Art education in Hong Kong has undergone various changes in response to educational reform. In art assessment, a major change in the Hong Kong New Senior Secondary (NSS) Curriculum is the inclusion of art criticism as a compulsory component of the new public examination. Assessing students’ abilities to interpret art in an art criticism public examination context is a critical issue in Hong Kong because the new senior secondary curriculum and assessment has brought attention to the role of written language in the art examination paper. This means the examination assesses not only students’ abilities to interpret art, but also their language abilities required to respond to art in written form. Since this new mode of assessment of art criticism has been published a number of issues have appeared. Recent studies show that teachers and students perceive this development negatively and they believe that the written format will assess students’ written language abilities rather than their critical abilities. These findings challenge the justification of the new art assessment policy and raise questions about the role of written language in responding to art. This article aims to raise the issue of the marriage between language and art criticism in the Hong Kong public examination context. It argues and examines the relationship of language to art interpretation, reasoning in the assessment, and issues in the public art criticism examination context. The issues addressed in this article provide opportunities for researchers and policy makers to reconsider and refine the new form of examination.
[Copyright © 2017 The Author. Ijade © 2017 NSEAD/John Wiley & Sons Ltd.]

Hong Kong has been implementing a policy of assessment for learning to counter-balance the strong, high-stakes, summative, and examination-oriented practices of the territory. While the purposes teachers have for various classroom assessment tasks are devoted to this learning premise, their views are bounded by the social expectations of assessment for accountability. This paper reports on a study of the types of assessment tasks used by four primary school curriculum leaders, the nature of assessment for learning in Hong Kong primary school context, and their views of how the tasks could support learning improvement in the accountability era. Results indicate that, consistent with official policy, “improvement” was the dominant reason for using the eight assessment tasks discussed in interviews. However, these tasks also met the functions of “accountability,” consistent with the dominant use of assessment in the Chinese context. It appears that assessment for learning in Hong Kong practice is still bounded by the need to demonstrating school quality through the preparation of students for examinations, which raises questions about the policy’s validity. This paper concludes with factors that hinder a formative learning practice and recommends some follow-up strategies under this improvement-accountability tension.
[Copyright © 2017 Education Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.]

This paper examines to what extent and how the data and results of PISA have been used for various education stakeholders and to what extent PISA affect educational policy and practices in Hong Kong. From the point of view of the government, PISA has played an important role in supporting and legitimising government educational reform since 2000. It has supported curricula frameworks and to some extent development and reform from the philosophical and educational viewpoints. However, the mass media and general public seldom went beyond ranking to look at other variables that might inform policy with the exception of some researchers and curriculum developers. Nonetheless, considerable effort has been expended by key researchers in Hong Kong in disseminating information about PISA prior to and after the administration of each assessment and in sharing the Hong Kong results, through such means as press conferences, seminars, international conferences, research and professional development. Experience from the case of Hong Kong suggested that, by keeping international assessment low stake but making good use of it to inform different stakeholders and initiating teacher professional development could be a cost-effective tool to drive educational reform. However, there is a tendency of overuse or abuse of international assessments by making international assessment high stakes, which might create unnecessary pressure for participating schools, teachers and students.

An introduction is presented which discusses various articles within the issue on topics including countries participating in large-scale assessments in education on education policy, Programme for International Student Assessment in Hong Kong, and development of regulatory interventions.

This paper reports a case study of four project schools in the primary school context of Hong Kong. It has investigated how teachers who were assigned subject panel head's and curriculum leader's roles perceived the student assessment reform and how they experimented with new assessment strategies in the school policy and classroom practice. The major focus of the paper lies on how these teacher leaders expressed their understanding of student assessment reform in classroom practice. The main discussion of findings shows the perception of these teacher leaders on student assessment reform, how they put their ideas of formative assessment into practice, and in addition, the challenges they faced in the reform process.
[Copyright © 2015 Illinois State University.]

促進學習的評估是香港教育局委托的小班教學研究顧問，劍橋大學Professor Galton提出的，六個提升小班教學效能的原則之一。工作坊目的包括：(一)透過活動，讓老師從做中體驗三種評估學習模式的分别：對學習的評估(Assessment of learning)、作為學習的評估(Assessment as learning)及促進學習的評估(Assessment for learning)。(二)分享中、英、數、常四科應用促進學習的評估的教學設計。(三)介绍適合人腦學習(Brain-based learning)的促進學習的評估教學活動。