The day that secondary school graduates dread the most is approaching once again—the 2025 Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education (HKDSE) results are set to be released on 16 July. On 12 July, Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn Hon-ho attended the 21st ‘Never Give Up Alumni Association HKDSE Results Release Cheering Conference 2025’, where she encouraged participants not to entertain extreme thoughts and emphasised that society should support diverse career choices. She stated: ‘Often, when our media interview top scorers, they all unanimously say they plan to study medicine, prepare to become engineers, or enrol in law. I personally don’t think that’s ideal. It’s not that Hong Kong doesn’t need doctors or the professionals mentioned earlier, but I feel it’s too uniform—this is just my personal view. I’m really looking forward to the day when media interview top scorers and they say they want to become a great chef, or pursue stage design, or become a singer, or work in radio’, rather than everyone aspiring to be doctors or engineers.’
However, this year’s 16 HKDSE top scorers are bound to disappoint Secretary Linn once more! Hong Kong still adheres to the notion that ‘all pursuits are lowly; only studying medicine is exalted’. Whether from traditional elite schools or more low-key secondary schools, nearly all top scorers intending to pursue further studies in Hong Kong indicated in media interviews that they would enrol in medicine at the University of Hong Kong or the Chinese University of Hong Kong. The only ‘exception’ also chose the highly medicine-related veterinary programme at City University of Hong Kong. The number aspiring to become chefs was zero. Among those planning to study in the UK, although none selected medicine as their university choice, not a single one hoped to pursue the culinary arts, stage design, music, or communications mentioned earlier by Secretary Linn—they either opted for economics or natural sciences.
Heep Yunn School top scorer Ho Wai-ying responded to Secretary Linn’s remarks by saying that the careers mentioned by the secretary were interests she could pursue outside her profession, in her spare time; having worked so hard to achieve good results, she ‘cannot let interests influence subject choices’. Why does she harbour the misconception that being a chef falls ‘outside the profession’ and is merely ‘amateur’? It’s hard to say. However, about two years ago, the Civil Service Bureau advertised for a Grade II Chef position to prepare ingredients and cook meals for Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu, his family, and visiting guests. The requirements were highly professional—at least nine years’ experience as a chef in large households, major catering establishments, or hotels, with expertise in Chinese and Western cuisines—but the salary was rather ‘amateur’—ranging from HK$30,870 to HK$35,775 per month, far below that of a doctor. When the ‘high-salary upwardly mobile class’ is seen as the group ‘contributing to society’, while young people on ordinary wages are often derided as the ‘lying flat’ generation, why is it the top scorers choosing medicine who need to reflect and change, rather than the societal elites who control resource allocation and economic structures? Another top scorer, Wong Ka-yeung, believes that society ‘should not criticise or offer too many opinions’ on top scorers’ choices for further studies.