Conceptions of 'soft' and 'hard' policy are now commonly discussed in the policy literature concerned with multi-level systems of governance (Abbott et al., 2000; Torenvlied et al., 2004; Cini, 2001; Hertin et al., 2003; Koulaimah-Gabriel et al., 1997). Such conceptions have been useful ways of delineating different incentives, pressures and motivations for policy implementation. On the one hand implementation can be directed by legislation and regulatory monitoring with the possibility of sanctions for non-compliance ('hard' policy) or it can come in the form of recommendations, education campaigns and strong advocacy ('soft' policy). The application of these conceptions to education policy making is relatively new (Fok, Kennedy and Chan, 2005; Chan, Kennedy and Fok, 2005). It is clear from this work that the concepts of 'hard' and 'soft' policy are useful in understanding aspects of education policy implementation by focusing on the nature of policy and its potential to influence subsequent implementation outcomes. It is equally clear that some adaptation needs to be made to the original meanings underlying these constructs if the full potential of the ideas are to be exploited. The purpose of this paper is to reinterpret the meanings of 'hard' and 'soft' policy with reference to particular case studies of curriculum reform and in particular to focus on the Hong Kong context that provides a unique set of influences governing both curriculum policy and its implementation.

After about ten years' curriculum and teaching reforms in China and Hong Kong introduced to enhance student learning, what can we learn from the experience? This lecture will examine the directions and contexts of curriculum and teaching reforms in Hong Kong and China followed by discussion of their implementation. In conclusion, some propositions for sustainability of the success of curriculum and teaching reforms are advocated in the context of China and Hong Kong. Firstly, it is important to pay close attention to teachers' receptivity to, and their emotions towards curriculum and teaching reforms. Secondly, it is important to preserve the merits and essence of Chinese pedagogy and explore ways of assimilating it with those Western approaches to teaching and learning. Thirdly, it is essential to give more support to the professional development of principals and teachers, especially the promotion of professional learning communities in schools. Fourthly, it is essential to pay attention to teachers' workload by providing adequate resource support. Last but not least, in future curriculum and teaching reforms it is essential to explore ways of enhancing students' self-directed learning and socio-emotional learning.
[Copyright © 2011 The Hong Kong Institute of Education]

This paper advances the argument that 'cultures of learning' (Cortazzi and Jin, 1996) not only affect people's conceptions of teaching and learning – and therefore classroom practice – but may also impede curriculum reform, especially where little attempt is made at 'cultural synergy' (Cortazzi and Jin, 1995). The paper first examines the 'culture of learning' in Mainland China, since Hong Kong's overwhelmingly Chinese population is likely to share many of the expectations, values and attitudes identified here. The resulting language teaching is also briefly considered. Second, the paper reviews selected "Western" learning cultures and associated language teaching methodologies. Areas of similarity and difference are noted and a prediction attempted. The third part considers the 'culture of learning' in Hong Kong, an entity that is neither China nor Britain. This appears to possess a fundamentally Chinese 'culture of learning', much confused and confounded by factors that inevitably perhaps arise from its unique historical and international situation. After indicating, very briefly, these critical issues, the paper presents views from the literature which suggest that a lack of attention to and respect for cultural difference has impeded both curricular and language teaching reform. Supporting material from In-service assignments and reflections on lesson observations may also be touched on, if time permits.
[Copyright © 1999 Australian Curriculum Studies Association Inc.]