Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of Arizona]On: 19 December 2014, At: 06:00Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Asia Pacific Journal of EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cape20
Identity and sense of belonging in post-colonial education in Hong KongKhun Eng Kuah-Pearce a & Yiu-Chak Fong ba Department of Sociology , University of Hong Kong , Hong KongSARb Curriculum Development Institute , Hong Kong SARPublished online: 14 Dec 2010.
To cite this article: Khun Eng Kuah-Pearce & Yiu-Chak Fong (2010) Identity and sense of belongingin post-colonial education in Hong Kong, Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 30:4, 433-448, DOI:10.1080/02188791.2010.519691
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2010.519691
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Identity and sense of belonging in post-colonial education inHongKong
Khun Eng Kuah-Pearcea* and Yiu-Chak Fongb
aDepartment of Sociology, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR; bCurriculum DevelopmentInstitute, Hong Kong SAR
(Received 21 April 2009; final version received 3 August 2010)
This paper explores the construction of local and national identities among secondaryschool students in post-colonial Hong Kong. As a Chinese society that has undergone aprolonged period of British colonial rule, the reunification of capitalist Hong Kong withthe motherland under socialism in 1997 has set the context for a negotiation ofidentities. It has been revealed that the Government of the Hong Kong SpecialAdministrative Region has tried to foster a stronger sense of national identity and asense of belonging among the younger generations through its education reformmeasures in the new millennium. Nation-building is part and parcel of the reform,although it is being interpreted and implemented diversely by local officials, schoolprincipals and teachers. The intersecting and overlapping nature of students’ differentidentities has set the parameters of their identity formation but allows different latitudesof observance and/or choice of different identities.
Keywords: national and local identities; post-colonial education reform; politicalreunification; citizenship; curriculum reform
Hong Kong was reconstituted as a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic
of China (PRC) in 1997 after more than 150 years of British colonial rule. Under the
British colonial rule, Hong Kong had been put in the forefront of the zone where “the East
meets the West”. Chinese ethnicity and cultural traditions were allowed and promoted by
the British administration in order to restrain the spillover of modern Chinese nationalism
and political ideologies. Migration from other parts of China was continuous and the
outflow of Hong Kong residents to foreign countries was also common. All these have
contributed to the uniqueness of Hong Kong.
During the British colonial rule, the education system was one of the key agents that
impacted on the formation of collective identities in Hong Kong. It is inevitable that the
education sector becomes one of the contested grounds with respect to identity formation
in post-colonial Hong Kong. An education reform, which geared towards the globalized
economy, the political reunification with China, democratization and social cohesion, has
been introduced since 1998. In this paper, the post-colonial educational discourse on
identity politics, in particular the reconstruction of the national identity vis-a-vis a
reconfiguration of the local identity and an emerging global identity, will be introduced.
The post-colonial negotiation and contest of identity within the context of limited
decolonization, democratization and nationalization as well as continued inbound
ISSN 0218-8791 print/ISSN 1742-6855 online
q 2010 National Institute of Education, Singapore
DOI: 10.1080/02188791.2010.519691
http://www.informaworld.com
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Asia Pacific Journal of Education
Vol. 30, No. 4, December 2010, 433–448
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
migration will also be illustrated through the voices of students, who have been
interviewed from 2000/01 to 2004/05 school year. Many of them are among the last
cohorts of students who have experienced the colonial education and then switched to the
post-colonial arena in 1997.
Colonial education and identity formation
During the colonial era, Hong Kong was still heavily linked to the mainland of China and
colonial education policies had to respond to the dynamics of Chinese politics. Basically,
the British colonial government adopted a two-pronged strategy to try to guard against the
budding Chinese nationalism and political influences from the mainland, namely the
imposition of political control cum desensitization and the promotion of Confucian and
traditional Chinese canons.
Undesirable political activities in schools had been prohibited through legislation.
The registration of a school, a manager or a teacher could be refuted or cancelled and
“all school curricula and textbooks (were required) to be approved by the Director
(of Education) before they could be used in schools” (Tse, 1998, pp. 97 & 157). Also, there
was a kind of “depoliticised and decontextualised” curriculum design which avoided
“content concerned with contemporary China, the local context or any ‘sensitive’ topics”
(Morris&Chan, 1997, p. 249). In addition, the content of commercially published textbooks
had been further depoliticized and desensitized under the system of textbook review by the
government (Morris, 1997, p. 110; Tse, 1998, p. 194).
The upshot was that there was “a political and nationalist vacuum in the local
schooling experience” since “political and nationalistic undertones in school ceremonies,
school mottoes and songs, and school speeches” were absent (Tse, 1998, pp. 239–240). It
contributed to the narrow focus of local schools on academic success (Lee & Leung, 1999,
p. 15; Morris, 1997, pp. 111–112; Tse, 1998, p. 242), which in turn reinforced
depoliticization and the neglect of civic and citizenship education in schools (Morris,
1997; Morris & Chan, 1997; K.L. Tse, 1998; T.K.C. Tse, 1999).
Alternatively, the colonial government promoted Confucian and traditional Chinese
canons to counteract new ideas like Bolshevism, anarchism and nationalism from China
(Chan, 1990, p. 228; Tse, 1998, p. 106) since Confucianism was deemed to be “the most
powerful conservative force, and the greatest influence for good” (Kotewall, 1925,
chronicled in Sweeting, 1990, pp. 401–402). The colonial policy of promoting cultural
China at the expense of political China was necessary since the former was deemed to be a
connective tissue holding together Hong Kong Chinese without prompting the emergence
of Chinese nationalistic feelings or sympathy with the development of socialism, which in
turn could challenge the legitimacy or stability of colonial rule. As the colonial government
had to rely on indigenous organizations, local leaders and resources so that imperial policies
could be implemented economically (Robinson, 1986, p. 271), the British administrators in
Hong Kong collaborated with Chinese educators escaping from the political upheavals on
the mainland and yearning for the good old Chinese culture, who “have selectively used
Chinese cultural heritage in the curriculum”, since it not only “honours the cultural heritage
and transmits the sense of Chinese identity” but also “fosters the sense of being at the
periphery of both the Chinese and the Western worlds – which, no doubt, assists the
consolidation of outside rule” (Luk, 1991, p. 650).
By the end of the 1960s, the colonial education policy took up further responsibility in
community building that intertwined with the emerging local identity. In response to the
1966 and 1967 social disturbances, the colonial government tried to promote a kind of local
434 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
citizenship through the formal curriculum. The emphases, however, were on civic duties
and responsibilities, law and order rather than civil and political rights (Education
Department, 1969).
