Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
of Hong Kong
Section one
Introduction
In recent years, Hong Kong economy experiences much fluctuation. Some analysis said
that when economy is in prosperity, students are more likely to choose studying in business-
related major because of higher payroll expectation in this sector. At a result the admission score
of business-related major would soar, implying that more outstanding students are likely to work
in the sector after graduation. In austerity period, people are more likely choosing jobs that
provide more job security. As a result the admission score of those majors that train students for
particular careers that provide more job security is considered to rise during austerity. The main
goal of the paper is testing whether this phenomenon really exist by providing evident to indicate
how strong are the relation between economics fluctuation and students’ admission score in
different major.
Earlier survey conducted by Calkins & Weiki (2006) in the University of Height had found
that the expected marketability and expected income rank respectively the second and sixth that
students concern when they were choosing university major. Further more, male weight expected
income a more influential factor than female. (Zafar, 2009). But no studies were conducted in
order to unveil how economics fluctuation influences students’ choice of university major and it
is what this paper aim to discover. Studies by Webbink & Hartog (2004) had found that in
general students’ predicted salaries and realized salaries rarely have large difference. But he did
not provide what factors indeed influence the forming of wage expectation. Berger (1998) found
that students would choose major that provide higher income expectation. Based on their finding
, I am going to test whether current economic environment affect major selection. With this
study, we could have better perspective on how students rearrange their choices of major among
economics fluctuation.
Apart from economic fluctuation, there is variety of factors that would influence students’
choice of major such as the interest in the subject, peers influence, suggestion from high school
teachers. (Calkins & Weiki, 2006), Gender (Zafar, 2009), high school performance
(ThomasSource , 1985) and socioeconomics background (Blau & Ferber, 1991). Although those
factors swing the choice in a great extent (Canes & Rosen, 1995), it is difficult to estimate the
change in those factors using existing data (from instant, it is impossible to estimate the
difference on students interest among different years). If students’ interests were changing from
year to year, the admission score would plunge without any economic fluctuation. As a result, I
In section two, I would introduce the methodology of this study. In section three, I would
give a brief summary on recent economic performance. In section four, I would analyze the trend
admission score in business-related sector. In sector five, I would analyze the trend in non-
business major. In sector six, I would analyze the trend on admission score that had discover
strong relationship between economic performance and admission score, but in other university
in order to examine whether the existing linking are the result of the characteristic of those major,
Methodology
To make comparison between the change on admission score in business-related major with other
degree progarmme. I would compare the admission score on Integration Bachelor of Business
Nursing in The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) so that we could have clear
perception about how admission score would change among economics fluctuation.
5 2
1
! ce + 2ceeng + cechi
i ! al + aleng + 2 alchi
i
i=1
x0.3 + i=1
x0.7
8 3.5
• ce is the marks of any Certificate Level Examination (CE) exclude Chinese and English.
In every subject, examination grade would be transfer to numerical score. A get 5 marks, B
The admission score would be used to estimate students performance, although different major
would have difference in calculating its own admission, the formula is no disclosed, for that
There are two indicators that I used to represent the economic fluctuation. The first one is
the year-on-year change in Gross Domestic Product in normal term (GDP) from 2004 to 2009,
which measure the general performance of Hong Kong economy. The second one is the Hang
Seng Index, which is a composite measurement on the performance of finance market. The first
could be seen as indicator of real sector; the second could be seen as indicator of financial sector.
In business sector could also be classified to those sector, for example, income of accounting
concentrated on IPO are consider closed related to financial market, but a manager of
After that, I would conduct regression analysis to reveal the relationship between those
From 2004 to 2010, General economics situation is pretty good. As showed in the Table
one, the nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) had risen from $1,291,923 millions to
$1,748,090 millions or 5.16% average increase. There was a slow down on growth in GDP in
2008(fron 9.5% in 2007 to 3.8% in 2008) and decrease in 2009 (-3.3%), but slump was
temporary as it reverted to grow in 2010(7.8%). We may say that although there was some
However, If we look at data much related to performance in financial sector, the picture
would be quite specular. The Hang Seng Index, which measures the general performance of
Hong Kong Stock Marker, could divide to three periods among 2004 to 2010. In the first period
from Mar 2004 to the Oct 2007, it records a consecutive growth of a magical 139% (rising from
13120 to 31352). The second period is the occurrence of slump from Oct 2007 to Feb 2009, it
record a 59% slump. (falling form 31352 to 12811). The third period is a robust rebuttal from Feb
Two indicator show a similar trend, so that either one could be used to compare with admission
score. Comparing two data would simplify the analysis and simple linear regression could be
adopted.
between admission score and change in GDP, In 2004 to 2007, admission score would have the
same trend (growing or dropping) due to the different wage expectation change in varies major.
