Second International Forum on Quality Improvement in Education

23

International Forum on Quality Improvement in Education: Policy, Research,and InnovativePractices in Improving Quality Education, 2nd, Beijing, China, 12-15 June 2001.Final Report [of the] Second International Forum on Quality Improvement in Education:Policy, Research and Innovative Practices in Improving Quality of Education, Beijing,China, 12-15 June 2001. Bangkok: UNESCO, 2001.

67 p.

Co-sponsored by UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific,The Chinese National Commission for UNESCO, China National Institute ofEducational Research, Office of National Leadership Group for EducationalSciences Planning

1. EDUCATIONAL QUALITY. 2. EDUCATIONAL POLICY.3. EDUCATIONAL REFORMS. 4. GOVERNMENT POLICY5. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION. 6. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT7. TEACHER EDUCATION. 8. CONFERENCE PAPERS. I. Title.

379.2

© UNESCO 2002

Published by theUNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for EducationP.O. Box 967, Prakanong Post OfficeBangkok 10110. Thailand

Printed in Thailand

The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the publicationdo not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCOconcerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, orconcerning its frontiers or boundaries.

AC/02/OS/277-300

23

Foreword 1

Chapter One 3

Second International Forum on Quality Improvementin Education

Chapter Two 8

Quality Education

Chapter Three 11Quality Education in the Asia-Pacific Region

Chapter Four 16

Issues in Quality Education

Chapter Five 19

Future Directions for Quality Education

Annexes

C

o

n

t e

n

t

s

Annex 1 23

Forum Programme

Annex 2 26

Major Speeches

Annex 3 40Selected Abstracts and Country Papers

Annex 4 52

School Visit

Annex 5 53

List of International Participants and Contact Details

1 1Final Report

Foreword

In my position as Director of the UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education,I am pleased to endorse this official report of the very successful Second InternationalForum on Quality Education, held in Beijing, China, in June 2001.

The level of educational quality determines that of personal quality and also determinesthat of the level of the future development in a region or even in a country. Thus educationalquality has caused various countries and international educational organisations greatconcerns.

UNESCO and its member countries have undertaken extensive co-operation and madeconsiderable efforts to improve educational quality. Progress and achievements of varyingdegrees have been made over recent years. International forums provide opportunitiesfor dialogue and exchange between key players in education policy and practice, andimportant opportunities are provided to promote diversified research studies and practicein innovations for quality.

The Asia-Pacific Programme of Educational Innovation for Development (APEID), which isbased in Bangkok and has major responsibilities for post-primary education around theregion, has made a commitment to again take the initiative for organising a similar forum,at a place to be decided, as soon as possible during 2002 or 2003.

APEID undertakes to negotiate with relevant Government bodies and educationalinstitutions, to secure the best arrangements possible for another of these stimulatingforums at a time when the call for improved quality in education is increasing.

More details relating to the background of the 2001 Beijing forum, its aims and objectivesare included in the first section of this report.

Over an intensive four-day period, around fifty participants from 20 countries, in additionto approximately 35 professionals from the host country, China, focused on re-definingwhat is really meant by quality education, and exchanged ideas and good practices onhow such goals may be achieved. The many country papers and reports, supported byseveral outstanding keynote and plenary addresses, provided a strong basis for theseries of Roundtable Workshop. These in turn led to the development of a series ofstrategic recommendations that, when implemented, will contribute significantly to animproved quality of education in the vast Asia-Pacific region.

Readers are advised that the Rapporteur-General’s excellent and most comprehensivereport to the Forum has been incorporated at all relevant sections into this document, tocomplement and add value to the text already prepared by the Resource Person.

Sheldon ShaefferDirectorUNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education

Chapter One

Second International Forum on Quality Improvement in Education

Chapter Two

Quality Education

Chapter Three

Quality Education in the Asia-Pacific Region

Chapter Four


Chapter Five

Future Directions for Quality Education

R

e p

o r

t s

3 3Final Report

Chapter One

Second International Forum onQuality Improvement in Education

At a regional and world-wide level, there has increasingly been a focus on theaccessand equity of education for all.

The first International Forum on Quality Education, initiated and sponsored by UNESCO-ACEID, and held in Shenzen, China, in 1999, adopted the recommendation that anInternational Forum be made an annual event if possible. They also asked that it beorganised by ACEID at UNESCO-PROAP, in co-operation with a Member State andother co-sponsors interested in jointly designed themes and sub-themes related todimensions of quality improvement in education for the 21st century.

The Dakar Framework of Action, adopted at the World Education Forum (April 2000),committed Member States and the international community to ‘improving all aspects ofthe quality of education and ensuring excellence of all’. The end-of-decade EFA 2000Assessment of the Asia-Pacific Region (Bangkok, January 2000: p.55) emphasised that“Improvement in quality of education is critical to economic and social development, andis therefore a national imperative”. The Report of the International Commission on Educationfor the 21st Century, Learning: the Treasure Within (the Delors Report) stressed that ‘theimportance of the quality of teaching cannot be over-emphasized’.

While a trend towards improved quality of education has been common, some debatehas taken place over the conceptual framework and standards of quality of education.This Forum presented an opportunity to further explore such contentions.

Objectives of the forum

“UNESCO will promote new approaches to improve the quality of education for allthroughout life. The pursuit of quality education must go beyond increasing the materialinputs for school systems or enhancing school effectiveness, important though theseare. Quality education must be geared to enhancing each individual’s potential and thefull development of the learner’s personality. This will require educational provision that isnot only flexibly adapted to specific situations but also strongly imbued with values thatform the basis of social cohesion and respect for human dignity. An education of qualitymust necessarily contribute to peace and solidarity. … The quest for quality education istoday inextricably bound up with the processes and impact of globalization.”

(UNESCO Medium-Term Strategy 2002-2007)

The International Forum on Quality Improvement in Education aimed to:

! redefine the quality of education in the changing development contexts and contrib-ute to new visions and approaches to quality education;

! review trends in national policy development for quality improvement in education,especially through favourable learning environment, curricular innovations/reforms,teacher retraining, better use of information technologies, and community participa-tion;

! present research findings/results on major dimensions of educational quality for bet-ter understanding of main factors accounting for learning achievement and for effec-tive strategies in improving quality of education;

Overview ofthe forum

4 Forum on Quality Improvement in Education

! exchange innovative approaches and ‘best practices’ in improving quality of educa-tion, with a focus on the achievements of learning to know, to do, to be, and to live/work together in peace, which are fundamental pillars not only of education but alsoof a learning society.

Themes of the forum

Major Theme: Policy, Research and Innovative Practices in Quality Improvement in Education

Sub-Themes:

! Redefinition, standards and core indicators of quality education

! Curriculum renewal, teacher professionalism, and evaluation/monitoring systems

! Use of information and communication technology in improving quality of education

! Family and community participation for quality education

! Regional/international partnership and networking for quality education

Intended outcomes of the forum

! A regional synthesis of national policies of participating countries in their respectivedevelopment contexts with focus on curricular reforms, teacher retraining, and newmanagement paradigms;

! Major research findings relevant to aspects of quality of education, especially totheories, standards, indicators, evaluation/assessment and monitoring of quality ineducation;

! Diverse school-based or community-initiated innovative practices in quality improve-ment, exchanged and shared;

! Recommendations on actions needed to further improve educational quality, ad-dressed to UNESCO, national policy makers, teachers, parents, communities, massmedia, and civic society;

! Formation and strengthening of regional and international networks and data basesfor quality education programmes; and

! A final report reflecting the above outcomes and intended actions.

Activities

! Keynote addresses by highly acclaimed educators;

! Plenary sessions on general themes of the Forum;

! Presentation of country papers providing perspectives and experiences in qualityeducational around the Asia-Pacific Region and beyond;

! Workshops and Round-tables on sub-themes, and reporting sessions;

! Quality Education in action: Visits to schools and classroom observations;

! Exhibition on innovative practices and research results in quality education in China;

! Development of recommendations to UNESCO, national policy makers and otherstakeholders; and

! Recreational activities as intercultural learning experiences.

It was, therefore, with a spirit of good will and anticipation that around 50 participants from20 regional countries came to Beijing, keenly anticipating a stimulating exchange ofexperiences, good practices and innovations, in order to contribute to the improvedquality of education. They were joined by approximately 35 colleagues from China as thehost country, who also participated in the Forum.

5 5Final Report

Inauguration of the forum

Mr Du YueMr Du YueMr Du YueMr Du YueMr Du Yue, the Director of Programmes and Projects at the Chinese National Commissionfor UNESCO, commenced the Forum in his role as Master of Ceremonies, by welcomingdelegates from the more than 20 countries represented. He expressed gratitude from theco-sponsors of the forum, and thanked all who had contributed to its organisation. Mr Duemphasised the importance of the Forum at a time when increasing attention is beinggiven to the definitions of quality education, and the processes required to achieve thedesired quality.

Mr Du Yue introduced the key speakers and leaders for the inaugural session, andinvited Mr Liu BingMr Liu BingMr Liu BingMr Liu BingMr Liu Bing, Vice Minister of Education, Inspector-General, and President, ChineseInternational Association for Educational Exchanges, People’s Republic of China, to speakand to officially open the Forum.

The conference was then inaugurated by His Excellency, Mr Liu Bing.

Mr Liu welcomed delegates, and referred to the key role of UNESCO in the Asia-Pacificregion in leading the discussion on quality education, particularly as a sponsor of the firstsuch Forum in China in 1999. He explained that there were many improvements in thequality of education in China, a developing country, and that the number of illiterates wasmarkedly reducing, especially since 1990. However, Mr Liu said that with the developmentof the knowledge-based economy and ICT, the Chinese education system has a majorchallenge in meeting both the quality and quantity aspects of education.

He referred to China’s education system, where there are now nine years of compulsoryeducation, with the expansion of the involvement of parents and easing the pressure ofentry examinations. Decentralisation is increasingly practised, with encouragement oflocal participation in the running of schools. In curriculum reform of basic education,there is a combination of local and national content. An emphasis on high quality teachersand teacher training adds to the quality of education.

Mr Liu said that according to the 5th National Census, 2001, China has a total of 1.259billion people, and 45.79 million are in schools. The literacy level above the age of 15 is85.07 percent. On the foundation of her achievements, China will emphasise on nurturinginnovative spirits among children; also instead of emphasising only on learningachievement, Chinese education will focus on aesthetic, ethical, physical and intellectualdevelopment. The Minister outlined 10 guiding principles for future development ofeducation in China. These are:

1. Expand senior high school and higher education structure

2. Gear up for a market economy

3. Devolve more power to provincial governments

4. Encourage social participation in schools

5. Accelerate examination reforms

6. Adjust curriculum and content of basic education

7. Expand educational facilities in Information and Communication Technology

8. Optimise structure to have high quality teachers

9. Enforce registration through inspection and allocation of funds, and

10. Improve employment.

These ten steps are being taken to convert the large population of China into a hugehuman resource.

Mr Liu concluded by saying that this International Forum would benefit from the manycountries participating, and wishing all delegates well in their deliberations.


In their welcome addressesIn their welcome addressesIn their welcome addressesIn their welcome addressesIn their welcome addresses, other speakers drew attention of the participants to theDakar Framework, and the internationally accepted framework and indicators of quality.Also, the emphasis was on four pillars of learning from the report of the Delors Commission– Learning to Know, Learning to Do, Learning to Live Together and Learning to Be as animportant basis of quality education.

Dr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou Nanzhao, Director a.i., UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and thePacific, then spoke on behalf of UNESCO and APEID, welcoming officials and delegatesto Beijing for this important Forum. Mr Zhou thanked those responsible for organising theForum, and providing assistance to allow it to proceed. He then went on to speak aboutnew definitions of quality in education, for all citizens, and used China’s great progress inthis area as an example of good practice.

Mr Zhou outlined two reasons why the Forum was so significant. Firstly, it came just afterthe World Education Forum of 2000, and was therefore able to build on those achievements.Secondly, the Forum was taking place at the time when UNESCO was developing its nextMedium-Term Strategy, which included a priority for improving the quality of education.

Mr Zhou outlined the objectives of the Forum, expressing confidence that the achievementsof the Forum would be significant. He then reaffirmed the commitment of APEID to co-operating with regional Member States to further pursue quality in education, and wishedparticipants well in their Forum.

Ms Shi Shu-yunMs Shi Shu-yunMs Shi Shu-yunMs Shi Shu-yunMs Shi Shu-yun, Deputy Secretary-General, Chinese National Commission for UNESCO,expressed a warm welcome to all delegates, and congratulated all taking part in thisopening session. She referred to UNESCO’s role as a leader in education, by holdingmany meetings to improve the quality of education. She expressed the view that whileeducation is more than buildings and spills over into all aspects of our lives, the introductionof the new technologies has polarised the population to some extent. This Forum will, shesaid, help to exchange views among many countries, where many such as China arereforming their education systems to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Ms Shiwished all delegates well.

Prof Xie GuodongProf Xie GuodongProf Xie GuodongProf Xie GuodongProf Xie Guodong, Vice President, China National Institute of Educational Research(CNIER), and the Office of China National Educational Sciences Planning LeadershipGroup, then spoke on behalf of the CNIER. He expressed his gratitude to all organisersfor their vision and work to develop the Forum, and warmly welcomed delegates fromoverseas and China. Now, in the 21st century, Prof. Xie said, the new currency of theeconomy was knowledge-based, and it had ignited a whole new revolution in economicdevelopments. A challenge was the sustainability of all the innovations in education andsociety, while allowing people’s social lives to also develop. Prof. Xie said that the 20th

century saw many changes, opportunities and challenges to society, and these challengescontinue into the 21st century, with decisions on how we meet them as being very important.This is especially true of the need to continue to improve the quality of education, and abasis tool in that quest is the use of educational research and the consideration ofeducational theories. Prof. Xie explained that the CNIER was responsible for studyingeducational programmes in order to improve the quality of education in China, and it wasconfident that this Forum represented a great opportunity to learn from experts andcolleagues in education from all countries attending. In closing, he wished delegatesevery success over the period of the Forum.

Mme Kaisa SavolainenMme Kaisa SavolainenMme Kaisa SavolainenMme Kaisa SavolainenMme Kaisa Savolainen, Director a.i. of the Division for the Promotion of Quality Educationin UNESCO Headquarters, then spoke to the forum, expressing her appreciation of thehonour of representing UNESCO at this forum. She thanked all organisers, especially MrZhou Nanzhao, and said that it was a very important Forum and was greatly appreciatedby UNESCO. Mme. Savolainen outlined several different approaches to quality education,including access to education through EFA around the world, leading to improved socialethics.

She went on to discuss core indicators of quality education, and the essential life skillsrelevant to each person’s locality and context that educators must pass on, in order to

7 7Final Report

live and work together in peace. While there is a move to a global society, the importanceof national societies living together is still relevant, especially in view of the importance oflifelong learning.

Mme Savolainen also referred to the Dakar Framework, particularly to ‘improving everyaspect of the quality of education so that world ensures access to quality education forall’. She also emphasised ‘improving quality of education through diversification of contentsand methods and promotion of universally shared values’ from the UNESCO’s new Medium-Term Strategy for the forthcoming years. The speaker mentioned the UNICEF publicationson the concept of quality and the 16 indicators of school quality presented by the EuropeanReport on Quality of School Education, classified into four categories, namely attainment,success and transition, monitoring, and resources and structure.

Mme Savolainen said that active dialogue was required in fields such as an holistic viewof education, and of the total human qualities. To this end, she expressed the clear viewthat this Forum in Beijing would contribute greatly to the world debate on quality in education.Finally, in signalling her own impending retirement, Mme. Savolainen stated that the newADG Education, Sir John Daniel, will extensively promote quality in education, and thatUNESCO will develop an extensive framework on quality in education.

A message from Mme Cecilia BraslavskyMme Cecilia BraslavskyMme Cecilia BraslavskyMme Cecilia BraslavskyMme Cecilia Braslavsky, Director of the International Bureau of Education,was read by Mme. Ginna Geal, of UNESCO’s Bangkok office. Mme. Braslavsky expressedregret at her inability to attend the forum. In discussing quality in education, she referredto two related certainties: the first one is that the quality education we have to constructis not simply an expansion of the traditional form, and the second certainty is that it will notemerge from bureaucratic deliberations, but from the relationship between theory, policiesand innovation in everyday life at schools.

Mme Braslavsky spoke of movements to change traditional education at the beginning ofthe nineteenth century, which did not succeed in modifying the educational culture. Asecond wave of attempts to change or reform traditional education took place in the1960s and 1970s, but most of those proposals tended to reject content and also theneed for teachers. While they had influence in re-modelling education, and contributedto improving school enrolment rates, they did not always provide the needed competenciesand construct the quality education required for the twenty-first century. Therefore, weare now experiencing a third wave of reform, where many educational institutions aretrying to innovate, and many policies and programmes are attempting to introduceinnovations in the form of quality education for all for living together. Researchers andeducators are involved in advancing a paradigm shift from traditional education to themost appropriate form to face the challenges of the twenty-first century.

Election of Bureau of Officers

The following Officers for the Forum were unanimously elected by the meeting.

