sssssssssssssssssss

Thanks for your posts,i just find the site and i have ta say that is very interesting,great structure and content guys.
Indian Wedding Videographer

Repost from UGC Site

political campaign ad

From reader posted on 19-08-2011 [23:33:05]:

A paid advertisement endorsing City University Chairman CY Leung for the CE job appeared in the newspaper a few days ago. It was written by a CityU graduate arguing that stability is achieved through changes. It read like a direct comparison between Leung, the self-proclaimed change agent, and CS Henry Tang, widely regarded as the representative of stability and continuity.

One would know the political advertisement was timed for the visit of the future Chinese Premier. But one wonders who paid for the advertisement? Is it a violation to run paid advertisement before the candidate declare his/her candidacy? If the advertisement was paid by the university, then god bless CityU.

Recently, several messages have been deleted and posters and viewers didn’t know why.  One clue they could get was that the messages reported the facts about a couple of CityU’s executives’ wrongdoings.

We demand UGC Forum Administrator’s explanation on this violating Freedom of Speech act and also want to know whether they have been threatened by these executives.

To avoid this censorship, if you have important facts to report please also post it on SaveCityU.com.

Quote from UGC Forum ‘The Couple’:

Well, with Gag Chan’s assistance, the suspected CE candidate is trying hard to demonstrate that he has the heart and ability to rule the university.  How?  Get rid of the opposition – the Staff Association!  The tricks: keep threatening every SA response or action by legal action, copying the SA ExCom member’s boss with every warning letter, taking away the SA Office (which has been regularly used to serve all SA members, recently used as a polling station for the opinion poll on the president), stop collecting SA membership fee from its member’s payroll (which is a standing practice for decades).
Audrey, Albert and Longhair, you better be careful, if one day the suspected becomes the real CE, he would replicate such tactic to get rid of you all.  Surely, Gag Chan, though in his late 60s, he would still manage to get a high pay job as the new CE would need him to bull dozing off all the opposition parties.  Judging from his dirty tricks planned or executed in the university, he is at least 10 times more effective then Stephen Lam.

庸官之「庸」也是一種惡

但人蠢又偏要做官，而且做到一塌糊塗仍死要霸住個位，就是一種惡。蠢人當官，害死多少百姓？那不是一句「阿媽生成」就可以了事。「離開很容易，留下來卻需要勇氣」並不是平庸的藉口，這樣會累死很多人。假如香港爆發沙士的時候能有一位英明果斷的領導者，也許不會死這麼多人。沙士不是天意，而是人禍。我不奢望高官有遠見和才能，只求他們做個負責任的庸官，力有不逮唔該辭職。

If you really want to savecityu, you need to get active, the place is disintegrating.

From U watcher posted on 06-06-2011 [11:35:49]:

The media will be interested in only a few celebrities—- CY Leung and Fung Wai Wah. Focus on both and make sure all CityU staff members and students and better HK public, especially education sector at all levels or via the media to all global universities ( let them know how messy or beautiful CityU is when they cast their votes on ranking exercise). The prongs of proactive tactical moves include 1. internal—student union leaders should be aware of anything to do with their welfare and see how they could draw feedback from a powerful constituent ,i.e. students as a whole 2 silent majority of staff members—identify their worries, grievances 3. HK Public—via celebrites such as Fung Wai Wah or Sung Lap kung (?), Chang Yu Sek (?) Leung Mei Fan (???? In this case, the media will provoke answers from her if she refuses to comment) 4. Global scholars and U administrators should be aware of something which is cooking in CityU to a point
of scorching 5. Finally all CityU Council members—-each will receive a formal letter of grievance.in front of the camera so that the public are aware of this and they got to do the job UGC expect them to handle.

Finally, would consider dumping Mr. Fung Wai Wah if he still show no response or take action. This could have diastrous impact on his ambition to shoot for the LegCo job. Who would vote for him—-見微思著

repost from UGG forum Internal Auditor’s message:

CityU Auditor is right, American Way (AM) is extravagantly wasting HK taxpayer’s hard- earned money, some examples as follows:

Many professors and senior administrative staff refuse to support AM’s ridiculous projects, he side-places them and promotes other staff or recruits his friends from the US to take up senior posts and enjoy fat salaries and other benefits.  Since he gets more and more resistance, he needs to keep recruiting more expensive but not necessary qualified staff to implement his pet projects.  As a result, the university has achieved another highest record that AM can be boast of – the most expensive administrative team on top of all universities in HK, possibly in the retire region.  Many positions, not even a profitable large corporation can afford, e.g.,
Chief Information Officer (though we already have a Director of Communication and Public Relations),
Chief Administration Officer (can you imagine, why we need a CAO to run an education organization?),
Chief of Staff (though we already have a Director of Human Resources),
Provost and Associate Provosts (God knows what they are doing, and why their jobs cannot be done by a competent President),
lots of Vice Presidents with very creative titles (good rewards to those loyal supporters though).
To ease the resistance and reduce ‘noise’, AM has a good trick – keep promoting professors and introducing acquaintances to take the chairs. He can be proud of building up departments with highest number of chair professors, e.g., Dept of Electronic Engineering has 15 Chair Professors. Some departments who are not perceived as friends of AM do not even have one.
To build up a good relationship with the media to promote AM as a convenient expert, the CIO is an old horse, that’s why you can see lots of advertisements sprinkling just about to all newspapers.
How we wish such huge amount of taxpayer’s hard-earned money can be spent on the students, services and research really benefit the industry.
CY Leung, UGC, and Government Internal Audit Chiefs, please do something to help curb wasting the public fund.  This is nothing to do with ‘academic freedom’. It is a matter of whether the public fund has been spent on ‘value for money’ principle.

Two-way cross subsidy at CityU - subsidizing the vet school idea with UGC funding

How has the CityU top management managed to keep the vet school idea alive after the UGC slammed the door shut and the opponents challenged the source of funding?

Well, the UGC is still funding the vet school in a convoluted way. A charitable foundation of the fortune left behind by a deceased tycoon decided to donate tens of millions to CityU more than a ago. It was agreed that the donation be earmarked for the vet school. As a quid pro quo CityU hired the spouse of one of the directors of the foundation as a professor paid by the UGC fund. The professor was trained to be a surgeon and has done some research work in the medical field but he has little or no teaching experience. CityU has many students who deserve a good education but it has no medical school. (One wonders if the foundation has had similar discussion with the Hong Kong universities that actually have medical schools.)

Sadly, the students are not in the equation of this two-way-cross- subsidy deal that mutually benefits the parties directly involved. Sadder still, if the UGC and the CityU Council do nothing to ensure the students come first.

From High education forum

cityu watcher posted on 21-05-2011 [21:09:39]:

yes, he is way too clever. Like our chairman Leung who claimed to be an educator, but Chairman Leung’s education experience is nothing more than HK government’s appointment on different U’s council.

So this is HK, you guys are cheap, naive, academic workers delivering your cheap knowledge to the HK clients. To Chairman Leung, Way, and G Chan, they the the GOD, or maybe the trinity, while you guys must pray for their mercy.

Quite honest, Leung is here for name and power. Way is here for money and future job. G Chan is a retired old man for money but nothing else. Chan will apologize to everyone without second though only when Way and Leung tell him so. He is a retired person and where can he find this sort of money. He is prepared to leave anytime any day. Chan lives on borrowed time here. Way lives on his protection. Leung thinks of politics only. This is how this CityU trinity works. GOD bless our students.

Source: UGC Higher Education Forum
From 忠實記錄 posted on 21-05-2011 [21:20:47]:

城大在QS世界排名脫離上升軌道轉向下降！
城大在《泰晤士報高等教育特刊》2010年世界大學排名淪為逃兵！
無理解僱教師導致千人示威爾後學務副校長下台！
城大學士生近年失業率「冠絕八大」（8％）!
城大高層指示學士生就業調查者更改原有標準！
城大的教員無歸屬感流失率(8%)連續兩年為各校之最！
城大合約工比率高，教師疏離失落，苛待教職員難辭其咎！
城大收生成績低落!
城大獸醫學院遭拒，高薪顧問依舊在職!
城大被法官杜麗冰狠批「疏忽」、「無能」、「行為羞恥」、「令人鄙視」!
質保局批評城大：各自為政雜亂無章！
城大策略計畫內容浮泛，遲到整整一年！
城大箝制資訊流通！
校長濫用公帑高薪聘用教授不教課！
校長公開說部份教師視大學為福利機構！
校長比喻學生是「不好的牛排」，加調味料炸過就吃不出不好！
除創意媒體中心命名權換得的捐款之外，籌款和配對補助金表現遠落後同級的浸大、理大甚至珠海！
城大學生會長說：城大推崇獨裁、官僚橫行、剝奪學生人權自由
城大前學生會長指責管理層認錢不認人，嘆 “捐錢便是城大一分子”。
城大教職員發表校長表現評分受阻（2010）！
城大校長2011評分2.27 (滿分10）無人問責（2011）！
僱用數度被控誹謗的前狗仔隊長出任公關主管
校長欽點莫名處長兼教授又將之網上蒸發！
狗仔隊長當道傳訊處為高層烏龍環保標書遮醜！
無視排名倒退事實在官方網站上謊報過時排名資料誤導學生、家長和納稅人！
校長漠視退休年限延用超齡教授治校！
校長高調抨擊教資會建議“草率”，卻前倨後恭自取其辱!
校長宣稱八大聯名致函教資會要求澄清建議內容卻查無此事!

