Immediately after the handover of Hong Kong to China, the teaching of Chinese in Putonghua was promulgated by the Hong Kong SAR government as a long-term goal. However, no clear definition and guidance regarding Putonghua instruction has been provided to teachers to facilitate the smooth implementation of this change. A review of the literature indicates that teachers' beliefs have great value in assisting them to make sense of changes and govern their thoughts and behaviours. However, little is known about how teachers' beliefs help teachers to understand the transition to a new medium-of-instruction (MOI). Thus, the aim of this case study is to examine how teachers' beliefs help teachers to conceptualize the Putonghua medium-of-instruction (PMI) and how these beliefs affect their curricular decisions as well as the implementation of PMI. Data were collected from 10 secondary Chinese Language teachers in one school using semi-structured interviews and classroom observations. The findings revealed that since teachers held misconceptions about PMI in the initial phase, the implementation of PMI led to a shift of focus away from Chinese content knowledge. In the second phase, PMI was perceived merely as a code-switching device, and, as a result, only a surface change occurred that appeared unlikely to facilitate effective teaching and deep learning. This paper concludes with the observation that code switching alone is insufficient to achieve a successful transition of MOI if the deeper issue of teachers' beliefs is neglected.
[Copyright of Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2012.746500]

This paper reports on my first-hand experiences of being a 'purist' in Hong Kong, during which time I was not allowed to use mixed code, a common discursive practice among Hongkongers in Hong Kong. I shall discuss the difficulties in using 'pure' English and 'pure' Chinese in my daily life, as well as exploring the problems I encountered when I used 'pure' English in teaching English to a small group of ESL students at a primary school in Hong Kong. I argue that mixed code is very much characteristic of everyday language use by most Hongkongers and represents an important marker of their ethno-linguistic identity. In relation to language teaching, I suggest that mixed code may be usefully adopted in teaching English in Hong Kong, rather than being shunned at all costs.
[Copyright of Changing English: Studies in Culture & Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2010.528875]

This paper proposes to overcome the traditional essentialist and dichotomous ways of conceptualising language and language pedagogies, i.e. to go beyond linguistic purist perspectives. Analysing bilingual teaching practices in a science lesson, the paper proposes that practical bilingual pedagogies can be developed to help students in bilingual education programmes to access dominant linguistic resources and discourses by capitalising on their indigenous linguistic and cultural resources.
[Copyright of Language and Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/le643.0]

Codemixing of Cantonese Chinese and English is a common speech behaviour used by bilingual people in Hong Kong. Though codemixing is repeatedly criticised as a cause of the decline of students' language competence, there is little hard evidence to indicate its detrimental effects. This study examines the use of mixed code in the context of the home setting, school setting and leisure activities. The data are complied from a questionnaire completed by 160 Hong Kong teachers and students. Subjects recorded their awareness of their frequency and purposes of using a mixed code communication style. Results showed that codemixing was frequently used by the subjects. Findings suggested that codemixing performed certain communicative functions and was used for various practical purposes. Codemixing appears to be a customary component of a bilingual society. No matter whether people dislike or prefer it, codemixing continues to exist and satisfy bilingual speakers' communicative needs. Administrative sanctions may not be effective.
[Copyright of International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13670050608668640 ]