night, the suspect was probably a UST student.
Hall I 險加設閉路電視
Additional CCTVs Almost Installed in Hall I
校方七月底突然宣布學生宿舍第一座加建閉路電視，指已獲學生代表同意。科大學生事務關注小組成員及多名社學生會代表約見學務長譚嘉因教授，與校方討論事件，共有約卅名學生到場。最終校方擱置有關計劃，承諾會諮詢學生。
At the end of July, the
University suddenly announced to install additional CCTVs in Hall I, claiming
that student represntatives agreed. Members of UST Student Affairs Concern
Group and House Association representatives made an appointment with Professor
Kar Yan Tam, Dean of Students, and discuss the incident with the University.
About thirty students arrived in total. The University at last laid the plan on
the table and promised that it would consult students.
商學院大樓啟用不順 被指華而不實
Business Building with a Bad Start of Use
Described as a White Elephant
李兆基商學大樓（Lee Shau Kee Business Building）於秋季學期啟用，適逢暴雨，扶手電梯因而連續兩天故障，側旁樓梯沒有上蓋，同學撐傘而行，使用一條僅容兩人並肩而行的樓梯，地面濕滑，易生混亂。
Lee Shau Kee Business
Building was put in use in Fall Term under a stormy weather. The escalator was
thus out of order for two consecutive days. Students holding their umbrellas
walked through the stairs beside, wide enough for only two persons to pass
simultaneously, wihtout any cover. The floor was wet and accidents were easy to
happen.
官僚作風阻送月餅 善事難玉成
Bureaucracy Blocking Mooncake Giving
有同學發起送月餅行動，在校園多處張貼海報，呼籲同學捐出月餅，置於儲物櫃內，收集所得的月餅會轉贈予拾荒長者及露宿者。但翌日校方職員撕走海報，自行換走該同學儲物櫃的密碼鎖。
A student launced an
action of giving mooncakes. Posters were posted at several places on campus to
call fellow students for donation of mooncakes to give the mooncakes put and
collected inside the initiator's locker to the old scavengers and the homeless,
but the next day the University's staff tore the posters away and changed the
password lock wihtout prior notice.
九‧二五校長公開論壇
September 25th President Forum
學生會及科大學生事務關注小組合辦校長公開論壇，環繞「學術範疇」、「校政問題」、「外務」、「科大未來：改變及發展」四項主題，邀請校長與同學交流意見。
SU and UST Student Affairs
Concern Group co-organized President Forum and invited our President to discuss
with students about four themes: "Academic Affairs", "University
Affairs", "External Affairs" and "The Future of HKUST:
Changes and Development".
校方制止學生抗議
Students' Protest Stopped by the University
校方向商人馬雲頒授榮譽博士學位。有學生於畢業典禮當日，默默展出抗議標語，被保安武力阻止，深感不滿，發起聯署讉責校方舉措，後與校方會面。校方表示，應信任和支持前線保安對突發事件所作的專業決定，但認同指揮及控制系統可改善，會再向保安部反映。校方澄清，絕對尊重並完全支持任何方法表達任何意見。校長表示日後示威可以預先提出，以便提早借出位置。
Ma Yun, a merchant, was
awarded an honorary master degree. Some students silently showing slogans on
the Congregation, were stopped by security guards with force. Dissatisfied,
they initiated a joint signature to condemn the University's acts and then met
with the University. It said that it should trust and support the professional
decisions towards sudden events made by security guards in the front, but
agreed that the command and control could improve and would reflect it to
Security Center. It clarified that it definitely respected and fully supported
any ways to express any views. The President claimed that protests can be
noticed in the future so that place can be reserved in advance.
評論與展望
Comments and Prospect
逾半與校方有關，可見校方態度依舊，甚或變本加厲，豈會是來年的好兆頭？
Over half of them are
related to the University, showing its unchanged and even intensifying
attitude. How will it be a good sign of next year?