Admission score in business-related major should record growth and the major that could be
classified as Shelter should record a drop. In 2008 and 2009, the economic situation had reverse
to shrinking, Hang Seng Index drop 27% from Mar 2007 to July 2008. From July 2008 to July
2009,t he Hang Seng endure another fluctuation, the index drop to 12811 and climb back to
around 18000 point in July 2009. The last chance to rearrange major selection through the
JUPUS system is in August, Students witnessed the fluctuation may prefer the ‘shelter’ rather
Table one and Table two show the admission score of different major between 2004 to
2009 by absolute value and year-on-year change respectively. If we plot the nominal GDP and
Admission score in Quantitative Finance together in a scatter diagram as showed in chart two.
We could find that they are positively related. In most of the case, when economy was expanding,
To test their relationship, regression analysis is conducted as shown in table six. The regression
!! is 0.79, indicating that 79% of the change in admission score could be explained by the
change of GDP.
However, if we expand the test to Economics and IBBA, this relationship is indeed not
clear. As Show in Chart three and Chart four. Most of the year, pattern on admission score in
Economics is basically following the trend, in which when economics expanding, admission
score would increase. But indeed the relationship is very weak. In 2005, 2006 and 2010, when
nominal GDP record around 7% growth, change in admission score fluctuate between -4% to
7.5%. With a !! of 0.14 and 0.02 respectively, it is hard to comment that admission score are
Ironically, when examining the data on IBBA, which should be credited for the most
business-oriented major for their concentrated studies in Accountancy, Finance, Decision Science
and Managerial Economics, Management, Marketing and STOT. (The Chinese University of
Hong Kong, 2010) As shown in chart four and table four, the admission score is decreasing
interruptedly except 2006. But after 2007, when the economy is in the most prospect period,
admission score revert to a drop. No pattern could be seen in the statistic, so it is even hardly
obvious relationship between admission score and economic fluctuation in every major. The
picture is diverging, no consist result are discovered. However, hypothesis could be tested in
Section
Some major, for example Medical Studies, Nursing would be consider as shelter when
economics is in austerity, due to its relatively high job security. Indeed, Hong Kong is lacking
doctors and nurses in public health sector (Sina, 2011), so studying in these major provide a
nearly perfect probability to be hired after graduation. As a result, the admission score should be
Chart five show the relationship between admission score in medical studies to the year-on-year
change in GDP. In 2006 and 2007 where the economy is approaching its economics peak, the
admission score in medical studies drop 3.4% and 5.3% respectively. It could be interpreted it as
students changed their major from medical studies to other major due to soaring economy, but an
other time, results are not consistent. In 2005 and 2010, GDP rise 7% and 7.8% respectively
following by a 15% and 5% rise in admission score. This inconsistent phenomenon could not be
explained merely by expected payroll. Other factors should be considered to the main cause.
The relationship between admission score on nursing and change in nominal GDP (Chart
six) show a perfect case of students choosing major following to economics fluctuation as
quantitative finance did. But ironically the pattern is similar to the quantitative finance one, in
which when economy is growing, admission score would grow as the same time. In 2007, the
admission score record a amusing 27% rise. But in the following two year when economy slide, it
fall 21% and 7.5% respectively, in which indicating less competition in Nursing enrollment. With
a !! of 0.43, the data is showing that students do not saw nurse as a shelter. Contradictorily, It
economic fluctuation, but is that phenomenon exist purely due to the characteristic of the major?
We would take statistic in other university into account in order to examine whether the pattern
Data of the cut-off score in nursing in The Hong Kong Polytechnic University (Poly) and
admission score in quantitative finance in The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
(UST) are adopted. Table three shows the data and Chart seven show the relationship between
No strong relationship between the admission score of quantitative finance and change of GDP
could be observed. As shown in chart seven, the !! is merely 0.2. It is much lower then what
economic fluctuation. It has very stable growth no matter what economic performance is.