Also, a kind of colonial historic discourse, which centred round the “barren island” and
“fishing village to megapolis” inference,1 was established and regurgitated by different
school subjects. The fishing village thesis gradually became part of the social memory
which contributed to the formation of the local identity, as Hongkongese “regard
themselves as having a common history” (Gillis, 1994, p. 7). This thesis, in turn, helped
sustain the discourse of falling into “barbarism, degradation and bestiality” if the
colonial master had to go, as pre-colonial history had been devalued (Fanon, 1971, p. 169).
The education sector gradually played a part in fostering an inferiority complex among the
colonized people (Fanon, 1986, p. 18).
From the 1970s onwards, one of the key considerations of the education system was to
produce workers that could be channelled into the booming economy. Accordingly,
universal free primary education and free junior secondary education were introduced in
1971 and 1978 respectively. The medium of instruction became an important factor that
impacted on the local identity. The adoption of Cantonese as the medium of instruction
in the majority of primary schools decreased the prominence of other “home-dialects”
vis-a-vis Cantonese (Bacon-Shone &Bolton, 1998, p. 57; So, 1998, p. 157). The increasing
prominence ofCantonesemay connect “with both perceived pressure towards conformity in
HongKongChinese society and the emergence and growth of a sense ofHongKong identity
amongst ‘Hong Kong people’” (Pierson, 1998, as cited in Bacon-Shone & Bolton, 1998,
p. 57). In contrast, Putonghua has been adopted as the national language in the mainland
of China.
In secondary schools, there was increasing popularity of the English stream in the
post-war period. Hong Kong parents perceived English as an opportunity for social
mobility (Evans, 2002, p. 102) and thus, there was a “pro-English language bias” which
permeated different social strata and gradually, “English proficiency for the prosperity of
Hong Kong” emerged as one of the major ideologies in Hong Kong (Tse, 1998, p. 169).
English, the language of the colonizer, became “a symbol of the educated, as well as
the elites”, which constituted the cultural identity of the Hong Kong people as well as
“their belief in colonial elitism” (Tam, 2002, pp. 115–116). However, the development of
the hybrid culture and identity and the aspiration for Western culture are quite confined, as
English has not been indigenized and remains foreign in Hong Kong.
In general, the colonial educational policy of political control cum desensitization
intertwined with the low level of politicization in the Hong Kong society (Endacott, 1964;
Lau, 1987) as well as the public’s “fear of leftist infiltration or an early communist take-over”
(Chu, 2004, p. 332). The historio-cultural identity being instilled was “traditional, pre-1911
China, nostalgic, gloomy; ‘theworldwe have lost’” (Luk, 1994, p. 11). It was suggested that a
kind of in-betweenness could be observed as sections of the local population “took for granted
their political place in theBritish empire” and “theywould solemnly salute theBritishflag and
rise to the tune of ‘God Save theQueen,’ but they feel patriotic to the Chinese ‘motherland’ as
well” (Siu, 1993, pp. 29–30).
Post-colonial educational discourse on identity politics
The education reform in post-colonial Hong Kong tried to meet various challenges, namely
the onslaught of a knowledge-based and globalized economy, Hong Kong’s political
reunification with the mainland of China, democratization, and the social cleavages mainly
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 435
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
because of the disparity inwealth (Education Commission, 2000, p. 3). The resultant changes
in terms of the formal, informal and hidden curricula inevitably impact on the identity politics.
In post-colonial Hong Kong, national identity is no longer a taboo within the
educational discourse. Students’ willingness to “contribute to the future well-being of the
nation” becomes part and parcel of the overall aims of the education for the twenty-first
century (Education Commission, 2000, p. 30). National identity has been highlighted as
one of the core values within moral and civic education (CurriculumDevelopment Council,
2001, p. 20). It has become one of the seven learning goals (Curriculum Development
Council, 2007) and accordingly, has been highlighted in many of the curriculum guides of
the Key Learning Areas as well as the revised or newly developed subjects such as General
Studies for primary students and Liberal Studies for senior secondary students. It has been
commented that the Chinese Hong Kong government has politicized the school curriculum
(Law, 2004, as cited in Lee, 2008, p. 34) when it is compared to the colonial era. However,
the post-colonial discourse is not completely a decolonization discourse and also there are
many controversies and contests within the development process.
Chinese History and Chineseness
One of the major controversies is the status of the subject of Chinese History which is closely
linked up with the interpretation of Chineseness. The subject had been introduced during the
colonial era alongside the subject ofHistory,which put greater emphasis on theworld history.
The colonial British administrators allowed the introduction of the subject of Chinese History
as it adopted “a depoliticised version ofChinese history” (Tse, 1998, p. 190) and “emphasised
cultural heritage over statehood and citizenship” (Luk, 1991, p. 660).
In the subject, the “sequence of dynasties; the names of emperors, sages, and villains;
and the great myths of cultural longevity” (Watson, 1992, p. 72) are introduced since the
Chinese nation, or more accurate the Han Chinese, is/are clearly identified. There is a
“highly traditionalist and, arguably, Han-centred agenda” in the syllabi and textbooks of
the subject (Vickers, Kan, & Morris, 2003, p. 103). It is quite different from the national
education in the mainland of China which “focuses on the common history and common
political/economic/cultural interests of all people within China” (Hansen, 1999, p. 141).
In order to keep up with the knowledge-based and globalized economy, an open and
flexible curriculum framework has been propounded in the education reform
(Education Commission, 2000, p. 59). Gradually, many schools are introducing
school-based integrated subjects at junior secondary level to replace independent subjects
such as History, Economic and Public Affairs, and Geography, and to a lesser extent, the
subject of Chinese History.
The reform measure, however, has been interpreted as a major threat to the status of
Chinese History as an independent subject, which in turn has been inferred by some
commentators as a reversal of the decolonization process since the subject alone, rather
than the teaching of Chinese history, has been treated as an essential ingredient of national
education. Although it has been highlighted that the “study of Chinese history will be
strengthened in the 9-year of basic education” under education reform (Curriculum
Development Council, 2001, p. 23), the controversies over the status of the subject
Chinese History remain.