Post at UGC Forum
From CityU sufferer posted on 20-05-2011 [14:51:36]:

Way Kuo assumed the presidency of CityU on 14 May. In the past three years, what did we see?

- increasing no. of demoralized staff
- increasing no. of complaints
- resources spent not on teaching and research but went to the pockets of big professors
- many questions and concerns unanswered

If Chairman Leung does not want to investigate what’s going on under Way Kuo’s leadership, should we write a letter to the Chancellor - The Honourable Donald Tsang Yam-kuen?

Repost from UGC Forum

From Pro-Research Employee posted on 20-05-2011 [18:53:57]:

Simple Logical Proof about the Scholastic Credentials of the President of xx-University and His Personal Appointees

Let us start out by assuming that the President and his personal appointees have outstanding research records. What about the fact that they have not responded to the many articles exposing their poor research records? Note that some of these insulting articles were even explicitly cited in the recent open letter forced in front of their faces by CityU’s Staff Association.

Well, it is reasonable to assume that they simply dismissed them because it is below their dignity to read such ridiculous articles. Unfortunately, their own public relations staff invalidated this defense, since the recent UGC-Forum’s deletion notice clearly proves that they make a huge effort to scrutinize these articles. Well, even if they had actually read these accusations and also tried to stop them, it is still reasonable to assume that it is below their dignity to respond to such ridiculous accusations.

Their own public relations experts struck another blow to their patrons by nitpicking on the Staff Association’s statements on such pedantic issues as PBPR’s exact implementation date and the difference between the terms “missions” and “roles.” Since it is not below their dignity to nitpick on the lowly Staff Association over such pedantic issues, they cannot simultaneously claim that it is below their dignity to respond to the extremely damaging, public and explicit claims about the laughable research records of some of the most senior academic “leaders” in a RESEARCH university.

Hence, only one explanation is left for the deafening silence of these “scholastic leaders” on the shocking claims about their research records – can those claims be true !?. However, we have not lost hope, and we hereby plead our “scholastic leaders” to defend the good name of our university. We now know that you are reading this letter! Please! Prove these rumors wrong by, for example, stating explicitly how many Category-1 articles the President has; how many journal papers (even Category-N-square will do) our Invisible Professor (of Medicine? of Veterinary Science? or whatever) has.

If your clique cannot even defend yourselves over such seemingly preposterous accusations, please do the next decent thing; i.e., R_S_G_ !(<- challenging IQ test).

Post from UGC forum
From 城大廢柴 posted on 20-05-2011 [16:05:16]:

由於本秘書處接獲相關院校提述法律意見，認為以下留言含有潛在誹謗成份，因此經徵詢本秘書處本身的法律意見後，有關留言已被刪除：

* (1) “城市大學2009-2011倒退大事記” by user “致校董會” posted on 02.05.2011 at 00:14:45; and
* (2) “城大鎮壓教職員發表校長表現評分第352日—城大校長超低民調評分2(10)發表第11日” by user “SaveCityU” posted on 01.05.2011 at 10:56:46.

城大即管利用法律手段強迫刪除輿論，但是市民的眼晴是雪亮的，是非對錯自有公論!

法律手段是不能遮掩城大管理層的過失!

