Amongst all jurisdictions, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China has been one of the most effective in limiting cases of COVID-19, despite being one of the first places to be affected by the pandemic in early 2020. In the months since the first case was confirmed, COVID-19 has affected all aspects of Hong Kong society, including the higher education sector. In this collective reflective essay, we describe the effects of these unexpected external events on academics' lives and the responses of higher education institutions. Specifically, we address the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on academics, their professional relationships, institutional frameworks, and Hong Kong's higher education sector as a whole. We conclude that the most significant effect of the pandemic is uncertainty, together with new realities expressed in sayings such as 'living with Zoom, learning from webinars'; 'you will be informed "in due course"', stay calm "until further notice"'; and 'people are stuck, but business is on steroids'. The essay further describes a three-pronged institutional reaction to the pandemic, focused on control, support, and positioning. It concludes with critical views on the way 'useful' knowledge in today's higher education is defined and how concepts and practices have been challenged during the pandemic. Copyright © 2021 Routledge.

This study explored factors that influence academics to collaborate in research with their doctoral students. It focused on Hong Kong academics, using data from the Academic Profession in Knowledge Society survey conducted in 2017–2018. The study found that academics' research collaboration with doctoral students is influenced by several factors, including research and teaching styles and institutional conditions. Specifically, those academics whose research agendas were characterised by discovery and collaboration were more likely to report working with their doctoral students, whereas those whose research agendas focused more on convergence were less likely to do so. The more legislative the academics' teaching style was, the less they collaborated with their doctoral students. Independence in research and institutional expectations of external funding increased the propensity to collaborate with doctoral students. Academics in the humanities were found to collaborate less with their doctoral students than those in other disciplines. The study suggests that the scholarly preference and styles of the academics, as well as their disciplinary and institutional backgrounds, need to be considered to improve research collaboration between academics and their doctoral students. Copyright © 2021 Springer.

This study assesses how four types of mobility, which are analysed simultaneously, are associated with the current research output quality and visibility of academics working in the city-based higher education systems of Hong Kong and Macau. Transnational educational mobility is associated with the academics' educational path, whilst intrasectoral job mobility, intersectoral job mobility and transnational job mobility are related to their professional careers. The research output, quality and visibility of academics are based on three indicators pertaining to the publications of these academics in international, peer-reviewed and indexed journals: the number of publications, the cumulative SCImago journal rank of these publications (which measures quality from an output perspective) and the citations obtained by these publications (which measures visibility). The results show that different mobilities have different effects on research output, quality and visibility, and that often these effects can be beneficial to one indicator but concurrently detrimental to another. Nested analyses of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM academics, and by sex, offer further insight into the associations of these mobilities with knowledge output and outcomes. Copyright ©Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

This research pioneered the investigation of the role of doctoral students' thinking styles in their program satisfaction and perceived intellectual competence. Participants were 285 STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) students in Hong Kong. Results showed that students' thinking styles as measured by the Thinking Styles Inventory-Revised II (Sternberg, Wagner, & Zhang, 2007) statistically significantly predicted their program satisfaction and perceived intellectual competence as assessed by two of the scales in the newly constructed Graduate Student Survey (Shin et al., 2015)-beyond their gender, program year, and academic discipline. Findings have brought new insights into the assessment of doctoral students' program satisfaction and perceived intellectual competence. At the same time, findings have contributed to the literature on intellectual styles and that on doctoral education in STEM fields. Practical implications of the findings are proposed for STEM doctoral students in understanding their own ways of thinking and program experiences and outcomes, as well as for academics and senior managers in their efforts to enhance students' access to positive program experiences and outcomes.
[Copyright of Journal of educational psychology is the property of American Psychological Association.]

This article explores how the past mobilities of academics affect their current research output (and its multidisciplinarity). Five types of mobility are used simultaneously in the analysis. Field mobility and transnational educational mobility are associated with academics' educational path, whereas transnational job mobility, intra-sectoral job mobility and inter-sectoral job mobility refer to their career path. The analysis is based on a representative sample of academics based in Hong Kong and Macau. Results show that intra-sectoral job mobility (up to a threshold) and transnational job mobility positively affect research output and its multidisciplinarity, whereas inter-sectoral job mobility, field mobility and transnational educational mobility exert slight or no effect. Nested analyses of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM academics as well as experienced and junior academics offer further insight into the roles of these mobilities. Impacts of mobile experience were stronger among junior than senior academics, and in STEM fields than non-STEM fields. The article discusses these findings along with the significance of considering mobilities rather than mobility when analysing academic trajectories and the determinants of academic research production.
[Copyright of Higher Education Quarterly is the property of Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12161 ]

With the processes of inter- and intranationalization, higher education in Hong Kong has been rapidly expanding in an effort to develop the city into a regional education hub. This chapter explores the trends and developments of higher education research (HER) in Hong Kong in the context of inter- and intranationalization. By drawing on the data from the Scopus database, this chapter analyzes a selection of journal chapters on higher education published in Hong Kong over the past three decades. Findings show that a significant growth and some new outputs have been seen in the field during the study period. In addition, local researchers have complied with the rule by forming more transnational and intranational research teams and by conducting more nonlocal studies. Interestingly, many of them have not abandoned local collaboration and studies, but they further developed their roots. These findings reveal that some internal signs of cosmopolitanization have been recorded in the field.