Follow-up on Requests Nos. 153/2026 and 154/2026 — Information on Training Courses, Quality Assurance and Collaborative Projects
Dear Access to Information Officer,
Thank you for providing information in response to my requests made under the Code on Access to Information (Request Nos. 153/2026 and 154/2026).
The Education Bureau stated that 65% of the funding spent was used for science teachers to attend short courses, seminars and workshops related to AI-assisted teaching, while the remaining 35% was used for collaborative projects between schools and tertiary institutions or professional bodies.
To better understand the specific content, quality management and subsequent application of these two categories of activities, I would like to request the following information that has not yet been provided.
1. Training course content and Continuing Professional Development recognition
The Bureau has provided the proportion of expenditure used for training and the total number of participating teachers. However, it has not specified which courses the teachers attended, the duration of the courses, or whether the training was formally recognised as teachers’ Continuing Professional Development.
Please provide:
A list of the short courses, seminars and workshops funded under this scheme, including:
course title;
course provider;
main content;
date of delivery; and
duration or number of training hours.
Whether the above training activities counted towards teachers’ Continuing Professional Development (CPD) hours. If so, please provide the number of recognised hours and the applicable recognition criteria.
Whether the above training activities counted towards the requirement set out in the Blueprint for Digital Education Development in Primary and Secondary Schools that teachers complete at least 30 hours of digital education training in each three-year CPD cycle. If so, please provide the relevant recognition and record-keeping arrangements.
If the Bureau did not collect or does not hold a complete course list, information on course duration, or CPD recognition records, please state this explicitly.
The Education Bureau’s website separately lists courses and learning resources related to AI literacy for secondary schools:
https://www.edb.gov.hk/en/edu-system/pri...
Please confirm whether a similar centralised course list or information page exists for courses funded under this scheme. If so, please provide the relevant link.
2. Course selection and quality assurance
The Bureau previously stated that tertiary institutions have their own quality assurance mechanisms. However, it has not explained whether the Bureau applied common approval requirements or quality standards when participating schools selected training courses.
Please provide:
Any list of recognised or recommended courses and course providers supplied by the Bureau to participating schools. If no such list exists, please state this explicitly.
The criteria, guidelines, minimum requirements or quality indicators that schools were required to follow when selecting courses and course providers.
Records or documents indicating which parties were responsible for reviewing and monitoring course content and teaching quality, including the respective responsibilities of the Bureau, participating schools, course providers and any other bodies.
Whether the courses were covered by any existing Education Bureau quality assurance framework for teacher training, CPD or related activities. If not, please provide any separate framework or guidelines adopted for this scheme. If neither an existing nor a scheme-specific framework was applied, please state this explicitly.
The Education Bureau’s Blueprint for Digital Education Development in Primary and Secondary Schools proposes strengthening teachers’ digital education training and using the enhanced School Development and Accountability framework to drive school improvement:
https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/edu...
Please provide any records indicating whether the management and evaluation of courses under this scheme were aligned with the teacher-training requirements and the School Development and Accountability framework referred to in the Blueprint. If so, please provide the applicable indicators, frameworks or documents. If not, please provide the alternative framework adopted for this scheme, if any.
3. Collaborative projects and their specific outcomes
The Bureau stated that 35% of the funding spent was allocated to collaborative projects between schools and tertiary institutions or professional bodies. However, no information has been provided on the content or outputs of these projects. It is therefore unclear what specific outcomes the collaborations have produced.
Please provide:
The existing list of collaborative projects, including:
project title;
participating school or schools;
collaborating institution or professional body; and
main project content.
The intended deliverables for each project and the deliverables submitted as of the latest available date.
The criteria or guidelines used by the Bureau to review, assess or accept project deliverables.
If the Bureau does not hold a project list, deliverable records or review criteria, please state this explicitly.
4. Publication and continued use of teaching resources
The Bureau stated that some schools had developed teaching examples or resource packages and had organised open lessons or classroom demonstrations. However, it has not indicated whether these outputs were reviewed, made available to other schools, or continued to be used after the relevant activities were completed.
