本文旨在探討香港新高中通識教育科的校本課程由誰來決定。本研究在2010年的暑假進行，透過半結構性的訪談以探索不同中學發展通識課程所採取的策略。研究者發現校長在通識科的課程決策上佔主導地位，通識科主任才是正真的課程領導，而科任教師多扮演追隨者的角色。 This paper aims to explore the position of different stakeholders in the development of the New Senior Secondary curriculum of Liberal Studies. This research was conducted in the summer of 2010 to investigate the curriculum development strategies used by different schools. It is found that subject panel heads are the authentic curriculum leaders even though school principal is the core person who makes the final curriculum decisions in school. Teachers prefer to act as the followers and often play passive roles. Copyright © 2011 華東師範大學.

課本是教育系統中的重要環節，也是重要的教學內容、系統知識的組織、課程與教學間的連結。然而，香港對課本的探討仍然不足，課本的品質亦有待提升。本文嘗試評析教育局在香港課本編審機制中的作用。全文主要分為兩部分，首先會探討教育局在課本編審機制中的作用，然後提出加強教育局作用的建議。本文作者認為，教育局在課本編選機制中扮演非常重要的角色；然而，除維持現有角色外，教育局也應與其他相關的組織配合以及統籌與課本有關事宜，進行更多的課本研究，以及研究優化編審課本的機制。Textbooks, crucial in educational systems, consist of essential teaching materials and represent the organization of systematic knowledge and the bringing together of curriculum and teaching. Hong Kong, however, needs to carry out more research of textbook and to improve the quality of textbooks. This article discusses the roles of the Education Bureau in textbook editing and selection mechanism and suggests ways to enhance those roles. The authors confirm that the Education Bureau plays crucial roles in the textbook mechanism. We suggest, however, that in addition to its present roles, the Education Bureau should cooperate with other relevant organizations to coordinate textbook affairs, conduct more textbook research, and strive to improve the textbook mechanism. Copyright © 2010 國家教育研究院.

香港推行校本課程剪裁計劃，目的是將其課程作適當的剪裁，以切合學業成績稍遜學生的需要。1994年9月，共十間中學參加試驗計劃，結果顯示計劃確能使學業成績稍遜學生獲益。試驗計劃成功協助錄取大量成績稍遜的學生，是在於採取了三方面的策略：1.調整課程內容，重新鞏固學生學習基礎；2.改善教材、教法，切合學生的需要；3.重視提高學生的學習動機。本文透過課程剪裁計劃，反思香港教育及課程改革的規模是否過大，以致未能集中處理學與教的問題。 Copyright © 2008 華東師範大學.

教科書是教育的重要環節，聯繫教學內容、系統知識、課程與教學、學習評估。香港教科書編審和選用的機制，雖然一直引發大量爭議，但探討其機制的文章不多。本文將評析教育局在教科書編審機制的特質。教育局在編審過程中，對特定項目加以控制，如編寫內容、編寫取向、價格因素等；然而，對部分項目則容許自由編寫，如附加內容、教學活動、撰寫篇幅等。出版商為爭取通過評審，獲得更大市場份額，需要滿足教育局的要求和學校教師的口味。在選用過程中，學校需要建立選用教科書的方法，經教師商議選用，但教育局未擬定教師選用準則的嚴格標準，教師選擇具有彈性。筆者認為，香港教科書編審和選用的機制中，教育局的取態經常徘徊於控制與自由之間。Textbook, linking teaching content, system knowledge, curriculum and teaching, and assessment for learning, is an important part of education. Although the mechanism for reviewing and selecting textbooks in Hong Kong has always caused a lot of controversy, there are not many articles inquiring into the mechanism. This article analyzes the features of the textbook review mechanism of the Education Bureau. During the review processes, the Education Bureau, on the one hand, controls specific issues such as contents, teaching approaches, and pricing matters. It, however, allows freedom in other issues such as supplementary contents, teaching activities, length of writings. Textbook publishers, aiming to gain greater market share, need to meet the requirements of the Education Bureau and the desires of school teachers. In the selection process, schools need to set the procedure of textbook selection and allow teachers to select textbook. The Education Bureau, however, has not issued rigid standards for the selection and allows flexibility for teachers’ choice. The author believes that the Education Bureau often hovers between control and freedom.in the textbook review and selection mechanism. Copyright © 2019 香港中文大學.

