You are on page 1of 16



- This paper summarizes the results of a study designed to determine why

teachers did not use a teaching approach which was recommended by curriculum
planners. The study indicated that teachers assessed the innovation with regard to
its efficiency for covering the syllabus, its congruency with the expectations of significant others and whether its use entailed any undesirable consequences. Each of
these criteria was directly influenced by the overall need to select pupils in Hong
Kong, which was manifested in the importance attached to the public examination.
These findings are discussed in the light of available models for explaining how
teachers react to innovations and with reference ~o the strategy of curriculum development utilized in Hong Kong.


As in many countries in East Asia, the teaching and learning styles used in
Hong Kong schools have been typified as stressing the transmission and rote
learning of information. In an attempt to change this situation, the government has imported and introduced a variety of curricular innovations.
These require the use of a 'new' approach to teaching which emphasizes pupil involvement and a heuristic style of learning. Smith and Keith (1971) aptly describe innovations which require a large scale of change and a radical
change of teacher behaviours as the 'alternative of grandeur'. Classroom
observations (Morris, 1984) showed that teachers did not use the new approach despite expressing attitudes favourable to that approach. More specifically, only a small proportion of the total observed time was devoted to
those categories of activities which require the active involvement of pupils,
and that time devoted to pupil involvement did not generally require that
they engage in tasks which emphasized a heuristic style of learning. The vast
majority of lessons observed were characterized by teachers lecturing and
pupils answering narrow questions and transcribing information into their
exercise books.
This situation merely confirms the results of research on the implementation of planned curriculum change which indicates that ' . . . the modal process o f change whereby innovations are developed external to the schools
and then transmitted to them has led to no significant change at the user levInternationaI Review o f Education - Internationale Zeitschrift fiir Erziehungswissenschaft Revue Internationale de Pddagogie X X X I (1985), 3-18. All rights reserved. Copyright 9 by
Unesco Institute for Education, Hamburg and Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht.

el' (Fullan, 1972). Similar findings have been reported by Galton (1980) and
Becher and Maclure (1975) i n t h e UK, Husen (1972) in Sweden, Hawes
(1979) in Africa, and Lewin (1981) in Malaysia and Sri Lanka. The important issue which arises - and to which this study is addressed - is: Why
are innovations, especially those which require behavioural changes, not
successfully implemented?
Explanations of the implementation of planned change have been derived
primarily from managerial and systems models (e.g., Easton, 1965; Lewin,
1947; Beeby, 1966). These stress the influence of resistance and conservatism on the part of the user and resource availability as the key determinants
of implementation. Thus the motivation, leadership, and attitudes of participants, and the structure, incentive system, and resources of an organization, have all been used to explain why innovations are/are not implemented. As Hurst (1981) aptly points out: 'in e d u c a t i o n . . , it is the custom to
blame failure on the Luddism of the work force.' By focusing on such factors, the assumption is that non-implementation is an essentially technical
and temporary phenomenon. If, for example, users' attitudes, skills, or resource availability are isolated as the cause of non-implementation, then
these are barriers which can be surmounted by the more efficient use, or increased allocation, of resources. A change agent could, for example, be employed to modify users' attitudes and a training course could be run to provide users with appropriate skills. From this perspective, which Olson (1982)
terms the 'logistic' conception of the change process, neither the context in
which the innovation is to be used, nor the nature of the innovation itself
are viewed as critical determinants of how an innovation is used.
An alternative viewpoint, which informs this study, is that termed the
'barriers to change perspective' (Crossley, 1984), which views users of innovations as rational decision makers who have to cope with a number of factors which can limit successful implementation. Macdonald and Rudduck
(1971) argue that these factors can operate at the school level, at the system
level, and on a wider socio-political level.
An example of work which is derived from this perspective is that of
Hurst (1978), and Doyle and Ponder (1977). They focus on teachers' decisions as a critical determinant of whether an innovation is implemented and
how it is implemented. Hurst identified eight criteria by which users appraise an innovation and decide whether to try and use it. These relate to
the availability of information, desirability, feasibility, resources, consequences, costs, efficiency, priority, and trialability. Doyle and Ponder argue
that teachers assess an innovation from the viewpoint of 'pragmatic scepticism'. This involves a primary concern for the practicality of an innovation
given the 'distinctive ecology of the classroom'. They argue that teachers assessed whether an innovation was practical with reference to the following