The chairperson of Chinese History Education Society argues in its homepage that the
teaching of the complete set of dynastic Chinese history through the subject Chinese
History is essential to national education. In 2008, the Regina and Louis’ Election Team
which was fighting for a seat of the Legislative Council argued in its platform that the
436 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
subject of Chinese History should be a compulsory one for secondary schools which in
turn, could promote national education. In short, the subject has been perceived as an
important tool to promote the ethno-cultural identity among the local students. The subject
has become “an important symbol of Chinese national pride and identity” to many local
educators and in the eyes of the Chinese press (Kan & Vickers, 2002, p. 76) in spite of its
colonial origin and depoliticized design.
In contrast, a commentator highlights that “the study of history from non-Chinese
perspectives and critical ways” should not be precluded and he also warns against
“the political indoctrination of parochial ethno-cultural nationalism” (Tse, 2006, pp. 63–64).
He highlights that “building up identity and patriotism and critical thinking” are incompatible
aimswithin the education reform (Tse, 2006, p. 63). Such kindof discussionwhich touches on
the essence of Chineseness as delivered by the subject is quite rare.Most of the commentators
who argue for making the subject a compulsory one for all local students accept the
“Han-centred agenda” in the syllabi and textbooks of the subject Chinese History (Vickers,
Kan, & Morris, 2003, p. 103) without doubt.
On the implementation level, however, the notion of ethnic identity is not well taught
to the students, who continue to have a hazy view of what constitutes ethnic identity.
Evelyn,2 who was studying at School Diaspora,3 noted that:
The term “Chinese nation” (zhonghua minzu) refers to the whole of China. The term“Chinese” can refer to an individual as well as the people living in China. With reference tothe minority nationalities, some are more or less the same as the Hanren. Some are quitedistinct in their appearances. Their fashions are quite different. The Han is equal to theChinese. . . . Minority nationalities are also Chinese.
In emphasizing “morphological phenotypes” like skin colour, hair and eye colour and
so on (van den Berghe, 1978, p. 406), Evelyn finds it easy to distinguish between Han
(such as herself) and foreigners, as well as between Han and certain ethnic minorities.
When cultural traits are referred to, she further finds differences between Han Chinese and
minority nationalities. But when tested against the discourse of a multi-ethnic state, the
distinction has to be ignored or else the classification becomes difficult.
The curriculum design of teaching the complete chronological and dynastic order at the
junior secondary level reveals that its historical conception is connected to the idea of
unilinear change and progress (Carduner, 1987, p. 93). But its characteristics of
depoliticization with respect to modern politics remain. Students are only required to learn
an insignificant number of topics on the PRC (about 5%of all topics for three years and only in
Secondary 3). In addition, it has been reported by experienced teachers and school inspectors
that many Chinese History teachers would forsake the teaching of the PRC, which is the last
topic along the historical timeline; and in fact it is often neglected because of the lack of time
towards the end of the academic year. At the same time many Chinese History teachers
“feel less familiar with the more modern topics” and “prefer to avoid voicing opinions on the
Nationalist-Communist rivalry which has dominated Chinese history for so much of the
contemporaryperiod” (Kan&Vickers, 2002, p. 78).Thus, it has beensuggested “real politics”
has been kept out of discussion in the subject (Tse, 2006, p. 63).
As a kind of protest, some of our student informants yearn for topics on the historical
development of modern China. For instance, Freddie, who was studying at School
Diaspora, talked about such an aspiration:
The subject ofChineseHistoryonlydealswith ancient historynow. Iwant toknowmore about themodernhistory ofChinawhichwill helpmeunderstandmore about the country . . . The lessonsofChineseHistory only concentrate on issues happened in the past. The teacher does not try to link itup with contemporary issues.
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 437
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
In short, the dichotomous argument over the status of Chinese History as an
independent subject misses the impact of the subject in classroom settings as well as its
ethno-cultural discourse on Chineseness.
Citizenship in civic, political and national education
The colonial government only introduced limited democracy in Hong Kong at the very last
mostmoment of its rule.4 Correspondingly, theGuidelines on civic education in schoolswas
issued in 1985. The traditional restriction on political activities in local schools was
loosened in 1990 through an amendment of the Education Ordinance. However, the
Guidelineswas neither promoting political education and participatory democratic practice
(Morris & Morris, 2000, p. 6; Tse, 1998, pp. 207–208) nor national identification and
understanding of the political regime of the PRC (Leung, 1995, p. 288). The permeation
approach propounded by theGuidelinesmade civic education “no-one’s responsibility” and
as in the past, civic education “has not been accorded a high priority by schools” in the
formal curriculum (Morris & Chan, 1997, pp. 253 & 256).
In preparing for reunification with the motherland, the revised Guidelines on civic
education in schools was issued in 1996 under the purview of the colonial
government. Basically, the revised Guidelines is torn between the “ethnic” and the
“civic” models/interpretations of the nationhood phenomenon in which the former
“maintains that national identity is purely cultural” and is a direct consequence of the
situation of birth whereas the latter suggests that “national identity is purely political” and
“the individual’s choice to belong to a community based on the association of like-minded
individuals” (Zubrzycki, 2002, as cited in Bauman, 2004, p. 60). The emphasis on
students’ sense of belonging to the nation-state belongs to the ethnic version. The civic
model, on the other hand, has been broached by characterising Hong Kong in terms of
“the importance of democracy, liberty, equality, human rights and the rule of law”
(Curriculum Development Council, 1996a, pp. 7–8). The distinction between Hong Kong
and the mainland is thus implied rather than spelled out explicitly.
The impact of the Guidelines in terms of its emphases on nation-building and political
awareness, however, is far from significant, taking into account the spectre of the
depoliticized and denationalized school education of the colonial era. It is commented that
the revised Guidelines is non-statutory and it is ad hoc in the sense that there is no clear
linkage to the existing school curriculum (Morris, 1997, p. 119). Although a subject
syllabus of Civic Education (Curriculum Development Council, 1998) was developed for
junior secondary level, it has never been a popular subject in local schools.
Although students’ willingness to “put forward continuing effort for . . . freedom and
democracy of their society” becomes part of the overall aims of the education for the twenty-
first century under education reform (EducationCommission, 2000, p. 30), the only political
element within the four core values of moral and civic education, which is one of the five
essential learning experiences, is “national identity” (Curriculum Development Council,
2001, p. 20). No doubt it has been pinpointed that “the idea of democracy falls short of
discussion and deliberation” within the formal school curriculum (Tse, 2006, p. 62). It has
been suggested that there is a re-depoliticization of civic education in post-colonial Hong
Kong (Leung&Ng, 2004). The continuing depoliticization and lack of clear commitment to
the idea of democracy within the education sector correspond to the overall political
development of Hong Kong. On one hand, colonial Hong Kong was being “governed by
broadly democratic values” but institutionally undemocratic (Davies, 1983, p. 103).
