Adolescent problems in Hong Kong have brought questions about their moral development and mental health to light. Moral education for preschool children will be strategically important to address these issues because applying early educational interventions to preschool children will effectively enhance their personal development. This article highlights the inadequacy of the Hong Kong preschool curriculum guides in the promotion of moral development in children. The lack of a consensus about the values and character that preschool children should develop is a fundamental problem of implementing preschool moral education in Hong Kong. If moral education is regarded as a school curriculum, either formal or informal, the objectives, content and assessment should be closely adhered to one another. In addition, the learning and teaching activities should also be in line with student's developmental characteristics and experiences. The O-C-A model is then proposed for moral education in the preschool settings of Hong Kong. Advice has also been made for the promotion of moral education in Hong Kong's early childhood settings.
[Copyright of Global Studies of Childhood is the property of SAGE Publications.]

This article draws upon the experiences of a five-year government-funded university–school partnership project known as the Partnership for Improvement of Learning and Teaching (PILT) (2004–09), aimed at supporting teachers through improving their teaching quality and enhancing their professional growth in key learning areas – particularly mathematics, education and personal, social and humanities education – and initial experience of another completed project, the School Improvement Project for Early Childhood Education (SIP-ECE). The article first describes the rationale and operation of the PILT and SIP-ECE, respectively, and then explores the application of a 4-P (problem clarification, planning, programme action and progress evaluation) action learning approach to the improvement of subject teaching practice. This is followed, through case studies, by an exploration of teachers' own perceptions and university partners' perceptions of professional development and instructional improvement through the project. The final part of the article refers to Western concepts of professional development and university–school partnership, and suggests ways forward for school-based teacher development and instructional improvement in Hong Kong.
[Copyright © 2012 by the Editor.]

Over the past decade, higher education has undergone drastic changes all over the world because of globalisation and the changing economy. The traditional view of university as a place for one-off training is now considered outdated. Instead, the strong focus on lifelong learning urges teachers, educators and academics to reconceptualise and transform education. In this new era, successful schools adopt outreach strategies and seek support from external agencies such as universities for their development. Institutions of higher education provide consultation or work with partner schools for collaborative sharing, reflection, research and growth. Hence, school–university partnerships have become important for professional development and educational reform. With the growth of school–university collaborations, there is mounting interest in empirical research on the variety and value of these initiatives. This article reviews the school–university partnerships in Hong Kong in light of the trends and development in the international context. The studies reviewed showed that school–university partnerships involving teacher training programmes focus on understanding the views of participants in school–university partnership with an aim to build appropriate teacher training and professional development features into the teacher education programmes. These studies have theoretically contributed to the construction of culturally relevant teacher education programmes. After all, new project initiatives have contributed to substantial changes in school leadership, teachers' professional development and school-based curriculum development which would benefit children's learning. The authors argue that the development of an appropriate mode of collaboration remains a challenge for successful school–university partnerships. They have a vision to move beyond the existing research focus to explore ways to build school–university collaborations. Gaps in the research base and relevant