This paper adopts a qualitative approach to study the perceptions of six secondary teachers from two schools with a similar background and history of school-based management (SBM). The study aims to explore the views of the teachers in the following areas: changes in school administration and the structure of the school under SBM; changes in the role of teachers and the activities of the Parent-Teacher Associations; the challenges facing principals; and teachers' worries and concerns under SBM. The study is significant as it supplements the limited number of researches on the roles of teachers and principals under SBM in Hong Kong. As serving teachers now play increasingly important roles in schools and work closely with their principals in administrative and educational matters, they can provide invaluable insights into the new era of change.
[Copyright of Educational Studies is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03055690600631085]

This article contains an analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data about the perception of both parents and school personnel on parents' participation at different levels of school activities. Findings indicated that most of the school personnel demonstrated unwelcome attitudes towards parent involvement and parents themselves did not like to become school managers either. Both of them expressed the intention of separate responsibilities in school management. It is recommended that schools should develop a school-based strategy to promote home-school cooperation. Besides, there is a need to establish parent schools to educate parents in their rights and responsibilities in participating in school education.
[Copyright of School Effectiveness and School Improvement is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/sesi.10.4.551.3488]

Leadership style has always been a controversial topic in educational administration and management. Following the recommendation of the Education Commission to introduce school-based management (SBM) into Hong Kong schools in the early 1990s, discussions about the kind of leadership style that is appropriate for SBM schools have never ceased. The government holds a continuing belief that SBM schools work better if they are managed by "better" principals, and emphasises the value of "transformational leadership." However, this paper articulates the limitations of that leadership style and argues for complementing it with "educational leadership," which purports that principals have an obligation to learn with others about ways of promoting student learning. Secondly, the staff should also be encouraged and helped to carry out certain leadership functions. These arguments are supported by references to the most relevant literature. The discussion is useful to school principals, leaders, and teachers by offering them a better understanding of how to facilitate the implementation of SBM.
[Copyright of Asia Pacific Journal of Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02188790600937292]

Preparation for school leadership has become a major global educational issue since the late 1990s. In Hong Kong, the establishment and implementation of school-based management in the 1990s have made significant demands on principals. In 1999, a leadership development and training programme for serving and aspiring principals was initiated by the Government of the Special Administrative Region, after visits to and study of similar programmes in England, Scotland, Australia (State of Victoria) and Singapore. In 2002, further suggestions were made to draw up a framework for principals' training in Hong Kong. With an adapted evaluation framework, and based on the evaluation findings of a principals' training programme developed by a tertiary institution in 1998, this paper attempts to give answers to: (1) why do serving principals attend principals' training programmes? (2) what sort of training programme do principals regard as useful? (3) are the findings consistent with the proposals of the Government? (4) do training programmes bring about changes in attitudes and behaviours of principals? The paper concludes with recommendations for (1) and (2).
[Copyright of School Leadership & Management is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13632430410001695796]