438 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
Decolonization, on the other hand, is “leading to ‘nationalisation’ without full
democratisation” (Tse, 2006, p. 60).
Irrespective of the depoliticized curriculum, one of the outstanding articulations by our
informants is that of their liberal democratic political leaning. For instance, Mandy talked
about her political orientation when she was studying at School Diaspora in Secondary 2:
Actually, it is more equitable and fairer to have universal suffrage because the candidates willbe elected by all of us rather than a selected few. There will be fewer grievances. Personally,I support the idea of democracy.
Susanna, who had finished primary education in the mainland of China before her
emigration to Hong Kong and was studying at School Jianguo5 in Secondary 2, showed her
appreciation of Hong Kong’s political condition:
In Hong Kong, we have the freedom of thoughts in school. Also, the governmental approval ofthe application for processions indicates that Hong Kong enjoys great degree of freedom whencompared to the mainland.
It has also been reported that a handful of socially and politically active students have tried
to cultivate a democratic culture in other youths (Leung, 2006).
In contrast to civic and political education, national education has enjoyed ever-increasing
importance in the official educational discourse.Asmentioned above, the fosteringofnational
identity becomes part and parcel of the post-colonial education reform. The promotion of
national education has to be strengthened as the President of the PRC, Mr Hu Jintao, advised
that there should be “more emphasis on national education for the youth inHongKong” at the
welcoming banquet theHongKong Special Administrative (HKSAR)Government hosted on
30 June 2007. Accordingly, the Chief Executive of the HKSAR and the head of the HKSAR
Government, Mr Tsang Yam-kuen, highlighted in his two policy addresses (2007–08,
2008–09) on the governmental policies in promoting national education among the youth.
In response to the policy initiatives, leading figures of the pan-democrats6 cautioned
against “indoctrination”, “”brainwashing”, and “ignoring political controversies” of the
national education (Apple Daily Online, 2008; Clem, 2008; Clem & Yau, 2008). A pan-
democratic Legislative Councillor, Ms Emily Lau, raised a question in the Legislative
Council on 3 November 2004 in order to check whether “love of China” and “love of the
Communist Party of China” were being distinguished in the national education being
promoted by the HKSAR Government. Also, she asked whether political controversies
such as the June 4 Incident, the democratic activities in Hong Kong and on the mainland,
and July 1 Protest March7 were being taught in the national education curriculum.
The political arguments reveal the underlying socio-political cleavages with respect to the
pursuit of liberal democracy in Hong Kong on one hand and the reunification with
the socialist motherland on the other.
In implementing the education reform, the Education Authorities in Hong Kong has
trodden a careful path with respect to the political dimensions of national education.
In general, Chinese government and politics are not well covered in the school curriculum.
At the primary level, national political structure is absent from the Strand on National
Identity and Chinese Culture of the subject General Studies. Topics of Chinese
government and politics have only been covered by some minority subjects at junior
secondary (e.g., Social Studies) and senior secondary levels (e.g., Certificate Level and
Advanced Level Government and Public Affairs, Advanced Supplementary Level Liberal
Studies), following the colonial tradition.
The only new curriculum initiative that will touch on Chinese government and politics
is the subject Liberal Studies. It is one of the four core subjects of the new senior secondary
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 439
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
academic structure, that is, most of the local senior secondary students will have to study
the subject. The reconciliation of the potential conflicts of the diverse subject aims,
namely the development of students’ “multiple perspectives”, “critical thinking skills”,
and also their becoming “independent thinkers” and “informed and responsible citizens of
society, the country and the world” (Curriculum Development Council & Hong Kong
Examinations and Assessment Authority, 2007, p. 5), will be tried out in classrooms when
it is implemented in the 2009/10 school year at Secondary 4.
Although an open and flexible curriculum framework has been promoted at junior
secondary level in post-colonial education reform, not many schools have included topics
of Chinese government and politics in their school-based integrated subjects. Even in
School Jianguo, our informants find that knowledge and understanding of China’s political
structure and development is insufficient. For example, Rosie commented that:
The school has not talked much about the Chinese government. I am not clear about the role ofthe Communist Party of China. I have only heard about the Party from my grandfather.
In a separate study, most Hong Kong students revealed that their teachers regarded topics
related to China too sensitive and “little or no knowledge about China was conveyed to
them” in their schools (Fairbrother, 2003, p. 97).
Actually, the local education authorities try to stay clear of political controversies.
When pressed by Ms Emily Lau as mentioned above, the Secretary for Education and
Manpower8 responded that teachers should treat any historical topics or current events in
an objective and impartial manner, and individual historical events would not be singled
out in the curriculum.
Although political controversies have not been explicitly stated in the school
curriculum, some local teachers or schools do not shy away from them. For instance, Mrs
Chen, who was the Chinese Language teacher of our informants in School Anglican,9
talked for the whole period with respect to the June 4 Incident in 2002/03, including some
of the details and her feelings. A short speech on the June 4 Incident for a few minutes in
the morning assembly on 4 June every year has become a ritual of School Vatican,10 as
explained by our informants from the school:
The teachers usually talk a little bit of the June 4 Incident without providing additionalcomments. But they remind us that, being a Chinese, one has to understand the incident.
However, most of my informants did not understand why the school kept on doing this.
They have no background knowledge of the incident and they do not share the feelings of
the teachers.
In contrast to the avoidance of topics on Chinese government and politics, the major
thrusts ofHKSARGovernment’s national education include national flag-raising ceremonies
with the formation of flag guard teams, and Mainland study trips and exchange programmes
(Tsang, 2007, 2008). Nonetheless, they are not without contests and contentions.
In Hong Kong, the national symbols arouse different sentiments among adults and
they have not automatically become the “valid knowledge” in the local curriculum
of the post-colonial era. Actually, the schools in Hong Kong are not required to “display
the National Flag daily” as required by law on the mainland.11 The HKSAR Government
has only “clearly required government schools to display the national flag on National Day
and important occasions”, whereas for all non-government operated schools, which are the
majority of local schools, the Government only encourages them “to display the national
flag on important days and special occasions”.12 Actually, about a quarter of the publicly
funded (non-government) schools and most private schools have not installed flagpoles.
The related controversies had been revealed by a secondary school principal in a seminar
440 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
organized by the Education Department13 in 2002 that he had been accused by some of his
staff of “leading the school to go red” when he tried to introduce the national flag-raising
ceremony.