Election of Chair Mr Yu Fu-ZhenChina

Election of Vice-Chairs Mr Isagani Cruz, Undersecretary,Department of Education, Culture and SportsManila, Philippines

Ms Pornnipha LimpaphayomDeputy Permanent Secretary/Secretary-GeneralThailand National Commission for UNESCO

Dr Carlo Fonseka, Secretary- GeneralSri Lanka National Commission for UNESCO

Election of Dr Marmar Mukhopadhyay, Senior FellowRapporteur-General National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration

New Delhi, India


Chapter Two

Quality Education

Mr Sheldon Shaeffer, Head, Education Section, UNICEF New York, and Director DesignateUNESCO-PROAP, provided an address entitled: Redefinition of Quality Education in theDakar Framework of Action on Education for All1.

Mr Geoff Haw expressed Mr Shaeffer’s sincere regrets for being unable to attend, andextended his very best wishes for all participants in their important deliberations on qualityeducation. Mr Shaeffer’s prepared address used as its main reference the outcome ofthe very important Dakar meeting held last year by UNESCO on Education for All. Thisframework is increasingly providing the major directions in quality education around theworld.

Mr Shaeffer referred to the Dakar Framework for Action, quoting Target 6 (that of improvingall aspects of the quality of education all so that recognised and measurable learningoutcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy, numeracy, and essential life skills)and Strategy 8 (the creation of safe, healthy, inclusive, and equitably resourced educationalenvironments with clearly defined levels of achievement of all). It was emphasised thatDakar’s definition of quality is no longer focused on only teaching and learning and theclassroom.

Mr Shaeffer’s presentation discussed ten components of quality education from the DakarFramework, and outlined how educators can help children to realise their right to a goodquality primary education. Essential ingredients were quality learners, quality content,quality teaching/learning process, quality learning environments, and quality outcomes.Throughout all these was highlighted the need for gender-sensitivity, and the overall needfor rights-based, child-friendly schools, which were further described. Mr Shaeffer’spresentation concluded by referring to the importance of children’s participation in schoollife in a family-focused school that is community-based in philosophy and practice.

Dr Zhou Nanzhao, Director a.i. of UNESCO-PROAP presented an address entitledPromoting Quality Education in the New Century: New Contexts, Visions, Approachesand UNESCO Strategies.

Mr Zhou presented a most comprehensive address on this important topic. He began byreferring to changing regional and international contexts and shifts within education systems,showing several tables illustrating enrolment trends. Shifts from an industrial to a knowledgeeconomy, from traditional to emerging technologies for the delivery of education, andfrom local to international concerns, were noted. Definitions of schooling, teacher-centredand learner-centred education and the continuum of lifelong learning were presented.

Mr Zhou’s presentation emphasised the shift from education for all to quality education forall; new equality is on accessing quality education by all. He pointed out, however, on thebasis of the synthesis report on EFA, the enormous data gaps and unusable data. Forexample, the no-detention policy at primary grades in several countries does not actuallyreveal the drop-out rate. His basic thrust was on the shift from the traditional andconventional to more relevant and more useful education. More significantly, he referred

Redefiningquality education

New contexts,visions,

approachesand UNESCO

strategies

1. Mr Geoff Haw, Resource Person, UNESCO Bangkok, delivered Mr Shaeffer’s opening Keynote Address.

9 9Final Report

to the shift from academic learning to learning of values as an emerging dimension ofeducation. He stated that the “failure of education in the 20th century was not failure toteach science but failure to teach human values”.

Mr Zhou reflected on traditional and new definitions of quality in education, leading to theneed to develop new approaches to education. He contended that quality should bedefined in broader national development goals, educational aims of shaping completeperson, greater effectiveness and higher efficiency. Quality standards are to be definedwith respect to cultural diversity. He recommended the application of ICT for quality on alarge scale.

UNESCO strategies for Quality Education were outlined by Mr Zhou, with the focus onthe fight against poverty, the contribution of ICT in the construction of knowledge, promotingeducation as a fundamental right, improving the quality of education through diversificationof contents and methods, promoting experimentation, innovation and sharing of informationand best practices, protecting the common good, enhancing diversity, and sharingknowledge.

Prof Gu Minyuan, President of the Chinese Association of Education, traced thedevelopment of education in China, particularly since 1985, now that China is openingup to the world. He referred to China’s basic education system as the biggest in theworld, and therefore its subsequent positive impact on much of the world’s population.He also highlighted some of the recent developments and policy initiatives.

One of the major initiatives is involvement of community efforts for expansion of educationand mobilising resources. He emphasised the need for reforms in tests and evaluationand curriculum design, as well as the problems and challenges due to emergence ofnew technology, international competition, population growth, tension between orientaland western cultures and the Confucian thinking that guides the Chinese life. He outlinedthe action programmes for improvement of quality in education in China.

The rate of illiteracy across the entire Chinese population is 7 per cent and falling,showing China’s strong commitment to education. Prof. Gu explained that the VocationalEducation system had not been fully developed yet, only of recent years receiving theattention required. By 1999, 52 per cent of Senior High School students had experiencedVET, with this figure rising. Higher Education has expanded greatly from 1949, whenthere were just 205 HE institutions, but by 1997, there were 1033 Colleges and Universities.Projections indicate a likely enrolment of 16 million students soon.

Community involvement has increased, and private sector participation in education isrising greatly. However, all these improvements are not sufficient yet to build China’squality of learning to the desired level, as a big increase in Higher Education and VocationalEducation and Training is required, to meet the labour and market economy.

Mr Gu referred to the potential conflict between Oriental and Western cultures, and alsostated that the culture of teachers and their training needed to improve, as many onlyhave secondary schooling qualifications. Reforms are required in curriculum design andcontent, with increased integration. Educational resources as seen as inadequate. However,Mr Gu was confident that China’s major steps in improving the quality of education weremoving in the right direction.

Dr Lourdes Quisumbing, President, APNEIVE (Asia-Pacific Network of International andEducation and Values Education) spoke on the topic, The Values/Attitudes Dimension inQuality Education.

Dr Quisumbing made an emphatic presentation on education in human values, which isa missing dimension of education. Her presentation focused on three major aspects ofvalues and attitudes. They were the origins of values dimension in quality education;current definitions of quality education, particularly in regard to standards and indicators

Developingquality educationin China

Values andattitudesin qualityeducation


of quality; and the need for a re-definition of quality in education, using an holistic andintegrated approach.

Dr Quisumbing referred to the research in education in human values and called theattention of the participants to some of the universally accepted human values. QuotingUNESCO documents of 1992, she insisted that values education should become anintegral part of education. She also referred to the source books developed by APNIEVEon Learning to Live Together in Peace and Harmony that are being used by teachers inseveral countries.

Dr Quisumbing referred to UNESCO’s Medium-Term Strategy 31 C/4 and 31 C/5, showinghow UNESCO was planning towards a path emphasising the importance of promoting anew approach to quality education. She focused on the acquisition of values, attitudesand skills needed to face the challenges of contemporary society and globalisation, inparticular through education for a culture of peace, for human rights, for cultural andlinguistic diversity and for a sustainable future.

Ms Quisumbing explained how standards of quality in this age of globalism and IT can bemet only through an holistic, integrated and humanistic approach to education. Thisretains the essential meaning of quality: the discovery and development of the talents ofevery individual, the full flowering of the human potential, and learning to be a completehuman person.

11 11Final Report

Chapter Three

Quality Education in theAsia-Pacific Region

At the request of the Chair, and in the absence of other Pacific Island representatives,Ms Edna TMs Edna TMs Edna TMs Edna TMs Edna Tait, ait, ait, ait, ait, presented an overview of the context of education in the area, in hercapacity as Director of UNESCO’s Pacific Regional Office.

Ms Tait explained the nature of the region, with 16 independent countries, includingAustralia and New Zealand. The Pacific has one-third of the world’s surface water, althoughparadoxically the provision of a clean drinking water supply is a region-wide problem. Thethree sections of the Pacific are Polynesia, Melanesia and Micronesia. She pointed outthe enormous difficulties due to wide variation in the sizes of the countries and their multi-linguality. Her contention was that quality has to be interfaced with multi-linguality in thisregion.

The nation of Nuie is the smallest, with just 1200 people (including 500 babies andchildren), and Papua-New Guinea is the largest (excluding Australia and New Zealand)with 4 million people and 800 languages. There are many problems in the region, suchas the false image of idyllic beaches and tropical islands. Cyclones and mismanagementhave caused havoc in the natural world. Growing pollution is evident; many people livealmost exclusively off imported goods. Many young people leave their birthplaces and goaway to study, never to return. In terms of gender issues, boys are more likely to haveproblems in their education than girls. In reality, the concepts as articulated in the DelorsReport often do not directly apply to the Pacific region. A major problem is literacy,especially in the native languages in some countries. The only island nations to havearmies are Papua-New Guinea and Fiji, therefore there is more accommodation for aculture of peace. Ms Tait noted that not all the answers to the problems in the Pacific areknown, but that some very hard questions must be asked.

An Australian paper entitled The Impact of National Goals and Policies on EducationalQuality at Local and National Levels was presented by Ms Sandra Lloyd, ExecutiveDirector, Strategic Planning and Information, Department of Education, Training andEmployment, Adelaide, South Australia.

Focus of the Australian report was the new national goals of education for the 21st

century endorsed by Australia’s Ministerial Council in 1999 for improving Australian schooleducation within a national framework of collaboration. The main thrust is on developingfully the talents and capabilities of students, achieving high standards in knowledge, skillsand understanding, and social justice. It foresees schools as learning communities. Aperformance monitoring system has been designed with priority assigned for developingkey performance areas and reporting schedules. The report also highlighted an emphasison vocational and technical education at the school level, on-line curriculum for schools,establishment of task force for recruitment and training of teachers, and school-basedmanagement.

Several excellent case studies and reports relating to the progress and improvement ofquality education in the Asian region were provided to the Forum.

A Pacificperspective

Case studiesfrom Asia


" Bangladesh

This paper was presented by Mr Nuruzzaman Mia, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Education,Bangladesh. The title of this official paper was Quality Improvement in Education for theTwenty-first Century.

The Bangladesh report presented data on enrolment, completion rate and literacy, aswell as participation rate of various age groups in school and higher education. As part ofa new initiative in quality management, the report highlighted the initiation of competency-based curriculum at school level, with emphases on science and technology relatedcourses, innovative teacher training programme, establishment of a separate commissionfor recruitment of teachers, and the increasing proactive role of an open university inteacher education.

" CambodiaThis paper was presented by Dr Nath Bunrouen, Director of Teacher Training Department,Ministry of Education Youth and Sports, in Phon Penh, Cambodia. The title of the paperwas Quality Improvement of Education in Cambodia.

The paper pointed out the repetitive and damaging nature of the non-availability of teachersin remote areas and the lack of participation in secondary and post secondary educationin such areas, thus ultimately limiting the availability of local teachers. There is, however,an increasing availability of female teachers. The report covers all levels of education.With donor assistance, Bangladesh has improved the internal efficiency of secondaryeducation through enhanced provision of qualified teachers, better deployment of teachingand non-teaching staff and access to improved textbooks. The report also covered thedevelopments and quality measures in higher, and vocational and technical education.

" China

The country report from China primarily covered research on quality issues in schooleducation. Such research was not only guided by pure academic considerations, butalso from the practical implications of investing the outcomes of research into training.Another special feature of the research in school education is its shift in focus from puresocietal needs to individual needs. Extensive research has been carried out on teachingwith the goal of improving instructional practices. An additional agenda item for action is todocument and disseminate exemplary instructional practices.

" Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

The presentation was made by Mr Hchoe Dokhun, Deputy Director, Ministry of Educationin the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The paper was entitled Report on QualityImprovement Education for the 21st Century.

The report from DPR Korea outlined the quality improvement mainly through seven majorefforts – (i) improving educational contents and methods with emphasis on holistic learning,(ii) broadening the base of IT education, particularly integrating it with mathematics andbiology, (iii) improving teacher quality through standardising teacher qualification andrefresher programmes, (iv) intensifying research on educational science, and improvingconditions of education, (vi) increased state investment in education, and (vii) ensuringbetter school facilities and materials.

" Hong Kong SAR China

The presentation was made by Professor Yin Cheong Cheng, Director, Centre for Researchand International Collaboration, The Hong Kong Institute of Education. His paper wasentitled Paradigm Shifts in Quality Education: Three Waves for the Future.

13 13Final Report

The paper offered a theoretical construct for quality in education in the 21st century. Thepaper traced the quality issue in education in three waves – a first wave of internal qualityin the 1980s; a second wave characterised by interface quality, and a third wave byfuture quality. The paper contended that the future quality can be achieved through‘triplisation’ – globalisation, localisation and individualisation. Prof. Cheng also argued thecase for multi-intelligence, comprising techno-economic, human-social, political, culturaland educational intelligence. Future quality will warrant nurturing of all these types ofintelligences.

" India

The Indian presentation was made by Dr Marmar Mukhopadhyay, Senior Fellow, NationalInstitute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA), in New Delhi, India. (He wasalso Rapporteur for the Forum.) The title of his presentation was Quality ManagementInitiatives in Indian Primary Education.

The Indian report dealt with concepts of quality of holistic development of children, foremancipation and view world as a family. It emphasised a philosophical basis for qualityinspired by the Upanishad. The paper identified the National Policy on Education in 1986as a watershed in Indian primary education. There have been specific policy and planningsupport for quality improvement in primary education. The policies for quality improvementled to formulation of several centrally sponsored schemes like Operation Blackboard,Educational Technology, District Primary Education Program, District Institutes of Educationand Training, among others. The main areas of intervention are infrastructure development,standardisation of teacher qualification and their continuing capacity building, provision ofeducational aids and materials for teachers, free quality textbooks for students, educationalmass media and minimum levels of learning. The paper however concluded that inabsence of well-developed school-based process competent to absorb systemicintervention, there is a considerable distance to go before achieving quality education forall.

" Japan

The presentation was made by Professor Shinichi Suzuki, Graduate School of Education,Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan.

This Japanese paper highlighted the paradox of the system characterised by universalenrolment on the one hand and school phobia, teenage violence and crime on the otherhand. Japan’s current emphasis is on internationalisation of education along withindividualisation. Among other major reforms, deregulation of school administration andinduction of information technology are priorities. There are also initiatives in reforms inhistory and civics textbooks bringing in Japan-centredness. The new policy initiative ofJapan is the enactment of Education Bill in 2000.

" Lao PDR

The presentation was made by Dr Khamphay Sisavanh, Director of National ResearchInstitute for Educational Sciences, Ministry of Education for Lao PDR The paper was titledCurriculum Reform in Lao PDR: Today and Tomorrow.

The reforms in Lao PDR have been informed and guided by its Education Vision 2020.The Vision 2020 projects universal literacy, compulsory primary education steadily movingtowards universal lower secondary education, carving out a specific role of education forhuman resource development and education as a common cause for all. The Visionstates specific objectives such as holistic development of pupil personality, national unityand international education; and recommends curricular reforms where moral educationand ‘the world around us’ find places as separate subjects.


" Malaysia

Malaysia’s presentation was made by H. J. Mazzlan Bin Abdullah, Deputy Director,Educational Planning and Research Division, Ministry of Education, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Mr Mazzlan Bin Abdullah spoke to a paper entitled Policy Dialogue on Quality Improvementin Education: Malaysian Experience.

The Malaysian report also referred to Malaysia’s Vision 2020 document. It visualisesdeveloping Malaysians who can think globally but act locally; it sets out the target ofdeveloping through education world class knowledge workers, to reduce the educationalgap between rural and urban population, and to increase education in science andtechnology every year. In another move, Malaysia is setting up SMART Schools andproposes to convert all Malaysian schools into SMART schools by 2010. Other areas ofemphasis for quality improvement are life-long education, special education, and continuingeducation of teachers in contents and pedagogy. Malaysia will also target offering on-lineeducation through broadband fibre optic cables.

" Pakistan

Mr M. Tariq Saeed, Programme Officer – Education, UNICEF, Lahore, Pakistan, wasinvited by the Forum to present an overview of education in and around Pakistan, on theunderstanding that while it did not represent an official country report, it provided a contextfor education in this important country.

The effect of growing enrolment in primary education has been largely neutralised due tohigh dropout rates. Several policy initiatives have been taken to improve quality ofeducation. These are curricular reforms, training and retraining of teachers and learningco-ordinators, and improvement of qualification of primary teachers. A specially designed4-week training programme has been developed for teachers in science and mathematics.

" Philippines

The presentation was made by Dr Isagani Cruz, Undersecretary, Department of Education,Culture and Sports, Manila, Philippines. The title of Dr Cruz’s paper was DemocratizingQuality: Secondary Education in the Philippines.

The country report from Philippines traced the origin of reforms and quality improvementto people’s agitation against corruption in education. The case of textbooks was highlighted.Following public agitation, the government set up new mechanisms for textbook reforms,such as public bidding in the presence of media. Success in this exercise encouragedthe government to take steps in reforming the examination system, by involvement of civilsociety and through several levels of approval. Associated reforms were in curriculumdesign and instruction. Toll free telephone facilities were extended to teachers to commenton lesson guides. ICT was introduced for on-line editing of textbooks, and for transfer oftextual material through cell phones.

