MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4404273836 · doi:10.46690/elder.2024.03.04

System capacity building in Hong Kong education reform: Strategies, challenges, and achievement

2024· article· en· W4404273836 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qi Xiu

Notice bibliographique

RevueEducation and lifelong development research. · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueHong Kong and Taiwan Politics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCapacity buildingMathematics educationAcademic achievementPolitical scienceEconomic growthPsychologyEconomics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

System capacity has been well discussed in the western context and there are much evidence to support that the process of system capacity building is complicated. However, less research about system capacity building has been conducted in the context of eastern countries and regions. Hong Kong, as a special region where contains the culture from both eastern and western countries, has it’s own way of system capacity building. This article identified the strategies of system capacity building under the background of Hong Kong education reform including the curriculum reform, evaluation reform, teacher professional development and technology information implication in education. At the same time, achievements and challenges of system building in Hong Kong will be thoroughly discussed in this article as well. This article will make a contribution on understanding the theory of system capacity building in the context of the mixed culture in Hong Kong. Cited as: Xie, Q. (2024) System capacity building in Hong Kong education reform: Strategies, challenges, and achievement. Education and Lifelong Development Research, 1(3): 135-145. https://doi.org/10.46690/elder.2024.03.04 Reference Adedokun, M. O., & Oluwagbohunmi, M. F. (2015). Capacity building through adult education programmes for poverty alleviation in Nigerian communities. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 6(7), 259-264. Berry, R. (2011). Assessment trends in Hong Kong: Seeking to establish formative assessment in an examination culture. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(2), 199-211. Cheng, Y. C. (2001). Educational relevance, quality and effectiveness: Paradigm shifts. In Invited keynote speech at the 14th International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI): Equity, Globalization and Change: Education for the 21st Century, Toronto, Ontario. Cheng, Y. C. (2003). School leadership and three waves of education reforms. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 417-439. Cheng, Y. C., & Townsend, T. (2000). Educational change and development in the Asia-Pacific region: Trends and issues. In Educational Change and Development in the Asia-Pacific Region: Challenges for the Future (pp. 317-343). Lisse, the Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger. Cheng, Y. C., & Walker, A. (2008). When reform hits reality: The bottleneck effect in Hong Kong primary schools. School Leadership and Management, 28(5), 505-521. Cheng, Y. C. (2001, February). Towards the third wave of education reforms in Hong Kong. Keynote speech at the International Forum on Education Reforms in the Asia-Pacific Region, Hong Kong. Cheng, Y. C. (2009). Hong Kong educational reforms in the last decade: Reform syndrome and new developments. International Journal of Educational Management, 23(1), 65-86. Cheng, G. (2014). Exploring students' learning styles in relation to their acceptance and attitudes towards using Second Life in education: A case study in Hong Kong. Computers & Education, 70, 105-115. Cheung, C. K. A., & Wong, P. M. (2012). Factors affecting the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong: Key findings from a large-scale survey study. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(1), 39-54. Committee on Professional Development of Teachers and Principals. (2015). Odyssey to excellence. Hong Kong. Committee on Professional Development of Teachers and Principals. (2009). Towards a learning profession: Third report on teachers’ continuing professional development. Hong Kong. Copland, M. A. (2003). Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(4), 375-395. Curriculum Development Council. (2001). Learning to learn: Lifelong learning and whole person development. Government Printer, Hong Kong. Dobie, P. (2004). Models for national strategies: building capacity for sustainable development. Development Policy Journal, 1, 1-18. Education and Manpower Bureau. (1998). Information technology for learning in a new era. Government Printer, Hong Kong. Education and Manpower Bureau. (2005). The new academic structure for senior secondary education and higher education - Action plan for investing in the future of Hong Kong. Government Printer, Hong Kong. Education Bureau. (2015). Realizing IT potential, unleashing learning power. Government Printer, Hong Kong. Education Commission. (1997). Education commission report No. 7: Quality school education. Hong Kong: Government Printer. Fok, P. K., & Ip, W. H. (2010). The decade review of Hong Kong curriculum reform: An analysis of contextual perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 5(1), 1-37. Forlin, C. (2010). Developing and implementing quality inclusive education in Hong Kong: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 10, 177-184. Fullan, M. (2000). The three stories of education reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(8), 581-584. Fullan, M. (2010). The future of educational change: System thinkers in action. Journal of educational change, 7(3), 113-122. Fullan, M. (2009). Large-scale reform comes of age. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2-3), 101-113. Harris, A. (2011). System improvement through collective capacity building. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(6), 624-636. Hargreaves, D. H. (2011). System redesign for system capacity building. Journal of educational administration, 49(6), 685-700. Hopkins, D., & Jackson, D. (2013). Building the capacity for leading and learning. In Effective leadership for school improvement (pp. 84-104). Routledge. King, M. B., & Newmann, F. M. (2001). Building school capacity through professional development: Conceptual and empirical considerations. International Journal of Educational Management, 15(2), 86-94. Massell, D. (2000). The district role in building capacity: Four strategies. CPRE Policy Briefs. Mathur, S. R., Clark, H. G., & Schoenfeld, N. A. (2009). Professional development: A capacity-building model for juvenile correctional education systems. Journal of Correctional Education, 60(2), 164-185. McKinsey Education (2009). Shaping the future: How good education systems can become great in the decade ahead. McKinsey & Company, Singapore. Morris, P., & Adamson, B. (2010). Curriculum, schooling and society in Hong Kong (Vol. 1). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Mulford, B. (2007). Building social capital in professional learning communities: Importance, challenges and a way forward. In Professional Learning Communities: Divergence, Depth and Dilemmas (pp. 166-180). London: Open University Press and McGraw Hill. News.gov.cn (2023). Bringing AI into classroom. https://www.news.gov.hk/eng/2023/01/20230116/20230116_110626_007.html NPEC (2013). Why Did Florida Schools’ Grades Improve Dramatically Between 1999 and 2005? https://nepc.colorado.edu/blog/why-did-florida-schools%E2%80%99-grades-improve-dramatically-between-1999-and-2005 O’Day, J., Goertz, M.E., & Floden, R.E. (1995). Building capacity for education reform. CPRE Policy Briefs. Sharratt, L., & Fullan, M. (2009). Realization: The change imperative for deepening district-wide reform. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press. Stiggins, R. J., & Chappuis, J. (2012). An introduction to student-involved assessment for learning (pp. 29-30). Boston, MA: Pearson. Stoll, L. (2009). Capacity building for school improvement or creating capacity for learning? A changing landscape. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2-3), 115-127. Stoll, L. (2010). Connecting learning communities: Capacity building for systemic change. In: Hargreaves, A., Lieberman, A., Fullan, M., Hopkins, D. (eds), Second international handbook of educationalcChange. Springer International Handbooks of Education (pp. 469-484). Springer, Dordrecht. Stoll, L., & Bolam, R. (2004). Developing leadership for learning communities. In Developing leadership: Creating the schools of tomorrow (pp. 50-66). Stoll, L., & Earl, L. (2003). Making it last: Building capacity for sustainability. Pearson Education. Wang, F. L., Zhang, R., Zou, D., Au, O., & Xie, H. (2019). On Hong Kong primary school English teachers' acceptance of technology-enhanced language learning and teaching. In 2019 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET) (pp. 233-235). Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic: IEEE. Wong, G. K. (2016). The behavioral intentions of Hong Kong primary teachers in adopting educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(2), 313-338.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,761
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,104
Tête enseignante GPT0,396
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEducation and lifelong development research.Même sujetHong Kong and Taiwan PoliticsTravaux en français237 207