要進一步完善課程與教學改革，我們必需加強理論與實踐的對話。本文第一部分探討課程與教學理論與實踐之間的關係，以及兩者出現差距的原因；第二部分探討實踐者研究（或教師研究）作為強化理論與實踐的對話之一個取向，並根據有關文獻探究，將實踐者研究的目的、與學術研究的關聯、溝通方式組成一個初步架構，亦會討論香港一些實踐者研究（如行動研究）的例子；第三部分探討課程與教學理論工作者的研究取向如何在實踐層面有助於課程與教學改革，並對學術的理解，以及大學與學校建立夥伴關係的定位作一審視。To further improve curriculum and instructional reforms, we need to strengthen the dialogue between theory and practice. This article is divided into three parts. The first part explores the relationship between curriculum and instructional theories and practices as well as reasons behind the discrepancy between theory and practice. The second part discusses the practitioner research (or teacher research) as one of the approaches for reinforcing the dialogue between theory and practice. This part refers to Zeichner and Noffke’s literature review and formulates an initial framework based on the components of purposes, relevance with academic research, and modes of communication. Examples of practitioner research (e.g., action research) in Hong Kong will be discussed. The third part highlights how the research approach of experts on curriculum and instructional theories (scholars) enhances curriculum and instructional reforms as well as examines the understanding of scholarship (e.g., Boyer’s scholarships of discovery, integration, application and teaching) and the orientations of university and school partnerships. Copyright © 2004 北京大學.

There has been a worldwide interdisciplinary curriculum development. By examining several official interdisciplinary curriculum in Hong Kong, this paper argues that curriculum integration which incorporates learning about globalization and global citizenship has gradually developed since the late 1990s. By using cross-sectional focus group interviews with experienced teachers and a sample of students, the author identified benefits such as enhancing students' interdisciplinary knowledge and applying critical thinking. But limitations can be found in having a weak disciplinary knowledge and difficult to develop transferrable skills, which necessitates teacher training. This paper also discusses the recent Liberal Studies controversy and youth protests. Copyright © 2020 James Nicholas Publishers.

香港科學教育課程改革既有自身持續更新的內在需求,又受到社會經濟及科技發展的驅動,以及全球教育改革趨勢的推動。科學教育課程從"知識和理解""技能和過程""價值觀和態度"等三個方面建構了以培養學生科學素養為目標的課程體系,旨在落實以學生為本的課程理念。通過開放而具彈性的課程架構、課程設置的連貫與統整、多樣化的教學策略,推進既定課程目標與理念的實現。香港科學教育課程改革過程中體現出的變革素養、課程內容的結構化設計、注重能力培養的綜合化學習方式,可為內地科學教育課程改革提供參考。

學科建設與學科組織之間的關係是一流學科建設理論研究和實踐探索的重要課題。以組織要素的視角研究香港大學教育學科的發展狀況,發現其具有引領教育研究與實踐的發展目標、匯聚全球的科研人員、以學科研究平台促進知識交流、擁有豐富的學術物質資料這四個方面的特征。橫向的學科研究平台在學科發展中居於主導的地位。學科研究平台整合科研人員,以學術物質資料為基礎,通過對知識信息的搜集、分析、整理、加工、研究和傳播,實現知識的再生產,促進學科目標的實現。內地在"雙一流"建設進程中,可以進一步優化學科組織制度設計,整合學科組織的各項資源,形成學科研究領域的不可替代性,從而更好地推進學科發展。

Internationalisation of the curriculum (IoC) is on the agenda of many higher education (HE) institutions worldwide. Typically seen as associated with a top-down strategy, IoC often meets resistance from university teachers, many of whom struggle to understand its relevance to teaching practice. This phenomenographic study investigates university teachers' conceptions of IoC. Five conceptions ranging in sophistication have been identified. The least sophisticated focuses on making the curriculum content internationally relevant, whereas the most sophisticated centres around developing self-awareness, awareness of others, and a change in mindset in students. The latter is realised by embracing reflexivity and criticality and, more importantly, utilising societal and political issues as learning opportunities for identity development. Situated in the Hong Kong context, the findings not only suggest the need for teachers to shift their focus from curriculum content to value-based development but also for educators to reflect on their role in helping students to reconcile their identity in relation to their counterparts regionally and globally.
[Copyright of Higher Education is the property of Springer.]

香港推行校本課程剪裁計劃，目的是將其課程作適當的剪裁，以切合學業成績稍遜學生的需要。1994年9月，共十間中學參加試驗計劃，結果顯示計劃確能使學業成績稍遜學生獲益。試驗計劃成功協助錄取大量成績稍遜的學生，是在於採取了三方面的策略：1.調整課程內容，重新鞏固學生學習基礎；2.改善教材、教法，切合學生的需要；3.重視提高學生的學習動機。本文透過課程剪裁計劃，反思香港教育及課程改革的規模是否過大，以致未能集中處理學與教的問題。 Copyright © 2008 華東師範大學.