" Republic of Korea

The presentation was made by Mr Lee Seung-hwan, Director of Education Unit, KoreanNational Commission for UNESCO, Seoul, South Korea. Mr Lee’s paper was entitledInitiatives for Quality Improvement in Education in the Republic of Korea.

The emphasis in South Korean reforms for improvement of quality has been on life longeducation using ICT. South Korea created the Life-long Education System in l999 andset up national and local Life-long Education Centres. A second target is to developinfrastructure for the use of ICT by all by 2005, proposing to provide a computer to everyteacher. Korea will create nine virtual campuses for adult education to reduce the digitaldivide and improve social cohesion. The national government plans to support computereducation for the poor.

15 15Final Report

" Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka’s presentation was made by Dr Carlo Fonseka, Secretary-General, Sri LankanNational Commission for UNESCO, Insurupaya, Bataramulla, Sri Lanka. The title of DrFonseka’s paper was Quality Improvement in Education in Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lankan report outlines the achievements in literacy, and primary and secondaryeducation. The country has fulfilled qualitative demands in school education. Emphasisneeds to shift now to higher education. Despite high participation and completion ratesin schools, the participation rate in higher education is as low as 2% of the relevant agegroup, and the investment in higher education is only 0.5% of the GDP. Its new emphasisis now on quality assurance in higher and medical education. The main thrusts of thequality assurance strategies are now on curricular reforms with employment orientation,introduction of modular courses, examination reforms, and capacity building of theacademic staff.

" Thailand

The presentation was prepared by Ms Pornnipha Limpaphayon, Deputy PermanentSecretary/Secretary General, Thai National Commission for UNESCO, Bangkok, Thailand.The title of the Thai paper was Quality Improvement in Education: Thailand Experiences.

The Thai report identified teachers, curriculum and teaching-learning processes, despiteimprovement in enrolment and enhanced average school life, as the main problems Thesubstance of the reform is 12 years of free basic education, adoption of learner centredapproach encouraging self-learning and self development. The report also emphasisedlifelong education and participation of all segments of the society in education. Reforms ineducational management, modernising instructional processes, new curriculum with Thaiidentity and international knowledge, professional development of teachers, reforms inassessment with introduction of national standards test and quality assurance mechanismsare some of the other strategies for management of quality in education. The futurethrust will be on expansion of ICT, with the aim of electronically connecting all schools by2003.

" Viet Nam

This presentation was made by Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hoi, Secretary General, Vietnam NationalCommission for UNESCO, Hanoi, Viet Nam.

The Vietnamese report referred the Parliament declaration indicating commitment of thecountry to the quality in education. The new emphasis is on renovation of curriculum andtextbooks, and shifting from passive to active participation in the learning process. Therevised textbooks have greater application orientation. Among other strategies for qualityimprovements are computer education, training and retraining of teachers, teaching ofcertain portion of the curriculum through ICT and higher incentives for teachers in remoteareas. A major innovation has been the involvement and use of local veterans in remoteareas to support education.

Mr Zhou Nanzhao thanked delegates for the high quality of the papers presented. Henoted that UNESCO’s planning for the Medium Term Strategy was organised aroundseveral main lines of action, relevant to the discussion. He asked participants to considerwhat types of programmes should be proposed to achieve quality education. MemberStates should propose priorities for programmes, projects and budgets.

Mr Zhou noted also that this Forum had been organised by APEID, which has a focus onpost-primary education, but there was also strong support for APPEAL, which focusedon basic education. He mentioned the importance of research in educational innovations,of appropriate teacher training to develop needed skills, and the need to promote publicdialogue on quality education.

UNESCOperspectives


Chapter Four


Prof. Jiang Ming, Director of Center for Curriculum and Teaching Materials Assessment,CNIER, presented a paper entitled Efforts to reform basic education curriculum, teachingmaterials and teaching.

For reforms in teaching, the emphasis has been on reviewing basic education for lifelonglearning aiming at students’ overall and sustainable development with practical skills, andspirit of innovation. To achieve these reforms in instruction, emphasis has been placed onlearning with success, co-ordination education, learning with interest by doing for bringingout creativity and an innovative approach in each learner.

Mr John Goodban, Director, International Baccalaureate Organisation Asia-Pacific Region,presented a paper entitled The International Baccalaureate and Quality InternationalEducation: Approaches and Perspectives on Curriculum, Assessment and Teacher Training.

Mr Goodban’s presentation was on the maintenance of quality by the IBO. He mentionedIBO’s three-level curriculum covering students aged from 3 to 19 years in their learningwith the IBO schools spread over 100 countries. The speaker described the process ofmonitoring after authorisation of a school that takes 18 months of preparation leading todetailed documentation of qualified staff, access to IT facilities, financial and materialresources, and subscribing to the IBO philosophy and ideology. Major quality maintenancestrategies comprise programme evaluation by IBO at regular interval of five years,counselling, use of standardised tests developed by experts for diploma examination andadequate investment in capacity building of teachers. The IBO has introduced on-lineexamination, online curriculum centres, and distance education through video conferencingfor teachers in remote areas.

Mr Zan Tiejun, in speaking on Reforming Examination/Assessment Systems to ImproveEducational Quality, referred to the traditional form of examination in China, and theintroduction of national examinations in 1980. The renewed thrust is now on improvementof national examinations leading to development of higher competencies among students.The phased model of reforms in national examination will cover standardising the contentof examinations, its combination with school reforms, and the introduction of threecompulsory subjects (Chinese, English and Mathematics) plus two optional subjects.

Dr Pamela Keating, University of Wisconsin, USA, argued that educational developmentin USA must be based on an appreciation of the past. Her paper, Issues of Quality inAmerican Education Reform: ‘A Nation at Risk’ to Standards and Tests, traced theemergence of American society from immigrants and settlers during the last two centuries.Dr Keating contended that the American educational developments on the quality ofdemocracy, quality of political union, quality of economic development and quality ofsocial equity. The USA, according to the speaker, is now ‘struggling with the appropriateassessment for ascertaining the educational quality that is needed’. This has raised newissues in teacher education and accountability, and actual learning opportunities that areavailable to the children. The challenge for quality improvement has now to be seen fromthe quality of actual learning, school organisation, overall system of education, andstandards of achieving educational excellence.

Wang Yuan-ling, the Director, Division of Comprehensive Department of Teacher Education,Ministry of Education, China, spoke on Teacher Professional Development for EducationalQuality Development. The presentation traced training of teachers during the last five

Curriculumreforms,

assessment andteacher training

17 17Final Report

years and also projected the target and approach of training and professional developmentduring the next five years. It focused on Information Technology applications in training ofprimary teachers and also improvement of open and distance education for enhancedteacher training during the next five years.

Ms Zhu Mu-jue, Deputy Director-General of Basic Education, Department of the Ministryof Education, China, addressed the Forum on Curriculum Reform for Basic Education inChina. The main goals of curricular reforms are to develop a spirit of innovation and valuefor democracy. She traced the long history, philosophy and the tradition of Chineseagrarian society that has shaped educational practices. To cope with the challenge ofthe 21st century, curricular reforms to achieve skills of lifelong learning, developing skills oflearning, and nurturing attitudes, values, emotions and other finer aspects of life arenecessary. The speaker mentioned the progress in development of the instructionalmaterial and evaluation, simplifying the subject structures to reduce the number at schoollevel. She referred to two case studies to highlight the effectiveness of the new initiativesin curricular reforms in basic education.

Mr Zhou Man-shan offered a comparative study of quality initiatives in developed countriesand their implications for developing countries in general and China in particular. MrZhou, Deputy Director, National Center for Education Development Research, addressedthe Forum on Comparative Perspective on Developed Countries’ Experiences in QualityImprovement in Education. He singled out the emphasis on the use and application of ICTin school education in the developed countries, and particularly in the USA. Further, hepointed out that use of ICT for training of teachers was another important strategy of thedeveloped countries. Chinese efforts to cope with the challenges of the 21st century mustlook at these experiences and adapt new strategies. Mr. Zhou advocated intensive useof ICT for school education and also involvement of the community.

Dr Jin Dong-Seop, Director General, Institute of Asia-Pacific Education Development,Seoul University, discussed practices to improve the quality of education in Seoul University.In his presentation he highlighted the role of young people and their enormous capabilities– both manifest and latent. He emphasised the need for actualising such potentialities.

Prof. Zhao Zhong-jian, Research Fellow, Institute of Comparative Education, East ChinaNormal University, presented a paper on School-based Management. Prof. Zhao’s paperfocused on school-based management and various techniques and strategies of qualitymanagement. He reviewed Total Quality Management – its philosophy and strategy forlinking with quality system of the school. The second strategy emphasised documentationand can be linked to management system of the school. A third strategy was the introductionof national quality awards similar to those introduced in America in 1987. Prof. Zhaoinsisted on the need for development of a quality management system that is resilient tochanging customer expectations of quality.

Mr Geoff Haw, Consultant to UNESCO-PROAP, presented a paper entitled Improving theQuality of Education through the Effective Application of Emerging Information andCommunication Technologies. His paper referred to UNESCO’s priority vis-à-vis ICT asindicated in the medium term strategy and Dakar Framework. He also mentioned theincremental approach and the prospective role of ICT in improving quality in education.ICT can be taught as a subject, used as an educational resource, and as a tool foreducational innovations. The speaker highlighted the changing nature of work that makesserious demands for change in education, and the role of ICT used in these changes.Other important issues covered in the paper were use of ICT for training of teachers, andimproving educational administration practices. Further, for more effective delivery ofeducation where access is difficult, practices such as creating virtual campuses andimparting education through distance education media are useful. Mr Haw made specialreference to APEID initiatives for quality improvement in education, and the role that ICTcan play.

School-basedmanagement

Applicationsof ICT


Mr B K PassiMr B K PassiMr B K PassiMr B K PassiMr B K Passi, Consultant to UNESCO-APEID, presented a paper on Creativity andQuality Education. The paper’s primary emphasis was on the teaching of thinking andcreativity, and dealt in detail with the structure of brain and the millions of unused braincells. Mr Passi mentioned that there are more than 2500 types of thinking. However, hedealt with just five types of thinking: systemic thinking, critical thinking, historical thinking,creative thinking and futuristic thinking. Further, he highlighted three states of thinking –natural, directed and subjective state of thinking. In his view, students do not need to betaught anything else but thinking, as the remainder of their education will then fall intoplace.

Ms Lindy Joubert, Consultant to UNESCO General Secondary Education Division, Paris,spoke about The Role of the Arts in Quality Education. Ms Joubert’s paper dealt with theissue of art education as an instrument of quality improvement in education. While lamentingthe separation of arts and science and thus putting arts in the periphery of school education,she quoted profusely from international research literature to indicate the important role ofart in health care, hospital design, etc. In her view, education is holistic and the arts mustfind a place in school education. She referred to three major research projects; theconclusion of all three were that art education and core values are necessary for schooleducation.

Creativityand the arts

19 19Final Report

Chapter Five

Future Directions forQuality Education

Arrangements for four roundtable working groups of participants across regional andinternational boundaries were introduced by Mr Geoff Haw, Resource Person.

The groups focused on the following sub-themes of the Forum:

Group 1Group 1Group 1Group 1Group 1: Redefinition of Quality Education: Conceptual Framework, Standards andIndicators, and Assessment/Monitoring

Group 2Group 2Group 2Group 2Group 2: Curricular Renewal and Development of Teaching/Learning Resources,including new technologies

Group 3Group 3Group 3Group 3Group 3: Teacher Education and Professional Development for Quality Education

Group 4Group 4Group 4Group 4Group 4: Learning Environments and Community Participation

Mr Haw provided by way of a handout the guidelines for roundtable discussions toincorporate in their considerations, and work groups then commenced their deliberations.

Reports were presented to delegates on the morning of Friday 15th June, in a plenarydiscussion, forming the basis for recommendations, listed in the notes of the final session.

The elected Chair, Mr Yu, presided over the important final session of the forum. Thefocus of this session was to review the deliberations and learning of the four days, and todraw them to a plan of reflection and action.

The esteemed Rapporteur-General, Dr Marmar Mukhopadhyay, Senior Fellow at NIEPAin New Delhi, was then invited to present his overview of the forum.

This descriptive report was most extensive and detailed, and delegates unanimouslyexpressed great appreciation for the excellent and comprehensive summary of the forum.The text of the Rapporteur’s report has been absorbed as appropriate into this entiredocumented report, and in some cases actually used as a basis for the report.

Delegates showed their warm appreciation of Dr Marmar’s outstanding contribution tothe Forum through acclamation.

The following recommendations were presented to the Forum in its final session by eachof the Roundtable Workshop groups. It should be noted that the recommendations havebeen edited, while retaining the spirit of the original recommendations.

Group 1:Group 1:Group 1:Group 1:Group 1: Recommendations Relating to Redefinition of Quality Education: ConceptuaFramework, Standards and Indicators, and Assessment/Monitoring

! That a new culture of quality education be developed and promoted locally andglobally, recognising that:

! Quality improvement is not only a structural change or technological change inmanagement, curriculum, teaching and learning, but more importantly a culturalchange related to the beliefs, values and attitudes about the nature, aims, andrelevance of education, among school practitioners, policy-makers, parents,community leaders in both local and international contexts;

Roundtableworkshopsessions

Rapporteur’sreport

Forumrecommendations


! A new culture of quality education emphasises student-centred, holistic,balanced, and lifelong approaches and provides unlimited opportunities to fullydeveloping each student’s potentials.

! That innovative alternative strategies aimed at achieving higher quality education becreated, by:

! Redefining the excellence in education and related targets, indicators andmeasures;

! Promoting multiple types of school-based quality assurance that can ensureand maximise opportunities for each student’s learning and development of his/her potential; and

! Encouraging initiatives among educators and various social actors and expertsthrough different types of partnership to apply new knowledge, ideas andtechnology for pursuing quality education for each child.

! That international sharing, partnership and collaboration be actively pursued.

! Quality education is a complex local and global human endeavour in a new eraof globalization.

! All international and national agencies should have the responsibility to facilitateinternational sharing, partnership and collaboration for building up the new cultureand the necessary knowledge base and innovative technology for qualityeducation development and its success for each child in different cultural contexts.

Group 2:Group 2:Group 2:Group 2:Group 2: Recommendations Relating to Curricular Renewal and Development ofTeaching/Learning Resources, including new technologies

! That the interface and interaction between technology and the key players in thelearning process must be given due importance in research and policy formulation.

! That creativity and critical thinking skills be further developed, particularly in the lightof increased volume and flow of information.

! Reform and renewal of education must take into account the need to spur produc-tive activity among the learners.

! That innovative approaches be used as a means for enhancing reading and com-munication skills, critical thinking and analysis, as well as for broadening the per-spectives of the students.

! That improvements in the curriculum be matched with improved assessment andmonitoring schemes, in order to ensure quality of learning.

! That the wide range of teaching/learning resources and digital curriculum materialssuitable for the Asia-Pacific Region and relevant to teaching/learning renewal thathave been developed recently be accessed for benchmarking purposes or to learnfrom the experiences of other countries that have adopted/adapted such modes ofreform.

! That the wide range of excellent curricular renewal best practices from Asia-Pacificcountries or regions be reviewed, disseminated by the Internet or other media, andthereby provide local government with policy advice, surveys and reviews of curricu-lum reforms may provide local schools models for development and application ofteaching/learning materials.

! Recognising the potential of new technology to promote teaching and learning qual-ity to help educators plan and manage education more cost-effectively, that currentinvestment be increased to encourage application of new technology in educationcan result in more efficient operations, especially for the Least-Developed countries.

! Recognising that the development of teaching/learning materials and/or application

21 21Final Report

of new technology should always serve children’s overall development, thus avoidingthe trend to pay the cost of sacrificing children’s social and/or humanistic developmentfor the sake of embracing new technology in education, when formulating policyabout how to integrate new technology in curriculum or develop teaching/learningmaterials, that the ultimate educational purpose should be borne in mind.

! Recognising that a combination of essential conditions is required to conduct cur-ricular innovations, that emphasis be given to develop and use digital teaching/learning resources, and to create learning environments conducive to powerful usesof new technology, including:

! Government support and proactive leadership in the educational system,curriculum content standards and curriculum resources

! Educators’ student-centred approaches to learning

! Educators and students skilled in the use of technology for teaching/learning,especially their technology and information literacy

! Assessment of the effectiveness of curricular renewal and new technologyapplication for teaching/learning

! Community partners who provide expertise, support, and real-life interactions

! Ongoing financial support for sustained innovation and use of technology

The group noted that the Draft 31 C/5 covers all the important areas of concern, particularlyin the context of education reform. It is recommended that UNESCO must, however,provide due recognition to the role of subregional intergovernmental organizations andshould likewise consider allocating resources for partnering/strengthening partnershipwith such organizations.

