MEASURES TO HELP STUDENTS WHO HAVE LEARNING DIFFICULTIES (a) Remedial Teaching

4.2.1 We deal first with students who require remedial teaching but nonetheless can benefit from the mainstream education system.

4.2.2 Remedial teaching has been offered in primary and secondary schools since 1982 as a means to help students in the mainstream who are having difficulties in their learning and require remedial support to overcome these difficulties. In primary schools, additional resources have been provided in the form of an enhancement of the teacher : class ratio from 1.1 : 1 to 1.2 : 1 to enable remedial work to be done. In secondary schools, three additional teachers are provided to each standard secondary school for remedial teaching.

4.2.3 Both a review conducted by ED of remedial teaching in 1988 and our own observations lead us to believe that the remedial teaching scheme has contributed substantially

42

towards helping students of lower ability to regain an interest in their study as well as confidence in themselves.

However, the review also showed that the effectiveness of the scheme was affected by several problems.

(i) Requirements of remedial teachers

4.2.4 Remedial teaching makes considerable demands on teachers. They need to have a genuine interest in helping children of weaker academic ability and to be imaginative and creative in their approach. We believe that it is advisable to allocate experienced teachers to this particular task.

4.2.5 We note that remedial teaching is included in the initial training of all teachers in both the Colleges of Education and the tertiary institutions. The Advisory Inspectorate of ED also provides specialist courses on remedial teaching for serving teachers, to ensure that the necessary skills are learnt. In order to improve the quality of remedial teaching we recommend that more specialist courses be provided for experienced teachers to develop further their skills in remedial teaching. The provision of training courses for serving teachers will be addressed in detail in our next report.

(ii) Practical problems

4.2.6 The lack of suitable teaching materials poses restraints on teachers. With the establishment of the CDI which we propose in Chapter 2, we recommend that high priority should be given by it to the need for developing suitable curricula for remedial classes.

4.2.7 At present there is a lack of diagnostic tests for teachers to use in identifying students' learning problems. The introduction of the attainment targets and target-related assessments outlined in Chapter 5 will, we believe, be of assistance in this regard. We recommend that

43

diagnostic tests be developed as soon as practicable to assist teachers of remedial classes in identifying and meeting the needs of individual students.

4.2.8 Many schools do not have sufficient teaching space for operating split classes. In primary schools and some secondary schools this has led to the less than satisfactory practice of teaching remedial lessons outside school hours. We recommend that funds be provided to schools which do not have remedial teaching rooms to create such rooms by conversion. If this is not possible because of the physical constraints of the building we recommend that in districts with an overprovision of places the school be asked to consider operating fewer classes. Alternatively advice could be sought from the ED with a view to rearranging the timetable to make optimum use of the accommodation available.

(b) Schools with large intakes of students with learning difficulties

4.2.9 The above proposals to improve remedial teaching apply to all schools. However, based on the 1988 review conducted by ED mentioned earlier, we have identified a need for additional support to be given to secondary schools with larger intakes of students with learning difficulties. In 1982 ED introduced a range of services called the Intensive Remedial Services (IRS) to help schools cope with students at the low end of the ability spectrum. This scheme caters particularly for students falling in the bottom 4.3%^* . The IRS for secondary students comprises Revised Resource Classes (RRC)^** in Government and aided secondary schools and the

* This figure is based on the results of ED's assessment of primary students identified as having learning difficulties using the Teachers' Observation Checklist. The results indicated that 4.3% of students would need intensive remedial assistance.

** Between eight to fifteen students are withdrawn from their classes and given 19-23 remedial periods per week in Chinese, English and Mathematics.

44

provision of remedial assistance in Resource Teaching Centres (RTC)^* to students from private secondary schools.

4.2.10 Recent feedback from principals in secondary schools with a large number of these students has substantiated our view that the current remedial services are unable to meet fully the needs of these schools. Both teachers and students suffer a great deal of frustration. Students who cannot keep up with their peers academically are more likely to create disciplinary problems or to play truant. The teachers may be overwhelmed by the disruption they face in the classroom. Students without learning or behavioural problems may also suffer as their teachers have to spend more time dealing with those who do.