Please provide:
A list of the teaching examples and resource packages submitted, together with any existing links through which they can be accessed online.
Whether the content and quality of these outputs were reviewed by the Education Bureau, the Science Education Section or any other body. If so, please provide the relevant review criteria or guidelines.
Whether recordings of the open lessons, classroom demonstrations or related activities were uploaded to the Education Bureau’s website, Hong Kong Education City, YouTube or any other platform. If so, please provide the relevant links.
Whether the Bureau holds any existing data on the number of views, downloads, adoptions or instances of reuse of these resources by other schools or teachers. If so, please provide the relevant records.
If there is currently no central publication platform, quality review mechanism or record of continued use, please state this explicitly.
This follow-up request seeks only records and documents currently held by the Education Bureau. It does not require the Bureau to create new statistics, conduct new analysis or formulate a new policy position.
If consolidated information is unavailable, please provide any existing lists, guidelines, forms, reports or other relevant records. Any personal data may be redacted where necessary.
Where the requested information is held in tabular form, please provide it in Excel, CSV or another machine-readable format where practicable.
Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to receiving the Bureau’s response in accordance with the Code on Access to Information.
Yours faithfully,
Morant Xu
Thank you for your e-mail. This message is an acknowledgement of receipt
of your e-mail. Your e-mail will be forwarded to the responsible officer
for processing/reply. (This message is generated by Auto Reply System)
Education Bureau Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 本局現確認收到你
的電郵。你的電郵會轉至有關負責人處理/回覆。 (以上訊息由自動回覆系統發出)
香港特別行政區 教育局謹覆
Dear Mr/Ms Xu,
Code on Access to Information
Application No. 153/2026 and No.154/2026
I refer to your follow-up enquiries under the Code on Access to
Information (the Code) received by the Education Bureau (EDB) on 10
October 2026.
Your request is now under processing. According to paragraph 1.16 of the
Code, we will inform you of the latest progress of the case separately on
or before 30 October 2026.
For enquiries relating to the Code, please contact the undersigned at 2892
6121.
Yours sincerely,
(Miss Leah CHAN)
for Secretary for Education
-----Original Message-----
From: [1][ATI #1662 email]
<[2][ATI #1662 email]>
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2026 1:29 AM
To: EDBInfo/EDB <[3][Education Bureau request email]>
Subject: 公開資料要求資料要求 - Follow-up on Requests Nos. 153/2026 a—d
154/2026 — Information on Training Courses, Quality Assurance and
Collaborative Projects
Dear Access to Information Officer,
Thank you for providing information in response to my requests made under
the Code on Access to Information (Request Nos. 153/2026 and 154/2026).
The Education Bureau stated that 65% of the funding spent was used for
science teachers to attend short courses, seminars and workshops related
to AI-assisted teaching, while the remaining 35% was used for
collaborative projects between schools and tertiary institutions or
professional bodies.
To better understand the specific content, quality management and
subsequent application of these two categories of activities, I would like
to request the following information that has not yet been provided.
1. Training course content and Continuing Professional Development
recognition
The Bureau has provided the proportion of expenditure used for training
and the total number of participating teachers. However, it has not
specified which courses the teachers attended, the duration of the
courses, or whether the training was formally recognised as teachers’
Continuing Professional Development.
Please provide:
A list of the short courses, seminars and workshops funded under this
scheme, including:
course title;
course provider;
main content;
date of delivery; and
duration or number of training hours.
Whether the above training activities counted towards teachers’
Continuing Professional Development (CPD) hours. If so, please provide the
number of recognised hours and the applicable recognition criteria.
Whether the above training activities counted towards the requirement set
out in the Blueprint for Digital Education Development in Primary and
Secondary Schools that teachers complete at least 30 hours of digital
education training in each three-year CPD cycle. If so, please provide the
relevant recognition and record-keeping arrangements.
If the Bureau did not collect or does not hold a complete course list,
information on course duration, or CPD recognition records, please state
this explicitly.
The Education Bureau’s website separately lists courses and learning
resources related to AI literacy for secondary schools:
[4]https://www.edb.gov.hk/en/edu-system/pri...