Conclusion
Examining the statistic in CUHK, It is very strange that the data would provide such a
divergent result. Firstly, not all business-related major show a similar trend on admission score.
Secondly, The majors that provide training on careers that are classified as ‘shelter’ do not show
an inverse trend with the quantitative finance which show a perfect example on a group of
but most of them do not. Further more, doctor and nurse should not be classified as a ‘shelter’
career because no obvious trend of and inverse relationship between admission score and
economics growth.
The reasons behind that may simply because expected payroll is not the overwhelming
factor that influence students choices of major. Other factors are crucial in making decision. But
The second reason may be that students did not form their expected payroll base on
current year’s economics environment. Predicting future economics situation would require
adoption of a comprehensive analysis, in which many factors need to be taken into account.
Certainly current economics fluctuation is not the sweeping factor that influences prediction in
our case.
Although the hypothesis that is aimed to prove is rejected, through this study, we might
have better understanding on decision making of students. Current economic performance would
not be considered as major factors that influence expected payroll and more importantly, the
GDP
At current market prices
Year Quarter HK$ million Year-on-year % change
2004 1,291,923 4.6
2005 1,382,590 7.0
2006 1,475,357 6.7
2007 1,615,574 9.5
2008 1,677,011 3.8
2009r 1,622,203 -3.3
2010p 1,748,090 7.8
Table two:
Table five
Quantitative
Finance
Nursing
(POLY)
(cut-‐
Year
(UST)
off
score)
GDP
CHANGE
2010
3.32326284
2.564102564
7.8
2009
-‐7.02247191
2.631578947
-‐3.3
2008
8.868501529
2.702702703
3.8
2007
21.11111111
2.777777778
9.5
2006
-‐14.01273885
2.857142857
6.7
2005
0.964630225
2.941176471
7
Data obtained in JAPUS, cut-off score in Poly are calculated by the following method.
The cut-off score is the total score of all of your HKAL/AS and GCEAL/AS subject attainments
using the scale of A = 5, B = 4, C = 3, D = 2, E = 1 and applying a weighting factor of 0.6 to AS
subject attainments. For subjects with repeated attempts, the best grade is counted. A ratio of
GCEAL/AS subjects to HKAL/AS subjects is also applied.
(The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 2010)
Table four Linear Regression analysis on relationship between admission score on quantitative
finance and GDP
Table six
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Score | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
GDP | .9357552 .2356898 3.97 0.017 .2813755 1.590135
_cons | -4.043099 1.581963 -2.56 0.063 -8.435331 .3491333
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chart 1
Hang
Seng
Index
35,000.00
30,000.00
25,000.00
20,000.00
15,000.00
10,000.00
Hang
Seng
Index
Linear
(Hang
DATE
Seng
Index)
8
y
=
0.9349x
-‐
4.0399
6
R²
=
0.7973
4
2
0
-‐4
-‐2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
-‐2
-‐4
-‐6
-‐8
Year-‐on-‐year
changei
in
nominal
GDP
Chart three
Economics
y
=
0.3441x
-‐
0.3391
10
Admission
score
R²
=
0.1432
8
6
4
2
0
-‐4
-‐2
-‐2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
-‐4
-‐6
Year-‐on-‐year
change
in
Nominal
GDP
Chart four
IBBA
6
y
=
0.1452x
-‐
3.0449
4
R²
=
0.02619
Admission
Score
2
0
-‐4
-‐2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
-‐2
-‐4
-‐6
-‐8
Year-‐on-‐year
change
in
Nominal
GDP
v
Chart five
Medical
Studies
y
=
0.54x
-‐
1.153
R²
=
0.09118
20
Year-‐on-‐year
change
in
nominal
GD{
15
10
5
0
-‐4
-‐2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
-‐5
-‐10
Year-‐on-‐year
change
in
admission
score
Chart six
R²
=
0.43103
20
10
0
GDP
change
-‐4
-‐2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Linear
Trend
Line
-‐10
-‐20
-‐30
Year-‐on-‐year
changei
in
nominal
GDP
Chart seven
Scatter
on
Quantitative
Finance
in
UST
y
=
1.2079x
-‐
4.136
R²
=
0.20337
30
Admission
Score
20
10
0
-‐4
-‐2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
-‐10
-‐20
Year-‐on-‐Year
change
in
nominal
GDP