Home Contact Us
Candidates Candidates Employers Employer Recognition Statistics Press Release Band Score Table Useful Link
     
 

Results of Common English Proficiency Assessment Scheme announced

The following is issued on behalf of the University Grants Committee:

The University Grants Committee (UGC) announced today (July 23) results of the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) taken by final-year university students under a voluntary assessment called the Common English Proficiency Assessment Scheme (CEPAS) in 2002/03.

Of the 8,500 students who have taken the test, an overwhelming majority (7,300) are final-year students of UGC-funded degree programmes. Their average overall score is 6.46 on a nine-point scale. Among the four modules of IELTS, students, on the average, did best in Reading but scored lowest in Speaking.

Breakdowns of the candidates' average scores by discipline and by institution are attached at Annexes A and B. It can be seen that across the disciplines and the institutions, the variation of performance, in terms of deviation from the overall average score, is not very significant (two and six percent respectively).

"With the introduction of the CEPAS, we are now able to see a rather comprehensive picture of the English proficiency of university graduates under a common frame. We have also shared the statistics with our institutions to help them in formulating their language enhancement strategies and programmes," a spokesman for the UGC said.

"We believe that the information will also serve as useful reference for recruitment and further studies purposes. We have therefore shared it with major business and professional bodies," he added.

The UGC announced the adoption of IELTS as the common English proficiency assessment in July 2002. Thirty-four testing sessions were held from December 2002 to May 2003. IELTS is an internationally validated English testing instrument. Its results are reported on a band scale from 0 to 9. Candidates scoring Band 6 are considered competent users who have generally effective command of the language despite some inaccuracies, while those scoring Band 7 are considered good users who generally handle complex language well.

End/Wednesday, July 23, 2003
NNNN

 
 

Annex A

Distribution of Average Overall Scores and Sub-scores

of Final Year Students in 2002-03 by Broad Discipline

Broad Discipline

No. of final year students participated in CEPAS

Average Reading Sub-score

Average Listening Sub-score

Average Writing Sub-score

Average Speaking Sub-score

Average Overall Score

Arts & Humanities

807

6.74

6.69

6.26

6.38

6.58

Business & Management

2255

6.80

6.60

6.19

6.18

6.50

Education

132

6.39

6.37

6.18

6.14

6.34

Engineering & Technology

1569

6.78

6.46

6.00

5.90

6.34

Medicine, Dentistry & Health

197

6.94

6.85

6.03

6.23

6.56

Physical Sciences

1339

6.73

6.40

5.98

5.90

6.31

Social Sciences

1058

6.87

6.71

6.32

6.35

6.61

Total:

7357

6.78

6.56

6.13

6.12

6.46

 
 

Annex B

Distribution of Average Overall Scores and Sub-scores

of Final Year Students in 2002-03 by Institution

Institution

No. and percentage1 of final year students participated in CEPAS

Average Reading Sub-score

Average Listening Sub-score

Average Writing Sub-score

Average Speaking Sub-score

Average Overall Score

City University of Hong Kong

1198 (51%)

6.53

6.36

6.02

6.00

6.29

Hong Kong Baptist University

633 (51%)

6.34

6.16

5.87

5.87

6.11

Lingnan University

387 (55%)

6.26

6.03

5.82

5.85

6.06

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

1313 (45%)

7.06

6.73

6.31

6.24

6.65

The Hong Kong Institute of Education

92 (17%)

6.27

6.18

5.99

5.93

6.16

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

962 (43%)

6.59

6.55

5.97

6.03

6.34

The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

1271 (70%)

6.87

6.55

6.05

6.06

6.44

The University of Hong Kong

1501 (57%)

7.14

6.92

6.43

6.39

6.78

Total:

7357 (51%)

6.78

6.56

6.13

6.12

6.46

1The percentages of participants of individual institutions are calculated based on their respective numbers of projected graduates in 2002-03. The percentage of the total number of participants is calculated based on the total number of projected graduates of all institutions in 2002-03.