criteria: Is it instrumental in terms of classroom contingencies? Is it congruent with prevailing conditions? What are the costs involved in using the innovation?
The concern of this study is the identification and analysis of those factors
which teachers perceive as influences on the teaching approach they use.
This allows consideration of why the innovation was not implemented and
of the appropriateness of two available models which seek to explain how
teachers react to innovations.
The innovation on which this study focuses is the Economics (form
IV-V) curriculum which was introduced to Hong Kong secondary schools
in 1975 (CDC, 1975). Along with a number of other new curricula which
were introduced at that time (e.g., 'Integrated Science' and 'Social
Studies'), the official curriculum documents were explicitly based on projects and developments published in the West. The main purpose of these
innovations was to bring about a less didactic approach to teaching. The
Economics curriculum stressed the need for an inductive teaching sequence
and the application of economic principles to real world situations. The use
of four specific strategies was recommended to achieve these purposes: role
playing and simulation games, tutorials and seminars, individualized instruction, and problem solving exercises.
In order to determine the factors which teachers perceived as influences
on their teaching, a series of semi-structured interviews was made with 45
teachers of Economics at the form I V - V level. Each of these teachers
taught at different schools. The teachers were initially interviewed after a
lesson had been observed and they were asked what factors had influenced
the approach which they had used in that lesson. Subsequently a series of
supplementary interviews was undertaken, which allowed teachers to elaborate on how these influences operated. All of these interviews were taperecorded and transcripts were made. The transcripts were analyzed to determine (a) the frequency with which different factors were cited as influences
on the teaching approach used, and (b) the precise manner in which these
factors were perceived to operate.

The interviewees readily provided explanations of the factors which influenced how they taught. Many provided more than one factor as an influence on their teaching approach. Accordingly, the data were differentiated to show when an explanation was the only one offered (the sole explanation) and when a combination of explanations was offered. In this situation
the first explanation offered was classified as the 'primary' explanation,

whilst the subsequent explanation was classified as the 'secondary explanation'. Table 1 shows the influences which teachers identified and the frequency with which they were cited.
Table 1. The Categories of Influences on Teaching and the Frequency with Which
They Were Used
Types of explanation
Categories of influences
The need to cover the syllabus
in the time available
Pupils' expectations
Pupils' ability level
Peer's expectations
Principal's expectations
Lack of materials
Standard English of:
(i) Pupils
(ii) Teacher










The majority of teachers cited aspects of the public examination as the

main influence on their teaching. Both 'sole' and 'primary' explanations
mainly referred to this influence. The second most important influence cited
was 'the pupils' expectations'. The standard combination of primary and
secondary explanations referred initially to the influence of the examination. This was then followed up by an explanation which cited pupils' expectations as an influence. Similarly, when pupils' expectations were given as
a 'primary explanation', this was combined, in the majority of cases, with
a secondary explanation concerning the influence o f the public examination. In these cases the two explanations were not usually independent of
each other. An interviewee would say that the need to cover the examination
syllabus influenced her teaching. She would then elaborate to explain that
if she was not to cover the syllabus, then the pupils would complain. Similarly, when the expectations of pupils, principals, and peers were the primary explanation, this was elaborated on to explain that their expectations
utilized criteria directly related to the public examination.
A central distinction, therefore, arises between the nature of the influence
and the channel from which it is transmitted. The main influence on the
teaching approach used was clearly the public examination. This influence
was, however, transmitted to teachers through a variety of channels.
Teachers' perceptions of how these influences operated and the channels
through which they were transmitted, are summarized in Figure 1. Below,
they are illustrated by some of the typical comments made by the teachers
in the interviews.