回顧以往衝突，皆先由同學不滿校方濫權或隱瞞，校方施以拖字訣或闊佬懶理，同學鬧大，民情洶湧，校方主動接觸同學，意見接受，態度照舊，惡性循環無限loop，彷如置身無間地獄。或因此索性通知大眾傳媒，務求曝光，藉公眾目光向校方施壓，想必校方為顧全校譽，不得不回應。再有衝突，勢必愈加向之求援，但繞了個大圈，終非長久之策。一旦厭倦，故態復萌，故技重施，示好後開空頭支票，蒙混過關，此計威力便連帶民氣一同消耗了。未有實質舉措和決定，不宜罷休。
In the previous conflicts, students first feel dissatisfied with the
University's abuse of power or concealment. When it delayed or ignored, students intensified the conflicts and
were in rage. Although it later actively contacted them and accepted their
opinions, its attitude remained unchanged. A vicious cycle has been formed.
Students perhaps thus directly inform mass media to gain exposure and exert
pressure on the University with public attention. The University is supposed to
respond in order to maintain its reputation. Help will be probably more often
seeked from mass media if conflicts happen again, but beating around the bush
could not work long. It will, once tired, resume his old manner and familiar
tricks by showing friendiness and having empty promises to muddle through. The
power of the tactic will then be used up with their morale. One should not stop
until real measures and decisions come out.
另外校園共治的主張益發深入民心，呼聲早晚會響徹科大，不再只限於Atrium。自主除了自己作主，亦要為自己負責：自由指的，不是天馬行空的「自由」，而是群己權界，不能傷害和侵犯他人的權益；且權責相隨。而學生自主與校園共治密不可分：學生有份享用校園，覺得自己也是校園主人，才會衍生歸屬感，甘於奉獻。校方怕共治之後學生「濫用」自由？無稽！何況世界潮流浩浩蕩蕩，順之則昌，逆之則亡，不容校方連番越權，干預學生自主，玩弄失效的把戲掩耳盜鈴。放手方可互信，別再玩拔河了。
Furthermore, the idea of co-governance in campus has been supported
deeply. The call for the co-governance will echo on the whole campus, not only
limited to Atrium. Independence is not only
decision-making by yourselves but also accountability for yourselves: what
liberty means is not "freedom" wihtout any borders and constraints,
but the boundary between the rights of one and the others that one cannot hurt
and infridge another's; responsibility goes with rights. Students' independence
and co-governance are inseparable: only once students, also users of the
campus, think they are also its owners, they will have a sense of belonging and
are willing to contribute. The University worries that students will
"abuse" liberty since co-governance? Ridiculous! Besides, the tide in
the world is mighty. Followers prosper, resisters perish. The University could
not repeatedly abuse its authority, intervene in students' independence and
play useless tricks like an ostrich anymore. Only letting go can build mutual
trust - stop tug of war.
年中公投不代表科大同學不贊成成立校內影音傳媒；反之，筆者相信吾等都寄望有志者為此努力。惟現時學生會制度健全，各架構分權制衡，無弄權之象，修補革新不必打破制度，與去年港大學生會長、評議會主席合流，不可同日而語。不過學生自主亦不宜遺漏學生會這一環。民主選舉中，政黨尚且乃因信奉某套信念、原則而成立，提出基於此等價值觀而設的政綱，吸納想法相似的選民的支持，以求（繼續）勝出選舉，背棄選民則不獲支持，屆屆如是；而學生會內閣屆屆不同，有如一個個小政黨，政綱不須貫徹，甚至神仙過海，咁就一年。同學應主動監察學生會，除了在選舉論壇、AGM詢問學生會架構候選／任內閣及候選／任普選評議員，還應貫徹此道，與幹事多作交流，閒時旁聽評議會會議，回應幹事會的調查和諮詢。大字報牆、《振翅》，甚至Secrets專頁，均容許發表對學生會的意見。問政當從此始。熱心者，加入學生會，是常識吧？至於本會，既受同學所託，定必一如以往，傳播校內資訊，恪守編採自主，保護言論自由，助同學監察、發表言論，不負同學信任。
The Referendum in the
middle of the year does not represent that USTers disagree with establishment
of any video-audio medium in UST; it is believed that we all hope that the
determined ones can fight for it. The current SU's system is, however, sound with
division of power among its bodies. Reform needs not breaking the system. It
differs from the collaboration between SU President and Council Chairperson in
HKU last year. Yet SU should not be missed in students' independence. In
democratic elections, political parties are established as they believe a
certain belief or principle, presenting their platform basedon these values to
gain support from voters with similar thoughts while lacking support if they
abandon voters every session. On the other hand, SU cabinets differ every
session like small parties, so their platforms need not be consistent and even
a year can just pass. Students should actively supervise SU; apart from
consulting nominated/elected Office Bearers on election forums and AGMs, they
should keep on as well to communicate with SU, attend Council meetings as
observers when free and respond to surveys and consultations by the Executive
Committee. The big character wall, WINGS and even HKUST Secrets page all allow
expression of opinions about SU. University affair participation starts from
here. If you are passionate, why not join SU? As for us, the Editorial Board,
since we are commissioned by fellow students, we will surely as before spread
information about our university, maintain editorial independence, protect
freedom of speech, and help fellow students supervise and express speech so as
to meet their expectations.
