Exploring teachers' attitudes towards research is always interesting. With the Education and Manpower Bureau's policy of introducing the position of Primary School Master/Mistress (Curriculum Development) to local Hong Kong primary schools, to understand the beliefs these curriculum leaders hold onto research - as a means to help schools to reflect upon their strengths and to decide how best to bring about reform in curriculum becomes significant. A survey of 209 PSM(CD)s suggested although people in general favour research in their work, there still reservations. A five-factor model indicated that, on the one hand, the majority of the respondents perceived themselves having ability to do research, valued research for professional development and providing solutions to teaching and learning deficiencies, and found the action research course that they participated useful. On the other hand, they preferred courses focussed on improving their teaching competencies to an action research course. It was shown that while demonstrated research experience and qualification of higher degrees revealed no significant difference in research attitudes, these factors associated positively with their commitment to school, self-efficacy and an internal locus of control. The work contributes to the understanding of how PSM(CD)s feel towards supporting doing and facilitating research for curriculum development in schools.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]

This paper describes a plausible values imputation approach for deriving population estimates on several language proficiency domains. The approach harnessed a multi-dimensional item response analysis combining student responses, rater judgements and student background variables. The target population comprised lower grade primary school students enrolled in the Hong Kong schooling system. The raters were local teachers of English employed within the sampled target schools. The consideration of student background variables in conjunction with student responses and rater judgements facilitated the process of "conditioning" (Reckase, 2002). The primary objective of this research was to impute plausible values for students where no data was provided or where rater data was deemed suspect. By necessity, a secondary objective of this study was to establish rules for justly excluding particular data on the basis of questionable validity. Surveys such as TIMSS, PISA and NAEP have used such "plausible value" methodologies to account for incomplete test designs and person non-response (Beaton & Johnson, 1990; Yamamoto & Kulick, 2000; Adams & Wu, 2002). The point of difference in this study was the use of item response theory (in particular plausible values imputation) to identify and correct for invalid rater judgements in a large-scale educational survey.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]

An outline is given of the context in which The International School Effectiveness Research Project (ISERP) was designed and it is argued that the deficiencies of existing studies and the increased internationalization of education makes the more rigorous approach of ISERP essential. A number of methodological lessons from the study are given, concerning the need for cohort studies, for observational data, for social outcomes data, for mixed methods, and for multiple indicators. The substantive lessons of the study for a strong technology of education, for a taken for granted in educational discussions within cultures, for societal support of education within cultures, and for a radical intellectual orientation are given.
[Copyright of Educational Research & Evaluation is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13803610600874026]

After sketching in the background for conversation generally about theoretical and methodological issues in comparative education and more specifically about its historical dimension, the author seeks to identify theories that, despite widespread eclecticism and even support for atheoretical standpoints, appear influential, together with characteristic forms of historical analysis. With these preliminaries as a basis, he analyses strategies for clarifying the historical dimension. This leads him to focus both on the units/levels of comparison and on three structures that can be used for this purpose: the familiar (narrative) forms of diachronic analysis, the more in-depth approaches opened up by synchronic analysis, and hybrid forms. The article also recognizes and explores problems associated with the use of the historical dimension, emphasizing those related to sources, interpretation, and periodization, while illustrating these problems and their possible solutions with specific examples from Hong Kong and elsewhere in the world. The article concludes by reaffirming the importance of the historical dimension of comparative education.
[Copyright of Comparative Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050060500073231]