Among the students, attending a national flag-raising ceremony on a regular basis or
being a flag guard is also not necessarily a reinforcement of their patriotism and sense of
belonging. Like her fellow schoolmates in School Jianguo, Betty, being a flag guard, was
concerned more about the weather than her status:
When I studied on the mainland, I could feel people’s endurance of hardship in the pastwhenever the national flag was being hoisted and the national anthem was being played . . . InHong Kong, I believe the school chooses us to be the flag guards because of our good conductand academic results. We have not received a lot of training. We only practise the procedurejust before the ceremony. Most of us are veterans and have ample experience. The status as aflag guard, however, does not mean much to me. During the ceremony, I wish I could finishthe job and get away as soon as possible because of the weather.
In short, the embedment of the national symbols in the school ambience is only
promoting the symbolization of the nation and the state but not trying to evoke the sense of
the government and the Communist Party of China, as is done on the mainland (Hansen,
1999). The impact of the informal curriculum is also limited by the different backgrounds
and personal experiences of individual students (Apple, 2004; Luykx, 1999) and subject to
the willingness of different schools in implementing the ceremonies.
With regard to Mainland study trips and exchange programmes, additional resources
have been promised in the Policy Address so that up to 37,000 students can participate in
such trips and programmes each year (Tsang, 2008), a more than seven-fold increase when
the HKSAR Government has to embrace the financial tsunami in 2008. With these trips
and programmes, selective dimensions of the motherland are exposed to the students.
In terms of the social discourse of “common blood” or “blood is thicker than water’”,
students’ ethnic and national identities can be easily evoked during some of the relief trips
or programmes. For instance, a group of students from School Diaspora were exposed to
the poor living conditions in Liannan, in northwest Guangdong, an area of mainly Yao
residents through a study trip in April 2000. They felt touched by the poor living conditions
in Liannan, although the students there were bright, hardworking and dedicated. One of
the Diaspora students, Mei Ling, suggested:
Blood is thicker than water and we should help the poor but hardworking students here . . . Ifeel uneasy about the differences in endowment between people living in Hong Kong andpeople living there, even though all are Chinese. Actually, I have a better understanding ofChinese people living on the mainland during this trip. I thought that they were dirty and onlyconcentrating in earning money from my past experiences in Shenzhen.
The students were being reminded that, being Chinese, they had a duty to help other
Chinese or tongbao who are in need, irrespective of their ethnicity. Likewise, university
students who had participated in similar activities “mentioned that they led to enhanced
feelings of closeness to Chinese nation and to a deeper understanding of the nation and its
people” (Fairbrother, 2003, p. 97).
In contrast, many students who visited developed areas on the mainland appreciated
the quick development there. After such visits, some of our informants clearly indicated
that their perception of “a backward China” had markedly changed. Only a few of our
informants cautioned against the possible biases as only the positive sides were shown.
Another missing link of these visits and programmes is the political dynamics on the
mainland. However, it has been contested by the students. For instance, some Secondary 7
students from School Jianguo still conjectured about the political dynamics on the
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 441
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
mainland in their interviews to collect data during the visit to the Yangtze River in 2003, as
revealed in a post trip group interview:
Rochester: The Chinese people are usually following policies dictated by the CentralAuthorities. I had interviewed migrants with respect to the construction of theThree Gorges Dam. I asked them whether they felt easy with the forced migration.They suggested that they had to follow orders from the Central Authorities and itcould take care of the needs of future generations. They supported the country.
Barbara: Actually, I feel that they are not satisfied with the policy. But they are just tooafraid to speak out even though the interview had not been monitored by others.Maybe such behaviour is part of the culture.
Donald: Maybe this group of people has been selected for us to interview. Thus, they speakthe same tone with the government.
Although they had interviewed people supporting the policies of the Central People’s
Government, they found it too good to be true. A kind of distrust of the Central Authorities
could be observed among our informants.
It is possible to argue that Mainland study trips and exchange programmes can deepen
students’ understanding of the social and economic aspects of the mainland, but it remains
to be seen whether these students will develop a strong sense of political identification
with China.
Restructuring of local, national, and global
During the colonial era, local history had not been included in the subjects of History and
Chinese History. Gradually, the issue of local history caught the attention of the education
sector with respect to the imminent reunification. In the revised junior secondary History
syllabus, which was issued in 1996, local history becomes a significant ingredient of the
subject. Local students are made aware of “the major groups and the great clans” and
“traditional customs and festivals of the rural community” of the traditional rural life of
Hong Kong (Curriculum Development Council, 1996b, p. 12). In the textbooks studied by
our informants, it has been stated that “all major groups are part of the Chinese nation”.
Also, the Chineseness of ancestral worship and traditional customs and festivals of the
rural community have been highlighted. The periphery has been linked up to the centre,
reinforcing Chinese cultural identity among the younger generations.
Elements of local history have been included in the revised Syllabus for Chinese
History (S1–3) as the learning of local history “can establish students’ love of the
community and their sense of national identity” (Curriculum Development Council, 1997,
p. 4). But the central task of the subject is “teaching the entire history of dynastic China
from a ‘national’ perspective” (Kan & Vickers, 2002, p. 84). The writer of the syllabus
reminds teachers that “one should take care of the time management in teaching local
history in case the teaching of other topics in the subject will be affected” (Curriculum
Development Council, 1997, p. 4). The peripheral status of local history in the subject
tradition makes sense, as the subject is clearly promoting the ethnic model/interpretation
of nationhood. It has also been argued that there is a reinterpretation of “Hong Kong
history” as “local history” with respect to the “greater and more inclusive ‘national
history’ of China” (Tse, 2006, p. 63). The historic discourse has been confirmed by the
education reform as “students in all types of junior secondary schools will study Chinese
history and culture” (Curriculum Development Council, 2001, p. 23).
In contrast, the hierarchical order of the national and the local has been disrupted by the
school language policy. During the colonial era, English language, which was never spoken
fluently by the majority of the local populace, has become the icon of status and success.
442 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
Cantonese, which is the lingua franca in HongKong, was dominant in local schools, and also
contributed to the formation of local identity. In view of the importance of English, “a ‘mixed
mode’ practice of teaching”, which used both Cantonese and English in spoken form together
with English textbooks, was common in the majority of local schools (Bolton, 2002, p. 38).