之所以振翅，乃飛得更高，看得更多。為了自由，方可天際翱翔，享有自由。如此學生自主、校園共治不遠矣。
We flutter to soar
higher and see more. Only for freedom we can fly in the sky to enjoy freedom.
Then students' independence and co-governance in campus are not far.
瞓街第二次召集
2nd
Call for Sleeping Outside
兩年前，當筆者尚未入科大之時，Atrium曾經爆發「瞓街事件」，抗議校方宿位政策失誤，以致宿分達五十分的同學都未能獲派校內宿位。今年，事件隨時重演。
Two years ago, when I did not enter UST, a "sleeping outside
incident" happened at the Atrium, in protest of faults of the University's
hall place policies causing students with a hall score of 50 not to be able to
be allocated on-camus hall places. This year the incident may happen again at any time.
近期，有人流傳校方打算改革宿位政策，實行一年必宿，意即只要新生申請，就獲派全年宿位。根據現行政策，校方會將部份宿位預留給新生，才接受非新生申請，以宿分高低分配宿位。由於校方保證新生至少有一個學期宿位，所以新生的宿分只會決定宿期是一年還是一個學期。最新數據顯示，非新生獲派宿位最少需要四十八分半，而新生最少有三十八分方獲一年宿期。
Recently, it has been
heard that the University planned to reform its hall place policies by
guaranteeing hall residence in freshmen's first year of study once applied.
According to the existing policies, after reserving some hall places for
freshmen, the University accepts non-freshmen's applications and allocate
places in an order of hall scores. As hall residence lasting for at least one
term is guaranteed in their first year of study, their scores only determine
whether it lasts for a year or a term. The newest data show that continuing
students need at least 48.5 points for hall places while freshmen would be
given hall residence of a year with at least 38 points.
那麼，「假如」校方「萬一」有這個意圖的話（好似係），大家的宿位爭奪戰又會如何呢？由於校方一直沒有公佈全盤數字，故此以下數字只是一個估算，希望各位見諒。
So, "let's
suppose" "in case" the University "may" have this
intention (seemingly), how would be the hall place war? As they have not
announced full data ever, the following numbers are just estimates. We hope you
will understand.
據悉，申請宿舍的外地生總數約為一千三百人。而每年本地新生則有二千人，約八成申請宿舍，換言之本地新生宿位需要一千六百個左右。根據官方數字，科大宿位（包括三育）總數為四千二百六十四個。按此推算，每年的本地非新生宿位，只有一千三百個左右。
It is known that about
1300 non-local students in total apply for hall places. 80% out of 2000 local
freshmen every year do. In other words, around 1600 hall places are needed for
local freshmen. With a reference of official statistics, the total number of
UST's hall places (including those in HKAC) is 4264. It is then estimated that
there are approximately only 1300 places for local continuing students every year.