From cityu junior staff posted on 20-05-2011 [00:22:42]:

A president is the one to look for donation, but apart from the major 100 million lined up by a council member, cityU president has done a less than Grade D in donation. A president is supposed to inspire students and faculty members to pursue higher teaching and research standard, but the cityU president has demoralized all teaching staff and admin staff. Everyone in Tat Chee Ave, except the supposed retired Pensioner Mr. G Chan, is in a hopeless situation praying for a new president to free us from the burning hell. A president is supposed to lead the institution to new direction, but we are now trapped in the vet school, nuclear engineering, and the failed energy school. What else you want to know UGC Chairman? We can name a long list of President Kuo’s mistakes. The looming 4 years system has become a burden of the president as he has no love in teaching issue. Whose fault and who are going to suffer, UGC chairman please don’t be stubborn to leave the Taiwan Way to damage the institution. Whether he has the passion and heart to do the job, only way knows, but it is absolutely clear that this president job is way way too much for WAY to carry. He proves he is not a president or has the view and leadership of a president. Way instead has the street smart of taking the advantage of the Japan disaster, claiming he was nuclear expert, going to the LEGO to talk about undergraduate level technical material to fool the HK public, what a shame! Why? because he is planning to open a new course of nuclear engineering. Can we stand such a person to be our president, of course not. We dream to have a president like HKU, CU, HKUST and other institutions.

Few years back shortly after being appointed as the CityU president, he made a brief visit to CityU. Without understanding the details of HK, he told senior professors to stop doing applied research, which we are only allowed to do in CityU. Way told everyone to do only basic research. So 3 years now, we still need to declare all research students’ work, research projects are “Applied Research”. This maybe a trifle issue but another fact to confirm he is not an appropriate leader.

Have you seen a president claiming that he was ill to get away from responsibility. We also have one in CityU, that is the Way. The firing of instructors that caused hundred of students coming out to protest, Way claimed that he was sick. Poor Rich Ho had to step down then. This is another piece of evidence showing how capable and honest of Way. Come on UGC and Chairman C Y Leung, we have had enough from this guy who has been setting negative examples to our students, to staff, to professors. Please find us a president.

From CityU Member posted on 20-05-2011 [10:08:49]:

I heard a very confusing message about staff perfomance scheme and recruitment policy in a kind of formal department meeting:

1) on one hand, the PBPR scheme emphasizing “standard teaching performance and research performance” to a good and outstanding level and recruiting people having outstanding publication records.

2) on the other hand, they have double standard on local and overseas recruitment, more tolerance on non-local staff’s performance on teaching and research

Example:
Some department management people share the story at the meeing:

The story I heard: The Cityu University management (President and Prov..) are requesting newly recruited local assistant professor having 4-6 or above Q1Q2 journals before confirming their appointment. However, the management will recommend to the department some overseas professors not able to meet the standard. Even the spouse that having minimum teaching and research experience can request to have the title of associate professor…JUST because they are coming from overseas?? Overseas = “Internationalize”???

What a jok to the PBPR scheme!!!

I understand that having an university being “internationalized” may involve to have diverse staff compositions, that’s good for students and research. However, at least you need to be consistent in evaluating or recruiting people from diverse background.

Why the local faculty members have to suffer at the expenses of Way’s “private and inconsistent policy” or his own"underlying agenda” or personal agressions?????

Do we have anti-racial discrimination ordinance in HK? Do we have equal opportunity employment policy at the Universities in HK?

From Care CityU posted on 17-05-2011 [21:00:30]:

Way Kuo is a irresponsible leader - he has been leading CityU for three years and he never face CityU staff members and students in public. If he was popular at CityU, the staff gathering party would be in full house. He is managing CityU with the Provost who have no experience and understanding of the higher education sector in Hong Kong and mainland China. They introduced new policies and schemes with ‘fake’ consultation. They never listen to staff voices. The morale of staff members is at record low. It’s a shame working at CityU.

If Eygpt could pull down their leader for the government mismanagement, why couldn’t CityU have a new leader? Who could help suggest to our Council Chairman to view the opinions posted on this UGC forum? He will get a sense what is going on at CityU. If CY Leung couldn’t fix the problem at an university, should HK people trust his ability to rule Hong Kong?

Please try to think what we should act before or on 23 June when the next meeting of the Council will be held.

From A Recently Join SA Member posted on 20-05-2011 [09:35:33]:

I have been working at Cityu for more than 5 years. I have not realized why should I join SA until 6 months ago when I observed the following actions done by the University Management:

1) Removing SA from the University Website where staff voices have been silent - why they did this?? a threatening to all staff to show Way’s power over staff of Cityu?

