1 / 10

Opinion Survey on the Public Ranking of Universities in Hong Kong 2011 Presentation of Findings

香港大學民意研究計劃 The University of Hong Kong Public Opinion Programme. Opinion Survey on the Public Ranking of Universities in Hong Kong 2011 Presentation of Findings. 25 July 2011. Background.

aviva
Download Presentation

Opinion Survey on the Public Ranking of Universities in Hong Kong 2011 Presentation of Findings

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 香港大學民意研究計劃 The University of Hong Kong Public Opinion Programme Opinion Survey on the Public Ranking ofUniversities in Hong Kong 2011Presentation of Findings 25 July 2011

  2. Background • Commissioned by Media Education Info-tech Co. Ltd. (MEIT, which owns “Education18.com”) since 2001, this is the 11th survey in the row. • Key objective is to gauge the general public’s perception of eight institutions of higher education funded through University Grants Committee (UGC) plus Hong Kong Shue Yan University and Open University of Hong Kong, as well as their opinions on qualities of university students. • The survey questionnaire was designed by HKU POP after consulting MEIT. • Fieldwork and data analysis conducted independently by POP, but final rankings wholly or partly based on perception figures are compiled independently by MEIT.

  3. Date of survey: May 25 – June 13, 2011 Target population: Cantonese-speaking population of Hong Kong of age 18 or above Survey method: Telephone survey with interviewers Sample size: 1,201 successful cases Response rate: 67.4% Sampling error: Less than 1.4% Weighting method: Data adjusted according to the gender-age distribution of HK population at the end 2010 Contact Information

  4. Public Ratings of Universities * 96% 96% 93% 94% 93% 91% 85% 88% 85% 83% * Recognition rate = No. of raters/total sample# Newly added in 2011 survey Valid samples (2011)：1,001-1,158 ^ Changes being statistically significant at 95% confidence level.

  5. Public Ratings of University Heads * 83% 73% 53% 45% 47% 61% 44% 44% 43% 42% Valid samples (2011)：504 – 990 • Recognition rate = No. of raters/total sample

  6. Perceived Deficiencies of University Students Work Attitude^ Social / interpersonal Skills Conduct and honesty Critical thinking and problem- solving ability Independence Proficiency in Chi, Eng and PTH Commitment to society^ Global prospect / foresight ^ Changes being statistically significant at 95% confidence level. Total samples (2011)：1,201 Note: top 8 responses are shown here.

  7. Most Preferred University Graduates[Only for respondents involved in recruiting new staff; base = 221] Won’t employ Don’t know Overseas universities No preference HKU CUHK PolyU HKUST CityU LU HKBU HKIEd HKSYU Others Sampling error at 95% confidence level: +/-6.7%

  8. Reasons for Graduate Preferences[Only for respondents involved in recruiting new staff and with preferences on university graduates] Good performance of previous graduates Good knowledge in job-related areas Good work attitude Good social relationship Reputation Diligent / motivated Alumni Good language ability Valid samples (2011): 157 Sampling error at 95% confidence level: +/-8.0% Note: top 8 responses are shown here.

  9. Public Ratings of Universities

  10. Notes of Caution • Findings only reflect general public perception of the ten institutions and their leaders, they are not results of objective appraisals or professional assessments. • Absolute ratings (i.e. 0-10) are used in the key questions, they are methodologically more powerful than relative rankings, because the score received by each institution in any one year is independent of the scores of other institutions, or its own score in another years. • Sequence of prompting respondents with the name of ten institutions was randomly rotated to avoid possible bias. • All respondents have been told at the beginning of the interview that POP was an independent research body.

More Related