獲一年宿期的新生最少有三十八分，所以，獲派一個學期與獲派一個學年之比應該高於七成。且按八二之比，新生之中約有一千三百人只獲派一個學期。
Freshmen with hall
residence of one year have at least 38 points, so the ratio between allocation
for one term and that for one year respectively shuold be higher than 70%. Take
it as an 80-20 ratio: about 1300 among freshmen are allocated hall residence of
only one term.
故此，如果校方實行一年必宿，額外宿位需求將增加一千三百個。現時非新生宿位有一千八百個左右，宿分Cut-off已經高達四十八分半，一千三百個額外需求，必定將此推高，超越五十絕非難事。現行宿分，居所距離部份最高只有五十分，上莊、學術成就另計。如果宿分Cut-off高於五十分，成績一般、又不參加課外活動的非新生，就算家住天水圍，或根本是外地生，都幾近無可能有宿位。
Therefore, if the
University implements this first year residential program, the extra demand for
hall places will increase by 1300. The current number of hall places for
non-freshmen is around 1800 and the cut-off of hall scores has risen to 48.5
points. The 1300 extra demand would surely lead to a rise of the cut-off to
over, say, 50 points easily. In the current hall score system, the maximum of
home distance is 50 points while contribution to campus life and academic
achievement are independently considered. Those continuing students without
outstanding academic achievement and participation in extra-curricular
activities will hardly be possible to have hall places if the cut-off is higher
than 50 points, even they live in Tin Shui Wai or outside Hong Kong.
相似的事，兩年前已經發生過。約三千五百個宿位（當時Hall VIII及Hall IX仍未落成）當中，校方預留逾二千一百個（六成）作兩屆新生之用，以滿足新生一學期必宿的政策需要。結果，宿分Cut-off高於五十分，大批學生不獲宿位，校方視若無睹，引發科大學生集體瞓Atrium，靜坐抗議。
A similar event happened
two years ago. The University reserved 2100 (60%) out of about 3500 hall places
(Hall VIII and Hall IX were not built yet) for two cohorts of newcomers in
order to satisfy the need based on the policy of guaranteed one-term hall
residence in the first year of study. As a result, the cut-off of hall scores
was higher than 50 points that lots of students were not allocated any places.
The University’s turning a blind eye drove students to sleep at the Atrium
together as a sit-in protest.
歷史，隨時重演，請各位運動員準備！
History repeats anytime.
On your mark, get set!
本地 Local
|
外地 Non-local
|
|
新生 New
|
約Approximately 1600
|
約Approximately 800
|
非新生 Continuing
|
約Approximately 1300
|
約Approximately 500
|
科大那些試
Exams in UST
我們都習慣了考試，也不得不習慣於考試。在所謂「亞洲第一學府」，透過考試，學生優劣得以區分。眾多評核方法中，考試似乎最為公平和省時，但當中的不當安排，卻令同學飽受痛苦。
We are, and have to be, used to exams. In the so-called "Asia's No.1 University", student’s perforamance can be distinguished with exams. Among all assessment methods, they seem to be the fairest and most time-saving. Yet the inappropriate arrangement has made fellow students suffer a lot.
那些沒準的
Grade Grades Not Based on a Proper Standard
哪些課程好Grade 哪些爛Grade，似乎一直以來都是同學孜孜不倦的話題，而等級的中位數總是成為量度一個課程好或爛Grade 的標準。根據校方對本科生課程等級分佈的指引，A 等佔10% 至20%、B 等佔25% 至40%、C 等佔35% 至45%、D 等佔5% 至10%、F 等佔少於5%。所以一般而言，中位數通常出現在C+ 至B 左右。但這個指引似乎對各等所佔比例的規劃過於寬鬆，導致不同課程成績中位數相差甚大。付出相若時間精神、賺取同等學分，同學自然想拿較佳的等級，難怪會有同學埋首鑽研選課策略。
Seemingly students always discuss which courses offer good grades and which ones offer poor grades. Meanwhile the medians of grades are always a standard to determine whether they are good grade courses or poor grade courses. According to the University's guidelines of UG course grade distribution, 10% to 20% are allocated with grade A, 25% to 40% with grade B, 35% to 45% with grade C, 5% to 10% with grade D and less than 5% with grade F. So the median is generally between C+ and B. Nevertheless the planning of grade proportion in this guideline seems too loose that the medians of various courses differ a lot. It is natural that students, spending the same period of time and earning the same amounts of credits, would like to achieve better grades. No wonder some would study strategies of picking courses.
