published_or_final_version / abstract / toc / Educational Psychology / Master / Master of Social Sciences

published_or_final_version / Education / Master / Master of Science in Information Technology in Education

published_or_final_version / abstract / Education / Master / Master of Education

published_or_final_version / abstract / Education / Master / Master of Education

published_or_final_version / Education / Master / Master of Education

published_or_final_version / Education / Master / Master of Education

by Chui Hong Sheung. / Thesis (M.A.Ed.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1988. / Bibliography: leaves 88-105.

教育是為學生而設的。不過，在課程設計上，學生往往並沒有發言權。首屆香港中學文憑試剛剛完成，教育界人士和研究員應把握機會，尋找改善校本評核部分規劃與實施的方法。傾聽學生的意見，重視他們的觀點將有助完善有關的課程設計。 / 透過訪問24位學生和兩名英國語文科教師，本研究關注學生的聲音，即他們如何表達、理解和詮釋他們自身和在英國語文科校本評核的學習歷程。本研究反映和肯定了學生的多元觀點，其研究重點為： / (1) 學生在校本評核中的學習經驗 / (2) 學生如何表達他們在校本評核中的角色 / (3) 學生如何參與改善教室裡的學習 / 在實際層面上，學生的觀點在微調課程和建議改革的方向和方法上，有其獨有的貢獻。在理論層面上，本研究探索學生在課程上的參與度，並嘗試完善Fielding (2001) 提出的學生參與度架構。當仔細研究該架構時，不難發現學生在第二層(學生作為積極的回應者)與第三層(學生作為共同研究員)之間存有缺縫。當中，學生應該還可擔當很多不同的角色。從研究結果所得，學生可以成為改革的積極原動力，更可以成為課程的實踐者。當學校文化和教師專業能給予適當的養份，學生的聲音便能呈現。否則，學生或選擇不發聲，或學生的聲音在課程實施上不能產生任何作用。 / Education is for students. Nonetheless, even the curriculum is designed for students, they have the least say in it. With reference to the relatively new initiative in Hong Kong: the Hong Kong Diploma of Education (HKDSE), it is time for researchers and educationalists to consider ways to improve the planning and implementation of the School-Based Assessment (SBA). Listening to students and valuing their perspectives can enable a more thorough planning of the curriculum. / Through interviewing twenty four students and two English teachers, this research aims at addressing the student voice, which means students expressing their views, interpretations and understanding with the expectation that someone will listen. During the process, students’ multiple perspectives on learning and their interpretations of the SBA in the English Language curriculum are reflected and would be acknowledged. The three foci of this research are: / (1)What do students experience in the SBA? / (2)How do students present their roles in the SBA? / (3)How are students involved in the improvement of what happens in classrooms? / At a practical level, students’ perspectives contribute to fine-tuning the curriculum, and suggest directions or ways to initiate changes more successfully. At a theoretical level, the study aims to further explore students’ involvement in the curriculum, and fill the gaps of the framework of four levels of student participation pioneered by Fielding (2001). If taking a closer look at his framework, there should be some other roles students can take, particularly in the gap between Level 2 (students as “active respondents“) and Level 3 (students as “co-researchers“). The data collected revealed that students can be active agents of change and practitioners in the SBA curriculum implementation, given that the school culture, teachers’ professional knowledge favour the emergence of student voice. Otherwise, the opinions of students would remain unvoiced or merely be heard, and no further action could be taken. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Chiu, Suk Mei Eva. / Thesis (Ed.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2012. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 345-357). / Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Abstract also in Chinese; appendix includes Chinese. / Chapter CHAPTER ONE --- INTRODUCTION --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Background --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- School-based Assessment as the context of the study --- p.1 / Chapter 1.3 --- The importance of listening to student voice --- p.3 / Chapter 1.4 --- Student voice in the SBA --- p.4 / Chapter 1.5 --- Research questions --- p.5 / Chapter 1.6 --- Significance of the research --- p.5 / Chapter CHAPTER TWO --- LITERATURE REVIEW: