The present paper tries to identify the social and psychological factors that motivate students to have better performance in English as a second language, and to postulate a theoretical model subsuming these socio-psychological variables to explain and predict the performance in English as a second language for Hong Kong students in Australia. Gardner (1959) hypothesized that students would have higher performance in the second language performance if they exhibit the desire to learn the second language in order to integrate themselves with the target culture than when they exhibit the desire to learn the language for pragmatic reasons. The perceived status of language affects the use of and attitude toward a language. Giles, Bourhis and Taylor (1977) defined Ethnolinguistic vitality as structural characteristics such as socio-economic status, demographic representation and institutional support pertinent to a language. Smolicz, Hudson and Secombe (1998) described multicultural policies of Australia as a solution to the dilemma of reconciling the immigrants' love of their homeland and its culture and their desire to adapt to the overarching Australian framework. 247 students of ethnic Chinese in Sydney metropolitan area who were studying in weekend Chinese schools (age 8 to 16 with mean age of 10.1) and 628 Hong Kong students who were studying in primary and secondary schools (age 8 to 16 with mean age 10.5) were sampled. Path analysis was used to determine the relationship between the performance of Chinese and English with ethnolinguistic vitality, motivation, attitudes and use and class anxiety in the learning of English.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]

When Hong Kong was returned to the sovereignty of China by the British in July 1997, the new Hong Kong SAR (Special Administrative Region) Government announced the 'Biliterate and Trilingual' policy for all schools. Hong Kong students of this generation are expected to be proficient in both written English and Chinese, and speak fluent English (the international language), Cantonese (the vernacular language) as well as Putonghua (the national language of the PRC). To find out the attitudes of secondary school students towards these three languages, a questionnaire study was conducted with 134 senior secondary students. Given also the important relationship between social class, achievement and language attitudes (Schumann, 1976; Gibbons, 1984; Gardner, 1985; Siu, 1988; Lee, 1998), this paper compares the language attitudes of two main groups of Hong Kong students, namely the middle-class elite and the working-class low-achievers. The findings showed that the former group was more inclined to use English while the latter group the vernacular Cantonese. Despite this difference, both groups of students held generally positive attitudes towards the three languages.
[Copyright of Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434630108666428]

This article examines colonial language policies and practices at the government Central School, Hong Kong - the so-called Eton of the East - in the second half of the nineteenth century. The article, which draws on a range of unpublished primary sources, seeks to enhance our knowledge of an important episode in Hong Kong's educational history and, in so doing, illuminate our understanding of British attitudes towards the learning and use of English in the empire. The article is divided into three main sections. The first section analyses the nature and purposes of the scheme to 'centralise' government-sponsored English teaching in a flagship school in the early 1860s. The second section investigates the roles of the English and Chinese languages in the colonial curriculum and the approaches to the teaching of English adopted by the school's founding Headmaster, Frederick Stewart. The final section examines the reform of the Central School in the late nineteenth century.
[Copyright of Language and Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/le744.0]