CAES1000 Core University English

Task 2 Essay Exemplar

This exemplar is adapted from an authentic student script from

the CAES1000 course

Key academic features and suggested areas for improvements are

annotated in the comment boxes

Overall Grade: A range

Topic: Socio-economic background and gender in relation to educational

inequality

WRITE AN ESSAY

TASK DESCRIPTION

Discuss and evaluate the ways in which socio-economic background and

gender contribute to educational inequality in Hong Kong/Hong Kong and a
place of your choice.
Evaluation of the Impacts of Socio-economic Background and Gender in Educational

Inequality in Hong Kong

Hailed as a city with a high degree of civilization, Hong Kong has rolled out various

education welfare benefits for its citizens, including the 12-year free education in public Commented [Author1]: Introductory sentence
establishing background on the important issue of
education in HK.

schools (Ng, 2018). Yet, the measure was only part of the little effort to address educational Commented [Author2]: Correct citation of source
used in this statement.
Commented [Author3]: “Yet” – effective signalling
equality in Hong Kong. Albeit the government has implemented an array of policies to word reflecting the incomplete nature of reforms.
Serves to help establish the topic as complex,
contested, worthy of deeper examination.
Commented [Author4]: “Although [not ‘albeit’] the
eradicate gender inequality, including law and financial subsidies (Ng, 2018), such social government…” offers a concession, i.e. suggesting
that some issues have indeed been addressed…

predicament still persists. In light of this, this essay serves to evaluate the underlying forces Commented [Author5]: …nonetheless more needs to
be done. Note the use of “such” as a referencing
word, recalling the issue of “educational equality”
mentioned earlier. Creates cohesion, the sense of a
leading to educational inequality in Hong Kong - discrepancy in gender and social-economic building argument that is well organized.
Commented [Author6]: Further signposting and
referencing: the foregoing ideas have set up the
status. possibility of a stance to be expressed. Good
cohesion.
Commented [Author7]: Expression of stance plus
the key areas that will be focused upon.

To commence with, gender perception and stereotypical traditional beliefs have confined Commented [Author8]: A weak way to start a
paragraph: avoid this as it adds nothing. Make a
straightforward statement without padding. Could
simply have said: “Gender perception and …”.
students’ decisions in subject selection, especially the subjects with heavy sex-role elements.
Commented [Author9]: Clear topic sentence (TS),
showing the reader what the para will focus on.
Commented [Author10]: Sub-clause here enables the
The phenomenon is particularly prevalent in Science, Technology, Engineering and addition of useful refinements, details, clarifications,
etc. Basic criticality.

Mathematics (STEM) subjects. Chan and Cheung (2018) reported that Hong Kong girls deem Commented [Author11]: Good elaboration here from
the basic topic sentence, giving further refinement and
definition.

themselves inferior to boys due to gender-biased discouragement from their family, teachers Commented [Author12]: Good use of citation to
support the statement in the previous sentence. An
example based on evidence to elaborate the point.
and peers. Females are traditionally regarded as having stronger language capabilities but

weaker mathematical intelligence; the cultural biases implanted on girls’ minds imperceptibly

downplays their confidence in STEM-related realms (Chan and Cheung, 2018). Hence, Chan
and Cheung (2018) pointed out that female students have less chances to choose STEM
Commented [Author13]: Well-constructed sentence
using conceptually related terms to support the topic
sentence (gender-biased, discouragement, traditionally
regarded, cultural biases, downplays confidence – and
‘gender stereotypes’ used later). All this shows the
effective creation of a lexical field which supports
cohesion.

subjects but a greater rate of withdrawing science-related subjects, which could be Commented [Author14]: Needs an ampersand (&)
here, not “and.”
Commented [Author15]: Careful: no need to give the
year for the same source in the same para.
demonstrated by the low participation rates of female candidates sitting in HKDSE Physics,
Commented [Author16]: Signalling word indicating
logical unfolding/implications/ramifications.

ICT and Mathematics (extended modules) examinations. Educational gender stereotypes Commented [Author17]: Good use of sub-clause to
offer further evidence for the statement in the main
clause.

prevail not only in secondary but also tertiary education. According to UNESCO (2017, as Commented [Author18]: Good use of the linking
phrase “not only…but also” to extend the evidence
from schools into universities and this build the
argument.
cited in Chan and Cheung, 2018), students studying education and health-related subjects are
Commented [Author19]: Good use of secondary
citation.

predominantly female. Unequivically, sex-role stereotypes in Hong Kong have pressurized

both genders, deterring students from studying certain subjects and aggravating educational

inequality. Commented [Author20]: Final sentence rounds off

the para and heightens and reiterates its basic
argument. Good structure.