Group 3:Group 3:Group 3:Group 3:Group 3: Recommendations Relating to Teacher Education and ProfessionalDevelopment for Quality Education

That the quality of teachers and teaching be improved by implementing these strategies:

! Ensuring teachers adopt a fundamental attitude of lifelong learning for self-develop-ment

! Training of trainers be used as a key strategy

! Incentives be used to attract suitable people to teaching, and to recognise teacherattainments

! Appropriate use be made of volunteers and experts

! Teachers be regularly assessed for effectiveness, by a committee that’s includesparents and members of the community

! Set up a clearly defined standard for evaluation (including humanity of teachers)

! An International agency of teachers be established

! The gap of evaluation in different countries should be bridged.

! Teachers must keep updated in the new technologies (ICT) and new concept ofteaching and learning

! Low cost teaching materials should be produced for teacher training

! Relevant Software should be exchanged among countries

It is further recommended that the topic of teacher assessment be included in a futureForum for Quality Education.


Group 4:Group 4:Group 4:Group 4:Group 4: Recommendations Relating to Learning Environments and CommunityParticipation

It is recommended to UNESCO/donors, Community, NGOs, and the Private sector:

! That due attention be paid to increase allocation for improving learning environmentand community participation in the context of Quality Education.

! That moral values of human beings, life skills and increased intellectual potential beenhanced through integrating arts in the mainstream education.

! That networking related to mutual understanding, mutual learning and mutual toler-ance continue to be improved at all levels: sub-regional, regional, inter-regional.

Delegates agreed to accept all recommendations in the spirit in which they were offered,as they were intended to represent strategies that will, on application, add to the quality ofeducation around the region.

UNESCO-PROAP, as part of its co-ordinating role in the region and in its regularprogrammes and activities, gave a commitment to pass the recommendations on to allrelevant groups at an international level. However, delegates were advised to ensure thatthey provide the report of the Forum to their own national authorities, drawing attention tothe relevant recommendations, so that they may be acted upon at a national level.

That UNESCO-PROAP, in collaboration with regional and national organizations, continueto sponsor and organize a third International Forum on Quality Improvement in Educationfor the 21st Century, to be held at a venue to be decided, during 2002 if possible.

This recommendation received very strong support from delegates. Delegates were madeaware of the willingness of Viet Nam to host such a forum.

Mr Marmar, Rapporteur to the Forum, asked participants to ensure that their NationalCommissions for UNESCO take steps to disseminate the report of the Forum and to acton the recommendations, so that they will understand the need for action and follow-up.

Prof Xie GuodongProf Xie GuodongProf Xie GuodongProf Xie GuodongProf Xie Guodong, China National Institute of Educational Research, and Office of ChinaNational Educational Sciences Planning Leadership Group, spoke to participants, reflectingon the outstanding contributions made by so many. He thanked all for their good will andco-operation, and also thanked again all who had contributed to the success of theForum. He urged participants to continue to focus on the processes necessary to ensurethat our learners of all ages are able to have access to a high quality education. Prof. Xiewished everyone a safe return home, and looked forward to meeting up with them andother colleagues at the next forum, wherever it is held.

Dr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou NanzhaoDr Zhou Nanzhao, Director a.i. UNESCO-PROAP, then presented his final address. Hesaid that the Forum had been a most rewarding experience for all participants, noting thevigorous debate and valuable exchanges of ideas between representatives of over 20countries. Mr Zhou particularly identified three sources of achievement in the Forum: theplenary presentations, the information provided in country reports, and the exemplarydiscussions of the Roundtable work groups.

Mr Zhou drew attention to the growing call for improvement in the quality of education atnational and regional levels, in line with global trends. He mentioned the increasinglyclose linkage of quality education to national development and to humanistic cultivation.These new visions, he said, were perspectives based on solid research. The manydiversified innovations noted at the Forum will add to extension of the move towardsquality education. Mr Zhou concluded by thanking all who had contributed to the successof the Forum, and wished them well for safe travels home and for the future.

The Forum was officially closed by the Chair, Mr Yu.

Generalrecommendation

of allparticipants

Closingaddresses

A n

n e

x e

s

Annex 1

Forum Programme

Annex 2

Major Speeches

Annex 3

Selected Abstracts and Country Papers

Annex 4

School Visit

Annex 5

List of International Participantsand Contact Details

2323Annexes

Annex 1

Forum Programme

1. Inauguration of forum

Welcome Speeches: Mr Du Yue, Chinese National Commission for UNESCO

Official Opening: Mr Liu Bing, Vice Minister of EducationInspector-General, and PresidentChinese International Association for Educational ExchangesPeople’s Republic of China

Inaugural Speeches: Dr Zhou Nanzhao, UNESCO-PROAP

Ms Shi Shu-yun, Chinese National Commission for UNESCO

Prof Xie Guodong, China National Institute of Educational Research, and Office of China National Educational Sciences Planning Leadership Group

Mme Kaisa Savolainen, UNESCO Headquarters

Message: Dr Cecilia Braslavsky, International Bureau of Education

Election of Chair, Vice Chairs,Bureau of Officers: Rapporteur

Adoption of Proposed Agenda

2. Keynote opening speeches

! Mr Sheldon Shaeffer, Head, Education Section, UNICEF New York, and DirectorDesignate UNESCO-PROAP: Redefinition of Quality Education in the Dakar Frame-work of Action on Education for All: [presented by Mr Geoff Haw, Resource Person,on Mr Shaeffer’s behalf.]

! Dr Zhou Nanzhao, Director a.i. of UNESCO-PROAP, UNESCO Principal RegionalOffice for Asia and the Pacific, Promoting Quality Education in the New Century;New Contexts, Visions, Approaches and UNESCO Strategies

! Prof Gu Minyuan, President, Chinese Association of Education: Developing QualityEducation in China

! Dr Lourdes Quisumbing, President, APNEIVE (Asia-Pacific Network of InternationalEducation and Values Education): The Values/Attitudes Dimension in QualityEducation

3. Policy dialogue on quality education: presentation of countryreports/papers

! Mr Geoff Haw, Resource Person: Introductory Comments

! Ms Edna Tait, Director, UNESCO-Apia Office for the Pacif ic States,Samoa


! Presentations from Australia, Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, DPR Korea, Hong KongSAR China, India, Japan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Nepal,Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Viet Nam.

4. Keynote presentations

! Prof. Jiang Ming, Director of Center for Curriculum and Teaching Materials Assess-ment, CNIER: Efforts to reform basic education curriculum, teaching materials andteaching.

! Wang Yuan-ling, Director, Division of Comprehensive Department of Teacher Edu-cation, Ministry of Education, China: Teacher Professional Development for Educa-tional Quality Development.

! Zan Tiejun: Reforming Examination/Assessment Systems to Improve Educational Quality

! Mr John Goodban, Director, IBO Asia-Pacific Region: The IB and quality internationaleducation: approaches and perspectives on curriculum, assessment and teachertraining

! Prof. B.K. Passi, Consultant, UNESCO-APEID: Creativity and Quality Education

! Prof. Zhao Zhong-jian, Research Fellow, Institute of Comparative Education, EastChina Normal University: School-based Management.

5. Roundtable workshops

Roundtable/working groups of regional and international co-operation, based on sub-themes of Forum:

! Redefinition of Quality Education: Conceptual Framework, Standards and Indicators,and Assessment/Monitoring

! Curricular Renewal and Development of Teaching/Learning Resources, includingNew Technologies

! Teacher Education and Professional Development for Quality Education

! Learning Environments and Community Participation

6. Reporting from Roundtable/Workshop and Plenary Discussions

7. Plenary Presentations

! Zhu Mu-jue, Deputy Director-General of Basic Education, Department of the Ministryof Education, China: Curriculum Reform for Basic Education in China.

! Mr Geoff Haw, Consultant to UNESCO-PROAP; Managing Director, Sagacity Ser-vices, Australia: Improving the Quality of Education through the Effective Applicationof Emerging Information and Communication Technologies.

! Zhou Man-shan, Deputy Director, National Center for Education Development Re-search: Comparative Perspective on Developed Countries’ Experiences in QualityImprovement in Education.

! Dr Pamela Keating, University of Wisconsin: Issues of Quality in American EducationReform: ‘A Nation at Risk’ to Standards and Tests.

! Ms Lindy Joubert, Consultant, UNESCO General Secondary Education Division,Paris: Role of the Arts in Quality Education

! Dr Jin Dong-Seop, Director General, Institute of Asia-Pacific Education Develop-ment, Seoul University.

2525Annexes

8. Plenary Closing Session

! Mr Geoff Haw, Resource Person: Reflections on Co-operation in Promoting QualityEducation.

! Rapporteur’s Report to Participants

! Consideration and Adoption of Recommendations

! Closing Address: Prof. Xie Guodong, China National Institute of Educational Re-search, and Office of China National Educational Sciences Planning LeadershipGroup

! Final Remarks: Dr Zhou Nanzhao, Director a.i. UNESCO-PROAP


Annex 2

Welcome AddressBy Dr Zhou Nanzhao, Director, a.i.

UNESCO-PROAP

Honourable Vice Minister Mr Liu BingDistinguished participants and guests,Ladies and gentlemen,

With strong support from UNESCO Headquarters and the Ministry of Education, thePeople’s Republic of China, the second International Forum on Quality Education issuccessfully opening. On behalf of UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and thePacific as a co-sponsor of the event, I take great pleasure in welcoming each and all ofyou, more than 100 distinguished participants and guests from 20 countries around theworld. UNESCO welcomes you and thank you for joining us contributing to its success.We are especially honoured by the presence of Deputy Minister of China, Mr Liu Bin,who will address us and officially open the Forum. UNESCO-PROAP wants to thank theChinese National Commission for UNESCO for its unfailing support to make this internationalgathering possible. UNESCO-PROAP wants also to thank China National Institute ofEducational Research and the Office of China National Educational Sciences PlanningLeadership Group for their efforts in co-organising the Forum. I want also to thank ourdistinguished resource person, Mr Geoff Haw, for the significant contributions in orientationand intervention for this Forum.

I would like to convey to you messages of good will from Dr Cellia Braslavsky, Director ofUNESCO International Bureau of Education, and from Mr Sheldon Shaeffer, the DirectorDesignate of UNESCO Bangkok and Asia-Pacific Regional Bureau for Education, whosekeynote on the redefinition and vision of quality education will be presented by the ResourcePerson at the first Plenary Session.

On a personal note, I feel honoured and pleased for this opportunity to revisit my homelandto learn about the new policy developments, new research findings and new innovationsas well as about international experiences of all participating countries in promoting qualityeducation.

Ladies and gentlemen,

As we enter the twenty-first century, the social, economic, cultural and technologicalcontexts of education have been profoundly changed. ‘Quality education’ has to be‘relevant’ to the worldwide efforts for poverty alleviation, and social cohesion, culturaldiversity, and conducive to a culture of peace. The dimensions of ‘quality’ in educationhave to be redefined in broad context of national development goals and in light of theprinciple of lifelong learning. Quality education should not be only for a few but for all.Quality must go beyond cognitive learning achievements to the affective, ethical, aestheticas well as physical dimensions of human development, with the ultimate aim at the fulldevelopment of human potentials for sustainable development and a culture of peace.

We are inspired to see that our host country China, as well as many other UNESCOMember States, has made remarkable achievements not only in universalizing 9-yearcompulsory education but also in improving overall quality of education for all-rounddevelopment of all children, by way of a series of policy actions, curricular reform, teachertraining, reform of examination/assessment systems, and transformation of labour/employment systems for new competencies. We have come to learn from Chinese

2727Annexes

experiences in promoting quality education; meanwhile we believe Chinese participantswill benefit from international experiences and learn lessons from colleagues in othercountries.

This distinguished gathering is of particular significance and relevance: First, it is takingplace as a major follow-up to the World Education Forum 2000, which set a fundamentalgoal of “improving all aspects of the quality of education and ensuring excellence of all’.This Forum, as a major international event initiated by UNESCO, will promote a policy shiftonto quality dimensions of education for all.

Secondly, the Forum is taking place at a time when UNESCO has been reorienting itselfand proposed the next Medium-Term Strategy, which has set three priority strategicobjectives for its education programmes in the years 2002-2007, namely:

1. promotion of education as a fundamental human right;

2. improvement of the quality of education through the diversification of contents andmethods and the promotion of universally shared values; and

3. promotion of experimentation, innovation and diffusion/sharing of information/bestpractices as well as policy dialogues.

This meeting will serve as an annual intellectual Forum for continuing policy dialogues onquality education.

Thirdly, the Forum will help strengthen linkage and interaction between policy makers,researchers and practitioners in their joint efforts in improving quality of education.

Taking into account the policy changes and innovative experiences in many MemberStates in promoting quality education, this International Forum aims to achieve the followingobjectives:

! to contribute to new visions and approaches of quality education through concep-tual debates, policy dialogues and exchange of research findings;

! to review country experiences and regional trends in quality improvement of educa-tion;

! to exchange and share successful innovations and best practices in quality educa-tion; and

! to develop recommendations addressed both to UNESCO and Member States onthe promotion of quality education.

Through plenary and working group sessions, the distinguished participants will be ableto deliberate from diversified perspectives on all major issues in quality education. Througha school visit, participants may have a chance to observe practices in quality educationat school level.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I want to take this opportunity to assure you that the Asia-Pacific Programme of EducationalInnovations for Development (APEID) at UNESCO-PROAP, a regional intercountry co-operative programme which initiated this Forum in 1999 in co-operation with the ChineseNational Commission for UNESCO, would strongly commit itself to continued co-operationwith all of you, from both governmental and non-governmental organisations, in pursuingquality education through policy, research and innovative practices.

This Forum is truly a distinguished gathering of high-ranking policy makers, accomplishedresearch scholars, experienced school headmasters and other visionary educators/managers. With your collective wisdom and great wealth of experiences, the Forum isbound to be a most fruitful and successful event.

I wish you full success in our common endeavours and a most pleasant stay in Beijing.

Thank you.


MessageBy Dr Cecilia Braslavsky

DirectorInternational Bureau of Education (IBE), Geneva

Honourable Vice Minister Mr Liu Bing,Senior Representatives of Governments,UNESCO Representatives,Excellencies, Distinguished Colleagues,Ladies and Gentlemen,

First of all, I want to wish all participants well in their deliberations during this extraordinarilyimportant Forum on Quality Education in Beijing. I greatly regret that due to major workcommitments I am not able to participate personally and benefit from the country reportssubmitted to enrich the dialogue and construct valuable frameworks for action towardsquality education for all.

However, I wanted at least to address a brief message to your highly important Forum.This message is that the twenty-first century must be the century of quality education forall, for learning to live together.

But it is not easy to define †and even less to construct †this quality education for all forlearning to live together, especially taking into account the new challenges emerging fromglobalisation and from the knowledge society.

In fact, we possess only two certainties, but they are related. The first one is that thequality education we have to construct is not simply an expansion of the traditional form.The second certainty is that it will not emerge from bureaucratic deliberations, but fromthe relationship between theory, policies and innovation in everyday life at schools.

The so-called traditional education was supposed to be centred on academic contentsand teachers.

Indeed, the origins of traditional education were, in some cases, closer to everyday andcommunity lives than we are now aware. One example is the French book “Le tour deFrance par deux enfants”, written at the end of the nineteenth century. However, it is truethat after the first expansion of school-based education, little more thought was paid toeducational practice.

As a result, it is possible to say that it became focused not only on academic contents,but on some very narrow academic contents. It became closed, transmission-orientedand control-oriented. Traditional education was also teacher-centred, but teachers werefrequently considered merely as “transmissions-tools” and not as educators.

Nevertheless, we need to recognise that traditional education presented many generationsin different countries with the opportunity of social mobility, to contribute to technical progressand to build strong societies. Even in some countries where that form of education wasnot present, local communities wanted to have it. In a very attractive way, Cheikh HamidouKane, a writer from Senegal, put into the words of the African communities a dialogue onthe advantages and disadvantages of sending the children from their communities to the“traditional schools” of the French colonial authorities. The community decided to sendtheir children to these schools in order to learn some of the competencies being taughtthere, while preserving at the same time “the soul of the community”.

2929Annexes

We are all aware of the movements to change traditional education at the beginning ofthe nineteenth century. But they did not succeed in modifying the educational culture. Asecond wave of attempts to change or reform traditional education took place in the1960s and 1970s. Most of the proposals of that wave tended to reject content †and alsothe need for teachers. They have had a great influence in re-modelling education. Theseproposals contributed to improving school enrolment rates, but did not always provide theneeded competencies and construct the quality education required for the twenty-firstcentury.

Nowadays, we are experiencing a third wave of reform. Many educational institutions aretrying to innovate, and many policies and programmes are attempting to introduceinnovations to transform education in the form of quality education for all for living together.Researchers and educators are involved in advancing a paradigm shift from traditionaleducation to the most appropriate form to face the challenges of the twenty-first century.

I am sure that you are involved in this movement to find renewed approaches to educationand I would very much like to benefit from your experiences.

Please let us know at the International Bureau of Education what you are doing andthinking so as to enrich the dialogue on the occasion of the forty-sixth session of theInternational Conference of Education to be held in Geneva from 5th to 8th September2001. Let us enrich together our practices to improve Quality Education for All to livetogether all over the world.