In the 1998/99 school year, a year after reunification, the HKSAR Government made it
compulsory for students to learn in their mother tongue, that is, Cantonese, so as to facilitate
the learning process. Only about 1/4 of selected secondary schools were permitted to use
English as a medium for teaching, while others had to switch to Cantonese. On a prima facie
basis, the mother tongue policy is a kind of politically-correct act of the Government in
decolonizing Hong Kong. The announcement of the policy, however, “was a decision of the
colonial government” (Bolton, 2002, p. 39). Actually, the use of Cantonese and traditional
characters instead of Putonghua and simplified characters represents a support for a local
Hong Kong identity (Bolton, 2002, p. 39; Bray, 1997, p. 18).
At the same time, the restriction of the number of selected schools assigned to use
English as the medium of instruction has reinforced the elitist status of such schools in a
highly competitive school environment. The mother tongue policy has an important
social-class dimension, as many parents feel that access to English and the brighter
future for their children will be limited by the new measures (Bolton, 2002, p. 40).
The significance of English has been further fortified by the globalization process. Parents
have not treated English as a colonial language that should be repudiated but rather as a
world language (Mathews, 2000, p. 156). In other words, the emergence of English as the
global language guarantees its continuing dominance in Hong Kong, not in daily life usage
but in the distinction between success and failure in terms of academic and career pursuits.
English being a colonial foreign language, which makes “the old centre-periphery
relationships get a prolonged lease on life” (Hannerz, 2002, p. 38), is not perceived to be a
threat to the national or local identity of Hong Kong.
While English is considered essential for successful education and career, it is
Hong Kong style Cantonese that serves to distinguish Hong Kong people from others,
especially from the migrants from the mainland. In fact, it is the creolized style of Hong
Kong Cantonese peppered with English slang that the Hong Kong youths use to
distinguish themselves from others. It is also this linguistic style, among other things, that
has led Hong Kong people in general and our informants in particular to discriminate
against the migrants from the mainland. Simon migrated to Hong Kong in 1999. In his first
interview in School Diaspora he was reluctant to voice his opinion in his non-Hong Kong
style of Cantonese. He continues to speak Cantonese with a strong Taishan accent today.
He said:
Many local people discriminate against newarrivals,whomigrated from themainland, becauseoftheir strong accent. Actually, I was teased by other Cantonese speakers when I tried to follow thepattern of the written form of Chinese in my daily conversation. The spoken form of Cantonesedoes not follow the written rule.
The language reform policy in the post-colonial era has reinforced the elevated status
of English language and the continued dominance of Cantonese as the lingua franca in
Hong Kong. Although there is an urge to switch to Putonghua among some of the
populace and during specific moments, the creolized style Cantonese continues to foster a
localized Hong Kong identity in the contexts of decolonization and globalization vis-a-vis
the national language.
Following the general directions of education reform, the fostering of global awareness
has been embedded in the new curriculum initiatives, namely the Personal, Social and
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 443
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
Humanities Education Key Learning Area (Curriculum Development Council, 2002b),
and subjects of General Studies (Curriculum Development Council, 2002a), Integrated
Humanities (Curriculum Development Council, 2003), and Liberal Studies (Curriculum
Development Council & Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, 2007).
In the post-colonial era, national education is justified by the political reunification
with the motherland and “we should . . . enhance our understanding of our country, our
culture, and strengthen our sense of belonging and commitment to our country”
(Education Commission, 2000, p. 28). Although being an inseparable part of China, it has
been suggested that Hong Kong needs to strive to be an international city and students
should be given “an international outlook and enables them to learn, work and live in
different cultural environments” (p. 35). Thus, it has been suggested that national identity
and global citizenship “are presented in the curriculum documents in a rather disjointed
and dichotomised manner”, namely global citizenship education has been justified in
economic terms whereas national identity education has been justified in political terms
and presented as obligatory (Lee, 2008, pp. 40–41).
The concentric circle model being adopted by the new curriculum initiatives implies that
“thenation-state is an objective fact rather than an imagined community of like believers” as it
starts with the concrete and move to the abstract (Harp, 1998, p. 179). Under this model, the
linkages among the local, the national and the global are seldom being touched upon. In other
words, the multiplicities, interpenetration and possible contradictions of the local, national
and global identities can be avoided as the three levels can be taught in schools separately.
In practice, schools are more willing to introduce issues such as environmental
protection and poverty reduction rather than human rights and political governance. In the
former, the linkage between an individual and the global issues can be easily visualized by
students and the political contests among governments are less controversial. In the latter,
the political and governmental dimensions are more sensitive to the teachers, taking into
account their backgrounds, experiences and training.
Although the dynamics among the local, national and global have not been emphasized
in the school curricula, our informants have tasted the intricacies within during the SARS
crisis.14 Susanna, a student from School Jianguo, recounted the distinctiveness of the local
situations within the national and global arenas as reported by the media:
Some medics in Taiwan have absconded whereas the medics in Hong Kong observe theirduties. However, the international standing of Hong Kong plunged. It is a pity because it needsyears of formation. Foreign countries should be more rational on the restriction of visits ofHongkongese.
The civic awareness in Hong Kong is higher than that on the mainland. During the struck ofSARS, nobody wear masks in Beijing whereas everyone wears a mask in Hong Kong. Maybethere are too many Chinese and no one cares about a small number of deaths on the mainland.In general, there is better education and hygiene in Hong Kong than that of the mainland.
In short, the concentric circle model is usually being used in treating places as naturally
disconnected, whereas spaces can be treated as “hierarchically interconnected” and thus,
cultural and social change can be a matter of “rethinking difference through connection”
(Gupta & Ferguson, 2002, p. 67).
Conclusion
The post-colonial education reform in Hong Kong tries to embrace diverse demands as a
result of socio-economic and political development at local, national and global levels.
The juxtaposition of those demands in the educational discourse indicates that the
444 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
education authorities have to take into account the societal sensitivities with respect to
identity construction and fostering of the sense of belonging. It is relatively open to
individual schools, principals, and teachers to accept, reject or ignore the reform initiatives
and strategies. The complexities, multiplicities, intermixing, ambiguities and contra-
dictoriness of different types of identities do not pose great problems to an individual
student as it is not necessary to attain logical, consistent and/or static identities with
respect to different contexts. The local, national and global identities of the younger
generations crystallize with respect to different contexts.
Notes
This paper does not represent the view of the institution to which the second author is affiliated.
1. The saying that Hong Kong was “a barren island with hardly a house upon it” by LordPalmerston, the British Foreign Secretary in 1841 just before the formal takeover of Hong KongIsland by the British in 1842, was reiterated in the yearbooks published by the colonialgovernment as well as historians like Endacott (1988, p. 4) and Chan (1993, p. 458).