/ ~



0 O





9- -





~ ' ~



The Need to Cover the Examinations Syllabus in the Time Available

Teacher A best summarized the main factor which teachers perceived as influencing their teaching: 'Well, you know why we teach that way, lecturing
all the time, it's pressure from the public examination, isn't it?'. This pressure resulted in two distinct teaching strategies. To a minority of teachers
it meant that they ' . . . have to prepare students for answering the questions
on the Hong Kong Certificate of Education examination.' However, the
vast majority of teachers said that their main objective was to cover the examination syllabus. But there was insufficient time available for that purpose, so they primarily lectured, because that was the most efficient way to
transmit the necessary information. As Teacher B explained: 'It's the time
constraint, isn't it? I've got to cover the exanubatuib syllabus. There's not
enough time to cover it. If I use games and films and those modern approaches, then I won't be able to cover the syllabus.'
The need to 'cover the syllabus' and the need to prepare pupils for the
examination are conceptually distinct insofar as the one does not necessarily
entail the other. However, for these teachers these influences in practice
amounted to the same thing. If pupils were to be prepared for the examination, then the teachers were required to cover all the topics on the examination syllabus. This requirement was seen to curtail the possibility of using
strategies consistent with the new approach. As a teacher elaborated:
These new modern techniques take a lot of time. There is a lot of examination pressure. I can't waste time discussing with them, developing my points logically, having
group discussions, and things like that. Instead I have to give them points, information, notes, so that they've got lots of information to prepare for the external examination. The examination is the important limitation - you've got to cover the syllabus.
Throughout the interviews, this view of knowledge as information, which
necessitated that the teacher supply the pupils with notes and points, was
reiterated. This is clearly contrary to the syllabus's emphasis on knowledge
as a process and on a heuristic learning style.
As in the initial interviews, the main reason used to explain both why an
essentially traditional approach was used and, conversely, why the new approach was not used, centred on the influence of the examination. Variations on the points raised by teacher A were constantly reiterated.
The decision not to use the new approach was therefore explained as a rational choice between alternatives. Teachers claimed that they used a traditional approach because it was more efficient for transmitting all of the information specified by the examination syllabus than the new approach. A
teacher's perceptions of this own role, implicit in the above comments, is
one which emphasizes the transmission of information.

When asked about the consequences if they did not cover the syllabus,
they answered with reference to the expectations of the pupils.

Pupils" Expectations of Teachers

I f the teacher did not cover the syllabus, then two consequences were envisaged by the interviewees. Firstly, if the pupils were to fail the examination, then they could blame this on the teacher. As teacher L commented:
' I f we cover the syllabus and the pupils fail, then they c a n ' t blame the teacher for not giving enough information.' Covering the syllabus was therefore
a safeguard which minimized the blame which could be attached to the
teacher if the pupils failed. Secondly, failing to cover the syllabus could result in more immediate consequences - for the pupils constantly monitor
the teacher's performance. Teacher M explained: 'They check that you cover all the points on the syllabus - if you don't, and they fail, then they d o n ' t
cooperate with y o u . ' Teacher H summarized the nature of these influences:
If we don't get good results or if the pupils think that we have not taught them
cough, then they will lack confidence and in that case they will blame the teacher,
as they have not been given enough information.
It could also result in a withdrawal of cooperation by pupils. For example,
a teacher who claimed to have tried modern methods explained:
the response of the pupils was indifferent. So I adopted traditional methods and
they were happier - at least I covered the syllabus. Whatever you do, you still receive the same salary, don't you?