另外，該指引對派Grade 的實際操作並無約束力，變相講師可隨時跟一己喜好或主觀判斷任意決定等級比例。據聞某數學課竟將F 等派給超過20% 的同學，也聽聞某課有近半同學獲A 等。不同課程等級比例分野巨大，對選修的同學難免造成不公。每當學期末派Grade 的時候，有人為當初報得好Grade 課程而暗喜，也有人為報得爛Grade 課程而懊悔。在運氣成份下，科大成績等級系統的公信力蕩然無存，而同學對於好Grade 和爛Grade之間的討論亦永不間斷。
In addition, the guideline does not bind on the practice of allocation of grades so that lecturers can decide the grade proportion with their own preferences or subjective judgment anytime. It is heard that over 20% of students enrolled in a maths course were given grade F while nearly half of students enrolled in a course were given grade A. The vast difference in grade proportion would be unavoidably cause a feeling of unfairness. When grades are distibuted at the end of every academic term, some are happy with their choice of good grade courses while some regret with that of poor grade courses. With the factor of fortune, the credibility of UST's grade system has gone and students' discussion about good and poor grade courses has never ended.
雖有規定等級比例若偏離常態時講師可能要接受質詢，但甚少講師會在完成評分後向同學公開等級比例，因此同學根本無從得知等級比例是否合乎預期，學生組織也無法逐一監察之。
Although it is stated that lecturers may have to face enquiries if the grade proportion deviates from normality, so few disclose it to students after grading. Students thus could not know if they are within expectation and student organizations could not supervise them one by one.
那張被沒收的Paper
Papers Collected
作為考生，相信大家都認同我們是具有考卷的擁有權的。哪怕是我交了白卷，卷上也有我的名字。對於講師教授，試卷可能只是測試學生的工具。為不讓舊試卷落在下一屆同學手上，每一次考完試，查了分數，試卷都不允許被帶走的。沒有Past Paper 作參考，學生很難透徹理解教學目標。譬如說，有些課程教得深入，但考得比較表面，有些內容廣闊，但重點只有那麼三五個。學生通過Past Paper，知道以往考了甚麼，就可以了解到哪些內容是重點，從而訂定最有效率的學習方法。試卷的參考價值不止於此，溫習時徹底理解上一次考核的內容，有助於鞏固舊有知識，從而促進新知識的吸收，此謂「溫故而知新」。
As exam candidates, all of us are believed to agree that we have the ownership of papers. One's name is on his or her paper even the paper is blank. For lecturers and professors, papers may be just a tool to assess students. In order not to let past papers be approached by the coming classes, one is not allowed to bring away papers after examinations and score checking. Without past papers as reference, students encounter difficulty in thorough understanding of targets of teaching and learning. For instance, some courses are taught deeply but examined superficially, while some are with broad contents but few main points. Knowing the past scope through past papers, students can know what contents are main points and thus they can set the most efficient learning methods. The value of reference of exam papers is not only limited to it: a thorough understanding about previous assessment contents during revision helps consolidate previous knowledge and hence facilitate the absorption of new knowledge.
參考舊試卷對同學有重大裨益，何以教者會沒收之？萬惡以惰為首，既然同學都無法參考舊試題，於是教者可以每年都擬以相同或極相似的試題，不必傷腦筋另築新題，省下不少功夫。但一個負責任的教者，應為貪圖方便而扼殺學生學習的機會嗎？
Referring to past papers makes great contribution to fellow students. Why do lecturers collect them? Laziness is the greatest vice. As students are not able to refer to past paper questions, every year lecturers can just put identical or similar questions and do not need to come up with new ones to save effort. But should a responsible lecturer wipe out students' learning chances for convenience?
