Curriculum documents as representation of institutional ideology : a comparative study

Judy W. Y. HO

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The present study is an analysis of curriculum-related papers in primary education published by the education departments of New South Wales, Australia, and Hong Kong, a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. The aim is to unravel and contrast the ideological positions adopted by the two communities in their approaches to first language education so that common-sense beliefs and practices may be challenged. Analysis shows that the Australian school discourse system exhibits characteristics of progressivism, utilitarianism and reconstructionism whereas the Chinese system in Hong Kong displays combined elements of European classical humanism and Confucianism. It appears that the Australian system prefers flexibility, free choice, individual autonomy, student-centredness, and exploratory spirit, whereas the latter inclines towards uniformity, orderliness, harmony, language-centredness and discipline. The Australian emphasis in language education is social, functional and communicative, while the Chinese focus is on formal correctness and integration of language, morality and aesthetics. These different ideological inclinations are suggestive of similar orientations at the societal level and affect the discourse practices at the situational level of the classroom.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)284-302
Number of pages19
JournalLanguage and Education
Volume16
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2002

Fingerprint

ideology
language education
curriculum
Hong Kong
progressivism
Confucianism
discourse
humanism
primary education
language
morality
aesthetics
flexibility
autonomy
classroom
China
school
community
Curriculum
Comparative Study

Cite this

@article{ab19430f501b4d6386d326d5de9616c9,
title = "Curriculum documents as representation of institutional ideology : a comparative study",
abstract = "The present study is an analysis of curriculum-related papers in primary education published by the education departments of New South Wales, Australia, and Hong Kong, a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. The aim is to unravel and contrast the ideological positions adopted by the two communities in their approaches to first language education so that common-sense beliefs and practices may be challenged. Analysis shows that the Australian school discourse system exhibits characteristics of progressivism, utilitarianism and reconstructionism whereas the Chinese system in Hong Kong displays combined elements of European classical humanism and Confucianism. It appears that the Australian system prefers flexibility, free choice, individual autonomy, student-centredness, and exploratory spirit, whereas the latter inclines towards uniformity, orderliness, harmony, language-centredness and discipline. The Australian emphasis in language education is social, functional and communicative, while the Chinese focus is on formal correctness and integration of language, morality and aesthetics. These different ideological inclinations are suggestive of similar orientations at the societal level and affect the discourse practices at the situational level of the classroom.",
author = "HO, {Judy W. Y.}",
year = "2002",
doi = "10.1080/09500780208666832",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "284--302",
journal = "Language and Education",
issn = "0950-0782",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

Curriculum documents as representation of institutional ideology : a comparative study. / HO, Judy W. Y.

In: Language and Education, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2002, p. 284-302.

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

TY - JOUR

T1 - Curriculum documents as representation of institutional ideology : a comparative study

AU - HO, Judy W. Y.

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - The present study is an analysis of curriculum-related papers in primary education published by the education departments of New South Wales, Australia, and Hong Kong, a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. The aim is to unravel and contrast the ideological positions adopted by the two communities in their approaches to first language education so that common-sense beliefs and practices may be challenged. Analysis shows that the Australian school discourse system exhibits characteristics of progressivism, utilitarianism and reconstructionism whereas the Chinese system in Hong Kong displays combined elements of European classical humanism and Confucianism. It appears that the Australian system prefers flexibility, free choice, individual autonomy, student-centredness, and exploratory spirit, whereas the latter inclines towards uniformity, orderliness, harmony, language-centredness and discipline. The Australian emphasis in language education is social, functional and communicative, while the Chinese focus is on formal correctness and integration of language, morality and aesthetics. These different ideological inclinations are suggestive of similar orientations at the societal level and affect the discourse practices at the situational level of the classroom.

AB - The present study is an analysis of curriculum-related papers in primary education published by the education departments of New South Wales, Australia, and Hong Kong, a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. The aim is to unravel and contrast the ideological positions adopted by the two communities in their approaches to first language education so that common-sense beliefs and practices may be challenged. Analysis shows that the Australian school discourse system exhibits characteristics of progressivism, utilitarianism and reconstructionism whereas the Chinese system in Hong Kong displays combined elements of European classical humanism and Confucianism. It appears that the Australian system prefers flexibility, free choice, individual autonomy, student-centredness, and exploratory spirit, whereas the latter inclines towards uniformity, orderliness, harmony, language-centredness and discipline. The Australian emphasis in language education is social, functional and communicative, while the Chinese focus is on formal correctness and integration of language, morality and aesthetics. These different ideological inclinations are suggestive of similar orientations at the societal level and affect the discourse practices at the situational level of the classroom.

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/6854

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85011944415&doi=10.1080%2f09500780208666832&partnerID=40&md5=3d5d1e81187db659ffc4d9f066aaba3f

U2 - 10.1080/09500780208666832

DO - 10.1080/09500780208666832

M3 - Journal Article (refereed)

VL - 16

SP - 284

EP - 302

JO - Language and Education

JF - Language and Education

SN - 0950-0782

IS - 4

ER -