The teachers also claimed that the pupils' concern with the coverage of the
syllabus also produced a pressure for them to provide notes and handouts.
Teacher J stated that:
The students will discuss amongst themselves - it will get back to the principal [if
the syllabus is not being covered]. Sometimes when I teach them, they complain that
they don't get enough notes. They always want more notes and handouts; just talking is not enough.
He admitted that the pupils had complained to the principal about his teaching:
Yes, they sent him a letter. They all signed it. It said that I wasn't covering the syllabus and that I didn't give enough notes9 The principal won't stand up for the teachers. He told me to do what they wanted, so I did it. It's always like that. Last term,

when the traids were making trouble, he wouldn't do anything - he's scared of the
pupils and of bad publicity.
The view expressed by the teachers concerning pupils' expectations contained two distinct but related elements. One relates to the extent to which
the approach they use is congruent with pupils' expectations (e.g., covering
the syllabus, obtaining good results, providing information). The second relates to the perceived consequences of not satisfying those expectations
(e.g., blame for pupils' failure, complaints about performance/efficiency).
Together these elements were viewed by the teachers as necessitating a traditional teaching approach which was congruent with pupils' expectations and
thus minimized the risk of undesirable consequences.

Principals" Expectations of Teachers

As with the other sources of influence, this factor was also related to the
public examination. While the teachers thought that their pupils primarily
expected them to 'cover the syllabus', their principals were perceived to expect good or improved examination results. This influence seemed to be of
greater concern to teachers in the more prestigious schools. Teacher R elaborated as to how this influence was manifested:
In my school we have a special system (maybe it's not special, maybe it's common),
as follows: We've got lots of statistics and whenever we have a general staff meeting,
then the principal will read out, for example, 'form la, English pass percentage is
So much, and form lb English pass percentage is so much,' and so on. Different
teachers teach different classes - this causes pressure. I teach form la and someone
else teaches form lb, so there are grounds for comparison. If my class has a lower
pass percentage or a low mean score, it means that I am an inefficient teacher.
The summary statistics concerning examination marks of different classes
were constantly referred to as the basis of the principal's influence. A teacher's effectiveness at his job was, by implication, a function of his ability to
obtain satisfactory examination results, as the following typical quotation
My principal has worked out a complete statistical summary of the examination results. He has noted all the results from last year and compares them to this year. He's
also done the same for the internal school examination. He won't scold you openly,
but you know you're not getting your job done - you feel it inside. After you've
seen the statistics on the pass percentages for the public examination, the principal
gives you a form. It asks you to rate the performance of your class, and then you
have to give reasons why the pupils are performing well or badly on the f o r m . . .
A lot of reasons are given, for example, low academic standard of pupils, language

problems, etc. You just tick the ones that apply to your c l a s s , . . , yes, they're listed
on the form. That form is sent to the panel chairman [equivalent to the head of department] when it's completed.
The influence of the principal contains the same elements as the influence
of the pupils but their nature is different. Teachers saw the principal's expectations as emphasizing examination results and a traditional approach
was perceived as congruent with that expectation. Failure to satisfy that expectation could result in undesirable consequences insofar as a teacher's self
esteem and prestige would suffer if he/she obtained unsatisfactory results.


The comments of the teachers can be interpreted in terms o f three main criteria. Firstly, the new approach was perceived as being inefficient for
achieving those ends which teachers viewed as important, especially coverage of the examination syllabus. Secondly, the new approach was perceived
as having a number of undesirable consequences - especially insofar as the
failure to cover the syllabus could result in teachers being blamed for pupil
failure. Thirdly, the new approach was not congruent with existing teaching
and learning styles and with the criteria by which colleagues and principals
assessed the teacher's task. Doyle and Ponder (1977) as well as Hurst (1978)
refer to the criteria of congruence and consequences, although Doyle and
Ponder refer to the latter as an aspect of the anticipated costs of using an
innovation. Hurst describes a category which relates to the perceived efficiency of an innovation.
Hurst distinguishes between factors which influence the way in which a
teacher implements an innovation, and those which influence the decision
as to whether or n o t a teacher will attempt to implement an innovation.
Clearly teachers in Hong Kong are affected by the latter. Teachers view the
demands of the syllabus, of students, of principals, and of colleagues as preventing the use of an innovation which was intrinsically desirable. This dichotomy vividly illustrates the importance of Guba and Lincoln's (1981)
distinction between the merit (based on intrinsic criteria) and worth (based
on extrinsic criteria) of curriculum innovations.
The selection and promotion o f curricular innovations by policy makers
in Hong Kong's highly centralized educational system is undertaken primarily with regard to the perceived merit of an innovation. In contrast, teachers'
decisions as to whether they would attempt to use the innovation were determined by criteria relating to the perceived worth of the innovation.
In the interviews reported it was also evident that teachers perceived the

