The paper discusses the current school curriculum of Hong Kong with reference to the education development in our society, to generate a thesis about the direction of education. The methodology includes: (a) documentary analysis of curriculum reform documents, key education policy documents and policy documents. (b) Interview with 5 experienced teachers on the teaching job and student learning. Content analysis was performed based on triangulating the data. Some findings are gathered: (a) the “Learning to Learn” (CDI, 2000) curriculum was only too passively reactive to the current globalization tide, in which competition, productivity, and efficiency (OECD, 1998; Wallerstein, 1979; Zajda, 1998) are the values. It identified a standard “global outlook” (CDI, 2001) our future young generation should model to cope with the challenges of the 21st century. (b) the curriculum connected harmoniously with the traditions of Hong Kong education, which was commented as “predominantly a highly utilitarian means to economic and vocational ends” in a external review (Llewellyn, 1982). When the curriculum reform was in full swing, the auditing systems were in place to transform school into an economy activity. This paper reexamines education and how we can respond to lead our future towards the goal of education, but not globalization.

Following the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, the new government set out an ambitious programme of educational reform. Following extensive community consultation, reforms to both basic education and senior secondary education were set out and programmed over a ten year period starting in 2001. The school curriculum was the centre piece of this reform agenda with proposals for a more integrated curriculum, more engaging teaching strategies and assessment processes that focused on learning rather than testing. A new approach to senior secondary education extended six years of schooling to all students. The reform agenda was post-colonial in nature but also sought to develop a curriculum that would support Hong Kong's role in the emerging knowledge economy. The reaction of schools to this agenda has not always been supportive. Yet there is some evidence that change is being made and teaching and learning in Hong Kong schools has been affected by the reform agenda.
[Copyright © National Institute for Compilation and Translation].

The New Senior Secondary Education (NSSC) curriculum will launch in 2009 under the new 334 academic structure of secondary school education in Hong Kong. The NSSC is intended to eliminate the backwash effect of public examinations and for the re-planning of human capital for the future of Hong Kong (EDB, 2005a; SAR, 1997, 2000). On the other hand, education of Hong Kong has been criticized as elitist, and Hong Kong culture was described as “survival, affluence and deliverance” (Chan, 1993). Very often, a curriculum reform proposal may not be carried out as it is intended because of the predominant values of a society that resists the reform ideas. The NSSC policy portrays an interesting curriculum decision making process which allows school the flexibility in the subject selections and the allocation of study time on various study components in the curriculum framework. According to a recent report (EDB, 2005B), the visions and goals of the NSSC were well supported by different stakeholders; however, reservations were also expressed on the proposed details of implementation on many aspects. Taken this as an inquiry point, this study attempts to understand how teachers think about the NSSC, and to further explore the overriding values behind the views of teachers on the intended curriculum blueprint. Interview data of 14 senior school teachers were collected. The findings suggested that teachers’ receptiveness to NSS were driven by predominant values on achievement and success, elitist model of curriculum conceptions, concern of school prestige, and teachers’ self interest. An interesting them emerged from the ideas on education. When they were asked about questions on the implementation level, teachers tended to shift to a utilitarian perspective that deviates from their own mission but assimilates with the employers’ expectations and fulfills their self interest. Implications are drawn on the role of government on curriculum policy making and implementation to ensure