1.    What is the nature of this study? This thesis appears to be educationally oriented, yet its precise academic positioning remains somewhat ambiguous. It would benefit from a clearer articulation of its educational framework, particularly through a focused literature review that engages with relevant domains such as life education, educational psychology, and pedagogical theory. A related and important question concerns the relationship between educational concerns and theological inquiry. While the thesis references public theology and the role of the church, it does not sufficiently clarify its objectives within the field of public theology. Specifically, it remains unclear what the thesis seeks to contribute to public theological discourse or how it intends to engage the church’s role in educational praxis.

 

A.    What is the academic nature of this study? Is it primarily an educational-oriented thesis, and if so, how is this reflected in its structure and methodology?

B.    Does the literature review sufficiently engage with educational domains such as life education, educational psychology, and pedagogical theory? If not, how might it be expanded to better reflect current developments in these fields?

C.    How are educational concerns correlated with theological concerns in this study? Is there a clear framework that connects pedagogical insights with theological reflection?

D.    What is the thesis aiming to achieve within the field of public theology? While references to public theology and the church are present, is the intended contribution to public theological discourse clearly articulated?

 

2.     To what extent does the thesis demonstrate adequate gender, cultural, and socio-political sensitivity, despite its emphasis on contextuality?

A.    Given that humility has historically been used to suppress marginalized groups, particularly women, how does the thesis ensure that its advocacy for humility does not inadvertently reinforce such oppressive dynamics?

B.    Why is Confucianism prioritized over other influential Asian traditions such as Buddhism or Daoism in the theological and cultural analysis? What values or assumptions underlie this selection?

C.    How does the thesis account for the socio-political context in which the interviews were conducted—particularly in light of the post-2019 social movement in Hong Kong, the COVID-19 pandemic, and other relevant developments?

 

3.     How does the thesis engage with classical Chinese philosophical frameworks in its treatment of the paradox between humility and courage?

A.    For instance, Mencius discusses the interplay of Ren (benevolence) and Yin (restraint), while Daoism explores the dynamic balance of Yin and Yang. Even the concept of the beginner’s mind in Confucianism reflects aspects of humility. How are these traditions incorporated into the study’s theological reflection?

B.    In what ways does the thesis address the Confucian pedagogical tradition of 傳道 (transmitting the Way), 授業 (imparting knowledge), and 解惑 (resolving doubts)? How are these educational principles reflected in the thesis’s approach to character formation and leadership development?

C.    What is the theological rationale behind the structure of the Delta Triangle Compass? Specifically, why are faith, love, and hope positioned as the foundational virtues, and why is wisdom placed at the apex? How does this arrangement reflect the thesis’s theological and educational priorities?

 

4.     Is the role of the church in character leadership cultivation clearly demonstrated or merely aspirational?

A.    A comment notes that the church’s role is not clearly evidenced. Does the thesis provide concrete examples of church engagement beyond individual Christian actors?