teaching approach they used as being determined primarily by external constraints to which they reacted. They thought of themselves as only marginally able to influence the approach they used.
These findings are in marked contrast to those of Doyle and Ponder, and
Hurst. In both these studies influences related to the public examination
were not identified as very important. Furthermore, their research, as well
as that of Taylor (1975), McConnelogue (1975), and the Schools Council
(I 981), found that teachers perceived themselves to be the main determinant
of the teaching approach they used. Their ability to apply a given approach
was only marginally affected by external factors. Thus, with reference to
teachers in Northern Ireland, McConnelogue concluded that:
The class teacher has the greatest power to influence the classroom curriculum. The
remainder of those [factors] exerting a marked influence on the classroom are drawn
from within school influences (esp. principals, pupils and colleagues).
The main criteria for evaluating teacher performance were pass percentages and syllabus coverage. These criteria were not only used by principals
and pupils but they also served as the basis for teachers' judgment of their
own performance and that of colleagues. Therefore, whilst the source of
constraint was the public examination, the interviews indicated that teachers
did not view examinations as a wholly alien phenomenon. They were viewed
as a normal and natural part of their work, which gave a purpose and a
framework to the task of teaching and to the functioning of schools. Clearly, if teachers do not think they can influence the teaching approach they
use, if they think they are judged by others and judge themselves and others
in terms of such instrumental criteria, then they are not likely to attempt to
use an approach which is perceived to be wholly dysfunctional for meeting
those criteria.
Insofar as all the teachers interviewed felt the need to meet the same criteria related to the public examination, this cannot be attributed to the climate
in a specific institution. It does indicate that the social climate in Hong Kong
stresses the selective function of education and that this is manifested in the
importance attached to the public examination. Therefore, the findings support the assertion of McDonald and Rudduck (1971), that the context which
influences teacher's decisions must be defined to include social and institutional influences as well as the 'distinctive ecology of the classroom' (Doyle
and Ponder, 1977).
These findings underline the importance of viewing both the teaching approach used and planned pedagogic innovations with regard to the social
context in which they are used. Hong Kong is a society with a very unequal
distribution of income and a person's life chances are primarily determined

