Since 1997, Hong Kong's reintegration with China has been founded on the principle of 'One Country, Two Systems', which serves to guarantee the sustainability of the capitalist system in Hong Kong under the rule of the socialist motherland. This paper is an intra-cultural and inter-regional comparative study of the curricula of two systems (socialist and capitalist) under one country, using the junior secondary History curricula in Shanghai and Hong Kong as a case study. In addition to tracing the differences and similarities, divergences and convergences in the junior secondary History curricula of the two systems, the paper also generates proposals for the future improvement of History education in both cities.
[Copyright of Comparative Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006042000274836]

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]

The literature on postcolonialism covers a diverse set of geographic areas, cultures, timeframes, and economic and political circumstances. Within the context of this literature, this article focuses on two territories which underwent colonial transition right at the end of the twentieth century, and moved not to sovereignty but to reintegration with their motherland. Language in education systems has long been recognized not only as a very significant indicator of power relations in societies but also as a very important instrument for continuity and/or change. Hong Kong's education sector is a complex arena for language, in which English, Cantonese and Putonghua each play different and changing roles. Macao's education sector has all of these factors plus additional complexities arising from the place of Portuguese. The article notes various paradoxes in the ways that patterns developed in Hong Kong and Macao in the initial postcolonial period. It identifies lessons not only from comparison between Hong Kong and Macao, but also from comparison of experiences in the territories as a pair with experiences in other parts of the world.
[Copyright of Comparative Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006042000231365]

Hong Kong's school history curriculum is unique worldwide in that it consists of two entirely separate subjects--'History' and 'Chinese History'--which differ not only in content, but also in terms of their pedagogy and their assumptions concerning the nature of history as a discipline. The distinct subject of 'Chinese History' was first created in the 1950s, largely in response to the colonial government's desire to limit the politicisation of local schools. However, there was subsequently little interference by the government in the development of curricula for the 'two histories'. The pattern of curriculum development for history in Hong Kong over the past few decades does not support conventional theories concerning the impact of colonialism on education. On the contrary, it suggests that the relationship of colonialism to curriculum development may in Hong Kong's case be better understood in terms of a mutually convenient collaboration between the government and local educational elites.
[Copyright of Comparative Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050060120103865]

It has been a global trend, since the 1980s, that the process of marketisation has been influential in the decision making of social policies around the world, and that this tidal wave is now crossing over to the Asia–Pacific region as well. Education policy, as one of the important social policies for many developing countries, has been influential in the forefront of national development in terms of manpower training, as well as in other arenas of economic and social developments. In this way, these countries are trying to improve the quality of their educational services so that they can be more competitive in order to cater for the demands in the international markets. One of the outcomes of this global trend is the international quality assurance movement in streamlining the educational institutions as well as in using different coping strategies to promote quality education for all concerned. For the Chinese mainland, it seems that the central government is adopting a policy of decentralisation in getting local governments to use multiple channels of resources and other methods to provide for their own educational services. Hong Kong as a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of China, however, has adopted quite a different approach by employing the principle of managerialism in order to enhance its competitiveness in providing quality education to meet the increasing market demands. Hence, the present study is to compare and contrast the educational reforms and coping strategies that have been adopted by the socialist mainland, on the one hand, and the capitalist Hong Kong SAR, on the other hand, in order to face this new challenge of marketisation.
[Copyright of Comparative Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050060020020417]

Personal and social education has become an important area of development in education in Hong Kong. Given that much of the literature on personal and social education is Anglo-American or European, what is the influence on the largely Chinese settings in Hong Kong? This paper will examine some of the debates of what constitutes personal and social education. The significance of competing contexts in the development of personal and social education will be analysed in detail. Comparisons will be made between Western and Chinese (especially Confucian) views on personal and social education. Attempts will be made to come up with a notion of personal and social education which is suitable for the Hong Kong context
[Copyright of Comparative Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050060020020435]

Greater China is an umbrella term used to cover Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau. This article reviews the evolution of comparative education in these four societies, noting major forces which have shaped the field. The article observes and comments on similarities and differences within the four societies. It has been prepared as a response to the millennial special issue of the journal, and notes some lessons and contributions from the field in Greater China to the global field 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/10.1080/03050060120091256]

This article attends to comparative education scholars' calls for more dialogue on the contribution of theory to comparative education research. It first presents the results of a review of a small sample of articles from comparative education related journals that elicited the purposes of their comparative research strategies in terms of exploration, explanation, argument, prediction, recommendation, and theory development. The article then discusses perspectives on the potential for the use of theory to contribute to richer explanations of educational phenomena. Finally, it demonstrates how a comparative study of political socialization in Hong Kong and Mainland China led to the development of explanatory concepts of critical thinking and the application and reconceptualization of the theory of resistance to explain the formation of students' attitudes towards the nation.
[Copyright of Comparative Education is the property of Routledge. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050060500073215]