STUDENT VOICE --- p.8 / Chapter 2.1 --- Background of student voice --- p.8 / Chapter 2.2 --- What is student voice? --- p.11 / Chapter 2.3 --- Why should we listen to student voice? --- p.14 / Chapter 2.4 --- Are students eligible to have their voice? --- p.17 / Chapter 2.5 --- Levels of student involvement --- p.21 / Chapter 2.5.1 --- Level 1 Students as data source --- p.23 / Chapter 2.5.2 --- Level 2 Students as active respondents --- p.24 / Chapter 2.5.2.1 --- Consultation --- p.25 / Chapter 2.5.2.2 --- Recognition --- p.26 / Chapter 2.5.3 --- Level 3 Students as co-researchers --- p.28 / Chapter 2.5.4 --- Level 4 Students as researchers --- p.29 / Chapter 2.5.5 --- Summary --- p.30 / Chapter 2.6 --- Core values --- p.31 / Chapter 2.6.1 --- Core value 1: Communication as dialogue --- p.31 / Chapter 2.6.2 --- Core value 2: Requirement for participation and democratic inclusivity --- p.32 / Chapter 2.6.3 --- Core value 3:Recognition that power relations are unequal and problematic --- p.32 / Chapter 2.6.4 --- Core value 4: Possibility for change and transformation --- p.33 / Chapter 2.7 --- Empirical studies of student voice --- p.34 / Chapter 2.8 --- Orientations of student voice --- p.50 / Chapter 2.9 --- Frameworks of student participation --- p.51 / Chapter 2.10 --- Summary --- p.52 / Chapter CHAPTER THREE --- LITERATURE REVIEW: SCHOOL-BASED ASSESSMENT IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE CURRICULUM --- p.54 / Chapter 3.1 --- School-based assessment as formative assessment --- p.54 / Chapter 3.2 --- School-based assessment as summative assessment --- p.60 / Chapter 3.3 --- School-based Assessment in the HKDSE --- p.62 / Chapter 3.4 --- Rationale of introducing SBA in English Language curriculum --- p.65 / Chapter 3.5 --- Hong Kong Context --- p.68 / Chapter 3.6 --- Students and teachers’ roles in the SBA --- p.73 / Chapter 3.7 --- Student voice in the SBA --- p.84 / Chapter 3.8 --- Summary --- p.86 / Chapter CHAPTER FOUR --- RESEARCH DESIGN --- p.88 / Chapter 4.1 --- Conceptual Framework --- p.90 / Chapter 4.2 --- Operational Definition of Key Terms --- p.92 / Chapter 4.3 --- Approach --- p.92 / Chapter 4.4 --- Research Methods --- p.95 / Chapter 4.4.1 --- Qualitative research --- p.95 / Chapter 4.4.2 --- Case study --- p.96 / Chapter 4.4.3 --- Pilot study --- p.97 / Chapter 4.4.4 --- Selection of cases --- p.98 / Chapter 4.4.5 --- Data collection method --- p.98 / Chapter 4.4.5.1 --- Interviews --- p.99 / Chapter 4.4.5.2 --- Documents analysis --- p.102 / Chapter 4.4.6 --- Sampling --- p.103 / Chapter 4.4.7 --- Summary --- p.108 / Chapter 4.5 --- Credibility --- p.108 / Chapter 4.6 --- Research steps --- p.109 / Chapter 4.7 --- Limitation of the study --- p.111 / Chapter CHAPTER FIVE --- FINDINGS --- p.113 / Chapter 5.1 --- Learning experience inside classroom --- p.113 / Chapter 5.1.1 --- School A --- p.113 / Chapter 5.1.2 --- School B --- p.121 / Chapter 5.1.3 --- Summary --- p.129 / Chapter 5.2 --- Learning experience outside classroom --- p.130 / Chapter 5.2.1 --- School A --- p.130 / Chapter 5.2.1.1 --- Self-learning --- p.131 / Chapter 5.2.1.2 --- Family support --- p.134 / Chapter 5.2.1.3 --- Peer learning --- p.135 / Chapter 5.2.2 --- School B --- p.136 / Chapter 5.2.2.1 --- Self-learning --- p.136 / Chapter 5.2.2.2 --- Peer learning --- p.140 / Chapter 5.2.2.3 --- Teacher support --- p.145 / Chapter 5.2.3 --- Summary --- p.147 / Chapter 5.3 --- Students’ changes during the SBA --- p.149 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- School A --- p.149 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- School B --- p.154 / Chapter 5.3.3 --- Summary --- p.164 / Chapter 5.4 --- Students’ interpretation of the SBA --- p.165 / Chapter 5.4.1 --- School A --- p.166 / Chapter 5.4.2 --- School B --- p.173 / Chapter 5.4.3 --- Summary --- p.180 / Chapter 5.5 --- Students and teachers’ roles in the SBA --- p.180 / Chapter 5.5.1 --- School A --- p.181 / Chapter 5.5.1.1 --- Participants and guests --- p.182 / Chapter 5.5.1.2 --- Performers --- p.182 / Chapter 5.5.1.3 --- Game players --- p.184 / Chapter 5.5.1.4 --- Competitors --- p.185 / Chapter 5.5.1.5 --- Followers --- p.186 / Chapter 5.5.1.6 --- Team members --- p.187 / Chapter 5.5.1.7 --- Soldiers --- p.188 / Chapter 5.5.1.8 --- Detectives --- p.188 / Chapter 5.5.2 --- School B --- p.191 / Chapter 5.5.2.1 --- Nobody --- p.191 / Chapter 5.5.2.2 --- Actors, screenplay writers and directors --- p.192 / Chapter 5.5.2.3 --- Carnivores and herbivores --- p.193 / Chapter 5.5.2.4 --- Game Players --- p.194 / Chapter 5.5.2.5 --- Team members --- p.196 / Chapter 5.5.2.6 --- Mountain climbers --- p.199 / Chapter 5.5.2.7 --- Summary --- p.200 / Chapter 5.6 --- Student voice towards the improvement of the SBA at the school level --- p.203 / Chapter 5.6.1 --- School A --- p.203 / Chapter 5.6.1.1 --- Curriculum --- p.210 / Chapter 5.6.1.2 --- Implementation --- p.210 / Chapter 5.6.1.3 --- Technical issues in conducting the SBA --- p.210 / Chapter 5.6.2 --- School B --- p.209 / Chapter 5.6.2.1 --- Curriculum --- p.210 / Chapter 5.6.2.2 --- Duration --- p.213 / Chapter 5.6.2.3 --- Implementation --- p.214 / Chapter 5.6.2.4 --- Additional support --- p.216 / Chapter 5.6.2.5 --- Self-learning skills --- p.217 / Chapter 5.6.3 --- Summary --- p.219 / Chapter 5.7 --- Student voice towards the improvement of the SBA at the systemic level --- p.221 / Chapter 5.7.1 --- School A --- p.222 / Chapter 5.7.2 --- School B --- p.225 / Chapter 5.7.2.1 --- Positive towards the SBA --- p.225 / Chapter 5.7.2.2 --- Having more opportunities to do the SBA --- p.226 / Chapter 5.7.2.3 --- Reducing the frequency --- p.226 / Chapter 5.7.2.4 --- Reducing the weighting --- p.227 / Chapter 5.7.2.5 --- Cancelling the SBA --- p.227 / Chapter 5.7.2.6 --- Valuing individual creativity --- p.228 / Chapter 5.7.2.7 --- Flexibility in choosing the tasks --- p.228 / Chapter 5.7.3 --- Summary --- p.229 / Chapter CHAPTER SIX --- DISCUSSION --- p.231 / Chapter 6.1 --- Students’ learning experience inside and outside classroom --- p.231 / Chapter 6.1.1 --- To conform or to confront --- p.232 / Chapter 6.1.2 --- To instruct or to construct --- p.234 / Chapter 6.1.3 --- Functional or personal orientations of schools --- p.238 / Chapter 6.1.3.1 --- Student voice in learning goals --- p.239 / Chapter 6.1.3.2 --- Student voice in learning materials and resources --- p.240 / Chapter 6.1.3.3 --- Student voice in learning activities --- p.241 / Chapter 6.1.3.4 --- To provoke or to unprovoke --- p.242 / Chapter 6.1.4 --- Learning beyond classroom --- p.243 / Chapter 6.1.5 --- Interweaving curricular commonplaces --- p.249 / Chapter 6.2 --- Students’ presentation of their roles --- p.254 / Chapter 6.2.1 --- Teachers’ presentation of their roles --- p.260 / Chapter 6.2.2 --- Relationship between the SBA and roles of students and teachers --- p.264 / Chapter 6.2.2.1 --- Case 1: The SBA is meaningful and pleasant --- p.264 / Chapter 6.2.2.2 --- Case 2: The SBA is meaningless and unpleasant --- p.266 / Chapter 6.2.2.3 --- Case 3: The SBA is meaningful but unpleasant --- p.268 / Chapter 6.2.2.4 --- Case 4: The SBA is significant but unpleasant --- p.271 / Chapter 6.2.2.5 --- Case 5: The SBA is fair and foul --- p.272 / Chapter 6.2.2.6 --- Case 6: Fair is foul, foul is fair --- p.273 / Chapter 6.2.3 --- Degree of student involvement --- p.276 / Chapter 6.3 --- Student voice in the improvement of the SBA --- p.283 / Chapter 6.3.1 --- Unvoiced --- p.284 / Chapter 6.3.2 --- Being heard --- p.287 / Chapter 6.3.3 --- Being listened to --- p.291 / Chapter 6.3.4 --- Collaboration among students and teachers --- p.299 / Chapter 6.3.5 --- Secretary for Education, can you hear me? --- p.307 / Chapter 6.3.6 --- Summary --- p.312 / Chapter CHAPTER SEVEN --- CONCLUSION --- p.316 / Chapter 7.1 --- A refined conceptual framework --- p.318 / Chapter 7.2 --- A refined framework of student participation --- p.324 / Chapter 7.3 --- Issues arisen from the study --- p.326 / Chapter 7.4 --- Final remarks --- p.329