by his/her educational qualifications. At the initial stage of his educational
career, the pre-primary school in which a pupil is placed is carefully chosen,
as the more prestigious ones act as a feeder to certain primary schools. These
primary schools also have a feeder link to the more prestigious secondary
schools. At each stage a pupil's academic performance is the main determinant of the type of school which he enters. This is critical, especially when
the pupil goes on to secondary school, as there are wide variations in the
facilities of the different types of schools. A few schools are run by the government, some are funded by the government, and the remainder are
privately run. The vast majority of pupils who enter the two local universities have attended one of the few long-established and prestigious secondary
Academic performance, as measured by examinations, is also the most
important ingredient which determines eligibility for well-paid employment
and the opportunity to pursue further education. The extent of selection
within the system is reflected by the enrolment data for the cohort which entered primary school in 1968 and graduated from university in 1983. O f the
164,000 pupils who entered primary school in 1968, only 90,000 went on to
secondary school, 60,000 went on to form IV, 20,000 entered the sixth form,
and less than 2,000 entered university.
Whilst this study focused on teachers of a publicly examined course, evidence exists to indicate that the influence of selection on the curriculum permeates throughout all levels of the educational system (Morris, 1983; Ching
and Sweeting, 1979; Llewellyn, 1982). As the Llewellyn report (1982) explained:
In the course of his or her school career, a child may go through as many as eight
sets of examinations which go beyond diagnostic classroom assessment and which
are all significant in opening up or closing off options for the student not only in
education but ultimately in life. In many cases, there is an interview and some kind
of appraisal to be gone through before being accepted into a kindergarten of the parents' choice. The same, with a stronger element of formal testing, may occur for admission to a preferred primary school though official policy discourages the practice. Towards the end of primary school, there is a combination of internal assessment and academic aptitude testing (to scale the school assessment) as the basis for
the all-important allocation to secondary school places. Form III - the last year of
compulsory education - leads up to the Junior Secondary Education Assessment
which runs from November to the following May. In form V, students sit for the
HK Certificate of Education Examination on which admission to form VI or other
advanced and/or technical education alternatives depends. In form VI, the HK
Higher Level Examination is taken mainly by those who aim for a place at CUHK.
Finally, in form VII there is the HK Advanced Level Examination whose main function is to establish entry qualifications to HKU. In addition, many students take the
English GCE (A and O levels) at ~he appropriate stages.

Thus, all teachers and pupils are influenced by constraints and pressures
arising from the effects of selection, which is manifested in the frequency
of and importance attached to examinations.
The financial and status benefits which accrue to the individual from
completing each level of education are substantial. Using the Government
Master Pay Scale (which is based on pay differentials in the private sector)
as a measure of earnings differences in Hong Kong, the ratio between the
earnings of an unskilled engineering labourer and a qualified engineer on
the mid-point of their respective pay scale is larger than 10:1. This compares
to Routh's (1980) estimate of a differential in the UK between unskilled labour and qualified employees of about 2/3:1. At the macro level this pattern
of income distribution is also reflected in a comparison of income distribution data between Hong Kong and other countries: The Gini coefficient I is
estimated to be about 0.5 (Cheng, 1979), which compares with a coefficient
of 0.38 in the UK, 0.23 in Australia, and 0.34 for the USA. This indicates
that the income distribution conforms to the pattern prevailing in developing countries.
The link between earnings and educational qualifications is also reflected
by the Master Pay Scale. The scale is made up of 51 points. Entry to each
point of the scale after point ten and progression on the scale is determined
by reference to a person's qualifications. Thus, for example, a teacher with
a non-graduate teaching certificate will be on points 17-26, whilst a graduate without a teaching qualification will be on points 20-37 of the scale.
In brief, parents are faced with a choice. They can encourage their children to do well at school. This means that they should succeed at the public
examinations. Success will ensure a well-paid job. Alternatively they can allow their child to obtain paid employment at the earliest opportunity. The
educational route provides the most realistic chance of achieving social mobility and financial well-being for their children. Accordingly, people view
education instrumentally, as the predominant function performed by the
educational system is a selective one and this is manifested in the pre-eminent influence and importance of the public examination.
The context within which teachers work, both reflects and serves to reinforce the importance of the examination and this does not facilitate the use
of the new approach to teaching. Despite expressing attitudes which were
favourable to the innovation, teachers did not attempt to use it, for its operational results were judged to be in contradiction with the realities of the
context within which teachers worked. These perceived 'barriers' were
therefore neither of a temporary nor of a technical nature. They were a
manifestation of the paramount importance of the selective function of the
educational system in the Hong Kong society. Teachers perceived the new
approach to be wholly dysfunctional, because it necessitated them to ignore

