Kindergarten Admission Arrangements Current Situation

11.3.1 All along, parents have autonomy in choosing a KG suitable for their children with regard to their needs while KGs, being privately run, may handle student admission matters at their own discretion subject to relevant rules and guidelines issued by EDB. In this regard, EDB has issued circulars to remind KGs of important points to note in student admission matters. Among other things, KGs should take positive action to provide parents with relevant school information⁴⁷ through

47 The information should include the estimated number of vacancies for application, approved school fee,

108

different channels such as leaflet, school notice, etc. To help parents make an informed choice of KG for their children, EDB issues the Profile of Kindergartens and Kindergarten-cum-Child Care Centres annually containing essential information about individual KGs, including their approved school fees, number of teaching staff and their qualifications, teacher-to-pupil ratio, the curriculum, quality review results and reports if any, school facilities, and any additional charges for school items. The Profile can be accessed on EDB website.

11.3.2 To avoid creating undue pressure on young children, KGs are requested to start the recruitment procedure which involves K1 applicants no earlier than November each year. For collection of application fee and registration fee, EDB has set fee ceilings and given blanket approval for KGs to collect application fee and registration fee below the ceilings⁴⁸. KGs wishing to charge a higher fee are required to seek prior approval from EDB.

Latest Development

11.3.3 In 2013, in view of the public concern over the K1 admission arrangements in Tai Po and the North districts, EDB implemented a number of special measures with a view to improving the KG admission procedure and better utilising the KG places in the two districts. In view of the positive results of the measures, the Committee recommended in its progress report in December 2013 extension of the measures to other districts. EDB accepted the recommendation and the measures were implemented in all districts for admission to K1 in the 2015/16 school year.

Details were as follows :

(a) Distribution of Application Forms

To avoid the situation where parents had to queue up for a long time for application forms, KGs were required not to limit the number of forms to be distributed. KGs were also required to inform parents in advance the arrangement for obtaining application forms and submitting applications

other approved charges and a list of school items/paid services (which parents may purchase on a voluntary basis) and their charges.

48 At present, the approved ceiling for application fee is $40. For registration fee, the approved ceiling is

$970 for HD session and $1,570 for WD session, or half of the monthly school fee, whichever is lower.

109

so that parents can make due preparation.

(b) School-based Admission Mechanism

To enhance transparency and avoid unnecessary misunderstanding or complaints, KGs were required to introduce a school-based admission mechanism, which should include the admission procedure and criteria, the number of candidates to be interviewed, etc. and keep parents duly informed.

(c) “One Place for Each Child”

To prevent a child from hoarding more than one place at one time, which would affect other children, KGs were required to use the “Certificate of Eligibility for the Pre-primary Education Voucher Scheme” (hereafter referred as the “2015/16 voucher”) under PEVS as a document for confirming acceptance of an offer. Parents were required to confirm acceptance of only one K1 place with the “2015/16 voucher” during the pre-set “centralised registration dates” in late January 2015.

(d) Release of Information on Vacancies

EDB collected information from KGs on K1 vacancies through an electronic platform, and released the vacancy information of all KGs through various channels, including EDB website, telephone hotline and Regional Education Offices, for parents’ reference.

The Stakeholders’ Views and Committee’s Deliberations

11.3.4 In general, the sector considered the arrangements had facilitated smooth operation of the admission process and parents’ concerns were addressed. It was observed that both the KG sector and parents could benefit at large, saving long queues for application forms and parents could confirm a K1 place for their children early.

11.3.5 Notwithstanding positive feedback from KG sector and parents in general, the sector had concern about the increase of administrative workload incurred by the increase in the number of applications received, and as a result more interviews were

110

arranged. There were views that adjustment should be made to the admission arrangements to reduce administrative workload. Some opined that the measure should be implemented only in districts where the supply of KG places was more stringent.

