Innovation in pedagogy by technology integration in kindergarten classroom has always been a challenge for most teachers. This design-based research aimed to explore the feasibility of using Augmented Reality (AR) technology in early art education with a focus on the gains and pains of this innovation. A case study was conducted in a typical kindergarten in Hong Kong, with a class of four- to five-year-old children (N=30) and their class teacher, ICT teacher as well as two parent volunteers. A series of art education activities using AR was designed and implemented in the class. Effectiveness of the activities was evaluated through a triangulation of semi-structured interviews with teachers, principal and parents, and surveys administered to children. The results indicated that (1) all the children could design, control and interact with the animated objects generated by the AR application; (2) all the stakeholders interviewed were supportive of this pedagogical innovation and (3) the principal, teachers and parents were concerned about the side effects of using AR in early childhood education. Possible improvements and implications to AR-based art education were also addressed.
[Copyright of Early Child Development & Care is the property of Routledge]

This paper, through discussion of a teaching intervention at two secondary schools in Hong Kong, demonstrates the learning advancement brought about by group work and dissects the facilitating role of teachers in collaborative discussions. One-hundred and fifty-two Secondary Two (Grade 8) students were divided into three pedagogical groups, namely "whole-class teaching", "self-directed group work" and "teacher-supported group work"groups, and engaged in peer-review, team debate, group presentation and reflection tasks related to a junior secondary science topic (i.e. current electricity). Pre- and post-tests were performed to evaluate students' scientific conceptions, alongside collected written responses and audio-recorded discussions. The results indicate that students achieved greater cognitive growth when they engaged in cooperative learning activities, the interactive and multi-sided argumentative nature of which is considered to apply particularly well to science education and Vygotsky's zone of proximal development framework. Group work learning is also found to be most effective when teachers play a role in navigating students during the joint construction of conceptual knowledge.
[Copyright of International Journal of Science Education is the property of Routledge]

Increasingly, the importance of reflexivity has been acknowledged in higher education research. In this paper, I reflect on my experience of researching lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) university students in Hong Kong. The focus is not on the findings that emerge from the in-depth interviews conducted per se, but on the methodological reflections of the research process itself. Particularly, I focus on the notion of ‘vulnerability’ in the qualitative research literature which suggests that some study topics are particularly sensitive and some interviewees are especially vulnerable. I argue that because LGBT students in Hong Kong live under the governance of family biopolitics and the colonial legacy of religious dominance in secondary education, they are subjected to enormous social pressure to reject or conceal their LGBT identities. In that sense, they can be conceived as vulnerable interview subjects. However, LGBT students, especially those who are in the closet, redefined the interview as an occasion to ponder their identity struggles, and to release problems and worries that in everyday life they can share with no one. For some LGBT students, knowing of the very existence of the research itself and participating in the research were empowering. The LGBT students had the capacity to shape the meanings of the interview, thus, they were far from being completely vulnerable. Quite unexpectedly, I found myself as a researcher in a relatively vulnerable position, feeling emotionally overwhelmed by the research and feeling guilty of not doing ‘enough’ for the LGBT students. This paper argues that although researchers need to continue to pay attention to the ethics of conducting culturally sensitive research, the vulnerability of some interview subjects should not be overestimated. Otherwise researchers risk further silencing the voices of those who are already socially marginalized. I also contend that qualitative research should acknowledge researchers’