Designing a curriculum is much more than a technical process. Indeed, it could be called a political activity because stakeholders usually attribute different values to, and hold different expectations from, a new curriculum. As early as 1949, Tyler had raised this issue in his classic Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Kelly (2004) holds the view that curriculum designers should deliberate the value issues when designing curriculum. Lawton’s cultural analysis theory (1975) can also be seen as an attempt to address this issue. By studying the culture of a place, Lawton postulates that an acceptable set of content can be chosen for teachers to deliver in schools. Who should be responsible for this unenviable task of consensus-building process? In Hong Kong, under the center-periphery curriculum development system, this responsibility should be borne by the official curriculum development agency, the Curriculum Development Institute. Has this system functioned well in the current wave of curriculum reform in Hong Kong? In this article, we report an in-depth case study of the policymakers’ conception of curriculum integration, one of the curriculum reform initiatives in Hong Kong. The research revealed that the system has not been functioning well. Copyright © 2006 Rowman & Littlefield Education.
|Journal||International Journal of Educational Reform|
|Publication status||Published - 2006|
CitationYeung, S. S. Y., & Lam, C. C. (2006). Malfunction in Hong Kong's curriculum policymaking system: A case study of curriculum integration. International Journal of Educational Reform, 15(3), 400-423.
- Primary Education
- Educational Policy and Management