Teachers, policymakers and project learning: The questionable use of 'hard' and 'soft' policy instruments to influence the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong

Teachers, policymakers and project learning: The questionable use of 'hard' and 'soft' policy instruments to influence the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong

• Fok, Ping Kwan Chinese University of Hong Kong
• Kennedy, Kerry J. Hong Kong Institute of Education
• Chan, Jacqueline Kin Sang Hong Kong Institute of Education

International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, 5(6), 1-14, 2010

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

2010

• F 教與學
  • FA 一般教學方法、各種施教方法
• M 教師與教師教育
  • MG 教育工作人員之身份認同、態度與意見
• R 教育政策與管理
  • RC 教育規劃及決策程序、教育體系行政
• R 教育政策與管理
  • RE 學校內部管理、學校與家長之關係

Curriculum Development Educational Change Foreign Countries Program Implementation Teacher Attitudes Public Officials Teaching Methods Elementary Secondary Education Student Projects Active Learning Educational Assessment Surveys Educational Policy Hong Kong

• Hong Kong

• 1997.7 onwards

• 小學教育
• 中學教育

• View Full Text 全文連結

Following the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region developed wide-ranging curriculum reforms, including project learning. A recent survey has indicated that over 80% of Hong Kong primary and secondary schools have adopted project learning as a curriculum task. Such an outcome is hard to reconcile both with the culture of Hong Kong schools and the generally bleak picture that pervades the literature on educational change.In seeking an explanation for this apparent success we focus attention on the policy instruments that were used by government agencies to facilitate the process of implementation. Our analysis revealed that teachers were caught in a pincer movement that involved voluntary activities promoting project learning and coercive measures that monitored and evaluated successful implementation. Teachers' views of these policy instruments differed markedly from those of policymakers. This confluence of mixed approaches, while apparently successful, is also shown to be problematic. Finally, the paper is located in a theoretical framework with its origins in recent policy theory that to date has not been applied to educational contexts.
[Copyright of International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership is the property of Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Access via Directory of Open Access Journals: http://journals.sfu.ca/ijepl/index.php/ijepl]

• 英文

期刊論文

• 15555062

https://bibliography.lib.eduhk.hk/tc/bibs/7a4ff0d6

2011-01-20