Using confirmatory factor analysis this study examines the cross-cultural generalizability of the factor structure for the Inventory of School Motivation (ISM), an instrument based on Personal Investment theory. The instrument consists of eight different scales with 43 survey items (ranging from 3 to 7 items each) and each reflecting one of eight specific dimensions: task, effort, competition, social power, affiliation, social concern, praise, and token. The factor structure was invariant over large samples of responses by Anglo-Australian (n=2,616), Migrant Australian (n=1,265), Aboriginal Australian (n=906), Hong Kong Chinese (n=697), Navajo (n=1,776), Anglo-American (n=884) and African (n=819) cultural groups of high school students. The results of factorial invariance analysis indicated that the ISM has a stable and reliable factor structure among the 7 cultural groups. Findings also provide evidence that the ISM scales are applicable to students of different cultural backgrounds; meaningful cross-cultural comparisons should use the 43 items in educational settings.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]

The twin policy domains of accountability and autonomy have featured in recent education reforms in many countries, signalling new relationships between governments and educational institutions. Despite different national and localised contexts, a number of common 'global' trends have been identified. However, simultaneously context-specific differences are also evident. For us, the concept of 'globalisation', when it implies policy homogenisation, is too blunt an instrument to critically analyse these major reforms. We would argue that there are still too few studies on globalisation processes grounded in detailed examinations of particular historical times and geographical spaces. Our research is located within the tensions between global commonalities and localised differences.
This paper reports research on changing accountability and autonomy in higher education in three 'Asian' countries. Empirical data has been collected in the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong and Singapore in an attempt to begin to redress a 'Western' hegemony in such research. Within each national context two different types of universities became case study sites for the analysis of both commonalities and differences in accountability and autonomy policies and practices. The current paper focuses in particular on the conceptual and methodological framings of the research and presents some preliminary findings.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]

Second language acquisition has social and psychological perspectives. The success of second-language learning depends very much on how a learner is motivated to learn the second language. Motivation is the central element in Gardner's Socio-Educational Model (Gardner, 1985). Factor analysis illustrated four major constructs: Integrativeness, Attitudes toward the Learning Situation, Motivation, and French-Language Anxiety (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1993). Intergrativeness was considered as the most important factor in explaining the language learning motivation (Csizér, Dörnyei, 2005). Language learning is culturally based, and people speaking the same language would quickly identify themselves from people speaking other languages. It is assumed in Gardner's model that if a learner identifies him/herself as a member of the second language group, he/she would have higher motivation to learn the language. In the language-learning context, the attitudes toward language situation, and the anxiety perceived in language class and language use environments affect the learner's persistence in language learning. The present paper tries to identify factors pertinent to the learning of English as a second language in Hong Kong and Sydney, Australia. Path modelling will be used to determine the relative contribution of English language motivation, language anxiety and Attitudes toward English learning.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]

Since the '50s, the once highly unified culture is now fragmented, leading to a variety of cultural derivatives, such as mainland Chinese culture, Hong Kong Chinese culture, Singaporean Chinese culture and Malaysian Chinese culture. Although still called Chinese culture, they have their distinctive forms. Communities like the mainland Chinese, the Hong Kong people, the Chinese Singaporeans and the Chinese Malaysians differ considerably from one another in such cultural aspects as behavioural approach, thinking mode, mental attitude and vocabulary. This paper examines some features of major Chinese-background discourses in Asia with a particular focus on educational aspects and issues.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]

Different and at times contradictory descriptions exist in the literature about the ways in which Asian students approach their learning. While educators with experience in teaching Asian students perceived them as passive, dependent, uncritical, and more prone to rote learning than western students, researchers who investigated empirically the learning approaches of Asian students held that these students were neither more oriented towards a surface approach nor less inclined to use a deep approach than western students. Differences in cultural characteristics and conceptions have bee proposed to account for Asian students' learning practices and to explain the discrepancies in views about Asian students. However, there is not much empirical research on comparisons of the learning behaviours of students from different cultures. This paper reports on a study that explores and compares the learning beliefs and practices of university students from a Chinese (Hong Kong) and a western (Australian) culture. Comparisons between the students were made on: the relative frequencies with which they reported using the learning behaviours; the frequencies with which they used the behaviours in different learning situations; their use of similar behaviours across various situations; and their preferences for particular types of learning behaviours. The results showed that the Australian and the Hong Kong students were similar in the relative frequencies with which they reported using the various behaviours and in what they reported to engage in most and least frequently in the various learning situations. However, they were different in the frequencies with which they reported using specific learning behaviours, particularly when spending their leisure time. These results suggest that educators should pay more attention to both similarities and subtle differences between students from different cultures or countries, rather than assuming that students from certain cultures or countries

Over the past several decades of research, consistent differences in academic achievement among students of various racial groups and of different nations have been well-documented. More recent models in accounting for cross-national differences in academic achievement centered on the importance of cultural values (Chen & Uttal, 1988; Stevenson & Lee, 1990). Chen, Stevenson, Hayward, and Burgess (1995) advocated that cultural values and beliefs would be important antecedents affecting students' motivation and learning behaviour, subsequently lead to the academic achievement.
Hau and Salili (1996) asserted that: "Cultural values of collectivism and emphasis on hard work, effort and perseverance have important implications on Chinese achievement orientations. There is some converging empirical evidence from a number of researches suggesting that Chinese are learning goal oriented and attribute their performance more to their effort than to their ability" (p. 129). Based on these speculations, it appears that cultural values such as collectivism and individualism may have influence on the motivational orientations adopted by the students. Recent researches on achievement goals had identified two goals: learning goal and performance goal. There are quite a number of researches that linked achievement goals and the learning strategies/cognitive engagement endorsed/spent by the students. Nolen's (1988) study implicated that task orientation (learning goal oriented) was positively correlated with use of strategies requiring deep processing of information. Greene and Miller's (1996) study had its significance in identifying that performance goals are positively correlated with shallow cognitive engagement. Kong and Hau's (1995) study implicated learning goal orientation is more adaptive in Chinese students. Therefore, with respect to the above findings, converging and significant conclusion can be drawn that achievement goal orientations have direct influences on the learning