Keynote AddressBy Mr Sheldon Shaeffer

Head, Education Section, UNICEF New York and Director-DesignateUNESCO-PROAP

Redefinition of quality education in the Dakar frameworkof action on Education for All

[Note: This address was presented on Mr Shaeffer’s behalf by Mr Geoff Haw,a Resource Person to UNESCO-PROAP]

Your ExcellenciesDistinguished participants,

I greatly regret that I am unable to be with you today in Beijing for this very importantForum on Quality Education. However, I congratulate all those involved with its organizationand support for their initiative and vision. The people of the vast Asia-Pacific region willcontinue to benefit from events such as this for many years. UNESCO’s Bangkok office isvery pleased to be a partner in the forum, and I thank Mr Zhou Nanzhao, the Director a.i.for his leadership in working closely with our Chinese colleagues, our very gracioushosts, and others in its organization.

Today, my comments are directed at some very specific aspects of what are fundamentalto improving the quality and relevance of education for our young people in particular. Inmy past role in UNICEF, I have had a commitment to the education of children, and nowthat I am taking up the Directorship of UNESCO in Bangkok, I wish to ensure that ourwork there on behalf of the region focuses similarly on quality education wherever possible.I intend today to use key parts of the Dakar Framework of Action on Education for All asthe basis for my remarks.

In the many targets and strategies assembled in the Dakar Framework for Action, inparticular I wish to focus on one key target and one major strategy related to quality ofeducation. They are:

! Target 6: Improving all aspects of the quality of education for all, so that recognisedand measurable learning outcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy, numeracy,and essential life skills; and

! Strategy 8: Creating safe, healthy, inclusive, and equitably resourced educationalenvironments with clearly defined levels of achievement of all.

It is important to note that Dakar’’’’’s definition of quality is no longer focused on only teachingand learning and the classroom, but extends beyond those.

I also draw your attention to ten key components of quality that are designated in theFramework for Action. They are:

1. Healthy, well-nourished, and motivated students

2. Well-motivated and professionally competent teachers

3. Active learning techniques

4. A relevant curriculum

5. Adequate, environmentally-friendly, and easily accessible facilities

Qualityin education

and the Dakarframework

for action

Commentsof quality

3131Annexes

6. Healthy, safe, and protective learning environments which include adequate waterand sanitation facilities; access to or linkages with health and nutrition services;policies and codes of conduct which enhance physical, psycho-social, and emo-tional health of teachers and learners; and educational content and practices lead-ing to health-related knowledge, attitudes, values, and life skills.

7. Adequate evaluation of learning environments, processes, and outcomes

8. Participatory governance and management

9. Respect for and engagement with local communities and cultures

10. Adequately and equitably resourced educational institutions and programmes

In order to help children realise their right to a primary education of good quality, we needto:

1. promote early learning experiences from birth

2. guarantee children safe, protective, and gender-sensitive spaces, free them fromviolence and abuse, and ensure their health and well-being

3. raise teacher morale, status, and motivation

4. mobilise community support for education.

Above all, we must help to develop learning environments that promote and demonstratea broad definition of quality:

1. Quality learners: healthy, well-nourished, ready to learn, and supported by theirfamily and community

2. Quality content: with relevant curricula and adequate materials for literacy, numeracy,and the essential knowledge and skills for life

3. Quality teaching-learning processes: with child-centred and (life) skills-basedapproaches and technology applications to reduce disparities and promote learning

4. Quality learning environments:

! policies and practices which prohibit harassment, humiliation, violence, corporal pun-ishment, and substance abuse

! facilities with adequate classrooms, clean water supplies, and sanitation facilities

! services which promote safety and physical and psycho-social health

5. Quality outcomes, with defined learning outcomes (knowledge, attitudes and skills)and suitable ways to assess them, at classroom and national levels.

To develop and put in place this broad definition of quality, we need rights-based, child-friendly schools. Such a school:

1. is a child-seeking school

! actively identifying excluded children to get them enrolled in school and included inlearning

! treating children as subjects with rights and States as duty-bearers with obligations tofulfil these rights

! demonstrating, promoting, and helping to monitor the rights and well-being of ALLchildren in the community

2. is a child-centred school

! acting in the best interests of the child

! leading to the realization of the child’s full potential

Achieving qualityeducation

Components ofquality learning

Rights-based,child-friendlyschools


! concerned about the whole child: health, nutritional status, and well-being

! concerned about what happens to children before they enter school and after theyleave school

3. above all, has an environment of good quality

! inclusive of children

! effective with children

! healthy and protective for children

! gender-sensitive

! involved with children, families, and communities

A child-friendly school, inclusive of children:

1. does not exclude, discriminate, or stereotype on the basis of difference

2. provides education that is free and compulsory, affordable and accessible, espe-cially to families and children at risk

3. respects diversity and ensures equality of opportunity for all children (e.g., girls, workingchildren, children with disabilities, victims of exploitation and violence)

4. responds to diversity, meeting the differing circumstances and needs of children(based on gender, social class, ethnicity, and ability level)

A child-friendly school, effective with children:

1. promotes good quality teaching and learning processes, with instruction appropriateto each child’s learning needs, abilities, and learning styles, leading to active, co-operative, democratic, gender-sensitive learning

2. provides structured content and good quality materials and resources

3. enhances teacher capacity, morale, commitment, status, and income- and theirrecognition of child rights

4. promotes quality learning outcomes, by defining and helping children learn what theyneed to learn (such as literacy, numeracy, life skills, child rights), and teaching chil-dren how to learn.

A child-friendly school, healthy and protective for children:

1. ensures a learning environment of good quality, that is healthy, hygienic, safe, andgender-sensitive. There will be:

! adequate water and sanitation facilities and healthy classrooms

! healthy policies and practices – such as, being free of drugs and tobacco, corporalpunishment, and harassment

! a venue for health ministry services – such as, micro-nutrient and vitamin supple-ments, de-worming, school nutrition, counselling

2. provides life-skills based health education

3. promotes both the physical and the psycho/socio/emotional health of teachers andlearners

4. helps to defend and protect all children from abuse and harm

5. provides positive experiences for children.

A child-friendly school, sensitive to gender:

1. promotes gender equality in enrolment and achievement

2. eliminates gender stereotypes

3. guarantees girl-friendly facilities, curricula, textbooks, and teaching

3333Annexes

4. socialises girls and boys in a non-violent environment and encourages respect foreach others’ rights, dignity, and equality.

A child-friendly school, involved with children, families and communities is:

1. child-centred:

! promotes child participation in all aspects of school life

2. family-focused:

! works to strengthen families as child’s primary caregivers/educators

! helps children, parents, and teachers establish harmonious collaborative relation-ships

! involved with children, families and communities

3. community-based:

! encourages local partnerships in education

! acts in the community for the sake of children

! works with other actors (duty-bearers) to ensure fulfilment of children’s rights.

The Dakar Framework’s definition of quality is not restricted to teaching, learning and theclassroom. It stresses improving all aspects of education quality, so that recognised andmeasurable learning outcomes are achieved by all, especially in literacy, numeracy, andessential life skills. It also emphasises the creation of safe, healthy, inclusive, and equitablyresourced educational environments with clearly defined levels of achievement of all.

I wish you all well in your deliberations over the next few days, and place on record myappreciation of your participation here, and the preparation of the many papers that areto be presented. Finally, I trust that you will have safe journeys home to implement thefindings and recommendations from this Forum on quality education.

Thank you.


Keynote AddressBy Dr Zhou Nanzhao

Director a.i.UNESCO-PROAP

Promoting Quality Education in the New Century: Contexts,Visions, Approaches and UNESCO Strategies

[Note: The following are the summarised main points fromMr Zhou’s Powerpoint presentation]

Changing contexts: regional and international shifts

! Education for All (EFA): Equality of opportunity of access: (‘best education for thebest’)

! Low achievement amid high rate of expansion

! Quality Education for All (QEFA): equality of actual learning acquisition (‘best educa-tion for all’)

! Raising achievement level becoming an imperative

Shifts within education systems

! The irrelevance and uselessness of much out-of-dated information in the curriculum

! Alienation of the young: isolation from social reality hindering experiential learning,and attention to self-centred interest

! Failure in teaching values skills, social skills and life skills

! Relevance and usefulness called for by development challenges of poverty, socialexclusion

! Socialisation of learners: positive values and strong sense of social responsibilitycultivated

! Increasing attention to values dimension of educational quality:

! High technologies require not only high IQ but high EQ (education quality)

! Schooling: ‘quality’ expressed in test scores in college-bound cognitive tests

! Teacher-centred education: ‘quality’ depends on effectiveness of teaching

! Lifelong learning continuum: quality reflected in the motivation and capacity to learnto learn

! Learner-centred education: quality also depends on ‘quality’ of learners

Shift to knowledge-based economy

Industrial economy:

! labour intensive

! manufacturing activities dominant

! physical capital the primary source

! national mass market economy

! division of labour built on narrow specialised skills and organised in hierarchicalinstitutions

1. Changingcontexts

3535Annexes

Knowledge economy:

! information intensive: quality implying the capacity to collect, process and manageinformation

! knowledge service becoming the largest sector of economy: quality human capitalbecoming the primary resource

! labour organised around small enterprises: education to develop entrepreneurship

Shift to an information-intensive learning environment

Then: Traditional tools and technology in delivery of education

Now: Increasing Use of ICTs:

! Web-based e-learning

! Breaking barriers of time and space, for information access and dissemination toanyone, anytime and anywhere

! Providing most up-to-dated information

! Providing learning environment to be configured by the learners for their own needsand learning styles/paces

! Encouraging interaction between teacher and learners and experts

! Encouraging learners to contribute/publish their own materials to the learning envi-ronment.

Shifts of concern from local to international

! national and local concern: education as a primary vehicle for transmitting and pre-serving cultural norms

! education staying away from market: most of limited state public expenditure going topromote access

! international concern: demand for new learning opportunities expanding across com-munities on a world wide basis

! emergence of a global education market (estimated at $ 2 trillion sizing): new pro-vider of quality content and new sources of investment for quality.

Reflection on quality of education

! Quality to be defined in broader contexts of national development goals: an educa-tion relevant and useful to development needs; quality first means relevance andusefulness

! Quality to be defined in light of educational aims, going beyond productivist/instru-mental vision: quality education as an education that develops each individual’shuman potential to the fullest and shapes a ‘complete person’

! Quality implying greater effectiveness: the extent to which educational objectives isachieved

! Quality implies higher efficiency: optimum use of resources to achieve goals —achieving more with less resources (time and opportunity as well as human, physicaland material)

! Defining quality

! Quality defined not only in cognitive but in affective, ethical, physical dimensions ofhuman development

! Quality defined in light of the principle of lifelong learning: the capacity to learn through-out life

! Quality defined in view of the constant change of the world of work: education forjobs that do not exist yet; quality reflected in the adaptability to change and creativeentrepreneurship

2. Developing new visions


Defining quality

Quality defined by learning environment:

! family environment: parental education, nutrition, health care, reasonably high ex-pectations, and caring, stimulating

! school environment: health intervention, school climate for values to be ‘caught’

! safe, healthy social environment (including mass media)

! quality standards set in reflection of cultural diversity and individual differences:neither ‘one size fits all’, nor ‘cutting the feet to fit the size of the shoe’

! Public policy placing priority on quality

! Transformation of educational content

! New professionalism: education of educators

! Improving family/school environment

! Learner’s capacity and time to learn

! Improving examination/evaluation and monitoring systems

! Reforming labour/employment systems mobilisation/redistribution of resources

Public policy support

! Redefining aims of quality education in light of national development goals

! Setting national standards for performance

! Creating enabling and healthy environment

! Enhancing factors conducive to quality improvement

! Developing national data-base and assessment/monitoring systems

! Mobilisation/redistribution of resources

Diversification and reorganization of content

! Diversification to meet diversified learning needs

! Reform for greater relevance

! Integrated programmes for inter-disciplinary learning

! A new emphasis on teaching human values and social skills

! Reorganisation around four fundamental learning (learning to know, to do, to be, andto live together) or themes/problem areas

! Exploring alternative curricular models

Developing new professionalism of teachers to adapt to new roles

Teachers in the past:

! Sole source of information; an authority of knowledge, teaching rote learningmethods, a craftsman, soloist, chalk-talk lecturer, one-for-lifetime teacher.

Teachers now:

! One of many sources of information, a guide to explore the unknown, teaching howto lear, to do, to be and to live together (the mind, the hand, the heart), an artist/scientists in pedagogical methods, a team member and accompanist, a professionalable to use multi-media technology as tools, and a life-long learner in-service.

3. Developing new

approaches

3737Annexes

Attitudes

! Love for children and devotion to teaching as a profession, with strong belief thatthere are no un-teachable children who cannot learn well; there are only teacherswho cannot teach well

! Subject matter specialist and knowledgeable generalist

! Role models: teaching not only the book but the person

Better use of new information and communication technology

! ICT as subject to develop knowledge and skills for effective teaching-learning

! an aid and tool to serve educational goal: supplementing teachers, changing rolesof teachers but not replacing teachers

! ICT as educational resource: providing most updated information and encyclopaedia-type factual knowledge

! Facilitating and improving pedagogy and teaching styles

! Disseminating the best practices of the best teacher to reach out to the largestnumber of teachers/learners in most effective/efficient ways

Central mission:

! Contributing to peace and human development in an era of globalisation througheducation, science, culture and communication

Strategic objectives:

! Protecting the common good

! Enhancing diversity

! Sharing of knowledge

Cross-cutting themes:

! The fight against poverty

! Contribution of new ICT in the construction of knowledge

New mid-term strategy, 2002-2007

! Promoting education as a fundamental right

! Improving quality of education through diversification of contents and methods

! Promoting experimentation, innovation and sharing of information and best practice:

" As a laboratory of ideas: promoting research/reflection and policy dialogue onmajor issues/trends in quality education

" As a standards-setter: to assist Member States in developing core indicatorsand exchange of national quality standards and legal/ethical issues especially ine-learning

" As a capacity-builder: to assist Member States in policy changes, diversificationof educational content and methods, training of teacher trainers, assessment/monitoring systems

" As clearing house: to collect and disseminate successful innovations and bestpractices

" As a catalyst for international co-operation: to serve as an international Forumfor intellectual dialogues.

‘UNESCO is not an operational agency, yet it must see that global ethics for peace,justice and solidarity, through international co-operation in education are morally observedand tangibly applied’ (D-G).

4. UNESCO strategies for quality education


Final RemarksBy Dr Zhou Nanzhao

Director a.i.UNESCO-PROAP

Excellencies,Distinguished participants,Ladies and gentlemen,

As this Forum is drawing to a successful end, and in my capacity as Acting Director ofUNESCO-PROAP and as Acting Chief of ACEID, I am honoured and very pleased tohave this opportunity to make a few remarks at the end of our Forum on Quality Education.

We have had a most rewarding time in Beijing this week. The friendship and fellowshipwith each other has been most enjoyable. The stimulation of vigorous debate and clearinghouse exchange of ideas has been invigorating, and we have experienced a laboratoryof ideas, contributing to capacity building around the region. The willingness of participantsto be frank and open and to make constructive comments has been outstanding.

This has been a most distinguished gathering, because a wide range of policy makers,researchers, scholars and leaders in education from around 20 Members States hasbeen with us. The quality of the debate has been most representative of the entire region,with many perspectives and many voices.

Much has been accomplished in these four days.

The most excellent time that we listened to participants telling us of achievements withintheir countries during the plenary sessions showed that much has been achieved, andthat there are many ways in which the quality of education can be improved.

The keynote addresses have also been most valuable, with their many insightful contents.

The Roundtable workshops themselves were most useful. I am sure you will agree, becauseparticipants were willing to seriously challenge many issues on quality education. Thiswas very valuable, and we are most grateful for your clear and decisive suggestions.

There has been a strong regional and national policy shift of emphasis onto qualityimprovement of education as reflected in the country reports. There is strong politicalcommitment to and investment of national governments in quality education.

The increasingly close linkages of quality education to national development (economic,social and cultural/technological) goals, and to humanistic personality cultivation (goingbeyond productivist/instrumental view of education) are to be welcomed.

The range and high quality of research studies done in developing countries in the Asia-Pacific Region, as well as in developed countries, has reflected much strengthenedcapacity at national and local levels, and at institutional level to undertake policies relevantand action-oriented research (especially by teachers).

The diversified innovations and best practices in quality education have ranged fromcurriculum reforms, teacher professional development, use of ICT for effective teaching/learning, development of new indicators, standards, classroom and school-basedmanagement (applying the Total Quality Management in business to school setting),individualised instructional methods, to name a few. These have proved the dynamics

3939Annexes

and great strengths of Asia-Pacific countries as well as European and North Americancountries in implementing quality education.

Lessons learned from school visits have been noted, with implications for what UNESCOcould and should do in disseminating/sharing successful innovations as an effectivestrategy to promote quality education.

New perspectives based on solid research have contributed to the re-definitions, newvision and approaches to quality education, in light of the UNESCO mid-term strategy.

The relevant outcomes (including recommendations) of the working groups, which will betaken into account by UNESCO-PROAP, especially APEID, in developing Work Plans forthe biennium programme 2002-2003 of the mid-term strategy. All stakeholders will benefit:Government organizations, non-government organizations, educational systems, public/private education, school, family and community.