2) The University Website is full of half truth “propaganda”, full of Way’s image - wondering if this is Way’s university?? what kind of person? what kind of mentality? why should I respect him even the website is full of the “propaganda” that trying to convince people he is the “outstanding scholar”, “expert” in higher education….....It’s a joke!! He’s the person trying to manipulating his power to achieve his own aims, without addressing cultural context, without addressing that cityu staff have “human agency”, they can negotiate or even can overpower him…..

3) I join SA because I believe that only through “collective action” we can overpower Way….

I am ready anytime!!

From cityu staff posted on 20-05-2011 [05:47:31]:

Way came from a second-tier institution in the US. One can confirm the Tennessee ranking from US News in less than 1 minute. Way first mission was to push CityU world ranking to top 100, although he knew full-well that the top 100 US university are not something that CityU can compare with, let alone the world top 100. But he also knew how to play the game of world ranking because the so-called World Ranking from Times Higher Education is only based on 6 attributes, namely 1. peers’ opinion, 2. recruiters’ view, 3. international student to local student ration, 4. international staff to local staff ratio, 5. faculty member to student ratio, and 6. Research citation. Unlike the widely used US News which has 10 attributes including SAT intake results etc, the Times Higher Education ranking is relatively easy to play with because of the only 6 attributes.

Way play the game by focusing on the few attributes such as international student to local student ratio, international staff to local staff ratio, faculty member to student ratio, and research citation. These factors can in some sense be improved by internal policy but maybe at the expanse of other things. For example, CityU welcome a lot of international student as exchange. CityU may need to revise their teaching staff profile which resulted in trying to fire lecturers, instructors etc as those were mot counted as faculty members. This explains the rational behind of firing instructors despite the long term negative effect on students. But Way didn’t care at all, as World Ranking was what he cared. It was speculated that he might receive a handsome bonus if he was able to meet such a mission, of course at the expanse of a lot of other things.

CityU faculty members have always been doing very respectable research work before Way’s arrival but Way pushed a lot more as research citation is another factor that counts. Way believes research is a short cut to push the world ranking as this is his past experience in the US. But there are over one thousand colleges in the US. The top 100 US colleges are all very strong research institutions. These top US colleges are filled with Nobel Laureates, Fields medal recipients, Turing award recipients, Wolf Price winners, so Way tried to recruit retired big name professors to boost the name. We can of course can give a long list here but everyone knows, the UGC knows. These professors have no teaching contact with our undergraduate students. That is the way how some of the money spent. But the fact is that can our local students be compared with those world top students at Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Berkeley, U Penn, Cal Tech? Don’t be kidding, we all know the caliber of our local students. Our money should be well spent on more teaching and of course research has and will always be an important element, but research should not be emphasized at the expanse of teaching.

UGC please check on the US top 50 college employment figures, their students are top of the world going to world top coporates. Can our local students be compared with them? Don’t be kidding, our students are even not in the same level of the top 10 university in Mainland China.

So most European countries believe this 6-attributes Times Higher World University ranking has caused so much negative effect on education. UGC administrator, UGC Chairman, and Chairman C Y Leung please think about the negative impact that Way and the University Ranking has brought to our local students.

From CityU Researcher posted on 18-05-2011 [22:47:07]:

The reason why CityU’s central administrators nitpick on the Staff Association’s publications but pretend to be oblivious to a very glaring “error”

The CityU administration is nitpicking on every piece of document published by the Staff Association (SA), intimidating SA over such trivial issues as the correct date of PBPR’s implementation and whether the “roles” assigned by the HKUGC to CityU can be called “missions.” Strangely, in the midst of all this fine combing, the university administration steadfastly turns a blind eye towards glaring “rumors” repeatedly highlighted by several SA publications; i.e., the explicit media reports on the unbelievably poor research record of several senior CityU appointees, all the way from the President to the former Provost to several professors and a department head appointed by the President. For example, it was demonstrated that, among others, the President has a ZERO count in Categoy-1 journal article; a stealthily appointed professor has an absolutely empty research record; and a recently appointed department-head-cum-full-professor has only two Category-1 journal articles—less than what the City administration now requires an assistant professor to achieve in order to keep his job! There can be only one explanation to this phenomenon – could it mean that the “rumors” are true?!

To a clique known for blowing its own “research” horn, it is difficult to think of anything more insulting, and it is amazingly pathetic for such a clique not to have any ability to defend itself. For crying out loud, if people say that you have a zero count in Categoy-1 papers, couldn’t you at least retort that you actually have 2 (OK, maybe 1) Categoy-1 paper(s)? If people say that you have an empty research record, couldn’t you at least retort that you have presented many (OK, maybe “a few”) conference papers? It is unfair that the numerous hardworking and honest CityU researchers have to endure this humiliation brought upon them by a bunch of charlatans who infested CityU in the past two years.

‘A Teacher’ cited a simple criteria for assessing whether a university is of world-class makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, American Way and his management puppets say YES to every count!

敢于说“不”：世界一流大学的必要条件

世界一流大学认定标准多重多样，一流的师资，一流的毕业生，一流的设备，一流的环境，一流的科研成果，……还可以列出很多。但我认为，从否定意义上去判别一 所大学是否为世界一流大学有其进步意义。大学是社会的良心，它只能满足社会的需要，而不能满足社会的欲望。大学无论在何种情况下，都应该有自己的独立价值 判断，有自己的独立人格，有自己的批判反思品质。因之，我们可以用大学是否敢于说“不”来判别一所大学是否具备了世界一流大学的条件。只有敢于说“不”的 大学，才无愧于世界一流大学的称号。

“不”唯上
不 唯上，即大学不以领导人的意志、执政党的意志为马首是瞻，而是根据自己的特色、自己的价值标准去发展自己，表现自己，证明自己。哈佛大学是公认的世界一流 大学，但它从来不以自己培养了多少位总统而自我标榜，也不以总统或国家领导人视察哈佛大学而自满。相反，它时时保持着与领导人的距离，唯恐因此沾上“官 气”。1986年恰逢哈佛大学350周年校 庆，里根总统应邀出席庆典。事先，不知天高地厚的里根总统向校方暗示，要哈佛到时给他颁一个“荣誉博士”的头衔。按照里根当时的政绩，哈佛真送给他一顶博 士帽，也不算为过。可校长德里克•博克却断然拒绝了里根的要求，并公开宣称：“我无意于奉承另一位总统的虚荣心！”总统归总统，哈佛归哈佛，总统不因此而 动怒，哈佛也不因此而失去与政府合作的机会。但因此，哈佛却赢得了世人的尊重，包括里根总统的尊重。

“不”媚俗
大 学和它所服务的社会、政府、组织与个人之间的关系是复杂的。因为大学不仅是社会的服务者、支持者，同时也是社会的评论者、思想者。大学不仅创造并传播知 识，还要对已存在的社会现象、评论体系和价值观念采取一种独立的质疑态度。为了发挥这种复杂角色的功能，大学必须设立一条与社会分离并渗透边界。这条边界 可以确保大学按大学自身的运行逻辑来发展大学，确保大学可以自主决定大学的活动边界、关系边界和行动者边界，最终确保大学发展的自主性、内生性。大学的特 性、大学自身的学术成长规律将在大学边界内健康发展，大学的学术自由、教学自由、学习自由将在大学边界内得到充分的保证。如果大学却失了这条边界，与社会 融为一体，则呈献出“媚俗”的特征。“不” 媚俗是大学保持独立人格的前提，也是确保大学独特本质的前提。如果大学媚俗，就会与社会混同，大学就会因此失去其独立的价值标准，因之，也就不会成为世界 一流大学。

“不”唯利是图
大学发展需要大量的资金支持，没有充足的资金，就不会有大学的快速发展。但大学不能因此而丧失自己的原则与立场。大学只有确保自己学术中立的地位，才会有其学术真理性的追求。附加条件的利益，只会影响学术研究的公正性、真理性、独立性，并将最终影响大学的声誉与发展。1990年 代中期，耶鲁大学一位校友要给母校捐献两千万美元。二千万虽非巨款，但对当时捉襟见肘的耶鲁来说，也不无小补。可是，后来校方了解到，捐款人意在设置“西 方文化历史课程”，以对抗当时美国大学校园文化日益多元的趋向，而且捐款人的附带条件是要提名该课程的教授。于是校方毫不犹豫地拒绝了这笔捐款。“不”唯 利是图是一流大学的品质，一流大学决不会被动地按照捐赠者的议程来为他们服务，一流大学决不会唯利是图，变为捐赠者实现他们抱负或野心的被动工具。