過去十多年，海內外學者曾深入探討「課程」和「教學」這兩個概念。整體而言，有提倡教學包含課程，有認為課程包含教學，有主張課程與教學並列，亦有較積極的學者建議把課程和教學整合。然而，學者在探討時主要是從概念出發，分析兩者的關係。本文目的是從學者的文章，探討他們對「課程」與「教學」的理解，並檢視兩者的差異。本文分三部分，首先概述學者對這兩概念的看法，接着從學者的文章判斷他們理解這兩個概念的差別，最後提出結論。本文發現，「課程」與「教學」各有關注點。筆者認為課程探討的範圍較教學的廣泛。「教學」重在探討學習者和教師，集中在課室層面；「課程」重在探討教育內涵的形塑問題，涉及不同層面，較集中在制度層面、地區層面、學校層面。During the past ten years, scholars have inquired into the concepts of “curriculum” and “teaching” with great efforts. In general, some scholars advocate teaching embodying curriculum, some regard curriculum embracing teaching, and some suggest that they are parallel concepts with close relationship. A few scholars proactively integrate “curriculum” and “teaching,” aiming to provide a better understanding on their relationships. However, the discussions of these scholars are only conceptual ones without research elements. This article aims to inquire scholars’ understanding of the two concepts through their actual usage and to distinguish the differences between the concepts. The article consists of three parts. First, it summarizes the scholastic views on these two concepts. Then, it identifies the differences between these concepts from their application by scholars. Finally, concluding comments will be made. This article finds that scholars have different concerns when using “curriculum” and “teaching.” The authors regard the inquiry of curriculum as having a broader scope than the inquiry of teaching. Whereas “teaching” focuses on the inquiry of learners and teachers at the classroom level, “curriculum” focuses on the inquiry of shaping education content at various levels like the system level, the regional level, and the school level. Copyright © 2010 香港中文大學 CUHK .

課程研究範式一直備受學者關注。在這一問題上，一些學者建議應綜合運用量性課程研究範式和質性課程研究範式，以彌補單一課程研究範式的不足。本文旨在探討整合兩種課程研究範式的建議，同時提出整合時必須關注的事項。在探討這一建議之前，本文首先簡介不同的課程範式，並分析量性和質性研究範式的差異。本文對整合兩種課程研究範式的探討圍繞三方面展開：（1）質性和量性本質的綜合；（2）建構實在論的可行性；（3）研究內容的性質。筆者認為，整合兩種課程研究範式極具吸引力，但是卻難於處理基本哲理的差異。The paradigms of curriculum research have been the major concern of many researchers. Some researchers suggest the integration of quantitative and qualitative curriculum research paradigms for supplementing each other. This article aims at discussing the suggestion on their integration. First, the article gives a brief introduction of curriculum paradigms, and analyzes the differences between quantitative and qualitative research paradigms. Then, it will discuss the integration of the two research paradigms in three aspects: (a) integrating the essence of qualitative and quantitative research; (b) the feasibility of constructive realism; and (c) the nature of research content. The article concludes that it is an attractive attempt to integrate the two paradigms, but it is hard to deal with the differences between their basic philosophies. Copyright © 2012 香港中文大學 CUHK .

2001年，香港課程發展議會發表《學會學習：課程發展路向》，開啟全面和影響深遠的課程改革。2014年，課程發展議會、香港考試及評核局、教育局檢視學會學習的實施後，發表《基礎教育課程指引─聚焦•深化•持續（小一至小六）》，以更新課程指引；新指引除回顧過去14年之實施成果外，亦補充舊課程指引之不足。本研究為回應教育局之小學課程指引，分為兩部分︰一、檢視課程改革的成效；二、分析課程改革受局限之根本問題。簡言之，香港課程改革歷經十多年，獲得一定成效，但仍存在不少的隱憂。從課程改革進展報告、質素保證視學報告、學校周年報告和國際研究報告，皆顯示課程改革取得不錯的成果。然而，學生雖在國際評量中表現優異，但承受著極大的學習和考試壓力；教師雖在課程改革和教學實踐中努力不懈、表現卓越，但仍面對沉重的工作壓力。香港課程改革要持續、有效地實施，亟需加強利害關係者之能量建構。In 2001, Hong Kong started a comprehensive and massive impacted curriculum reform through introducing the Learning to Learn. In 2014, Curriculum Development Council, Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, and Education Bureau introduced the Basic Education Curriculum Guide: To Sustain, Deepen and Focus on Learning to Learn (Primary 1-6) to review the progress and achievements since the Learning to Learn curriculum reform. The Basic Education Curriculum Guide emphases for the ongoing curriculum renewal and updating over the past 14 years. This paper aims to review and discuss the Basic Education Curriculum Guide in 2014. The article is divided into two parts. First, it examines the effectiveness of curriculum reform. Second, it highlights the fundamental problem of curriculum reform in Hong Kong. In precise, even though the curriculum reform is more remarkable in Hong Kong over the last decade, it still challenged with a lot of impacts. The curriculum reform progress report, the quality assurance inspection report, annual school report and the international research report all show that the achievements of curriculum reform have been observed. However, students are pressed by course workload and examination pressure even their performance has been impressive in international assessments. Teachers always work hard in curriculum reform and teaching practice with exhibited outstanding performance. Nevertheless, the reform has led the intensification of teachers’ workload. Sustained and effective implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong depend on capacity building of difference stakeholders