UNESCO-PROAP will finalise a comprehensive report of this Forum, and circulate itamong Member States. Furthermore, UNESCO-ACEID may consider selecting andpublishing quality papers as one title in the recently launched APEID series of EducationInnovations for Development, reflecting contributions and roles of policy, research andpractices in promoting quality education.

With regard to the next International Forum on Quality Education, further consultation withthe Chinese National Commission and other Member States for the venue, dates andthemes. Efforts will be made by UNESCO-ACEID to further expand the level of participationand the depths of papers/reports and to seek stronger support from UNESCOHeadquarters.

The challenge for us now is to turn ideas into actions, and theory into practice. That willlead to a quality education for all.

I most sincerely thank all people who had major responsibilities, such as the Chair Mr DuYue, the Vice Chairs, our most capable Rapporteur, Mr Marmar, and our esteemedResource Person, Mr Geoff Haw, who has done so much to assist us in the success ofthis Forum. However, everyone contributed in a most distinguished manner, and we aremost grateful for that.

I also thank the members of the APEID professional staff and the secretariat for theirsupport and assistance.

Thank you for your involvement in the Forum.

I wish you safe journey in your return home.


Annex 3

Selected Abstracts andCountry Papers

Editor’s Note: Where electronic copies of these were provided, they are included here.

AUSTRALIA

The Impact of National Goals and Policies on Educational Quality at Localand National LevelsBy Ms Sandra LloydExecutive Director, Strategic Planning and Information,Department of Education, Training and Employment, South Australia

This address provides an overview of the diversity within the Australian educationallandscape including the role and impact that states and territories have in shaping thenational education agenda and, in turn, the way in which this interaction influenceseducational progress and outcomes at the local level. It outlines the prominence ofnational goals and policies and the impact of these on curriculum reform, teaching andlearning, data-gathering and monitoring of student performance and teacher professionaldevelopment.

There is a focus on particular reforms and initiatives at the national, state and local levelaimed at improving the quality of learning outcomes and educational pathways for allyoung people. These include examples of local management reform undertaken in anumber of states to ensure increased flexibility and community involvement to better meetlocal school needs. References to major ongoing work, including development andimplementation of national literacy and numeracy benchmarks, accredited vocationaleducation and training in schools, indigenous education strategic initiatives, early childhoodeducation and development of online curriculum demonstrate how quality improvement isconceptualised within the broader context of lifelong learning and Australia’s ongoingcommitment to sustaining itself as a vibrant and innovative knowledge-based society.

BANGLADESH

Quality Improvement in Education for the Twenty-First CenturyBy M Nuruzzaman MiahJoint Secretary (Admn.), Ministry of Education

In Bangladesh, the question of improving the quality of education at all levels has naturallyand necessarily been receiving high attention from the policy makers as well as plannersconsidering the fact that although Bangladesh has achieved considerable progress inexpanding the system these successes have been eroded by low quality.

During the last 10 years, the literacy rate has nearly doubled (from 37 per cent in 1991 to66 per cent in 2000), the enrolment rates in primary and secondary education haveincreased tremendously and even in higher education, the enrolment rates at Bachelor’sdegree level and above have almost doubled (137.8 thousand to 219.6 thousand atBachelor’s degree level and 12.7 thousand to 30.1 thousand in Masters). Another positivefeature in the system is the wide participation of the female population. Both enrolmentand completion rates of the female students at all levels of education have risentremendously over the years and now are almost equal to that of the boys.

4141Annexes

As witnessed in other developing countries, these achievements are overshadowed bythe fact that in terms of the relationship of outputs of the education system to economicand social needs, it fails to educate students for the lives they are likely to lead and it alsodoes not provide equal access to quality education and therefore outcomes. Anotherweakness of the education system is its inability to adjust adequately to the recent revolutionsin science and technology, economic and political conditions and demographic andpolitical structures.

There is also a growing awareness that Bangladesh has a long way to go to walk side byside with other countries of South-East Asia and even with its neighbours in its preparationto meet the challenges of the twenty-first century, especially in the development and useof information technology. In the present rate of fast globalisation, the question of raisingthe quality of education is also critically important. The Dakar declaration has obviouslygiven Bangladesh adequate incentives to review the present situation in the domain ofeducation including the emerging issues.

The role of education is particularly critical in realising Bangladesh’s development potential.The ultimate basis of wealth in today’s world is not land or natural resources or evenphysical and financial capital. Bangladesh’s people are her greatest asset. Nurturingthem intelligently, utilising their vitality to the fullest, the country can grow at speeds tomatch those achieved elsewhere in Asia. Neglecting them and the investments theyrequire means foregoing growth, perpetuating poverty.

Bangladesh has several advantages in educating its population that many other developingcountries do not have. It is culturally homogenous, with one language, one dominantreligion, and no ethnic conflict. Family life is highly valued and serve as the principalcentre for learning basic social ethos, thus making the job of teachers in the formaleducation system relatively easier from a disciplinary standpoint. Teachers are held inhigh esteem by parents as well as students. Bangladesh’s very high population densityleads to economies in school location as well as size. There is widespread awareness ofthe benefits of education, even the poor consider children’s education as one of their topinvestment priorities. Those who can afford to do so appear to be willing to spend asizeable portion of their income on their children’s education.

In the context of its preparation to cope with the challenges of the 21st century and toimplement Dakar framework for action, Bangladesh has framed the new Education Policy2000. The implementation of the policy will not only make the population a potentialeducated force, it will also empower Bangladesh to emerge as a powerful nation in SouthAsia.

JAPAN

Quality Improvement in Schooling: Japanese CasesNational Educational Policies and Local InitiativesBy Professor Shin’ichi SuzukiGraduate School of EducationWaseda University, Tokyo

The ad hoc National Council on Education (NCE) established by the Parliamentary Act of1984, made several series of recommendations and they were implemented by theMinistry of Education and Science (Monbu-sho in Japanese, MoB hereafter). The guidingprinciples of educational innovation could be summed up into four leading ideas:individuation of school education, internationalisation of national educational system,education for information age and deregulation of educational administration (NCE’s finalreport, 1987).

Quality of School Education was a central issue for the NCE. Generally speaking, twotopics among others turned out to be intrinsically essential for the betterment of schooleducation and lifelong learning. Those were (1) teachers’ qualifications, their professionalcapabilities and responsibilities and (2) school curricula and teaching-learning processes,including teaching methods and learning resources, on the one hand, and open structure


of information processing, information compilation and communication in a newly developingsphere of new learning, on the other.

Accepting the present society to re-mould itself towards information oriented knowledgesociety, the NCE asserted to change the whole structure of higher education. All of theseissues were put on the tables of discussion. As the result of deliberation, the NCErequired MoB, the then key governmental administrative organisation, to revise the existinglaws and introduce new ones when necessary. MoB responded to its variousrecommendations and implemented a variety of policies, among which renovation andinnovation of school curriculum and teacher education were included. The establishmentof the University Council brought a broader structural and functional change of highereducation and the replacement of Social & Adult Education Department of MoB by theLife-Long Learning Bureau paved a way for new national network of continuing andadvanced learning for all people. The four principles of educational reforms were realisedinto practice to some extent.

However, the quality of public schooling has been criticised by many. For example, theRevised Law of Teaching Certificates was enacted by the Parliaments in 1988. It wasfollowed by restructuring teaching certificate courses within the institutions of teachereducation and training. At the same time, new induction systems and some provisionsfor in-service training for teachers were brought into existence. All of public educationcommittees were required to provide in each serving area a comprehensive scheme ofon-the-job training covering both fields of school-based training and teacher-centreprogrammes not only for initial teachers but for experienced senior teachers. Despitesuch innovating reorganisation of teacher education and training systems towards theend of 1980s, there arose again some criticisms of teachers’ professional abilities andattitudes towards professional responsibility.

In 1990s the National Government established several advisory councils so that theycould introduce new policies for Japanese society to adapt itself to stringent standardsand shifting situations of so-called global economy and international politics. Towardssmall government and privatisation was a dominant tone of institutional structuralreorganisation. Education could not be an exception.

The MoB set up the Central Council on Education (CCE). The MoB Ministers of CoalitionGovernments asked them to consider the most appropriate measures to bring the wholeof educational systems to the most successful adaptation to the needs from renewingJapanese and international contexts. Each council deliberated on one or some points ofeducational issues in a wider sense in order that every council might review, from thegeneral viewpoints, relevance of school curricula, efficient management of school andinnovative strategies for betterment and enhancement of teaching force. Lifelong learningschemes should be developed to a satisfactory degree of national networks where all theneeds of population of different areas, of different ages and of different vocationalorientations could be met. Various proposals were made public.

! From 2002 the newly standardised course of studies should be introduced to allschools from primary to secondary levels.

! Educational administration should be made more decentralised.

! School teachers will be required to hold renewed teaching certificates.

! Within the changing international circumstances, Japanese education should notonly adapt to new conditions but also retain its own cultural and traditional character-istics.

! Minority groups of people who are living in and coming to Japan should be givenequal opportunity in the rights to education and learning.

All of these requirements could be unique problems to education and schooling themselves.Whatever the objectives of education for all and lifelong learning in the Japanese situationscould be, schooling facilities and teaching force must be the solid foundation for theirrealization.

4343Annexes

MALAYSIA

Policy Dialogue on Quality Improvement in Education: Malaysian ExperienceBy H. J. Mazzlan Bin AbdullahDeputy-Director, Educational Planning and Research Division, Ministry of Education

Malaysia has always strived to achieve its objectives to further improve the quality ofeducation that encompasses inter alia, curriculum development, teachers’ development,assessment and evaluation and information technology. The focus has been onstrengthening the capacity for children to act progressively in this millennium through theacquisition of relevant knowledge, useful skills and inculcating positive attitude towardsracial harmony and healthy interactions.

At the same time, Malaysia is moving forward to be the Centre for Educational Excellencefor this region that can also be seen as a move to provide greater access and equity, andefficiency in higher education for Malaysians in particular, as well as people from otherregions. For Malaysia to be a Centre for Educational Excellence involves having qualityeducation, rigorous yet flexible educational programmes that can keep pace not onlywith new developments but also in meeting the different needs of the clientele.

In conclusion, the impacts of globalisation and liberalisation necessitate Malaysians toseek higher intellectual capital-knowledge for them to be ready for the KBE. In this respect,the sharing of ideas in this international intellectual dialogue not only provides more inputfor quality improvement in education among UNESCO member countries, but also pavethe way towards the establishment of a functioning intellectual community.

THE PHILIPPINESDemocratizing Quality: Secondary Education in the PhilippinesBy Dr Isagani R Cruz, Philippines

A model for democratising quality can be derived from the two People Power Revolutionslaunched by the Filipino people against two corrupt presidents in 1986 and 2000. Essentially,the two revolutions worked because volunteer critical masses, remaining within broadconstitutional frameworks, changed leaders through moral pressure and not througheither elections or violence.

This People Power Model of Quality harnesses the resources of civil society to eliminatecorruption in the government education ministry, to improve access to basic education,and to ensure that education remains relevant to its customers, the latter defined as bothstudents and future employers. The Philippine model includes the participation ofprofessional organisations and civil society groups in the evaluation and distribution oftextbooks and other instructional materials, the exercise of academic freedom on thesecondary level by private schools, the non-marginalisation of out-of-school youth throughan accreditation and equivalency system, and the institutionalisation of a wide base forcurricular reform.

SRI LANKAQuality Improvement in Education in Sri LankaBy Carlo FonsekaSecretary-General, Sri Lanka National Commission for UNESCO

Sri Lanka is an island with a population of about 19 million. Its per capita income is $823.Throughout its recorded history of about 2,500 years, Sri Lanka has placed a high valueon education. At present it has a literacy rate of about 90% for both males and females.

For several decades the emphasis was on primary and secondary education. Thecountry has been able to meet the demand for primary and secondary education both inregard to quantity and quality, affordable by a country relatively poor on material resources.

Sri Lanka is committed to the programme of “Education for All” by the year 2015. It issystematically pursuing the 10 components of quality set out in the Dakar Framework for


Action. In the recent past the focus has been mainly on improving the quality of highereducation. In this area, Sri Lanka has a long way to go before it can satisfy the demandfor quality education, in the quantity demanded.

The higher educational system consists mainly of 12 universities of the conventional typeand one open university. The annual enrolment in these universities is about 35,000.This accounts for only about 2 per cent of the relevant age group. Investment in highereducation during the past decade has rarely exceeded 0.5 per cent of the GDP.

Sri Lanka has embarked upon reforms to improve the quality of higher education. Thesereally represent an extension of the 10 components of quality defined in the DakarFramework for Action to higher education. The reforms calculated to improve the qualityof higher education include the following.

! Curriculum reforms

! Course unit and modular system

! Continuous assessment

! Broad-based the curriculum to give students greater options in accordance withcurrent employment demands

! Programmes for staff development.

! Requiring every higher education institute to prepare a three-year corporate plan.

! Improving university management and decentralisation of administration.

! Improving facilities for students (hostels, canteens, health services etc.)

The Report of the Task Force on Higher Education and Society convened by UNESCOand the World Bank was published last year. The main conclusion of the Report is thatwithout more and better higher education, developing countries are unlikely to registerrapid economic development. If so, the public interest will be best served by improvingthe quality of higher education.

Note: The following abstracts were presented by Chinese participants at the Forum, and were kindly translated from Chinese to English by the staff of the Chinese National Institute of Educational Research.

Curriculum Reform for Basic Education in ChinaBy Zhu MujuDeputy Director-General of Basic Education Department of the Ministry of Education

The curriculum reform for basic education since the 1990s has had the followingcharacteristic features:

! Adjusted objectives, ensuring that the new generation citizen is imbued with qualitiesnecessary to adapt to the 21st century’s society and scientific, technological andeconomic development, and shared human values.

! Changed mode of training talents, realising that there was a basic change in learningmode of the students who have desire and abilities to lifelong learning.

! Reformed curriculum contents, paying more attention to students’ experience, re-flecting the latest development in society and science and technology and meetingthe needs of the diversified development of students.

! Improved evaluation method, fulfilling the function of evaluation on promoting stu-dents’ potentials, personality and creativity and making every student has confi-dence and the ability of sustaining development.

The major objective of the new curriculum is to carry out the education principle of thestate, to implement quality-oriented education, to reflect the spirit of our age and to enablestudents to have a sense of social responsibility; a noble character; a spirit of democracyand respect for the rule of law; a spirit of innovation and practical capabilities; desire andability to lifelong learning; better knowledge of information technology; and an awarenessof environment.

4545Annexes

The paper shows the six specific objectives of the reforms implemented, and providesexamples of how each has been applied.

Efforts to Reform Basic Education Curriculum, Teaching Materials and TeachingBy Jiang MingDirector, Center for Curriculum and Teaching Materials AssessmentChina National Institute for Educational Research

Increasing fierce competition for comprehensive national strengths in the 21st centurymakes new demands for educational reform and development. The formulation andimplementation of the Action Plan on Revitalising Education towards 21st Century, approvedby the State Council in January 1999, and of the Decision of the Central Committee ofthe Communist Party of China and the State Council on Deepening Educational Reformand Promoting Quality-oriented Education in an All-Around Way issued on 13 June1999have been accepted as signed. Education is seen as a basic right for prosperity andrejuvenation of the Chinese nation and for training personnel of various levels and types.

The major guiding principles of deepening education and teaching reforms are presented.The major issues on deepening education and teaching reforms are explained in detail,including curriculum, teaching materials, and teaching, emphazising changes in teachingideas, such as education and teaching efficiency outlook, various experiments on teachingreform, and reforms for teaching and examination.

Finally, strategies for development education and teaching reforms are presented, bringingeducation into a current context, by:

! developing systematic, developmental and pluralistic concepts

! conducting more investigation on education, linking the teaching contents with reali-ties with emphasis on relevance, and widely spreading good practice after experi-ments and following the principle of creating new ways before negating the old

! displaying the characteristics of fundamental importance, making progress throughdifferent phases and different levels

A Thinking on the Quality of Education Following the Enrolment Reformof Junior High SchoolBy Xiamen Institute of Educational Science, Gao Pei

To carry out the Party’s educational policy, implement quality-oriented education, andlighten the student’s burdens, since 1998 the Education Commission of Xiamen City hasreformed the system of enrolling new students of junior middle school. It has changedfrom admitting the students with best results from external examinations to using acomputerised system operating from the school location. This system has been in operationfor three years. Have people achieved the anticipated reform purposes?

The main effects that this reform are as follows:

1. It has alleviated pupil’s heavy burden of study. It is good for their physical and mentalhealth and, to a great extent, their development in an all-around way.

2. The government has strengthened weaker schools through the provision of hard-ware and personnel.

3. This offers an extremely good external environment for reform in education of theprimary school. A lot of primary schools have gone on scientific research projects ofimplementing quality-oriented education. These projects are suitable to these schoolsas well as environment around them.

The main problems that this reform has met are:

1. Some schools and teachers have not adopted a systematic and organised ap-proach, with insufficient specific goals. The quality of education has declined inthese cases.


