食子文化不忍卒睹—— 給科大校管的公開信與聯署:請恪守教育原則善待學子(文:May Tam)

Share This:
  •  
  • 11
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

pic via HKUST Students’ Union FB

一個多星期前,傳來香港科技大學學生會成員因在校園悼念周梓樂同學及展示與翻新文宣,而遭到校方重罰的消息。作為科大校友,也作為在青春歲月的英殖時期,得享在校園內百無禁忌地探索世界的今日廢中,深感驚愕與悲傷。做夢也估不到,一個曾經是現代文明典範的香港,倒退至今天「食子文化」天天在上演的敗落之都。

一個悼念會、在校園路上翻新已存在好幾年的「希望在於人民 改變始於抗爭」的文宣字樣,以及在學生會告示版有關港獨的政見,只是稚子表達對社會的關心和期盼,實在看不到行為怎麼惡劣到要被剝奪學習機會一段時間,包括暫停使用校園設施(連圖書館在內)、停學一個學期。根據報道,學生的活動被阻止,是為免人群聚集擴散疫情,學生會的版本是已採取了措施減少人流。這些技術性的活動安排爭議,為甚麼嚴重到要被罰停學?

不能使用圖書館,同學便無法須學習和做功課了;遭停學,就更不用說了。在當代文明社會,無論是教育或懲教,目標都是善導,而非高壓威嚇、剝奪基本權利。

不久前,中文大學畢業禮,畢業生在校園遊行,展示政治信念,和理非得像溫酒,結果是校方報警,舉報他們涉嫌違反國安法,然後警方一舉拘捕。

虎毒不吃兒,香港漸漸變得苛毒猛於虎。如果少幼被視為犯錯,不是開導勸誡嗎?為何要推到去毀滅前途不可?(科大的懲治包括留下處分記錄)

我身為廢中,經歷過外族治下的自由香港,人生曾經充滿機會和尊嚴,今天回顧過去幾年的年青人運動,深受感戴,也難掩羞愧。我們獅子山下年代也許是滿街貧民,也許是普遍民智未開的關係,許多人的人生目標都不算高尚,以脫貧安穩入富為生活焦點。當年,即使是高貴神聖的大學殿堂,七、八十年代的學子大部分都是四仔主義,物質飽足再配以威榮與存在感,於願足矣,這就是今天777、689及一眾樂享收成期的權威廢老的成長和人生寫照。他們註定無法明白今天為了理想和美善價值而「犧牲前途」的稚子,因為權威廢老的民智缺了一塊。

雨傘運動之前,我原以為生活在富裕環境的新生代,不及我們艱難歲月的一代願意承擔和更能吃苦。而今天極權巨輪越輾越亢奮的時刻,人人都被嚇得噤聲失神的時候,竟然看到這群富裕青年初生之犢不畏虎,單純無偽地一往無前,而且堅拒硬食,追求社會公義不惜血淚披面。好相信,背後的推動力除了是大義澟然之外,更重要的是人對自己獨立人格和尊嚴的捍衛,這是不同世代的心靈文化的轉化,應該是來自我們受治於外族的諷刺。

年青人眼前的路還很長,而像我的廢中及一眾享受收成期的廢老,卻行將入木,上了岸的你們大多是身家不單可以安顧到百年歸老,甚至足夠下世投胎做人的一生衣食。足夠了,就收手頤養天年吧,不作聲不阻撓,讓年青人自主探索自主前路是你們的最大智慧。曾享盡自由之福以致名成利就的你們,為甚麼一定要反過來食子不可?

香港的大學都在國際上享譽甚濃,不過這事即將過去。世界都正在目擊,國際都會的國際高級學府,如何一天一天地丟掉對學子的包容,走向全城食子文化的大合奏。

今天廢中廢老的我們在極權的鐮刀與鐵槌之下,沒有年青稚子的殉道勇氣和能力,但卻也無法硬食,無法面對長輩應該維護少幼的這種人類責任和良心拷問下而可以無動於衷,眼巴巴看著年青人一個個被吞噬。於是唯有發起以下這個給科大校管高層的公開信暨簽名運動,懇請科大校管高層對學子網開一面,檢視今次的懲處,忠於教育原則,以育人職志善待學子,不把他們推向窟境。

也懇請科大人(校友、前教職員)廣傳以下鏈結並簽署,讓母校校管聽到我們的心聲。此公開信亦已直接電郵往三位校管高層:科大校董會主席廖長城先生、科大校長史維教授、科大教務處主任James Prince先生。

http://chng.it/wdLH4MgV

(此公開信暨簽名運動全文中英版本抄錄如下)

______________________________________________________________

科大人籲科大校管恪守教育原則善待學子

此函奉達:
香港科技大學校董會主席廖長城先生
香港科技大學校長史維教授
香港科技大學教務處主任James Prince先生

我們是一群香港科技大學(下稱「科大」)畢業生及曾服務科大的教職員,日前得悉,科大一眾學生會成員遭到校方嚴厲懲處,包括褫奪使用校園設施權利半年、強制執行校園服務令、留下紀律處分記錄,甚至有人被勒令休學一個學期,罪狀只是在校園內為去世的周梓樂同學舉行悼念會、在校園地上的文宣補油翻新,以及於學生會告示板張貼文宣,以表達他們對社會事務的關注和期盼。這些活動全皆出於稚子關心社會、追求公義的善良意願,卻換來重罰,我們不禁震驚和悲傷。

以教研科技為重點的科大,教育願景乃「孕育敢於創新、積極有為的全球領袖」。這意味著,科大理應不會希望培養出來的科技專才,是單以科技圖利,卻對社會漠不關心,對
公眾事務的是非對錯不聞不問,只以學識自肥和為商人服務。這樣的人不會積極,亦必眼界短淺,定無創意,不能成為領袖。可惜的是,今天受罰的學生,展現出關懷社會和以行動作回應的積極精神,擁有領袖的基本素質,他們做著正確的事,卻換來校方嚴懲。這表明,科大作為高級學府,不容學生關心社會,不容他們表達善良意願,這是否符合教育專業原則?

大學乃追求知識,探索真理,推動世界文明進步的殿堂,必重多元開放,思想自由,給予學生廣闊的空間思考、活動、探究,學生若有偏差錯誤也會高度包容,這亦是香港過去百年來的大學校園傳統。然而今次事件中,同學因舉辦合理無害的活動而受罰,實向國際社會傳達極壞訊息——科大作為教育殿堂的自由多元精神已褪色,對學生缺乏包容,難以與國際高級學府的地位匹配。

作為科大人,我們深感傷痛,更令我們猶疑還應否支持母校(包括財資與非財資的支持),因為其教育原則和精神似已改變,惡待學子,不再單純忠於學生福祉。

因此,吾等懇切要求,校方撤銷今次對學生的刑罰,並與學生會一起檢討事件,探討日後如何在支持學生自由學習和探索的原則下,包容各類學生活動,同時符合校園的基本規則。

發起人及聯署人
譚秀貞(2006年畢業生,人文學部,香港科技大學)
________________

The HKUST Community Urges for Adherence to Education Professionalism

This letter is addressed to:
The HKUST Council Chairman Mr Andrew LIAO Cheung-Sing
The HKUST President Professor Wei SHYY
The HKUST Academic Registrar Mr James Prince

We are members of The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) community, namely former graduates, former faculty and admin staff. We are aware that some HKUST Students’ Union members and leaders have lately encountered heavy penalty from the HKUST management, including suspension of the students’ rights to use campus facilities for half a year, compulsory campus service order, penalty records and even suspension from classes for a semester. The offenses are merely holding a memorial event on campus for their deceased schoolmate Chow Tsz-lok, repainting slogans on a campus path and posting on the Students’ Union noticeboard expressing students’ concerns for Hong Kong’s public affairs. We all regard these actions as entirely out of the students’ care for Hong Kong and social justice. But their good will has only brought them severe punishments, which is shocking and deeply saddening us.

The HKUST, which places a premium on teaching and research of science and technology, is committed to the vision of “We provide a breeding ground for innovative global leaders of tomorrow”. It follows that the kind of scientists and technologists the HKUST would like to cultivate should not be solely concerned benefiting themselves and serving business tycoons by means of science and technology, while ignoring public affairs and social justice. This otherwise kind of so-called experts must be short-sighted and in lack of creativity, and therefore unable to become real leaders. On the other hand, the students now penalised have shown concern for our society and the proactive spirit of responding in action, which is exactly the prerequisite of competent leaders. The students have done correct things, only to be returned with woes. This indicates only one thing: as an internationally renowned tertiary education institute, the HKUST does not allow students for civic participation, nor expression of their good will. Is this in line with education professionalism?

University is a sacred temple where knowledge is pursued, truth explored and civilisation advanced. It must therefore embrace openness, diversification and freedom of thoughts, and provides ample opportunities for students to reflect, act and explore. Even if students make mistakes during the process, they will be highly tolerated, which has exactly been the tradition of Hong Kong’s university culture for the last one hundred years. However the case in question this time has sent an extremely bad message to the international community that the HKUST as an internationally acclaimed and quality higher education institute suppresses freedom and diversification on the campus and lacks tolerance for its students. This is going against the global status the HKUST has enjoyed.

As part of the HKUST community, we feel deeply distressed about the case and we even begin to doubt if we should continue to support our alma mater, whether in terms of finance or intangible assistance, because the University is now seen to have deviated from education professionalism, treating students indecently and neglecting their well-being.

Therefore we earnestly request the HKUST management to revoke the penalties for the students concerned, review the case together with the Students’ Union and study how to tolerate students’ sundry activities while maintaining the basic regulations of the campus, and in accordance with the principle of supporting students’ freedom of learning and exploration.

Initiator and Cosigner:
May Tam (2006 alumnus, Humanities Division, HKUST)


Share This:
  •  
  • 11
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Comments