Please confirm whether a similar centralised course list or information
page exists for courses funded under this scheme. If so, please provide
the relevant link.
2. Course selection and quality assurance
The Bureau previously stated that tertiary institutions have their own
quality assurance mechanisms. However, it has not explained whether the
Bureau applied common approval requirements or quality standards when
participating schools selected training courses.
Please provide:
Any list of recognised or recommended courses and course providers
supplied by the Bureau to participating schools. If no such list exists,
please state this explicitly.
The criteria, guidelines, minimum requirements or quality indicators that
schools were required to follow when selecting courses and course
providers.
Records or documents indicating which parties were responsible for
reviewing and monitoring course content and teaching quality, including
the respective responsibilities of the Bureau, participating schools,
course providers and any other bodies.
Whether the courses were covered by any existing Education Bureau quality
assurance framework for teacher training, CPD or related activities. If
not, please provide any separate framework or guidelines adopted for this
scheme. If neither an existing nor a scheme-specific framework was
applied, please state this explicitly.
The Education Bureau’s Blueprint for Digital Education Development in
Primary and Secondary Schools proposes strengthening teache’s’ digital
education training and using the enhanced School Development and
Accountability framework to drive school improvement:
[5]https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/edu...
Please provide any records indicating whether the management and
evaluation of courses under this scheme were aligned with the
teacher-training requirements and the School Development and
Accountability framework referred to in the Blueprint. If so, please
provide the applicable indicators, frameworks or documents. If not, please
provide the alternative framework adopted for this scheme, if any.
3. Collaborative projects and their specific outcomes
The Bureau stated that 35% of the funding spent was allocated to
collaborative projects between schools and tertiary institutions or
professional bodies. However, no information has been provided on the
content or outputs of these projects. It is therefore unclear what
specific outcomes the collaborations have produced.
Please provide:
The existing list of collaborative projects, including:
project title;
participating school or schools;
collaborating institution or professional body; and main project content.
The intended deliverables for each project and the deliverables submitted
as of the latest available date.
The criteria or guidelines used by the Bureau to review, assess or accept
project deliverables.
If the Bureau does not hold a project list, deliverable records or review
criteria, please state this explicitly.
4. Publication and continued use of teaching resources
The Bureau stated that some schools had developed teaching examples or
resource packages and had organised open lessons or classroom
demonstrations. However, it has not indicated whether these outputs were
reviewed, made available to other schools, or continued to be used after
the relevant activities were completed.
Please provide:
A list of the teaching examples and resource packages submitted, together
with any existing links through which they can be accessed online.
Whether the content and quality of these outputs were reviewed by the
Education Bureau, the Science Education Section or any other body. If so,
please provide the relevant review criteria or guidelines.
Whether recordings of the open lessons, classroom demonstrations or
related activities were uploaded to the Education Bureau’s website, Hong
Kong Education City, YouTube or any other platform. If so, please provide
the relevant links.
Whether the Bureau holds any existing data on the number of views,
downloads, adoptions or instances of reuse of these resources by other
schools or teachers. If so, please provide the relevant records.
If there is currently no central publication platform, quality review
mechanism or record of continued use, please state this explicitly.
This follow-up request seeks only records and documents currently held by
the Education Bureau. It does not require the Bureau to create new
statistics, conduct new analysis or formulate a new policy position.
If consolidated information is unavailable, please provide any existing
lists, guidelines, forms, reports or other relevant records. Any personal
data may be redacted where necessary.
Where the requested information is held in tabular form, please provide it
in Excel, CSV or another machine-readable format where practicable.
Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to receiving the Bureau’s
response in accordance with the Code on Access to Information.
Yours faithfully,
Morant Xu
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[6][ATI #1662 email]
[7]https://accessinfo.hk/change_request/new...
[8]https://accessinfo.hk/help/officers
-------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[ATI #1662 email]
2. mailto:[ATI #1662 email]
3. mailto:[Education Bureau request email]
4. https://www.edb.gov.hk/en/edu-system/pri...
5. https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/edu...
6. mailto:[ATI #1662 email]
7. https://accessinfo.hk/change_request/new...
8. https://accessinfo.hk/help/officers