2. Since the primary school graduates’ differences are greater, the teaching of juniormiddle school presented some complex new difficulties. Some teachers, who areteachers of the key middle school, have not yet fully adapted to teaching studentswho are not selected by the examination method.

The main measures taken to counter these problems are:

1. Educational organisations need to establish a more uniform view of quality. We shouldgive consideration both to the educational result immediately apparent and those thatfollow in coming years. We should consider both the reported educational resultsand those that are not obvious.

2. A system should be set up to manage by objectives. According to the concreteconditions of each school, the educational resource that they occupy; and the com-munity environment that they are in, the achievable goals of quality education ofdifferent schools can vary slightly.

3. Similarly, a control system should be established that is attuned to the whole courseof education as a total body of knowledge and skills.

Training for Professional Skills and Comprehensive Occupation Ability: Core Issue forVocational Schools to Improve Quality of EducationBy Zhong Chongren and Zou ZhenjiangLongkou Secondary Technical School for Adult, Shandong Province

Judging by the current situation of developed countries in the world and the futuredevelopment trend in China, vocational school graduates will constitute a major force inChina’s labour market in the 21st century. Professional skills and comprehensive occupationability are very important for vocational students to find a job in the competitive labourmarket. Therefore, how these abilities can be improved is becoming the key issue forvocational school to increase education quality.

The training in professional skills and comprehensive occupational ability mainly dependson three variables: whether the objective of training is reasonable, whether training facilitiesare sufficient, and whether guidance and management are scientific and standardised.

In setting the objectives of training, efforts should be made to correct the previous practicesthat put an over-emphasis on professional skills training while ignoring other kind of skilltraining, such as abilities to solve problem, to communicate and to innovate. Therefore,we could enable students to adopt an approach of lifelong learning, and to practise thefour pillars of education: learning to be, learning to know, learning to do and learning tolive together. As regards professional skills training, the content of training should bedeveloped according to a fresh outlook based on social needs and development. Thesingle type of job skills training should be expanded to more of a multi-skills type of jobtraining. In addition, some advanced optional training close to the reality of the workplaceshould be added, so as to meet the needs of employment and job transfer.

The fundamental conditions in vocational school include the supply of adequate equipment,practical learning facilities and training of the professional teaching force. Vocational schoolswill need to raise funds through a range of channels and establish practical learningbases of a high standard that should be managed at high level and issued in a highlyefficient way. The problems related to the shortage of professional teaching force whichcan affect the skill training could be solved by adhering to the policies of “training ourselvesfirst, recruit second” and “in-service training first, sending out for short-term training second”.

For practical instruction and management, it is advocated to divide the content of traininginto several” modules” and special topics, from easy to difficult, from single tocomprehensive, following a sequential order and advancing step-by-step. With regard totraining methods, video playing, teachers’ demonstration and students’ practical learningshould be systematically combined, with more time being spent on practical operations.Every student is required to pass a strict examination in skills training so as to guaranteea high standard of training.

4747Annexes

In the meantime, vocational schools should pay more attention to practical learning andproject work, strengthen partnerships with enterprises and institutions relevant to subjectsoffered, and set up practical learning bases outside the school to help students find jobsin labour.

Deepening the Reform of Vocational Schools and Optimising the Environment ofRunning Schools for Improved Educational QualityBy Shan SuhuaLongkou Education Commission, Shandong Province

During the ninth five-year period, we had applied for a research grant from China NationalInstitute for Educational Research to set up an experimental school and to optimise theenvironment of managing it through financial support from the government. As a result,we have improved the quality of education considerably, implemented quality-orientededucation in an all-around way and greatly promoted vocational education development.

With financial support of 10 million Yuan (1.2 million US$) from the government, weinvested in physical facilities in the upper secondary vocational school. The school nowcovers an area of 40 thousand square meters, containing 50 teaching classes and 22standard laboratories. There are 2,088 students enrolled in the school. The reform andconstruction of this school have also stimulated the development of other vocationalschools.

We reformed the enrolment system and promoted the implementation of universal uppersecondary education. In recent years, great efforts have been made in reforming enrolmentsystem, changing from enrolling students once a year to three times a year. At the sametime the City Education Commission relaxed four restrictions on schools:

! relaxing restrictions on the enrolment plans for schools

! allowing schools to determine the number of students to be enrolled

! relaxing the age of attendance of students

! allowing schools to enrol students all year round.

Great efforts have been made to implement a “credit system” management model and toevaluate the situation in enrolment at the end of the year in a bid to promote theimplementation of education at upper secondary stage.

Efforts have been made to improve teacher quality and to realise the overall modernisationof education. In recent years, we have implemented Young Teacher In-service TrainingProject. This meant that young teachers should qualify for teaching in one year, become“backbone” teachers in three years and, through hard work, become a star teacher infive years. In the meantime,the City Education Commission has issued an ImplementationScheme of Longkou City on Computer-aid Quality Teaching Activity in Vocational Schools.This will require multimedia-aid teaching being introduced in quality classroom activities.

Teaching quality of vocational schools has been improved considerably due to effectivemeasures. More than 90% of vocational graduates have found employment after theircompletion of study, and they have been well received by employers.

The improvement of High School Education Quality in the 21st Century: Four-Step-Teaching Method and Six-Skill Method are New Models for Creative EducationBy Zhang Tianru and Tang XiziZhuzhou City No. 2 High School, Hunan Province

In the times of industrial production, the standard production process has created greatpossessions for society. Under this economic situation, educational assessment pursuingstandardised answers was no doubt beneficial to the development of education.

However, in today’s knowledge-based economy, society requires highly qualified personnelwho cannot only master and apply more enriched knowledge but also have a spirit ofinnovation and practical capacities.


Standardised assessment as used in the industrial era, as well as the traditional educationmodel combined with eight-part-styled thinking in China’s feudal society, has greatlyhindered the implementation of quality-oriented education.

Our school has developed and implemented innovative education since 1985. Especiallyfrom 1998 onwards, innovative education has been implemented in a very comprehensiveway in every course offered in experimental classes. Special teaching materials aiming tohelp students develop a spirit of innovation has been developed and used on a trial basis.Innovative education has been incorporated into compulsory courses.

According to the characteristics of different students, teachers’ teaching has structured anew teaching model with focus on developing students’ spirit of innovation and practicalcapacities while students’ learning has taken innovation and research as main learningmodel.

Art Education Fosters Highly Qualified Talents for the 21st CenturyBy Jiangyin Tianhua Art School

The 21st century calls for highly qualified and developed talents whose education lies inrenewed education thinking, that is, cerebral revolution.

The research project on Improvement in Education Quality towards the 21st Century notonly lays a theoretical foundation for fostering highly qualified personnel, but also providesan experimental basis for this cerebral revolution.

Art education is the best way to apply the cerebral revolution and to foster highly qualifiedtalents.

The principle of the comprehensive of expression of wisdom will be used to teach pupilsto draw inferences about other cases from one instance.

In accordance with the law of the combination among elements of comprehensive aestheticeducation, the quality of art education needs to be improved constantly.

Art education can help right- and left-brains to develop co-ordinately. It can best help thelatent capacity and intelligence of persons, so that in the end we will arrive at the highestaim of education, portraying the perfect character of children.

We show “joyful learning and understanding happily” in the method of operation, to makechildren successful and enjoy happiness in a joyful teaching atmosphere.

Practice proves that art education has promoted the all-around implementation of quality-oriented education, and improved artistic accomplishment and holistic qualitiescomprehensively. The children nurtured by arts appear to be more intelligent, aware ofinnovation and to have improved social manners. Science and arts, just like the front andback of one coin, can be divided.

The cerebral revolution is a necessity of historical development and art education is thehome of fostering highly qualified talents. We firmly believe that through unremittingexploration and practice, the great educational outlook with Chinese characteristics willhave a due position in the world’s educational field.

Establishing Educational and Teaching Evaluation Advantageous to Advancement ofQuality Education and All-around Development of Quality of EducationA Brief Introduction to the Achievements in ResearchBy Zheng Naihan, Yang Daoxiang, Lin GuoshuangResearch Group of Cangnan No. 1 High School, Zhejiang Province

“Experimenting by stages, exploring major fields, and promoting development” is our overallresearch train of thought. According to this train of thought and the current situation ofelementary education, we have carried out the research on three subjects in view ofexisting problems in our school.

4949Annexes

1. Practice and Research in the Establishment of Evaluation of Teachers: We havedeveloped a set of evaluation indexes to the information for the preparation work, theimplementation, and the usage of the results of evaluation of teachers, which issystematic, comprehensive and dynamic and has distinguishing features of our school.

2. Research into Campus Group Cultural Activities and Quality Education: In the past,campus culture research was theory-oriented, not practice-oriented. Realising theharmful tendency towards campus culture research, we have put forward an en-tirely new concept, that of Campus Group Cultural Activities, and elaborated itscharacteristics, aims, operating modes and its significance.

3. Research into the Modernisation of School Management: To solve theproblem with the educational micro-management of a key high school and meet thedemands of the development of social economy on school education, we haveexplored the managerial ideas, system and methods which can be adapted to themodernisation of school management. We have established an integrated system ofthe modernisation of school management, which has at present filled in the gaps inthis research field in the country.

Our research has made it possible for our school to develop at the optimum speed andmake unprecedented achievements. Our school passed the assessment of the first-class key high schools of Zhejiang Province in 1998 and was successively awarded thehonourable titles of City-level Advanced Unit in Education with Electrical Audiovisual Aids,Province-level Advanced Unit in Scientific Research in Education and Province-levelCivilised School. Meanwhile, our school was designated as Province-level ModernEducation Technology Experimental School. In the appraisal of the achievements in theresearch on educational subjects, our school won a second prize. Our achievements inthe research are radiating around the local district and playing a positive role.

Rational Thinking on Implementing Science Educationin Primary and Secondary SchoolsBy Xu GuochenQingdao Institute for Educational Research

In the 21st century, people will enter an era of a knowledge-based economy in which thepossession, disposition, production and distribution of the intellectual resources areconsidered as the important factors. In order to adjust to these changed times and tocontrol the influential aspects of a knowledge economy, various countries in the world arenow reforming their basic education system. They are re-assessing the important roleplayed by science education in raising the national scientific attainments and in enhancingthe spirit of innovation of the nation and practical achievements. However, scienceeducation has the problem of rationalism of science, social departmental selfishness,and the clash of thinking highly of theories while avoiding putting them into practice, dueto the influence of traditional education.

Because of the existing outdated concepts of education, science education in our countryis seriously prevented from developing as quickly and robustly as is desirable.

This paper starts from three points of views, which are raising the ability of scientificcompetition, improving the national constitutional predisposition to an unhealthy situation,and carrying forward the basic education reform to emphasise the necessity ofstrengthening science education. The article also analyses the negative influence ofstale concepts on science education proceeded from the present situation of scienceeducation in the country. Meanwhile the author puts forward the following ideas basedon both his own and predecessors’ research:

! First, science education of primary and secondary schools should change educa-tional concepts and acquire the science education outlook of “science for all” and“people-centred”.


! Second, science curriculum should be integrated, and the mutual relations ofscience, technique and society should be treated appropriately in order to realize theharmonious development between humans and science, scientific development andsocial progress.

! Third, the objective of science education should focus on the central task of improv-ing the students’ scientific accomplishments so that the subject system can be foundednot only reflecting humanism but also strengthening scientific accomplishments.

! Fourth, teachers should be recognised as being central to the ultimate strengtheningof science education.

Improve Education Quality Through Educational ExperimentsBy Yancheng Experimental High SchoolYancheng, Luohe, Henan Province

Educational research and experiments lasting from August 1996 to November 2000 inYancheng Experimental High School focused on Deng Xiaoping’s “three needs”: educationshould be geared to the needs of modernization, of the world and of the future. Withguidance, research and innovation as the impetus, the improvements in education qualityas the target and base point have achieved fruitful results.

The following is the brief introduction of the results of research and experiments.

1. Defining connotations, setting targets and placing emphasis on research on theory.It should be clear that with the coming of 21st century, science and technology isgoing ahead rapidly, and international competition is becoming much more intensive.Certainly, education is in a strategic position for the formulation of comprehensivenational strengths. The number and quality of all kinds of talents determine whether anation is strong or weak. The need for talents put forward higher requirements foreducation. All students should be the builders and successors of socialism, anddevelop in all-round way in morals, intellectual rigour, physics, aesthetics. They shouldalso have the characteristics of idealism, morality, knowledge and discipline.

2. The modern curriculum system has been developed consisting of three parts:subject curriculum, activity curriculum, and environment curriculum. Measures havebeen taken to:

! Reform subject curriculum, set its basic status and bring its principal function intoplay. Two basic problems of education reform were solved successfully. One is togive students access to all subjects and to offer periods required under the guidanceof “National Curriculum Scheme”. The other is to establish ‘classroom teaching modelof quality education’. The school won first prize in educational research results inHenan province, and has been selected as a model school of ‘national class teach-ing model of quality education’.

! Standardise the activity curriculum and provide students with selective curriculum.An article titled “Selective Curriculum in Yancheng Experimental Secondary School”was published in China Education News.

! Develop an environmentally-friendly curriculum and thus improve the school learningenvironment and exert a subtle educational influence on students.

3. Efforts have been made to improve moral education, to perfect managementmechanism, to deepen the reform for educating and teaching, to govern the schoolaccording to law, and to strengthen education in Information Technology.

4. The education quality for the 21st century has been promoted in a comprehensiveway.

! Emphasis on moral education. The “Unit, Ten, Hundred, Thousand Project” initiated5 years ago has been completed, and reached a high standard. In one excellentschool at the city level, 13 excellent classes or groups, 98 outstanding teaching staffand 1271 top students have been nominated, which are 30 per cent, 79 per centand 75 per cent of total number respectively.

5151Annexes

! Optimising knowledge education. The school enrolment rate and retention rate were100 per cent over past 5 years while 100 per cent of student have passed theirexaminations. The school has been nominated as an excellent school at city levelthat trained a large number of qualified students for the higher level of school.

! Emphasis on physical education. The school is an advanced unit that met the physi-cal education standard set by the province and implemented traditional exerciseprogramme. The rates of students who meet the physical education standard andwith excellent marks were 98 per cent and 47 per cent respectively.

! The school has also paid careful attention to art education and vocational education.

In the five years of research and experiment, the school has become an exemplarywindow school at both county and city level, and has been nominated as a pilot schoolof quality education at county, city and provincial level, and as a research and experimentbase for three research projects conducted by China National Institute for EducationResearch.


Annex 4

School Visit

A visit to the High School affiliated with the Chinese People’s University was organized forparticipants on the 14th June, aptly titled Quality in Action. This school was described asa school of the future, or what Chinese schools would like to be in the future.

There were two phases of the visit.

The first phase comprised a formal presentation by the principal on the school highlightingits academic excellence, including its outstanding performance in Academic Olympiads,sports and games, and cultural activities. The forthcoming exchange programme with USschools was also mentioned.

In the second phase, participants were taken for a tour around the school, including thelibrary for the teachers, the language laboratory, the training centre for driving, the computercentre with Internet facilities, a distance education centre with video conferencing facility,and the music centre.

Participants expressed great appreciation for the opportunity to visit and observe thisoutstanding school, and to talk with students and staff.

