This article investigates the variety of factors that hinder the implementation of play (as defined by western scholars) in Asian preschools. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of policy borrowing, enactment and glocalisation, we analyse three jurisdictions that illustrate distinctive problematics: India, Mainland China and Hong Kong. The methodology involves a bibliographic review. Each jurisdiction is presented as a narrative portrait, including key sociocultural characteristics, features of early childhood education system, role of play in government policies, and teachers’ beliefs and practices pertaining to play. The findings show that the distinctive factors hindering play relate to societal mindsets in India, a lack of curriculum clarity in China, and structural factors and parental pressures in Hong Kong. Common hurdles include a high societal emphasis on academic learning, lack of information on how play should contribute to achieve curriculum outcomes, and insufficient teacher preparation. The authors show that play is neither adequately defined nor justified in some Asian policy frameworks, and argue that play might not be viable in certain preschools (especially in half-day programmes). An alternative glocal notion is proposed – child-led activities – which would be less conceptually problematic and more culturally appropriate. The study highlights the need for the glocalisation of Asian early childhood education systems. Copyright © 2021 The Author(s).

This paper describes Hong Kong’s borrowing, primarily from the UK, of the assessment for learning policy, in the context of prolonged use of formal summative public examinations. The narrative review and analysis are guided by a social positivist critique of the assessment for learning policy in the Hong Kong context. This paper concludes that Hong Kong’s attempts to implement assessment for learning are ambitious but somewhat futile because of persistent use of public examinations for important decision-making. Change in Hong Kong may only happen through a gradual implementation of assessment for learning practices that takes into account cultural, societal, and historic norms. Critical issues are identified and recommendations are proposed for further implementation of assessment for learning in Hong Kong. Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd.

Education reform is increasingly based on emulating the features of world-class' systems that top international attainment surveys and, in England specifically, East Asia is referenced as the inspiration' for their education reforms. However, the extent to which the features identified by the UK Government accord with the situation within East Asia is problematic. This paper examines the relationship between the English representation and the reality' of East Asian education systems, using school autonomy as an illustrative example. We focus on Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai, which are cited extensively to legitimate policies providing greater autonomy for schools in England. We argue firstly that the English representation has been largely discursive and inaccurate; has failed to recognise the variations across the region; and has been selected to endorse the Government's ideological preferences. Secondly, the scope, form and nature of school autonomy vary markedly, and are operationalised in each society in ways reflecting the prevailing sociopolitical priorities.

Background: This paper analyses the role of, and approach to, policy referencing and borrowing in Hong Kong’s recent reforms that culminated in the creation of its New Academic Structure and the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education. Main argument: It argues that Hong Kong has gone further than most jurisdictions not just in responding to global influences on education reform, but in taking explicit steps to internationally benchmark its curriculum and assessment, and in involving the global community at multiple levels in the process of education policy planning and implementation. Sources of evidence and method: The paper is based on the documentary analysis of policy documents in Hong Kong, and 23 interviews with key stakeholders in the policy network, including policy-makers, practitioners and community leaders. Discussion and conclusions: While policy referencing and borrowing in the Hong Kong context can, in part, be traced to a colonial legacy, the Special Administrative Region of China demonstrates a collaborative approach to education reform involving local and international engagement that may be relevant to other systems. Its approach was informed by a measured use of policy referencing that involved ‘horizon scanning’ of other systems’ policies and practices; international benchmarking; and engaging international expertise to facilitate implementation.
[Copyright © 2016 NFER.]