學校本位課程發展可說是近年課程改革範圍內一個重要議題。本文嘗試整理和探討有關學校本位課程發展的定義，以及探討不同的學校本位課程發展取向和模式。首先，文章探討課程發展、課程改進以至校本課程發展的意涵，此外，有關學校聚焦、學校為中心到學校為本課程發展的定義亦作探討。其次，文章初步探討中國內地、台灣和香港的校本課程發展脈絡。本文從技術－科學和非技術取向探討不同的校本課程發展取向與模式，尤其對史克北模式評析，以及非技術取向下的人文教育模式、協商課程模式、創作周期模式等。School-based curriculum development is an important agenda in the field of curriculum reform in recent years. This article attempts to consolidate and discuss various definitions related to school-based curriculum development as well as to discuss their different approaches and models. First, the article discusses the meaning of curriculum development, curriculum improvement and school-based curriculum development. Secondly, the definitions related to school-focused, school-centred as well as school-based curriculum development are explored. Moreover, the article initially discusses the contexts of school-based curriculum development in the Chinese Mainland, Taiwan and Hong Kong. The article also discusses different approaches and models of school-based curriculum development from both technical-scientific and non-technical perspectives, especially with regard to the critique of Skilbeck's model and elaboration of humanistic education model, negotiation curriculum model and authoring cycle model. Copyright © 2003 中華民國課程與教學學會.

過去十多年，海內外學者曾深入探討「課程」和「教學」這兩個概念。整體而言，有提倡教學包含課程，有認為課程包含教學，有主張課程與教學並列，亦有較積極的學者建議把課程和教學整合。然而，學者在探討時主要是從概念出發，分析兩者的關係。本文目的是從學者的文章，探討他們對「課程」與「教學」的理解，並檢視兩者的差異。本文分三部分，首先概述學者對這兩概念的看法，接着從學者的文章判斷他們理解這兩個概念的差別，最後提出結論。本文發現，「課程」與「教學」各有關注點。筆者認為課程探討的範圍較教學的廣泛。「教學」重在探討學習者和教師，集中在課室層面；「課程」重在探討教育內涵的形塑問題，涉及不同層面，較集中在制度層面、地區層面、學校層面。During the past ten years, scholars have inquired into the concepts of “curriculum” and “teaching” with great efforts. In general, some scholars advocate teaching embodying curriculum, some regard curriculum embracing teaching, and some suggest that they are parallel concepts with close relationship. A few scholars proactively integrate “curriculum” and “teaching,” aiming to provide a better understanding on their relationships. However, the discussions of these scholars are only conceptual ones without research elements. This article aims to inquire scholars’ understanding of the two concepts through their actual usage and to distinguish the differences between the concepts. The article consists of three parts. First, it summarizes the scholastic views on these two concepts. Then, it identifies the differences between these concepts from their application by scholars. Finally, concluding comments will be made. This article finds that scholars have different concerns when using “curriculum” and “teaching.” The authors regard the inquiry of curriculum as having a broader scope than the inquiry of teaching. Whereas “teaching” focuses on the inquiry of learners and teachers at the classroom level, “curriculum” focuses on the inquiry of shaping education content at various levels like the system level, the regional level, and the school level. Copyright © 2010 香港中文大學 CUHK .

課程研究範式一直備受學者關注。在這一問題上，一些學者建議應綜合運用量性課程研究範式和質性課程研究範式，以彌補單一課程研究範式的不足。本文旨在探討整合兩種課程研究範式的建議，同時提出整合時必須關注的事項。在探討這一建議之前，本文首先簡介不同的課程範式，並分析量性和質性研究範式的差異。本文對整合兩種課程研究範式的探討圍繞三方面展開：（1）質性和量性本質的綜合；（2）建構實在論的可行性；（3）研究內容的性質。筆者認為，整合兩種課程研究範式極具吸引力，但是卻難於處理基本哲理的差異。The paradigms of curriculum research have been the major concern of many researchers. Some researchers suggest the integration of quantitative and qualitative curriculum research paradigms for supplementing each other. This article aims at discussing the suggestion on their integration. First, the article gives a brief introduction of curriculum paradigms, and analyzes the differences between quantitative and qualitative research paradigms. Then, it will discuss the integration of the two research paradigms in three aspects: (a) integrating the essence of qualitative and quantitative research; (b) the feasibility of constructive realism; and (c) the nature of research content. The article concludes that it is an attractive attempt to integrate the two paradigms, but it is hard to deal with the differences between their basic philosophies. Copyright © 2012 香港中文大學 CUHK .

The development of inclusive education practices have led to worldwide discussion of how best to deliver a more equal education apportunity for all. In Hong Kong this has led to the development of the concept of an inclusive curriculum for special schools. This paper looks at the implications of writing an inclusive curriculum that has common curriculum content for all pupils that is based on the State curriculum. Over a four year period, nine special schools for pupils of different designated disability collectively pooled their resources to work for one common curriculum goal. In doing so they discovered that the biggest challenge was to the teacher's hearts and minds. Over 130 teachers were involved in the project. It required a significant paradigm shift in the way the teachers thought both about what they taught and how they taught. It required a common team effort within and across each school. It was apparent that providing equal opportunity to raise standards of education for the all the pupils required the recognition that every teacher had to change their way of thinking, every teacher matters. 全納教育的發展及實踐已引發了全球性的討論，討論焦點為如何為所有學生提供平等教育機會的最佳方法。在香港，一個全納課程的概念正在特殊學校中發展。本文檢視這一套以中央課程為本及以課程內容適合所有學生的原則下發展的全納課程範式及其所涉及的問題。過去四年，九間收納不同弱能類別學生的特殊學校匯聚他們的資源，致力為達致同一課程目標工作。過程中，最大的挑戰來自教師的心能及熱誠。超過130位教師參與這個計劃。這計劃涉及一個重要的範式轉移，教師需要就教學內容及教學方法重新思考。這計劃亦需要學校共同努力。計劃顯示要達到為所有學生提供平等機會及提升教育水平的目的，每一位教師都需要改變他的思維方式︰一位教師都也不能少！
[Copyright of Hong Kong Special Education Forum 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]