Some believed that the Hong Kong government has been underlining educational equality by Commented [Author21]: Avoid such vague wording
(and get the tense right).

introducing the gender-neutral Technology and Living (T&L) subjects (Convention of
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 2020). Notwithstanding the fact
Commented [Author22]: This TS seems precise – it
looks like we might be focusing on T&L. But as we read
on, does it really reflect the content of the rest of the
para properly?
that T&L offers both boys and girls the same opportunities in Home Economics, Design and

Technology, the impact of gender stereotypes in education materials on educational equality

should not be neglected. The research by Lee and Collins (2010) found that gender Commented [Author23]: OK – but where are we
going now? The TS introduced T&L, but now we have
moved to a different/wider issue not really reflected in
the TS.
stereotyping local textbooks, as well as visual representations, was commonly found. Note
Commented [Author24]: OK, but again how does this
follow from the TS? And indeed, can the writer
integrate this point more effectively into the wider
that the government has not rolled out an official code of practice for educational publishing ecosystem of the essay?

houses to stay aware of their use of sexist language. Even though the Curriculum
Development Council Ad Hoc Committee on Textbook Quality’s Guiding Principles for
Quality Textbooks stated that “the content and illustration do not carry any form of
Commented [Author25]: Again, this sentence is
taking us further into new territory, namely government
guidelines for educational materials – itself an issue
that requires careful criticality… Remember the need
for clear, sequential, elaboration which unfolds the
argument in logically compelling ways and signposts
any changes of direction/concession/clarifications
clearly.

discrimination on the grounds of gender...” (2003, as cited in Lee and Collins, 2010, p.4),

publishers may interpret the non-legally binding guideline in their own way (Lee & Collins,
2010). As gender stereotypes are reinforced in education, the aforementioned phenomenon of
students’ subject selection on the basis of sex-role biases will only persist.
On top of it, another justification deserving our attention is the socio-economic status, which
plays a vital role in educational inequality in all levels of the local education system. Students
from well-off families have a greater chance to receive more advanced quality academic
Commented [Author26]: … and now we have moved
into the area of publishers’ responsibility…where is the
argument going? Doesn’t the quotation suggest there
is no discrimination in textbooks? This is confusing:
make sure you line up your arguments, examples,
source citations and elaboration clearly.
Commented [Author27]: “Education” is too vague a
word considering the odyssey we have been on in this
para, from T&L to government to publishers… The final
sentence tries its best to wrap up the para, but the
organization and focus here have been messy. So in
your writing be careful to carve out a clear focus in the
para, step by step, via a strong TS that reflects what
the para is really about, align your evidence (validly)
to this, and mesh your argument via linking phrases
within your wider stance distributed across the essay.
Commented [Author28]: On the basis of the random
ideas put forward in this para, this conclusion is not yet
proven…
Commented [Author29]: The redundancy here can
be cut – give a clear, straightforward TS: “Socio-
economic status plays…”.

resources and support, thus enjoying more advantages from kindergarten to university (Ng, Commented [Author30]: Better TS, and better
elaboration here.
2018). Grassroots families are not able to seek quality education with limited income, as
proven by their reliance on government vouchers to support their children’s tuition fees for
basic kindergarten education (National Centre on Education and the Economy [NCEE],
2020). As students progress to primary and secondary education, the situation will only get
worse. Wealthier families have more alternatives in selecting schools, including private
institutions under the Direct Subsidy Scheme (DSS) (Lam et al., 2019). With the university
admission rate of less than 20% (Post, 2004, as cited in Ng, 2018), parents favour private
schools inasmuch as they help students secure university seats more easily with quality
teachers who tailor their teaching to students’ needs and abilities (Ng, 2018). Moreover,
biases towards the middle class are found in the HKDSE English curriculum that the
examination assesses critical analysis, which students from the middle class usually perform
better (Ng, 2018). These attributes in Hong Kong’s education system have proven that
students from more affluent families have better access to education, especially the tertiary.
Critics may believe that the government and school’s financial support can alleviate
educational inequality. It is ostensibly true that subsidies like scholarships in DSS schools
and School Textbook Assistance Scheme can provide more learning resources for the
Commented [Author31]: Can a brief but telling
definition be given for what “grassroots families” are?
(Avoid the word “grassroots” in this context – students
tend to misuse it. Say “socially less advantaged” or
“disadvantaged” etc).
Commented [Author32]: If the student adds “[NCEE]”
here, why didn’t s/he do so for the CEDAW citation
above?
Commented [Author33]: Try to be more specific in
this sentence: a phrase such as “As students progress
from….educational inequalities become more
pronounced” offers more precision.
Commented [Author34]: Careful: this citation is not
included in the reference list. Double-check that your
citations match your ref list.
Commented [Author35]: Good elaboration across
these sentences. Generally, criticality is well engaged
in this para: use of evidence, elaboration of ideas,
probing the issues as much as space allows.
Commented [Author36]: Well-constructed para, with
an effective concluding sentence.
Commented [Author37]: Could this TS be stronger
and more focused? Arguably it could be removed
entirely, with the second sentence becoming the TS.
grassroots students (NCEE, 2020), and the government’s university grant loan can ease the

working class’s financial difficulties in receiving higher education. However, unfairness in

educational resource allocation still exists. Regardless of the subsidies, educational resources Commented [Author38]: Effective sentence offering
counter-argument and rebuttal.

that working-class families can afford are incomparable to that of the middle class which

spends thousands of dollars for their children to do additional exercises and attend tutorial

centres for boosting their academic results intensively. HKPISA Centre (2008, as cited in

