Introduction
The advantages of a good education are many, but they all boil down to one main point: having a good education gives a person the opportunity to make the most of his or her talents. This paper compares two curriculum programs that are currently being offered in many parts of the world. One is four-year university curriculum and the other in three-year university curriculum. The advantages and disadvantages of both curriculums will be analyzed and discussed.
Four-Year and Three Year Bachelor’s Degree Compared
The four-year bachelor’s degree makes it easier to get into a Master’s level program. It is an international norm and most universities only accept students with four year bachelor’s level education into their Master level’s programs. Admission to graduate programs requires a 4-year degree and while a number of professional second-entry programs do accept students with a 3-year degree, many improve their chances of acceptance by completing a 4-year degree.
The three-year degree is most viable for more mature students as it entitles them to many job opportunities and second-entry programs with only three years of university education. Also, the academic abilities of the student often dictates degree choices. On the one hand, it is the favored option for weaker students who want a university education but are unable to meet the higher academic requirements of the 4-year degree. On the other hand, many of the brightest students who are going on to second-entry degree programs (such as medicine, education) are able to achieve those goals with a 3-year degree. For so many years, Hong Kong has followed the British educational system where in university degrees are earned in three years. The integration of Hong Kong to mainland China and the changes in the international education arena has made the education body in Hong Kong to move from a 3-year university curriculum to a 4-year university curriculum which is the one used in The United States, Canada and was adopted by China.
Higher Education in Hong Kong
Higher education in Hong Kong consists of three levels. At the first university stage level are the Associate Degree and Higher Diploma, the Bachelor’s Degree and the Honors Degree; at the second stage is the Master’s Degree; at the third stage is the Doctorate Degree. Associate Degree and Higher Diploma programs commonly require two years and offer a different route to higher university degrees. Bachelor’s Degrees require a three-year course study (some programs take four to six years). In addition, in technical/vocational institutions students may continue studying part-time for Higher-Certificate or Higher-Diploma qualification. Master’s Degrees require one to two years of full-time study (three years part-time). Doctoral degrees are conferred after two to seven years of research work and approval of a dissertation.
Hong Kong still has a seven-year university system (7 years secondary school + 3 years bachelor degree), something that was established during the colonial era to bring it in line with the system in the United Kingdom. This will eventually be transformed into a six-year secondary school pattern to permit a four-year university education to be established (Li 2005). The proposed change of the university curriculum in Hong Kong has been a subject of debate between the supporters and the critics of the proposal. Thus, the comparison between the two systems arise. In the succeeding discussions, the writer will seek to compare both systems (Murad 2003).
Proponents of “4 years university education” tacitly imply that general education cannot be covered in three years. According to them, the move from three-year to four-year university education in Hong Kong will raise the overall quality of the students. The 4-year degree will also allow the universities to offer different learning approaches, including more independent studies, and to produce outstanding graduates (Fan 2003). Although the 3 years degree programs are argued to be unsuitable for general education, many Hong Kong universities (such as Hong Kong Polytechnic) are offering supplementary courses to its students. These universities are able to offer quality general education in three years. Many argue that 3-year university education is not needed because many countries do not offer them, but 4-year university education. In name, they do not. In practice, many do. In America and Japan, there are many 2-year community colleges; their graduates can go on to study at year 3 in other universities. If and ever Hong Kong abolishes 3-year university curriculum, Hong Kong may probably have to introduce another 2 year curriculum for students graduating from secondary schools, either out of the need of the students, or the need of the job market.
Conclusion
Higher education in Hong Kong is to face a great change in 2012, when the normative years of studies will be shifted from three tears to four years. A four-year curriculum provides ampler time for students to explore different topics and issues. It is thus considered a curriculum that better facilitate the development of general education.
Although the 4-year university curriculum in viewed by many as more effective, I have not found any single resource that can substantiate the claim. Perhaps, the question here is not about the which system is more effective but which system will paved the way for a better future for Hong Kong. Hong Kong universities have used the 3-year university curriculum for such a long time, and this do not hindered Hong Kong to produce quality, competent and world-class graduates. Hong Kong graduates are among the brightest in the world. I would also want to stress that adoption of the 4-year university curriculum will not ensure success as the experiences of countries that went ahead of Hong Kong in adopting the said curriculum are varied. While countries such as Japan have been successful, many countries particularly in Asia and Africa are continuously struggling.
I think it is safe to say that neither system is more effective than the other but because of the changes brought about by globalization in the educational sphere and because of the demands of the society for competent workforce, I think that the move from a 3-year curriculum to a 4-year curriculum is timely and an intelligent move. I think the aim of every university is to achieve balance education. I believe that both educational systems have potential to achieve that goal. The changes in Hong Kong’s educational system is an ongoing search for a more effective way to achieve the universities’ goals in the face of internal and external changes and constraints.
References
Fan, L. Y. (2003). Economic Globalization and Education Reforms in Hong Kong: Corporate Managerialism and Quality Education at Work. Education in Hong Kong, Retrieved November 22, 2008, from http://www.ln.edu.hk/cultural/materials/MCSsymposium2006/Panel01/YuenFan.pdf
Li, C. (2005). Bridging Minds Across the Pacific: U.S.-China Educational Exchanges. Lexington Books.
Murad, L. C. (2003). Hong Kong’s Education System: Challenge for the Future. Retrieved November 22, 2008, from
http://www.lehigh.edu/~incntr/publications/perspectives/v20/Murad.pdf
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment