' X' e, D# F" M, Q( N第四，同理，評鑑大學學院的院長，看的是他在學術上是否能夠為同事開闢新的領域，吸引新的資源，保護和 扶持後進的同事，維護學術的誠信與尊嚴，讓學院在學術上不斷更加卓越，等等。從來不會看他的政治立場與政治生活。就陳文敏來說，他的業績，法律學院的同事有目共睹；他的民主派背景，完全不會進入他的 領導業務。TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。& H% [; A. d' m6 |& d
/ \, t) ^7 h$ h x) R. D, u公仔箱論壇0 Q: F- L' z. }( L) k7 c' |) n The Faculty of Law’s Response tothe RAE 2014 Reporttvb now,tvbnow,bttvb: v8 ]0 I/ H1 J1 r
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb6 k1 T. J# r7 |4 i7 Q* i- O
There has been media interest in the last few days concerning the University Grants Committee (UGC)’s results of the Research Assessment Exercise 2014(RAE), particularly with the comparison between the law faculties of The University of Hong Kong and The Chinese University of Hong Kong. 7 {% t3 p B3 u$ |' k8 c, ?) w 7 V/ i" p. s* H( A5 S- f& K5.39.217.76We begin by thanking the Law Panel of the RAE for completing a demanding and important task in such a professional manner, and we congratulate the Faculty of Law of The Chinese University of Hong Kong for its excellent achievement in the Exercise. It is a very good situation that all the law schools in Hong Kong SAR are collectively making a significant impact in Hong Kong, in the region and internationally. + }6 a& C0 d) q7 ]* s6 M: Etvb now,tvbnow,bttvbWhat we wish to point out is well described on the UGC website and the Reading Guides of the RAE report: 3 V8 W, Z i4 F1 H公仔箱論壇8 o4 d* S3 \7 v. G1 z* Y
“On the interpretation of the RAE results of each institution, [it has been] emphasised that due regard should be given to the institutions’ different roles, missions, discipline focus and history.” (http://www.ugc.edu.hk/eng/ugc/publication/press/2015/pr27012015.htm) * y6 K T; b3 h: M5.39.217.76TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。+ R3 | _4 x3 O9 z. D4 O5 \* g$ g: Z
“The results are not for comparison purposes and not to be used in a standalone manner… [I]t is neither fair nor appropriate to compare the quality profiles of different institutions.” (Reading Guides1 and 5) - z+ ]( L; _. X, F/ J公仔箱論壇6 Z* r! L2 @ q2 V, U9 b1 }
The Faculty of Law of The University of Hong Kong is the oldest and the largest of the three law schools in Hong Kong.Historically, it has seen its mission to be both a law faculty that responds to the needs of the legal system and legal profession in Hong Kong and as part of the international community of legal scholars. It has sought to produce high quality research and publications in a way which has a high impact in both Hong Kong and global legal discourse. As an institution the HKU Law Faculty divides its time and resources between them. The RAE report on us in fact reflects this dual mission.TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。6 U6 O/ Q) `( P4 J) q. ]. n" m+ Q
. v! a( c; @# k% O+ R8 h8 H% ~2 QTVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。The Faculty wishes to dispel the suggestion or implication made in some quarters that it is not doing well in terms of research. The Faculty was, and is, aware that serving its mission to contribute to the Hong Kong community in general and the legal profession in particular might mean that it will sometimes be at the expense of doing more work with a global focus, but that is a trade-off the Faculty is proud to make. - I! c0 m$ Q N& G0 |5 U; y, L公仔箱論壇1 l) m# z# p9 e }+ ^
