The New Senior Secondary Education (NSSC) curriculum will launch in 2009 under the new 334 academic structure of secondary school education in Hong Kong. The NSSC is intended to eliminate the backwash effect of public examinations and for the re-planning of human capital for the future of Hong Kong (EDB, 2005a; SAR, 1997, 2000). On the other hand, education of Hong Kong has been criticized as elitist, and Hong Kong culture was described as “survival, affluence and deliverance” (Chan, 1993). Very often, a curriculum reform proposal may not be carried out as it is intended because of the predominant values of a society that resists the reform ideas. The NSSC policy portrays an interesting curriculum decision making process which allows school the flexibility in the subject selections and the allocation of study time on various study components in the curriculum framework. According to a recent report (EDB, 2005B), the visions and goals of the NSSC were well supported by different stakeholders; however, reservations were also expressed on the proposed details of implementation on many aspects. Taken this as an inquiry point, this study attempts to understand how teachers think about the NSSC, and to further explore the overriding values behind the views of teachers on the intended curriculum blueprint. Interview data of 14 senior school teachers were collected. The findings suggested that teachers’ receptiveness to NSS were driven by predominant values on achievement and success, elitist model of curriculum conceptions, concern of school prestige, and teachers’ self interest. An interesting them emerged from the ideas on education. When they were asked about questions on the implementation level, teachers tended to shift to a utilitarian perspective that deviates from their own mission but assimilates with the employers’ expectations and fulfills their self interest. Implications are drawn on the role of government on curriculum policy making and implementation to ensure

Liberal Studies will be a core subject in the new senior secondary curriculum to be implemented in 2009 in Hong Kong. The subject is very new to many pre-service and serving teachers who will be taking up teaching in this subject specialty. The present study is intended to be an exploratory one, with the aim of learning about how pre-service teachers majoring in Liberal Studies in a Postgraduate Diploma in Education programme offered by a local university make decisions when planning for lessons in the subject. The findings show that three factors played a key role in these teachers’ instructional decision making – disciplinary backgrounds, curriculum considerations, and considerations of how to represent knowledge for students. The findings will contribute to an understanding of the professional learning needs of Liberal Studies teachers.

這項研究是以活動理論這一重要前提來設計的。2005年4月香港一所改革試點學校的一群小學教師運用該理論來發展課程領導。他們組建了3個課程開發團隊，並在一個實行扁平式領導的情境中，人為控制組員資質和領導階層，以保持內在的張力，目標是調查教師參與課程決策受上下級關係、角色和領導風格等人為因素影響的程度。在對數學和國文課程團隊的面談以及錄影帶診斷會作出分析後，我們發現兩個人為因素，也就是顧問風格和領導風格對教師參與課程決策具有不同的影響作用。

香港於回歸後，特區政府在課程方面推行多項改革措施，學者亦積極探討該些課程政策。近年，以軟、硬政策概念來分析這些新課程政策的性質，也引起一些關注。研究者嘗試從學校政策制訂者的角度，了解學校如何理解新課程，如何制訂應對措施。研究在三所小學進行。研究發現，學校政策制訂者對新課程的「軟」、「硬」性質有不同的理解；而且，他們為學校決定課程方向時，實取決於其對這些理解。

自2000年的課程改革以來，香港政府在課程方面採納了「軟」政策，取代了殖地時期以立法為根據的「硬」政策。在「軟」政策的實施當中，政府以實質可觀的資源，提供各種人力、物力讓學校採用，期望協助學校實施各種校本革新，達致整體的課程改革要求和效果。理論上，「軟」政策應該很受教師歡迎，最少，教師可以藉著「軟」政策下的資源改善教學的環境、提升課堂教學的質素和效果、並發展自己的專業能力；但實際上，教師對「軟」政策所提供的支援卻不樂觀，他們所理解的「軟」政策，與「硬」政策其實只是一線之差。本文就以「學會學習」課改為背景，並以三所小學作為個案，從教師的層面與角度探討課程的「軟」和「硬」政策。

幼兒教育素被視為終身學習與全人發展的一個重要基礎，它的重要性亦在香港的教育改革中被認定。為了確保幼稚園的課程質素，教育局等政府部門印製了不同的文件以供老師參考，這些課程文件反映出政府對幼稚園課程的期望在這些年來是一致的。本文分為兩個部分，並嘗試從三種廣義的課程觀去分析上述文件：第一部分是以經典的泰勒式課程觀去分析；第二部分是以施瓦布的實用性課程觀去討論。最後，我們將從批判的視角出發評論這些文件。
Early childhood education has long been recognised globally and locally as significant in laying the foundations for lifelong learning and all-round personal development. The same recognition is prominent in the education reform proposals of Hong Kong. To facilitate kindergarten teachers to design quality curricula, several government bodies issued curriculum related documents to serve teachers as guidelines. A study of these government-published materials reveals a degree of consistency among them in terms of what the government expects of the kindergarten curriculum, despite the fact that their publication spans the two decades 1984 to 2006. This paper, divided into two parts, attempts to analyse the aforementioned documents from three broad, multiple curriculum perspectives. The first part will cover the categories and questions inherent in a Tylerian perspective. The second part will cover the notion of Schwab's practical perspective and associated curricular "commonplaces" (teacher, student, subject matter and milieus) (Reid, 2006), which address related pedagogical questions such as what, when, how, why, to whom, and by whom (Heydon & Wang, 2006). Finally, we shall offer some comments from critical perspectives.
[Copyright of Hong Kong Teachers' Centre Journal is the property of Hong Kong Teachers' Centre at http://www.edb.org.hk/hktc]