Economics cram-school tutor Kevin Ko (高式卡)* has commenced defamation proceedings in the High Court against the makers of a film entitled Trick or Cheat (愛出貓), in which a character (alleged to resemble Ko in name and appearance and who is likewise dubbed “King of Tutors”) engages in a sex-for-exam-questions deal with an official from the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority. The lawsuit has been covered by the South China Morning Post (16 October, Page C1) and Mingpao (1, 2, 3 - pages in Chinese).
Much has been written about celebrity tutors in Hong Kong in previous years (The New Paper, WSJ, HK Magazine). More recently, celebrity tutors have received less favourable attention in the form of litigation: earlier this year judgment was handed down in a breach-of-contract claim brought by local cram school King’s Glory against English tutor Karson Fan (commonly known as “K. Oten”). (Consolidated Actions HCA 900 and 945 of 2006, Deputy Judge To, 15 July 2009.)
Regardless of the merits of Ko’s defamation suit, the action has again brought to the fore the questionable, if not downright unscrupulous, tactics common amongst local cram schools. The use of profanity by such tutors (itself parodied in the film) and the extensive advertising (Ko spent $1.5 million between January and September this year) are, no doubt, legal - albeit in extremely bad taste. However, more sinister measures such as the use of video screens to circumvent class-size limitations and the issuing of public (and deeply humiliating) “apologies” to “failed” students are clear evidence that the industry is only focused on pecuniary gain, not students’ interests.
More fundamentally, however, allegations of ethical breaches and sharp practice abound. HK Magazine’s exposé in 2006 noted that local tutors were being less than forthright about their qualifications; there have also been numerous complaints in previous years relating to the leaking of exam questions.
Despite these endemic problems in the industry, there appear to have been few efforts to impose regulation. Ko has gone on record as saying the blame lies with parents who are not checking whether their children are getting their money’s worth; this suggestion is particularly disingenuous in the context of education (where, by definition, the tutors are supposed to know better). In Hong Kong’s highly competitive academic environment, any advantage - real or perceived - is rapidly seized on by anyone who can afford to do so.
Proponents of the recent change in local secondary and tertiary education systems claim that the change in curricula will place greater emphasis on holistic development and reduce the emphasis on exams. While the impact of such changes on cram schools remains to be seen, it seems highly unlikely that the “shadow education system” will be at any risk. As creatures of the market, cram schools will continue to exist for as long as there is demand; in the absence of a major cultural shift in how Hong Kong parents and students view education, do not expect the mugshots of celebrity tutors to disappear any time soon.
* The characters are a homophone of “high-interest credit card” (高息卡), a curiously apt moniker for an Economics tutor. ?