那段遲到的Break
A Break Coming Late
科大本科教程相當緊迫，每個常規學期只有短短十三週。在密集式授課的壓力下，考試前的假期相當重要。經學生反映意見，校方終於在本學年實施期末考試前為期七日的Study Break，比以往多出四日。可是普遍而言，同學學業壓力最大、最忙的時候應是期中而非期末。在應付期中試的同時，除了平時上課，同學還需繳交各式各樣的功課和報告。上學期，筆者在一星期內須應付三個期中試、一個測驗、一份文字報告和一個口述報告，那種辛苦程度真是不可言喻。
UST's UG curriculum is very tense; each regular term consists of thirteen weeks. Under the pressure of compact lecturing, pre-exam vacations are important. With students' reflection of opinions, the University finally carried out a seven-day study break before final examinations this academic year. It is four days more than before. However, generally it is midterm but not the end of a term when students bear the most academic pressure and are busiest. While dealing with midterm exams, students have to attend lessons and submit various homework and reports. Last term, I had to deal with three midterm exams, one quiz, one written report and one oral report within a week. The tiredness is beyond words.
秋季學期，校方沒有設置Midterm Break，令不少同學吃盡了苦頭。到春季學期，Midterm Break 千呼萬喚始出來： 由四月十六日至廿一日一連六日，沒錯，是在大家都考完Midterm，才有假放。
In Fall Term, the University did not establish a midterm break, making many students suffer. In Spring Term, Midterm Break appears finally. It consists of 6 consecutive days from 16th to 21st April - right, we will have holidays after midterm exams.
眾所周知，科大期末考較期中考相對輕鬆，其實只要將學期末Study Break 的其中兩至三日調至學期中，在不影響授課進程的情況下，同學的苦況將得以紓緩。
As we all know, UST's final examinations are less demanding than midterm exams. Actually, once two to three days in Study Break are moved to midterm and the progress of teaching is not affected, students' burdens will be alleviated.
那個消失的E
Grade E Disappearing
科大的成績主要由ABCDF 五等十一級組成，D 或以上為合格，F 為不合格，若必修課程考獲F，則須重修該課。對於一些僅僅差一點合格的同學，再用一個學期重修課程可是個極之沉重的打擊，既浪費時間，又拖慢進度。
UST’s results are mainly formed with five ranges and eleven letter grades composed of A,B,C,D and F. Grades above D mean Pass and F means Failure. If one gets F in a core course, he or she must retake it. It is a heavy blow for those who almost pass to retake in another term that it wastes time and slows down his or her progress.
大家有否想過D 之下是F，E 去了哪？翻查舊的本科生守則「Regulations Governing Undergraduate Studies」， 原來過去是有E 的。D 為Marginal Pass，F 為Fail， 而E 則為Conditional Failure。據這份文件所述，成績得到E 等的同學可在兩星期後參加補考，而透過補考，表現較好的同學有機會獲得合格。這個補考制度為不少不合格的同學帶來希望。該同學可於下一學期前把不合格的科目變為合格，以免浪費重修時間或延遲畢業。可惜這個科大鮮有的人性化制度在筆者入學前已被取消。
Have you ever thought where grade E goes when grade F is below grade D? Grade E was included in the previous “Regulations Governing Undergraduate Studies”. Grade D meant Marginal Pass, F meant Failure and E meant Conditional Failure. As this document stated, students with a grade E could sit in supplementary examinations after two weeks. Those who perform better may pass with the aid of supplementary examinations. This system brought hope to many who failed. A student could pass the subject he or she had failed before the next term so that he or she would not waste time restudying or have his or her graduation postponed. It is a pity that such a rarely student-friendly system in UST was cancelled already before my admission.
作為科大的學生，筆者希望，校方在追逐國際排名的同時，也兼顧同學的感受，授以知識的同時，也多頒佈人性化的政策。總括而言，考試制度有待完善。
沒有留言:
發佈留言