4.2.11 Even in schools where there are fewer students who need remedial services, the lack of accommodation for split class teaching has resulted in schools being reluctant to run RRCs. At present, only around 195 secondary students attend such classes in the whole of Hong Kong. While the service offered in RTCs is well received as shown by the positive feedback from teachers and students, the continued viability of these centres is doubtful since, with the conversion of private schools to unisessional operation which will start this year, students will have little time left to attend the centres.

4.2.12 We recommend, in view of the above problems that the IRS be phased out for secondary students. We recommend instead the introduction of a school-based remedial support programme and that this support be extended to the bottom 10%

* There are seven RTCs in Hong Kong which provide assistance to around 1 260 students per year. Students attend a centre twice a week outside school hours for about two and a half hours on each occasion.

45

of junior secondary students in the mainstream schools^*. This programme is discussed in the following paragraphs. Assuming resources are made available and allowing time for the detailed planning for the programme and the training of the teachers involved, the earliest the programme could be introduced would be in September 1993.

4.2.13 An example of a possible programme worked out by ED comprising Intensive Remedial Teaching Sessions, self-study Sessions and Learning Support Sessions is described in Annex 4A. At Annex 4B are two alternative models for timetabling a remedial programme.

4.2.14 The advantage of this programme is that it is school-based, so that the particular needs of students in particular schools may be met through a flexible support programme. We believe that it is therefore very important that schools be given the flexibility to use the resources provided to best meet their students' needs. ED would draw up implementational guidelines to help schools to make use of the additional resources for providing remedial support for their students. They would also monitor the use of these resources. School heads could submit their own proposals and subject to the approval of D of E, would receive additional resources.

4.2.15 We recommend that school heads choose more experienced, mature and dedicated teachers to undertake school-based remedial programmes as we believe they will be in a better position to set up and develop this new initiative. In order to release these experienced teachers from part of their normal teaching duties for remedial work, we recommend that additional teachers, ranked at CM level, be provided to schools.

* This excludes the bottom 0.9% of students who have severe learning difficulties and should preferably study in skills opportunity schools (see paragraph 4.4.5).

46

4.2.16 The number of additional teachers required have been calculated on the basis of a ratio of 1 teacher : 75 lower ability students at Secondary 1 level and 1.5 teachers : 150 lower ability students at Secondary 2 and Secondary 3 levels. The ratio is based on a total of 30 periods per week being spent on remedial assistance for 75 students as Secondary 1, that is to say the equivalent of the workload of 1 teacher.

And at Secondary 2 and Secondary 3 levels, a total of 45 periods per week for 150 students, that is the equivalent of 1.5 teachers. In May each year, ED would inform schools of the number of additional teachers they would employ that year. The entitlement would generally be based on their student enrolment pattern for the previous three years^*.

4.2.17 To ensure the effectiveness of the programme, the teachers involved in providing such remedial assistance should be provided with the opportunity to undertake training. We recommend that ED offer a training programme to cover the skills required for remedial teaching and subsequent refresher courses. Moreover, we recommend that are advisory service be set up. The advisory team from the ED would visit schools to provide specialised advice to teachers on appropriate means to deal with problems encountered in the school-based remedial support programme, for example, on the use of materials produced by the CDI, or the use of specific teaching techniques.

4.2.18 We are of the view that new initiatives should be assessed so as to ensure that problems are identified, programmes are improved if necessary and resources are deployed effectively. For the school-based remedial support programme, we recommend that the programme be evaluated three years after its introduction.

* For a school with less than three years of operation, its enrolment will be averaged over the number of years the school has been in operation.

47

4.2.19 The expenditure involved in running the proposed school-based remedial support programme is as follows ($ million at current prices)

-91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01

5.41 10.99 20.91 34.43 42.25 44.08 44.08 44.08 44.08 44.08

4.3 MEASURES TO PROVIDE FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE ACADEMICALLY GIFTED