Finally, this research discovered that the "Key Performance Measures" had the greatest impact on schools. We suggest that the assessment standard should be grounded on and supported by more academic researches. The "Key Performance Measures" should include qualitative descriptions beyond classroom teaching, accept diversified values, and offer schools more autonomy to develop their own educational ideals. It should offer the autonomy for schools to develop their own characteristics rather than trying to mode every school into a standard model. Schools should try their best to reduce teachers' work load, and focus on transferring the authority and autonomy back to teachers in order to develop their professional confidence. These should be considered as important paths to teacher empowerment. Teachers should develop the critical awareness in order to clearly understand the productive relationship between power and knowledge. They should also try their best to fight for the emancipation of their souls. Teachers' participation in decision making of school policies should be perceived as the essential pathway to professional development. / In the context of educational reform in Hong Kong, disciplinary technologies penetrated every school and affected the daily work of teachers through the consecution of "Key Performance Measures". This was a top-down and continuous process of power execution. During this process, a productive relationship among disciplinary technologies, power, and knowledge was developed. First of all, a disciplinary truth was legitimized through the training course of members in external assessment. With the implementation of school internal assessment, this disciplinary truth penetrated through every section in the school, and is then endorsed by the process of external assessment. Through the above process, a set of disciplinary truth was produced, enhanced, and extended to become a network of power which began to govern the souls of all stakeholders in school. Finally, this disciplinary truth completed its self-reproduction process through the execution of power and develops into an eternal truth. Whether practitioners agreed or disagreed with it, they were forced to express their loyalty and to implement it whole-heartedly. Even after conducting an external assessment, this disciplinary truth still governs every teacher's soul because principals and panel chairpersons firmly stick to it as the standard for assessing the performance of teacher's daily work. This disciplinary truth is perpetuated by the collaborated efforts of stakeholders in schools. Therefore, a power relation is not developed by A affecting B's behavior once, but is a long-term interactive negotiation process between A and B. Once a power relation starts to execute, it would be circulated within the power web. No one could totally handle or even control it, and it puts all the stakeholders into its eventual observable situation. Under the governance by the "eye of power", A and B participates in the process of negotiation between surveillance and resistance and becomes a continuous process of negotiation. This is the manifested state of the nature of power and is confirmed by this research. / This is an exploratory study which employs a qualitative research method to investigate the nature of power relation among schools in Hong Kong. In recent years, the Education and Development Bureau initiated a series of education reform which caused the intensification of teacher's work, the decline of trust on teacher, and the compression of professional autonomy. Among these various reform measures, the "Key Performance Measures" caused the greatest impact on Hong Kong schools. / 梁建新. / Adviser: Po King Choi. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 71-01, Section: A, page: 0040. / Thesis (doctoral)--Chinese University of Hong Kong,2008. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 155-160). / Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, MI : ProQuest Information and Learning Company, [200-] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Abstracts in Chinese and English. / Liang Jianxin.

published_or_final_version / abstract / toc / Education / Master / Master of Education