2. The names of students and teachers used here and thereafter are all pseudonyms in order toprotect their identities.
3. The school sponsoring body of School Diaspora is a hometown-based association ortongxianghui.
4. Directly elected seats at the level of district administration were introduced in 1982. Indirectlyelected seats were introduced to the Legislative Council in 1985 whereas directly elected seatswere only introduced in 1991. Six years later Hong Kong reunified with the motherland.
5. It is a traditional patriotic school in Hong Kong. During the colonial era, it was labelled as aleftist school and was carefully watched by the colonial government.
6. It is a political label reserved for those who are supporting liberal democracy and usually lesstrustful of the Central Authorities of the PRC. Political figures come from various politicalparties and bodies, for example, Civic Party, Democratic Party, Frontier, Hong KongAssociation for Democracy and People’s Livelihood, and League of Social Democrats.
7. About half a million people (the figure was subject to disputes) came out to protest against theHKSAR Government in 2003 and 2004 on 1 July, which is the Establishment Day of theHKSAR.
8. The post has been renamed as the Secretary for Education after some reshuffling of duties.9. The school sponsoring body of this school is the Hong Kong Anglican Church (Episcopal)
Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui.10. The school sponsoring body of this school is the Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong.11. The requirement is stated in Article 6 of The Law of the People’s Republic of China on the
National Flag.12. It was quoted from the oral reply submitted by the Secretary of Education and Manpower to a
question asked by Mr Yeung Yiu-chung, a local legislator, on 4 December 2002 in a LegislativeCouncil sitting.
13. It merged with the Education and Manpower Bureau in 2003 and is currently known as theEducation Bureau.
14. SARS is the acronym for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. There was a multi-countryoutbreak of SARS in 2003. Hong Kong and the mainland of China were the hardest hit places.
References
Apple, M.W. (2004). Cultural politics and the text. In S.J. Ball (Ed.), The RoutledgeFalmer reader insociology of education (pp. 179–195). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Apple Daily Online. (2008, October 16). [Advocacy of nationaleducation accused of brainwashing]. Retrieved August 19, 2010, from http://www1.hk.apple.nextmedia.com/template/apple/art_main.php?iss_id¼20081016&sec_id¼4104&art_id¼11726388
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 445
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
Bacon-Shone, J., & Bolton, K. (1998). Charting multilingualism: Language censuses and languagesurveys in Hong Kong. In M.C. Pennington (Ed.), Language in Hong Kong at century’s end(pp. 43–90). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Bauman, Z. (2004). Identity: Conversations with Benedetto Vecchi. Cambridge: Polity Press.Bolton, K. (2002). The sociolinguistics of Hong Kong and the space for Hong Kong English.
In K. Bolton (Ed.), Hong Kong English: Autonomy and creativity (pp. 29–53). Hong Kong:Hong Kong University Press.
Bray, M. (1997). Education and colonial transition: The Hong Kong experience in comparativeperspective. In M. Bray &W.O. Lee (Eds.), Educational and political transition: Implications ofHong Kong’s change of sovereignty (pp. 11–23). Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong,Comparative Education Research Centre.
Carduner, J. (1987). The making of French citizens: Conflicts between fading traditions andemerging values. In E.B. Gumbert (Ed.), In the nation’s image: Civic education in Japan, theSoviet Union, the United States, France and Britain (pp. 87–103). Atlanta: Georgia StateUniversity, College of Education, Centre for Cross-cultural Education.
Chan, K.C. (1993). History. In P.K. Choi & L.S. Ho (Eds.), The other Hong Kong report 1993(pp. 455–483). Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.
Chan, L.L.C. (1990). China, Britain and Hong Kong 1895–1945. Hong Kong: The ChineseUniversity Press.
Chu, B.W.K. (2004). The ambivalence of history: Nostalgia films as meta-narratives in thepost-colonial context. In E.M.K. Cheung&Y.W. Chu (Eds.), Between home and world: A readerin Hong Kong cinema (pp. 331–351). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Clem, W. (2008, October 16). More HK students off to mainland. South China Morning Post,p. EDT8.
Clem, W., & Yau, E. (2008, October 18). Address ignored by issues, say critics. South ChinaMorning Post, p. EDU1.
Curriculum Development Council. (1996a). Guidelines on civic education in schools. Hong Kong:Government Printer.
Curriculum Development Council. (1996b). Syllabuses for secondary schools: History (SecondaryI–III). Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Curriculum Development Council. (1997). Syllabuses for secondary schools: Chinese History(Secondary 1–3). Hong Kong: Printing Department. [in Chinese].
Curriculum Development Council. (1998). Syllabuses for secondary schools: Civic Education(Secondary 1–3). Hong Kong: Printing Department.
Curriculum Development Council. (2001). The way forward in curriculum development – Learningto learn: Life-long learning and whole-person development. Hong Kong: Printing Department.
Curriculum Development Council. (2002a). General studies for primary schools curriculum guide(Primary 1–Primary 6). Hong Kong: Printing Department.
Curriculum Development Council. (2002b). Personal, social & humanities education key learningarea curriculum guide (Primary 1–Secondary 3). Hong Kong: Printing Department.
Curriculum Development Council. (2003). Personal, social & humanities education key learningarea: Integrated humanities curriculum & assessment guide (Secondary 4–5). Hong Kong:Printing Department.
Curriculum Development Council. (2007). Seven learning goals. Retrieved October 12, 2008, fromhttp://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeid¼2366&langno¼1
Curriculum Development Council and Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority. (2007).Liberal Studies Curriculum and Assessment Guide (Secondary 4–6). Retrieved October 19,2008, from http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManager/EN/Content_5999/ls_final_e_070508.pdf
Davies, S. (1983). Review article: Bureaucracy and people in Hong Kong . . .Like a horse andcarriage? Asian Journal of Public Administration, 5(1), 103–114.
Education Commission. (2000). Education blueprint for the 21st century – Learning for life learningthrough life: Reform proposals for the education system in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: PrintingDepartment.
Education Department. (1969). [Syllabuses for Chinesesecondary schools: Syllabus for civics]. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Endacott, G.B. (1964). Government and people in Hong Kong 1841–1962: A constitutional history.Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Endacott, G.B. (1988). A history of Hong Kong (10th ed.). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
446 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
Evans, S. (2002). The medium of instruction in Hong Kong: Policy and practice in the new Englishand Chinese streams. Research Papers in Education, 17(1), 97–120.
Fanon, F. (1971). The wretched of the earth (C. Farrington, Trans.). Harmondsworth, Middlesex:Penguin Books.