The Faculty does not, by any means, intend to convey the impression that it thinks that there is no room for improvement. It is the Faculty’s aim to be regarded amongst the top law schools in the world.The Faculty has been engaging in a wide-ranging exercise of institutional self-reflection and strategic planning. Many of the RAE panel’s suggestions on international collaboration and globally-focused research form a major part of our current research strategy. We shall, over the next few weeks, be discussing the RAE report very carefully to reflect on how we can do even better. Indeed, we are most grateful for the positive and critical feedback which the exercise has provided. " j4 I6 ^4 }8 ]4 ?% b9 V. I " [5 M; ?7 D" _$ q% E3 uWith the feedback gained from RAE and the continued support of the community, the Faculty looks forward to becoming even stronger in the coming years. 3 t; z% ?& C6 c0 `* Y" |. k6 ITVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。. |, @0 z# E+ G) M
Michael HorTVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。7 T4 A. B+ y( {* }2 {
Dean ) y5 m* z1 L# ~TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。Faculty of Law 4 r8 h: K. \6 p/ C6 t/ c, m! o/ wThe University of Hong Kong . C y1 |+ X; ]8 J" M( t5.39.217.76TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。, d4 m. P& E9 t9 U! J A0 S. T3 G 作者: felicity2010 時間: 2015-2-6 08:44 AM
; ^' Q# X! ?9 E, g' q1 b- k+ W+ h. U2 ]! ?[attach]3036291[/attach] P" R! U8 V7 \& D9 M' w7 J; ntvb now,tvbnow,bttvb 5 @7 J& m4 I' [2 }! B( R* t% M5.39.217.76: ]" r6 P* n4 [ n
港大法律學院連日受左報、匿名放料攻擊之烈，尤如文革批鬥。繼《文匯報》上周獨家率先報道教資會尚未公開的文件內容，以此攻擊被指是港大副校長人選的前法律學院院長陳文敏，再有《星島日報》接獲匿名者報料，指港大法律學院院長何耀明獲合約優厚，質疑新院長遴選程序不公。各種指控羅列所謂「證據」，包括教資會內部文件、港大內部會議資訊，被疑是有權勢力人士甚至是政府官員，為求達到政治目的，放料發動連串攻擊。左報和匿名者的指控，大部分都是一面之詞，欠缺有力論證，部分更令人啼笑皆非。 1 G0 c* o# u0 a# ~2 F$ Q5.39.217.765 \9 b3 x% W3 w+ N
這一浪「瘋狂式攻擊」，要從年初說起。今年1月13日，《文匯報》、《大公報》報道，梁振英在一個新書發佈會上公佈戴耀廷勾結外部勢力的「證據」，引述左報去年報道、相信是黑客盜取得來的戴耀廷電郵紀錄，指他於2013年3月收受80萬，經觀塘匯豐銀行入款，而早前多名政黨中人接受前壹傳媒主席黎智英捐款，亦由觀塘匯豐銀行入款，暗指戴與壹傳媒有利益關係。翌日《文匯報》再有報道，指有文件顯示黎智英與美國中情局有關，又說戴耀廷迴避收受利益的指控。' S b4 U M: q$ M9 _' N0 ?! t
& w( a8 f, [) ^1 |公仔箱論壇觀塘匯豐銀行成勾結外部勢力之說，成為政界笑話，連資深傳媒人柳俊江也在Facebook諷刺梁振英，「九月份我的確喺匯豐銀行觀塘分行，將一筆家用秘密匯到家母戶口…以外部勢力介入中國內部事務。」《立場》其後追問特首辦及十條問題，包括政府是否早已掌握所謂的「證據」、有沒有主動搜集有關「證據」並向傳媒放風、獲得「證據」的手段有否違法、有沒有大陸國安部門提供「證據」等，但特首辦回覆指，梁振英已回應，沒有其他補充。公仔箱論壇% N- g& }9 n" R. a% v
/ u6 a. P( \, s) c% N, O0 x左報矛頭轉向陳文敏 4 G: e& F9 o I/ G& A5.39.217.76+ Q* C. D4 I/ G8 O8 R- j5 V. O
1月16日，《文匯報》將矛頭轉向被指是港大副校長人選的陳文敏，「罪名」包括 : 身為當時的法律學院院長卻未阻止戴耀廷發起佔中，任由他「荒廢教務」，還為戴的《佔領中環》新書寫序 ; 又指陳文敏包庇戴耀廷收受匿名者的30萬捐款。7 U- H- a1 o, X$ j. k& w1 o7 f& i$ X
* F# c' ] H1 o" Ftvb now,tvbnow,bttvb1月26日，文匯報更動用三版的篇幅，重點講述陳文敏擔任院長時，如何「貽害」港大法學院。報道披露理應於翌日由教資會公佈的「研究評審工作（RAE）2014」報告內容，指出陳文敏任內，港大法律學院的學術質素轉差，例如研究項目僅有46%達三星至四星的「卓越標準」，表現不如中大法律學院，大罵該學院「有人只顧搞政治」，「不務正業」。7 p7 @: `3 w$ @* e
/ M# ^& m6 Y) I3 x! v$ O到底文匯如何取得教資會未公開的文件？據蘋果日報報道，有關文件理應只得教資會高層才持有，而教資會委員、「梁粉」張志剛事前曾閱覽文件，《立場》本周二去信教育局、特首辦及教資會委員、「梁粉」張志剛，有否向外界洩密，至今未獲回應。tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb+ a( M7 F. z( U2 G+ I2 P1 _
