本文從台灣特殊教育立法的進程和內容,反思現行香港特殊教育立法的情況,並獲得以下九項啟示:1.儘快訂定特殊教育立法的時間表;2.加深及擴展特殊教育立法的層次;3.列明有關特殊教育的具體條文;4.增加特殊教育的經費,並列明特殊教育經費的比率;5.明訂特殊教育教師的任用資格及聘用流程;6.重新檢視及列明特殊學生鑑定和安置的內容;7.延伸及擴展特殊教育的服務對象;8.訂立罰則及特殊教育的申訴機制;9.加入本地特殊教育發展的具體條文。This paper reviews the process and contents of the legislation of special education in Taiwan and discusses its implications on the current legislation situation for special education in Hong Kong. The review reveals the need for nine actions. 1. To set up a time table for the legislation of special education in Hong Kong as soon as possible 2. To refine and expand the levels of legislation 3. To list out the specific clauses of legislation 4. To increase funding for special education and list out the ratio of funding5. To clearly lay down the employment qualifications of special education teachers and the recruitment procedure 6. To review and lay out the details for the identification, and placement of students with special educational needs 7. To extend and expand the service targets for special education 8. To set up terms of penalty and a complaint mechanism for special education and 9. To add specific clauses for the development of special education in Hong Kong.
[Copyright of 香港特殊教育期刊 is the property of 香港特殊教育學會有限公司. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
https://sites.google.com/a/seshk.org.hk/seshk-org-hk/c_publication]

This paper looks at the evolving trend of government influence on schools and education across the world, and asks what is happening in Hong Kong in both mainstream and special education. Recent evidence would suggest that in many countries governments are starting to question the efficacy of current policies and practices. The challenge is for the Hong Kong government to reduce its quasi influence, and for teachers to begin to self-examine the efficacy of their teaching practices in terms of meeting the needs of each and every student in their classroom. There appears to be a conflict of interest between the needs of the state and the needs of the classroom. If teachers were to be given more responsib1ility for the learning progress of each student, rather than simply the overall progress of groups of students, current pedagogical practices would require a major paradigm shift. 本文就全球不斷進展的趨勢,檢視各國政府政策對學校及教育的影響,並探討香港主流教育與特殊教育的現況。最新資料顯示,不少國家的政府已開始懐疑現行政策及實踐的成效,香港政府要面對的挑戰,是如何減少它在形式上的影響及如何令老師開始自我審視在處理個別學生需要教學方法的效益。事實上,國家所認同的需要與課堂裹所期望的需要,像各有分歧。作者指出,如果老師要為每一個學生學習進展負責而不是為一群學生的整體進步為目標,則現行的教學實踐需經歷一次重大的範式轉移。
[Copyright of Hong Kong Journal of Special Education is the property of Special Education Society of Hong Kong Ltd.. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
https://sites.google.com/a/seshk.org.hk/seshk-org-hk/c_publication]

Hong Kong and Macau are two cities which share many common features. For example, both are located in south coast in China, colonies of European countries for more than a century, Special Administrative Regions (SARs) in China, small in area, etc. The main differences are obvious: Hong Kong is considerably larger in terms of population and land area, a key role in financial field, whereas Macau is a gambling-based economic and known as the "Las Vegas" in the East. It has been about two decades since the reunification of both Hong Kong and Macau to China. The political, social and economic environments have been significantly changed. One main change is that China now becomes the world's second-largest economy and more influential in the policy making of two SARs. This paper attempts to explain the differences and similarities of educational policy changes of primary and secondary schooling in Hong Kong and Macau in recent years. Since the educational policies play an essential role in many social issues such as shaping national identity, social justice, etc, it is important to investigate how are they changed in recent year and understand the implications of such changes. Copyright © 2018 IEEE.

In recent years, both Singapore and Hong Kong have been ranked top in international education rankings. They are widely admired as high-performing education systems (HPES) and, not surprisingly, among the best education systems in the world. The success stories of Singapore and Hong Kong education have aroused widespread attention internationally among different stakeholders, such as policymakers, researchers and practitioners, to investigate if it is possible for their policies and practices to be learned and borrowed by other countries. In this article, we stress the importance of context in understanding policy phenomena and possibilities for policy transfer. The Singapore and Hong Kong education systems are facing critical issues such as the economization of education, educational disparities and the paradigm shift from meritocracy to parentocracy. How well they deal with these policy issues will determine if their present international standing continues into the future. This article provides a critical review of their education policies to explore how these policies can be refined and adjusted in order to cope with the challenges facing both education systems.
[Copyright of Infancia Y Aprendizaje is the property of Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis Ltd. Full article may be available at the publisher's website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2018.1434043]

2001年，香港課程發展議會發表《學會學習：課程發展路向》，開啟全面和影響深遠的課程改革。2014年，課程發展議會、香港考試及評核局、教育局檢視學會學習的實施後，發表《基礎教育課程指引─聚焦•深化•持續（小一至小六）》，以更新課程指引；新指引除回顧過去14年之實施成果外，亦補充舊課程指引之不足。本研究為回應教育局之小學課程指引，分為兩部分︰一、檢視課程改革的成效；二、分析課程改革受局限之根本問題。簡言之，香港課程改革歷經十多年，獲得一定成效，但仍存在不少的隱憂。從課程改革進展報告、質素保證視學報告、學校周年報告和國際研究報告，皆顯示課程改革取得不錯的成果。然而，學生雖在國際評量中表現優異，但承受著極大的學習和考試壓力；教師雖在課程改革和教學實踐中努力不懈、表現卓越，但仍面對沉重的工作壓力。香港課程改革要持續、有效地實施，亟需加強利害關係者之能量建構。In 2001, Hong Kong started a comprehensive and massive impacted curriculum reform through introducing the Learning to Learn. In 2014, Curriculum Development Council, Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, and Education Bureau introduced the Basic Education Curriculum Guide: To Sustain, Deepen and Focus on Learning to Learn (Primary 1-6) to review the progress and achievements since the Learning to Learn curriculum reform. The Basic Education Curriculum Guide emphases for the ongoing curriculum renewal and updating over the past 14 years. This paper aims to review and discuss the Basic Education Curriculum Guide in 2014. The article is divided into two parts. First, it examines the effectiveness of curriculum reform. Second, it highlights the fundamental problem of curriculum reform in Hong Kong. In precise, even though the curriculum reform is more remarkable in Hong Kong over the last decade, it still challenged with a lot of impacts. The curriculum reform progress report, the quality assurance inspection report, annual school report and the international research report all show that the achievements of curriculum reform have been observed. However, students are pressed by course workload and examination pressure even their performance has been impressive in international assessments. Teachers always work hard in curriculum reform and teaching practice with exhibited outstanding performance. Nevertheless, the reform has led the intensification of teachers’ workload. Sustained and effective implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong depend on capacity building of difference stakeholders

This study captures the thoughts and perceptions of a group of Hong Kong principals on the transfer of sovereignty and its effects on education. The investigation addressed the following guiding research question: What, according to their perceptions, have been, and will be, the effects on education policy and on school-level management and curriculum, of the transfer of sovereignty? A qualitative approach was adopted, using naturalistic methods of inquiry. Nine principals of aided secondary schools were selected for interview according to procedures of purposive sampling. Findings indicate that, faced with uncertainty arising from the change of sovereignty, principals feel confident of managing and coping with situations at the school level in connection with curriculum and management. However, they express concern and greater uncertainty about their ability to manage changes emanating in the broader socio-political educational environment, especially in regard to values and norms and access and opportunity, all of which are likely to impact on their schools. Copyright © 1997 Carfax Publishing Ltd.