5353Annexes

Annex 5

List of International Participantsand Contact Details

Australia Ms Sandra LloydExecutive DirectorStrategic Planning and InformationDepartment of Education, Training and Employment9th Floor, 31 Flinders StreetG.P.O. Box 1152, Adelaide South AustraliaFax: 61-8-82262299E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Simon LamplughProject ManagerInternational programmeCurriculum Corporation, Casseldon PlaceLevel 5, 2 Lonsdale StreetMelbourne VictoriaTel: 61-3-92079679Fax: 61-3-96391616E-mail: [email protected]

Bangladesh Dr Ansar Ali KhanUNESCO-Dhaka, IDB Bhaban 16th FloorE/8-A Rorkeya SararSher-e Bangla NagarDhaka 1207Tel: 88-02-9123469Fax: 88-02-912-3468E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Nuruzzaman MiaJoint Secretary, Ministry of Education1 Asian HighwayPalassy – NikkhumDhaka 1206c/o Bangladesh National Commission for UNESCOTel: 880-2-8627968Fax: 880-2-8613420

Cambodia Dr Nath BunrouenDirector of Teacher Training DepartmentMinistry of Education Youth and Sports80 Blvd, Preah NorodomPhon PenhTel: 855-15-851975Fax: 855-23-217250E-mail: [email protected]


China, People’s Mr. Bin LiuRepublic of Chairman

Chinese International Education Exchange Association

Ms. Keming HaoChinese International Education Exchange Association

Ms. Shuyun ShiDeputy Secretary-GeneralUNESCO-CNC, 35# Damucang HutongBeijing 100816

Prof. Mingyuan GuChairman, Chinese Education Society

Mr. Du YueDirector, UNESCO-CNC35# Damucang Hutong, Beijing 100816

Mr. Dongzhan YangDirector, Education InformationDepartment of Science and TechnologyMinistry of Education35# Damucang Hutong, Beijing 100816

Prof. Mansheng ZhouDevelopment CentreMinistry of Education35# Damucang Hutong, Beijing 100816

Mr. Linyuan WangDirector OfficeDepartment of Teacher TrainingMinistry of Education35# Damucang Hutong, Beijing 100816

Prof. Zhongjian ZhaoInstitute of Comparative EducationChinese East-South Normal UniversityShanghai

Mr. Liqin YanPresident & ProfessorChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088

Mr. Fuzeng YuFormer Secretary-GeneralUNESCO-CNC35# Damucang HutongBeijing 100816

Prof. Guodong XieVice PresidentChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong LuBeijing 100088Tel: (86-10) 6200-3404

5555Annexes

China, People’s Ms. Jian LiuRepublic of (cont’d) Deputy Director

Office of National Education Science PlanningChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong LuBeijing 100088Tel: (86-10) 6200-3389

Ms. Ming JiangDirector of Curriculum Development CentreChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong LuBeijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6200-3364

Ms. Yaqin QiDeputy Director of CNIER OfficeChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong LuBeijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6201-3039

Mr. Baocheng JinDirectorOffice of National Education Science PlanningChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong LuBeijing 100088Tel: *6-10 6200-3389

Ms. Bin LiDirector, Education Science Publishing HouseChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088

Mr. Tiejun ZangProfessor, Department of Education Evaluation & MonitoringChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6200-3356

Ms. Jun SongChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6201-3039

Mr. Xiangchi WeiEducation Research Administrative OfficeChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong LuBeijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6200-3390

Ms.Lengmei LiuEducation Research Administrative OfficeChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6200-3390


China, People’s Ms. Jiwen LiuRepublic of (cont’d) Information Centre

China National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6200-3345

Mr. Jianzhong LiDirector of International Affair OfficeEducation Research Administrative OfficeChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6236-7491Fax: 86-10 6203-3132E-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Boliang GuoInternational Affair OfficeEducation Research Administrative OfficeChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6236-7491Fax: 86-10 6203-3132E-mail: [email protected]. Wanqin LiuCentre for Gem. Hygiene & Art Education StudyChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong LuBeijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6200-3347

Dr. Ni WuEducation Strategic and Planning StudyChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6200-3362

Dr. Yong FangCentre of High Education StudyChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6204-2470

Prof. Zhiren LiCentre of High Education StudyChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6204-2470

Ms. Yawen YangCentre of High Education StudyChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088Tel: 86-10 6204-2470

Mr. Baoshan YangCentre for Curriculum DevelopmentChina National Institute for Educational Research46# Bei San Huan Zhong Lu, Beijing 100088

5757Annexes

China, People’s Dr. Zhang TiedaoRepublic of (cont’d) Director, Division for Collaborative Research and Exchange

7# Xichang’anjie Avenue, Beijing 100031Tel: 86-10 6606-7158Fax: 86-10 6607-5470E-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Dengjia JiangPrincipal, The 9th Middle School37# Hangzhou Road, PingduShandong Province 266700Tel: 86-532 736-1375

Mr. Feng LiuLimai SchoolTianzhu real estate development areaBeijing 101300Tel: 86-10 232-9373

Mr. Haihai TangPrincipal, Shenzhen High SchoolShen nan da daoShenzhen 518040Tel: 86-755 393-9893

Guosen LiaoHaili Primary SchoolShenzhen 518003Tel: 86-755 554-9165

Mr. Xianru ZhuPrincipal, Experimental Middle SchoolYancheng CountyHenan 462300Tel: 86-395 616-3719Mr. Tianru ZhangThe 2nd Middle School33# Tiantai Road, ZhuzhouHunan Province 412007Tel: 86-733 882-3823

Ms. Pei GaoXianmen Institute for Educational Research5# Lizhi Road, XiamenFujian Province 361003Tel: 86-592 203-5710

Mr. Zhang WangPrincipal, Shuguang Senior Vocational School138# Yacheng StreetYongzhong Town, WenzhouZhejiang Province 325-024Tel: 86-577 8693-5116

Mr. Yinliang YuPrincipal, Waishi Primary School215# Kang le fang, WenzhouZhejiang Province 325000Tel: 86-577 919-8224


China, People’s Mr. Chongren ZhongRepublic of (cont’d) Vice Principal

Longkou Adult Vocational SchoolHaidai Town, LongkouShandong Province 265716Tel: 86-535 888-6422

Ms. Shuhua ShanDeputy Director, Longkou Education CommissionXihuan Road, LongkouShandong Province 265701Tel: 86-535 850-1671

Mr. Yonghua WangDongying Education BureauDongying CityShandong Province 257091Tel: 86-546 833-2334

Mr. Ying ShiPrincipal of Tianhuan Art School105# Junshan Road, Jiangyin CityJiangsu Province 214400Tel: 86-510 682-6787

Mr. Beiyan ZhaoTianhuan Art School105# Junshan Road, Jiangyin CityJiangsu Province 214400Tel: 86-510 682-6787

Mr. Hongjiang TangHeilongjiang Office for Language & Character Administrative10# Hongxiang Road, Hegang DistrictHarbin, Heilongjiang Province 150090Tel: 86-415 232-9373

Mr. Chongwen XuVice DirectorHuangpu Education AcademyInstitute of Learning Research105# Xinqiao Road, Shanghai 20003Tel: 86-21 6359-8642

Ms. Li ChenLecture, Department of Education AdministrativeBeijing Education AcademyHuangsi, Dewai, Beijing 100011Tel: 86-10 8208-9203E-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Wenbin JinEducation InspectorEducation Inspecting OfficeZhejiang Province

5959Annexes

China, People’s Mr. Libing WangRepublic of (cont’d) Department of Education

Faculty of EducationUniversity of ZhejiangTel: 86-571 8827-3656Fax: 86-571 8827-3659

Mr. Qinquan ChenThe 14th Secondary SchoolWenzhou CityZhejiang 325000Tel: 86-577 8885-0848

Mr. Chongqing DuCentre of Quality Education StudyChinese South-West Normal UniversityChongqing, Sichuan 400715Tel: 86-23 6825-2447Fax: 86-23 6825-2530

Mr. Qixun GunOffice of Basic Education ResearchHenan Province 450000E-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Wuqiang ZhaoThe 14th Secondary SchoolWenzhou, Zhejiang 32500E-mail: [email protected]

Ms. Lili BaiQuang Chang Lu Primary School98# Guangchang RoadWenzhouZhejiang 32500Tel: 86-577 8829-0350E-mail: [email protected]

Ms. Shaoming ChenQuang Chang Lu Primary School98# Guangchang RoadWenzhouZhejiang 32500Tel: 86-577 8829-0350E-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Weiping LinDirectorWenzhou Education CommissionWenzhouZhejiang 325000Tel: 86-577 8821-9101

Mr. Zhichao ChenDirectorCangnan County Education CommissionCangnan County, WenzhouZhejiang 325000Tel: 86-577 6475-1551


China, People’s Mr. Jiaxuan DongRepublic of (cont’d) Director, Office of Education Development Strategic Study

Wenzhou Education CommissionWenzhouZhejiang 325000Tel: 86-577 8822-4975

Mr. Naihan ZhengThe 1st Middle School in CangnanCangnan County, WenzhouZhejiang 325000

Mr. Guangcheng ZhouLongkou Experiment Primary SchoolLongkouShangdong 265701

Mr. Ruyan ZhaoTinahu Art SchoolJiangyin CityJiangsu 214400Tel: 86-510 683-6787

Mr. Guochen XuQingdao Institute for Education Research4# Hubei Road, QingdaoShangdong 266001

Mr. Ruizheng XiangHuanqiao Middle School111# Lucheng RoadWenzhouZhejiang 325000

Mr. Binggui JinOhai Middle SchoolWenzhou, Zhejiang 325000

Democratic People’s Mr Mun Jong NamRepublic of Korea Counsellor and Coordinator

Embassy of DPRK14 Mooban Suanlaemtong 2 Soi 28Pattanakarn RoadSuan Luang DistrictBangkok 10250ThailandTel: 66-2-3192686Fax: 66-2-3186333

Mr Hchoe DokhunDeputy DirectorMinistry of EducationDemocratic People’s Republic of Koreac/o National Commission of the Democratic Republic of Korea for UNESCOP.O. Box 44, PyongyangNorth KoreaFax: 850-2-3814660

6161Annexes

Hong Kong SAR Professor Yin Cheong Chengof China Director

Centre for research and International CollaborationThe HongKong Institute of Education10 Lo Ping Road, Tai PoNew TerritoriesTel: 852-29487722Fax; 852-29487721E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Wing Ming CheungRegistrarHong Kong Institute of Education10 Lo Ping RoadTai Po, New TerritoriesFax: 852-29487721

Dr Magdalena MokDeputy Centre DirectorCentre for Research and International Collaboration’HongKong Institute of Education10 Lo Ping RoadTai PoNew territoriesTel: 852-29487704Fax: 852-29487721E-mail: [email protected]

India Dr Ashwani SharmaSenior lecturerRegional Resource CenterPunjab UniversityChandigarhE-mail: [email protected]

Dr Kuldip PuriSenior Lecturer cum Project OfficerRegional Resource for Adult and Continuing EducationPunjab University, Chandigarh# 339 Section 15-DChandigarhIndia 1600015Tel: 91-17-2547315E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Marmar MukhopadhyaySenior FellowNational Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA)17-B Sri Aurobindo MargNew Delhi 110016Tel: 91-11-6518218 (Office) 91-11-6853492 (residence)Fax: 91-11-6853041; 6865180E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]


Japan Professor Shinichi SuzukiGraduate School of EducationWaseda University1-6-1 Nishiwada, Shinjuku-kuTokyo169-8050 JapanTel: 81-3-52861539Fax: 81-3-52861539E-mail: [email protected]

Lao PDR Dr Khamphay SisavanhDirector of National Research Institute for Educational SciencesMinistry of Education for Lao PDRTel: 856-21-212026Fax: 856-21-212026

Macau SAR of China Ms Catarina FongAssistant to the DirectorUNESCO Centre of MacauAlameda Dr Carlos d’ AssumpcaoMacau, ChinaTel: 853-727058Fax: 853727057E-mail: [email protected]

Malaysia H. J. Mazzlan Bin AbdullahDeputy-DirectorEducational Planning and Research DivisionMinistry of Education2nd Floor, Bldg. J (South)Damansara Town Centre50604 Kula LumpurTel: 60-03-2556813 60-03- 2583149Fax: 60-03-2554960

Pakistan Mr M. Tariq SaeedProgramme Officer–Education,UNICEF, Pakistan124-111C Model TownLahore PakistanTel: 92-42-5868432 92-42-5863227Fax: 92-42-5863142E-mail: [email protected]

Philippines Mr Isagani CruzUndersecretaryDepartment of Education, Culture and SportsPasig City 1600Metro ManilaTel: 63-2-6374211Fax: 63-2-6364877E-mail: [email protected]

6363Annexes

Philippines (cont’d) Mr Benito E. BenozaExecutive Assistant to the DirectorSEAMEO-INNOTECH (Southeast Asian Ministry of Education Regional Center for Educational Innovation and Technology)Commonwealth Avenue, U.P. DilimanQuezon City, PhilippinesTel: 63-29287348Fax: 63-2-9210224E-mail: [email protected]

Ms Lourdes R. QusumbingPresident, UNESCO-APNIEVEc/o Mirriam CollegeUPPO Box 110, Diliman1101 Quezon City, PhilippinesFax: 63-2-4260172 63-2-4260169E-mail: [email protected]

Republic of Korea Professor Ki-Seok KimDirectorInstitute of Asia-Pacific for Educational Development (iAPED)Seoul Normal UniversitySan 56-1 Shilim-dongKwanak-Gu SeoulTel: 82-2-8807646Fax: 82-2-8781665E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Jin Dong-SeopDirector GeneralInstitute of Asia-Pacific Education DevelopmentSeoul National UniversitySan 56-1, Shillim-dongKwanak-gu 151-748Tel: 822-880-7650Fax: 822-878-1665E—mail: [email protected]

Mr Lee Seung-hwanDirector of Education UnitKorean National Commission for UNESCOC.P.O. 64, SeoulFax: 82-2-7557477E-mail: [email protected]

Singapore Mr John GoodbanDirectorIB, Asia-Pacific Regional Officec/o United World College of Southeast AsiaPasir PanjangP.O. Box 15 Singapore 911121Tel: 65-7760249Fax: 77644369E-mail: [email protected]


Sri Lanka Dr Carlo FonsekaSecretary- GeneralSri Lanka National Commission for UNESCOMinistry of EducationInsurupaya, BataramullaTel: 94-1-865889Fax: 94-1-872158E-mail: [email protected]

Thailand Assoc. Prof Kreecha VongnamAssociate Dean for Student AffairsFaculty of EducationNaresuan UniversityPhitsanulok-NakornSawan RoadAmphoe Muang, Phitsanulok 6500Tel: 66-55-261029Fax: 66-55-261028E-mail:[email protected]

Dr Pollasanha PolsitongDeputy Secretary-GeneralOffice of the Rajabhat Institutes CouncilMinistry of EducationBangkok 10300Tel: 66-2-2803463Fax: 66-2-2804906

Ms Pornnipha LimpaphayonDeputy Permanent Secretary/Secretary GeneralThai National Commission for UNESCOMinistry of EducationRajdamnoen-nok AvenueBangkok 10300Fax: 66-2-2823490E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Rujroad KaewuraiHead, Department of Educational Technology and InformationFaculty of EducationNaresuan UniversityPhitsanulok-NakornSawan RoadAmphoe MuangPhitsanulok 65000Tel: 66-55-261029Fax: 66-55-261028E-mail: [email protected]

Assoc. Prof Dr Talernsook KaewuraiHeadDepartment of Educational Administration and DevelopmentFaculty of Education, Naresuan UniversityPhitsanulok-NakornSawan RoadAmphoe MuangPhitsanulok 65000Tel: 66-55-261029Fax: 66-55-261028E-mail: [email protected]

6565Annexes

Thailand (cont’d) Mrs Tippawan UthongsapOffice of Educational Assessment and Testing ServicesDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction DevelopmentMinistry of EducationRajdamnoen-nok AvenueDusit, Bangkok 10300Fax: 66-2-6285344

Assoc. Prof Dr Wareerat KaewurajHead, Department of EducationFaculty of EducationNaresuan UniversityPhitsanulok-NakornSawan RoadAmphoe Muang, Phitsanulok 65000Tel: 66-55-261029Fax: 66-55-261028E-mail: [email protected]

USA Dr Pamela KeatingUniversity of WisconsinU S AHome address: 4116-12th Street,Kenosha, WI 53144USAFax: 1-262-59593216E-mail: [email protected]

Viet Nam Mrs Nguyen Thi HoiSecretary-GeneralViet Nam National Commission for UNESCO8 Khuc Hao StreetHanoi, Viet NamTel: 84-4-1993510Fax: 84-4-8230702E-mail: [email protected]

Resource Person Mr Geoff HawConsultant to APEID, UNESCO-PROAPManaging Director, Sagacity Services10 Picadilly PlaceWheelers Hill 3150Victoria, AustraliaTel: 61-3-95900173Fax: 61-3-95900174Mobile: 61-418-580081E-mail: [email protected]

UNESCO Paris Mme Kaisa SavolainenDirector ED/PEQ a.i.Fax: 33-14-5685639

Mme Bah DialloDADG/EDUNESCO7 Place de Fontenoy75352 Paris 07 SP


UNESCO Paris (cont’d) Mrs Lindy JoubertConsultantGeneral Secondary Education SectionDivision of SecondaryTechnical and Vocational EducationUNESCO, 7 Place de Fontenoy75352 Paris 07 SPTel: 33-1-45681000Fax: 33-1-45685630

UNESCO-PROAP Mr Zhou NanZhaoActing Chief, ACEIDDirector a.i. UNESCO-PROAPDarakarn Building920 Sukhumvit RoadBangkok 10110Tel: 391-0577 ext 212Fax: 391-0866E-mail: [email protected]

Mr B K PassiConsultant, ACEIDUNESCO-PROAPDarakarn Building920 Sukhumvit RoadBangkok 10110, Thailand

Ms Ginna G. GealConsultant, ACEIDUNESCO-PROAPDarakarn Building920 Sukhumvit RoadBangkok 10110, ThailandTel: 66-2-3910577 ext. 203Fax: 66-2-3910866E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Ms Kraiwan CharnviwatanaSecretary, ACEIDUNESCO-PROAPDarakarn Building920 Sukhumvit RoadBangkok 10110, ThailandTel: 66-2-3910577 ext 210Fax: 66-2-3910866E-mail: [email protected]

UNESCO-Apia Office Ms Edna Taitfor the Pacific States Director

UNESCO-Apia Office for the Pacific StatesP.O. Box 5766 MatautuApia, SamoaTel: 685-24276Fax: 685-22253/26593E-mail: [email protected]

6767Annexes

UNESCO-Apia Office Mrs Galo Apelufor the Pacific States National project Officer (Education)(cont’d) UNESCO Apia Office for the Pacific States

P.O. Box 5766, MatautuApia, SamoaTel: 685-24276Fax: 685-22253/26593E-mail: [email protected]

Documents

Second International Forum on Quality Improvement in Education