Cheng, Andrews and Yu, 2011) found that students’ reading performance is highly associated

with parents’ investment in learning resources. The above has exemplified that the financial

support from the Hong Kong government and schools are not enough to eliminate

educational inequality driven by differences in socio-economic background.
To recapitulate, differences in gender and socio-economic backgrounds are the primary
Commented [Author39]: A good concluding
sentence. Could this paragraph have been reduced in
length and combined with the previous one? Arguably,
yes: on its own it is rather thin and seems not so
different in theme from the previous para, nor to offer
much to advance the argument. To remain as an
independent para, more clarity around the differences
between this and the previous one needs to be added.
Organisation and argument issues.

culprits that cause educational inequality. To eradicate such unfairness in education, every

stakeholder should join hands to discard the gender stereotypical beliefs. Meanwhile, the

Hong Kong government should allocate adequate resources to the students from the

grassroots. Many a little makes a mickle – the lofty goal for Hong Kong to launch a fair Commented [Author40]: Definitely avoid cliches,
proverbs, wise saws, at all times. They don’t have a
place in this kind of academic writing.

educational system can be achieved eventually with the concerted effort of the community.
(964 words)

References Commented [Author41]: An almost perfect reference

list in terms of style (but see final entry) - but why is
Lam et al. (2019) not included?.

Chan, A. K. W., & Cheung, A. K. L. (2018). Gender differences in choosing STEM subjects

at secondary school and university in Hong Kong. The Women’s Foundation Hong Kong.

Cheng, L., Andrews, S., & Yu, Y. (2011). Impact and consequences of school-based

assessment (SBA): Students’ and parents’ views of SBA in Hong Kong. Language Testing,

28(2), 221-249.

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

(2020). Article 10: Educational inequality. Retrieved July 31, 2020, from

https://www.lwb.gov.hk/CEDAW/eng/articles.htm

Lee, J. F., & Collins, P. (2010). Construction of gender: A comparison of Australian and

Hong Kong English language textbooks. Journal of Gender Studies, 19(2), 121-137.
National Centre on Education and the Economy. (2020, August 23). Hong Kong: Supporting

equity. https://ncee.org/what-we-do/center-on-international-education-

benchmarking/topperforming-countries/hong-kong-overview/hong-kong-education-for-all/

Ng C. W. (2018). Education for mobility: Factual or fictional? Hong Kong Teacher’s Centre Commented [Author42]: What is missing here?

Journal, 17(2), 99-122. https://www.lwb.gov.hk/CEDAW/eng/articles.html

Overall comments
Criterion 1: Structure

Key elements of structuring are present:

An adequate introductory section establishing the importance and contested nature of the
topic, with a stance and basic arguments given.

A concluding section: not introducing new materials, with a clear summary. Avoid cliches
and proverbs.

Paragraphing (essay form) is well handled, though cohesive phrases across paragraphs would
have added and greater sense of flow.

Topic sentences are mostly well handled here, except in para 3, which is unfocused, and
possibly in paras 4 and 5 which are a little flabby.

Use of linking words / phrases to show relationships within and between paragraphs are
generally present, but this could have been improved in para 3 as indicated.

Appropriate use of aspects of cohesion (pronouns, lexical fields, synonyms, referencing

words, signposting, linking words, etc).

Criterion 2: Ability to express academic arguments

Generally a nuanced stance that acknowledges complexities and counterarguments is given,

but occasionally deeper criticality and nuance could have been engaged (eg para 3) in order
to answer the question more fully.

The stance is generally consistent, and the position is well backed up with appropriate
evidence from a range of quality sources. The citation from sources clearly supports the
stance (except for the direct quotation in para 3, as indicated, which suggests carelessness of
approach).

There are few irrelevancies in the text: almost all information is on topic except again for
some elements in para 3.

‘Clear and concise’: the essay explains concepts so the reader can understand them easily,
and does so in a brief yet comprehensive manner.

The essay offers a position that is not confusing or ambiguous: the meaning is clear, and the
reader can easily understand the position.
Criterion 3: Ability to write grammatically

Grammar: ‘Systematic errors’ (defined as ‘errors made throughout the text rather than just in
isolated places, including the use of subordinate clauses, conditionals, passives, complex
noun phrases, relative clauses, etc’): no systematic errors. The grammar was fluent, flexible,
idiomatic, easily accessible to a reader. The style was appropriate for the academic genre.

Vocabulary: (defined as ‘using a wide range of vocabulary accurately,’ i.e., able to use less
common words accurately, as well as more common words):

Mostly very well handled, articulate, clear, though occasional inappropriately used vocab
(e.g., grassroots, albeit) and spelling (“unequivically,” end of para 2).

Criterion 4. Citation/referencing:

In-text citation is mostly very well handled, but one citation (Lam et al.) is missing from the
reference list. There was inconsistent use of abbreviations (CEDAW, NCEE) and there was a
missing ampersand in para 2.

Ordering of information alphabetically was good in the reference list and the form was good
(except for the minor error of Ng, C. W.).

Page numbers for direct quotations were given, and secondary citation is well handled.