11.3.6 Some considered that EDB should impose a central allocation mechanism to place children to KGs near their homes. However, others had grave concern that such a central allocation system would inevitably have a negative impact on parental choice. The Committee notes that in the actual situation, parents may not choose a KG in the district where they live because their children may be taken care of by relatives living in other districts, while other parents may choose a KG near where they work, or have particular preference on the curriculum or other characteristics of a particular KG which suit their children’s aptitude, etc. Statistics available showed that the actual KG student enrolment in certain districts significantly outnumbered the corresponding population projection, indicating that some KG students in these districts are residing in other districts. For example, the actual KG student enrolment in Kowloon City in the 2014/15 school year was 22 873 while the projected population size of those aged three to five residing in that district was only 10 100.

11.3.7 Having regard to the above, the Committee was of the view that with a central allocation system, free parental choice and autonomy of the sector in student admission might be jeopardized. Besides, the sector also expressed great reservation about the creation of KG nets under the allocation system, in which all KGs would be divided into a number of school nets in line with the district administration boundaries, and the Government needed to provide sufficient KG places in each school net for all eligible children in the net. Under the Primary One Admission System, there are some 30 school nets, and it is anticipated that for a similar mechanism for KG, more school nets will be necessary to reduce the travelling time for the small children. The system would be very complicated and subject to disputes among the KGs. Moreover, unlike the aided primary schools that are operated mainly in government-owned or rent-free private lands, the operation of KG in commercial premises will render the planning of school places in a holistic manner not viable. Nevertheless, it was recommended that support for parents in securing a KG place should be strengthened.

111

11.3.8 With regard to the amount of application fee and registration fee to be collected by KGs, there were views that the approved ceiling should be raised to enable KGs to recover the respective costs incurred. On the other hand, some were of the view that the approved ceiling should be at a reasonable level acceptable to parents, and KGs which had to collect an amount exceeding the approved ceiling could apply for approval from EDB individually to meet their operational needs.

11.3.9 The Committee also deliberated on the admission of students in pre-nursery (PN) classes to K1 in the same KG. It was noted that in the KG-cum-CCCs where PN classes are operated, most of the K1 places would be filled by the PN class children and just a few places could be open for other applicants. In this regard, there were views that if children for some reasons or others are not admitted to a PN class, they will be deprived of equal opportunities to access a K1 place with government subsidy.

To tackle the issue, some suggested the option of requiring the KG-cum-CCCs to open all K1 places for application. However, the sector had great reservation in introducing such a requirement as it would in effect force some PN students to transfer to other KGs to continue their study in K1. They considered that for such small children, continuing to study in the same school would be more beneficial as they had already adapted to the school environment.

The Committee’s Recommendations

11.3.10 In the light of the above deliberation, the Committee considers that a central allocation mechanism is not conducive to the high level of flexibility and vibrancy of the KG sector in meeting the service needs of the parents. It will adversely affect the sector’s overall operating flexibility in coping with the rise and fall of students in different districts. The Committee proposes that KG student admission should remain a school-based matter in order to maintain the flexibility and diversity of the KG sector and free choice for parents. The Committee is of the view that the K1 admission arrangements adopted for admission in the 2015/16 school year should be reviewed and enhanced to address the stakeholders’ concerns.

With regard to providing better support for parents in looking for a K1 place, besides providing timely vacancy information for their reference, EDB could render assistance in various ways as and when required, including liaising with KGs with vacancies and parents on admission matters and ensuring families in need (such as those with

112

working parents) be given priority in admission to WD/LWD services. As for the application fee and registration fee, the Committee proposes that EDB may conduct regular review of the approved ceiling in order to strike a balance between KGs’

operational needs and parents’ financial burden.

11.3.11 Regarding the admission of PN class students to K1, the issue has to be addressed by balancing factors such as equitable access to places with government subsidy, KG’s discretion in student admission, parental expectation and choice of KGs.

In this regard, the Committee suggests that EDB may further study the issue of requiring KG-cum-CCCs to set aside K1 places required for application from non-PN class students.

113