Fanon, F. (1986). Black skin, white masks (C.L. Markmann, Trans.). London: Pluto Press.Fairbrother, G.P. (2003). Toward critical patriotism: Student resistance to political education in
Hong Kong and China. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Gillis, J.R. (1994). Memory and identity: The history of a relationship. In J.R. Gillis (Ed.),
Commemorations: The politics of national identity (pp. 3–24). Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press.
Gupta, A., & Ferguson, J. (2002). Beyond “culture”: Space, identity, and the politics of difference.In J.X. Inda & R. Rosald (Eds.), The anthropology of globalisation: A reader (pp. 65–80).Malden, Oxford: Blackwell.
Hannerz, U. (2002). Notes on the global ecumene. In J.X. Inda & R. Rosald (Eds.), The anthropologyof globalisation: A reader (pp. 37–45). Malden, Oxford: Blackwell.
Hansen, M.H. (1999). Lessons in being Chinese: Minority education and ethnic identity in southwestChina. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Harp, S.L. (1998). Learning to be loyal: Primary schooling as nation building in Alsace andLorraine 1850–1940. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.
Kan, F.L.F., & Vickers, E. (2002). One Hong Kong, two histories: “History” and “Chinese History”in the Hong Kong school curriculum. Comparative Education Review, 38(1), 73–89.
Lau, S.K. (1987). Society and politics in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.Lee, W.O. (2008). The development of citizenship education curriculum in Hong Kong after 1997:
Tensions between national identity and global citizenship. In D.L. Grossman, W.O. Lee, &K.J. Kennedy (Eds.), Citizenship curriculum in Asia and the Pacific (pp. 29–42). Hong Kong:The University of Hong Kong, Comparative Education Research Centre.
Lee, W.O., & Leung, S.W. (1999, April). Institutional constraints on promoting civic education inHong Kong secondary schools: Insight from the IEA data (Occasional Paper Series No. 8). HongKong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Department of Applied Social Studies.
Leung, S.W. (1995). Depoliticisation and trivialisation of civic education in secondary schools:Institutional constraints on promoting civic education in transitional Hong Kong. In P.K. Siu &T.K.P. Tam (Eds.), Quality in education: Insights from different perspectives (pp. 283–312).Hong Kong: Hong Kong Educational Research Association.
Leung, Y.W. (2006). How do they become socially/politically active? Case studies of Hong Kongsecondary students’ political socialisation. Citizenship Teaching and Learning, 2(2). RetrievedJanuary 16, 2007, from www.citized.info/pdf/ejournal/Vol%202%20Number%202/023.pdf
Leung, Y.W., & Ng, S.W. (2004). Back to square one: The “re-depoliticising” of civic education inHong Kong. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 24(1), 43–60.
Luk, B.H.K. (1991). Chinese culture in the Hong Kong curriculum: Heritage and colonialism.Comparative Education Review, 35(4), 650–668.
Luk, B.H.K. (1994, April). Hong Kong people’s perceptions of their identity. In The identity of HongKong: Proceedings of a workshop. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, Institute ofInternational Relations.
Luykx, A. (1999). The citizen factory: Schooling and cultural production in Bolivia. Albany:State University of New York Press.
Mathews, G. (2000). Global culture/individual identity: Searching for home in the culturalsupermarket. London: Routledge.
Morris, P. (1997). Civics and citizenship education in Hong Kong. In K.J. Kennedy (Ed.),Citizenship education and the modern state (pp. 107–125). London: Falmer Press.
Morris, P., & Chan, K.K. (1997). The Hong Kong school curriculum and the political transition:Politicisation, contextualisation and symbolic action. Comparative Education, 33(2), 247–264.
Morris, P., & Morris, E. (2000). Civic education in Hong Kong: From depoliticisation to Chinesevalues. International Journal of Social Education, 14(1), 1–18.
Robinson, R. (1986). The excentric idea of imperialism, with or without empire. In W.J. Mommsen& J. Osterhammel (Eds.), Imperialism and after: Continuities and discontinuities (pp. 267–289).London: Allen & Unwin.
Siu, H.F. (1993). Cultural identity and the politics of difference in South China. Dædalus, 122(2),19–43.
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 447
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
So, D.W.C. (1998). One country, two cultures and three languages: Sociolinguistic conditions andlanguage education in Hong Kong. In B. Asker (Ed.), Teaching language and culture: BuildingHong Kong on education (pp. 152–175). Hong Kong: Longman.
Sweeting, A. (1990). Education in Hong Kong pre-1841 to 1941: Fact and opinion – Materials for ahistory of education in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Tam, K.K. (2002). Post-coloniality, localism and the English language in Hong Kong. In K.K. Tam,W. Dissanayake, & T.S.H. Yip (Eds.), Sights of contestation: Localism, globalism and culturalreproduction in Asia and the Pacific (pp. 111–130). Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.
Tsang, Y.K.R. (2007). The 2007–08 policy address: A new direction for Hong Kong. Hong Kong:Government Logistics Department.
Tsang, Y.K.R. (2008). The 2008–09 policy address: Embracing new challenges. Hong Kong:Government Logistics Department.
Tse, K.L. (1998). The denationalization and depoliticization of education in Hong Kong, 1945–92(Doctoral dissertation). University of Wisconsin-Madison. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI DissertationServices.
Tse, T.K.C. (1999). Civic and political education. In M. Bray & R. Koo (Eds.), Education andsociety in Hong Kong and Macau: Comparative perspectives on continuity and change(pp. 151–169). Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong, Comparative Education ResearchCentre.
Tse, T.K.C. (2006). Civic education and deformed citizenry. In A.S. Ku & N. Pun (Eds.),Remaking citizenship in Hong Kong: Community, nation and the global city (pp. 54–73).London: Routledge.
Van den Berghe, P.L. (1978). Race and ethnicity: A sociobiological perspective. Ethnic and RacialStudies, 1(4), 401–411.
Vickers, E., Kan, F., & Morris, P. (2003). Colonialism and the politics of “Chinese History” inHong Kong’s schools. Oxford Review of Education, 29(1), 95–111.
Watson, J.L. (1992). The renegotiation of Chinese cultural identity in the post-Mao era.In J.N. Wasserstrom & E.J. Perry (Eds.), Popular protest and political culture in modern China(pp. 67–84). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
448 K.E. Kuah-Pearce and Y.-C. Fong
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f A
rizo
na]
at 0
6:00
19
Dec
embe
r 20
14