“不”急功近利
普林斯顿大学不是综合性大学，但是因为普林斯顿大学对学术规律的尊重，她却培养出几十位诺贝尔获奖者。一流大学“不”急功近利，不会把教授当成每天必须下蛋的母鸡，不会给教授定下急功近利的学术目标，更不会要求他们每年必须完成多少篇SCI论文。正是因为此，普林斯顿大学的安德鲁•怀尔斯（Andrew John Wiles）教授才有可能9年不出1篇论文，埋头苦干，静心研究，解决了困扰世界数学界长达360余年的一大难题——费马大定理，最终获得历史上惟一的菲尔兹特别成就奖；也正是因为这种“不”急功近利的品性，才有对大师和学术的敬重，才有患精神病的天才数学家约翰•纳什（John Forbes Nash）静心地生活在校园内，终于使他在与疾病搏斗30年后获得了诺贝尔经济学奖。 [1]
“不”唯上，“不”媚俗，“不”唯利是图，“不”急功近利，说着简单，做着难。也正是因为做着难，它们才成为世界一流大学的必要条件。一所大学如果做不到说“不”，就永远成不了世界一流大学。

[1]杨福家．中国当代教育家文存—杨福家[M]．上海：华东师范大学出版社2006．197．

本人的朋友在城大任教, 說城大新校長來後有不明文新政策, 不請本地博士畢業生任教, 只請海外大學, 連港大, 中大和科大博士畢業生都不如一些海外遙距課程博士畢業生, 不只是真是假? 本人的朋友說是正式開會時講的, 可有城大其他人士証實?

Thanks CityU Employee’s response:
http://www.ugc.edu.hk/cgi-bin/ugc/mb_message.pl
which gives me a chance to clarify another two major myths in some of the academic colleagues’ minds. Like you, I oppose Way’s new policies with sound reasons.  I particularly oppose his responses triggered largely from his street-smart instinct. For instance, hearing a couple of complaints from pet owners he then ‘forced’ through (I’m sure you know how Senate meeting works) the motion of setting up a veterinary school and announced in public in a high profile way. The most recent one is taking advantage of Fukushima’s nuclear crisis – the self-claimed nuclear expert, wanted to build a new nuclear center and run ‘Hong Kong first’ nuclear degree. These opportunistic mindsets are no different to those convicted investment executives in Wall Street. Of course, with his astonishing acts and ‘great’ pet projects CityU soon became the laughing stock in HK. Our hard-earned reputation in the past two decades has been severely damaged since Way’s arrival.
It’s wrong to accuse SA or those hired in Polytechnic era are pro teaching and against research staff.  Before Way’s arrival, CityU had a very fine culture of strong collegiality between research and teaching staff to deliver high quality research and education. The excellent UGC remarks and the steady improvement of the World University Ranking speak for itself.  We never had so many grievances and complaints against the president in Prof HK Chang’s and Prof Patrick Cheng’s eras. Therefore, you equate those oppose Way as against research staff is absolutely unfounded.
Another myth you advocate is the idea that ‘a good researcher is a good teacher’. That is more like saying C. Rolando ought to be a good football coach.  A good teacher can inspire students by offering different schools of thoughts and more importantly can spend lavishly amount of time to care about the students and mark their assignments. Guess how many professors can afford the time, have the patience and willingness to do all these pastoral activities?  Moreover, many counseling-based disciplines, such as social work, media and communication, law and business, they need teaching staff with real-world experiences.  Their outputs like cases, books, newspaper and trade journal articles from their counseling and consulting activities while well valued by students and practitioners are not recognized by Way now as they have no citation impacts.  However, if you talk to the employers and parents of our students, great majority of them expect us to teach the students with practical knowledge and good work ethics to enhance their employability.
Save those several digits after decimal percent of students, like you, who is aspired to be a distinguished researcher, will need a professor who is able to build elegant models for inspiration. Those elite professors they teach a few research students and one or two classes a year, they ought to be good teachers.  But how many of them win the teaching excellence awards?
The ‘deep contradictions’ in CityU is while good teachers (professors or instructors alike) are greatly contributing to CityU, and indeed, Hong Kong as a whole are considered as second-rate citizens and have no future in here, but those mediocre in teaching but can publish in top-tier journals research staff can get promotions and salary raises.  That was not the case before Way’s time.  Way’s PBPR scheme divides this university.  In order to prevent him from damaging CityU further, we need to clarify those myths and unveil the truths to all CityU staff and its stakeholders.