在2012及2015年學生能力國際評估計劃（PISA）考試中，亞洲地區包括上海、香港、新加坡及台灣的學生（平均15歲）的數學能力名列首五名，美國、英格蘭等歐美國家則處於中游位置。從這項考試數據顯示，美、英兩地學生的數學能力不及亞洲地方。硏究顯示，不同地方學生的數學運用差異與身處的學習環境有一定關係；此外，他們如何學習數學、應用數學邏輯亦會影響評估表現（OECD, 2012）。課堂上，教科書是輔助老師教學的主要工具。Nciol & Crepo（2006）指出，教科書對學生數學學習表現有重要影響，亦在教師教授數學時扮演關鍵角色。Stein、Remillard與Smith（2007）研究進一步發現，教科書内容中的排序、組織、焦點會影響數學老師的教學及學生如何學習數學。 因此，本文對照香港、新加坡、美國及英格蘭的初中數學教科書，探討當中異同。透過20多篇探討四地初中數學教科書的文章，檢視學生數學成績差異與教科書編撰的關係。全文將從教科書的課程目的、課題內容、練習題目及使用等四方面分析問題。

Various terms have been used to define civic education (CE) in Hong Kong since the colonial era. This has been particularly true since 2011, when CE has been given many names, causing confusion among educators. Mixed methods were employed to examine teachers’ perceptions of different conceptions of CE expressed as moral, civic and national education. The findings indicate that some teachers might not be able to differentiate among moral education, CE and national education. Most teachers contended that national education should be included in CE, while others believed the opposite. Teachers perceived that moral and civic education was more successful than moral and national education in cultivating students to become ‘good citizens’. Teachers’ comprehension of these terms has policy and pedagogical implications. While the study is set within the context of Hong Kong, the findings are valuable to policymakers and educators in other countries seeking to improve CE.
[Copyright © 2016 British Association for International and Comparative Education.]

The global drive for world-class universities is twinned with a radical movement to create research assessment indicators, and universities have never been pressured as much as today by global rankings. This paper aims to focus on how research assessment exercises have reconfigured the institutional missions of the university in terms of knowledge production, teaching, and service address, by comparing three top research-intensive universities in Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Japan. It critically investigates how far and in what ways academics in the three systems have been pressured to respond to these exercises. The empirical findings show that all the three cases have been affected severely and that Hong Kong universities are the most internationalized and Mainland universities are the most productive in research outputs, as also evidenced in recent QS rankings. The paper argues that the global ranking regime has created a Double Bind for East Asian universities, and has brutally dominated their institutional reconfigurations. To turn the tide, the manipulated emphasis, flawed methodology, and unethical desirability of global university rankings and research assessment exercises should be avoided to help universities healthily and meaningfully focus on real missions to which they should commit themselves. Meanwhile, critical reflections and policy actions are particularly urgent on the indigenousness of knowledge exploration and production by higher education systems in East Asia and other post-colonial contexts. Furthermore, the paper anticipates that the importance of teaching and service will be revitalized in the new stage of East Asian universities, e.g., the Chinese University 3.0.

Education reform is increasingly based on emulating the features of world-class' systems that top international attainment surveys and, in England specifically, East Asia is referenced as the inspiration' for their education reforms. However, the extent to which the features identified by the UK Government accord with the situation within East Asia is problematic. This paper examines the relationship between the English representation and the reality' of East Asian education systems, using school autonomy as an illustrative example. We focus on Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai, which are cited extensively to legitimate policies providing greater autonomy for schools in England. We argue firstly that the English representation has been largely discursive and inaccurate; has failed to recognise the variations across the region; and has been selected to endorse the Government's ideological preferences. Secondly, the scope, form and nature of school autonomy vary markedly, and are operationalised in each society in ways reflecting the prevailing sociopolitical priorities.

An introduction is presented which discusses various articles within the issue on topics including countries participating in large-scale assessments in education on education policy, Programme for International Student Assessment in Hong Kong, and development of regulatory interventions.

本文通過對香港教育與內地教育進行比較,談談香港教育對筆者思考教育的本質產生的啟發,並總結其中可取之處,以期有助於學校教育管理工作的開展。

Since the mid-1980s,a number of East Asian societies have consistently performed well in international tests, and these 'high performing' education systems have emerged as models of 'best practice'. Policy makers in England (as well as some other Western systems) have been keen to reference Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai and South Korea when developing and promoting their own reform agendas. Although Hong Kong has been extensively cited and praised by politicians and their advisers in England local dissatisfaction with the education system has prompted a series of major education reforms. This mismatch between the two policy communities in their perceptions of the strong features of Hong Kong education is explored in this paper using documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews with policymakers and other key stakeholders. We analyse the ways in which features of Hong Kong's education system are reconstructed, used, and manipulated in policymaking in England. We argues that the referencing of Hong Kong is an act of political theatre, reminiscent of a pantomime, a traditional performance built around stereotyped villains and heroes, narratives of good conquering evil, and comical set-pieces that sometimes verge on the farcical.