In recent years, both Singapore and Hong Kong have been ranked top in international education rankings. They are widely admired as high-performing education systems (HPES) and, not surprisingly, among the best education systems in the world. The success stories of Singapore and Hong Kong education have aroused widespread attention internationally among different stakeholders, such as policymakers, researchers and practitioners, to investigate if it is possible for their policies and practices to be learned and borrowed by other countries. In this article, we stress the importance of context in understanding policy phenomena and possibilities for policy transfer. The Singapore and Hong Kong education systems are facing critical issues such as the economization of education, educational disparities and the paradigm shift from meritocracy to parentocracy. How well they deal with these policy issues will determine if their present international standing continues into the future. This article provides a critical review of their education policies to explore how these policies can be refined and adjusted in order to cope with the challenges facing both education systems.
[Copyright of Infancia Y Aprendizaje is the property of Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis Ltd. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2018.1434043]

University education has been thrust into the limelight by policymakers in Hong Kong and Singapore in recent years. Reforming university education thus has become a norm for both city-states. This article reviews and compares some recent developments in the university reforms in both city-states. It argues university education, as a public policy area, is not immune from the profound influence of such concepts as accountability, performativity, quality assurance and market relevance, which prevail in a wider policy context of public sector reforms and governance changes. Hong Kong and Singapore's university reforms are similarly extensive, ranging from the admission mechanisms through to the governance and funding systems. This article has four main sections. The first sketches a paradigm shift in the policymaking process and the changing state-university relationships in the age of globalization. The second reviews and compares some recent developments of the university reforms in both city-states. The third turns to assess the impacts of the reforms on university stakeholders. The final section is the conclusion.
[Copyright of Higher Education Research & Development is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0729436032000083625]