the expectations of their pupils, principals, and colleagues. The situation described in Hong Kong parallels that reported in a variety of developing
countries (Dore, 1976; Oxenham, 1984), in which the primary function of
education is one of selection.
The implications of these findings for curriculum policy relate to the necessity of developing or selecting innovations with regard to the characteristics of the context of use and of the prospective users. Three specific policy
issues are identified:
Firstly, the present context is one in which the public examination and its
relevant syllabus critically influence classroom processes. Change will not
occur unless teachers perceive it to be necessary for the pupils to pass the
public examination. The examination must therefore be used to promote
curriculum reform. As Lewin (1984) comments with reference to Malaysia
and Sri Lanka:
Decisions on teaching methods, content objectives, and the use of the curriculum,
are clearly not wholly circumscribed by public examinations. None the less, in situations where a primary motive in going to school is to be selected for more schooling
and acquiring qualifications, examinations are likely to exert considerable influence
on the curriculum at both design and implementation stages; more than, for example, exhortation, rhetoric and prescription contained in texts and guidebooks.
In Keyna, Somerset (1982) has shown how a gradual change in the nature
o f examination questions has had a positive effect on teaching methods.
Secondly, teachers' comments indicated that they had a limited understanding of what the 'new' approach entailed in practice. If teachers were
to attempt to use the new approach, this would serve as a major barrier to
successful implementation. Support for teachers is required if new curricula
are to be used. This could involve the provision of in-service and initial
training courses and the provision of classroom resources.
Thirdly, decisions relating to the selection of curricular changes should
be influenced by the realities of the classroom and the constraints with
which teachers and pupils operate. Innovations should be selected by reference to the probability of their successful implementation as well as by reference to their desirability. A more modest, rather than a radical proposal for
change, might allow a gradual movement towards a desired long-term goal.

I am grateful to Dr. H.O. Brown and Mr. A.E. Sweeting for their comments on an
earlier draft of this paper.


1 This is a measure of income distribution in an economy. The coefficient is equal

to zero when incomes are distributed equally. It is equal to one when all income
is earned by one household.


Becher, T. and Maclure, S. 'The state of the art in curriculum development'. In Harris, A. et al. (ed.) Curriculum Innovation. London: Croom Helm, 1975.
Cheng, T.Y. The Economy of Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Far East Publications,
Ching, S.S. and Sweeting, A.E. Pre School or Prep School? The Dilemma of Kindergarten Education in Hong Kong. Mimeo, 1979.
Crossley, M. 'Strategies for curriculum change and the question of international
transfer'. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 16 (1984), No. 1.
Dore, R.P. The Diploma Disease. London: Allen and Unwin, 1976.
Doyle, W. and Ponder, G. 'The practicality ethic in teacher decision making'. Interchange. 8 (1977), No. 3, pp. 1-12.
Easton, D. A System Analysis of Political Life. New York: Wiley, 1965.
Fullan, M. 'Overview of the innovative process and user'. Interchange. 3 (1972), No.
Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. Effective Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1981.
Galton, M. (ed.) Curriculum Change: The Lessons of a Decade. Leicester: Leicester
University Press, 1980.
Hawes, H. Curriculum and Reality in African Primary Schools. London: Longman,
Hurst, P. Implementinglnnovatory Projects. London: The British Council/World
Bank, 1978.
Hurst, P. 'Some issues in improving the quality of education'. Comparative Education. 17 (1981), No. 2, pp. 185-193.
Husen, T. 'Strategies of educational innovation'. Australian Journal of Education.
16 (1972), No, 2, pp. 125-135.
Lewin, Keith. Science Education in Malaysia and Sri Lanka. Curriculum Development and Course Evaluation 1970-1978. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of
Sussex, 1981.
Lewin, Keith. In Oxenham, J. (ed.) Education versus Qualifications? London:
George Allen and Unwin, 1984.
Lewin, Kurt. 'Group decision and social change'. In Newcomb, T. and Hartley, E.
(eds.) Readings in SocialPsychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Wilson, 1947.

LLewellyn, J. A Perspective on Education in Hong Kong: Report by a Visiting Panel. Hong Kong: Government Education Department, 1982,
MacDonald, B. and Rudduck, J. 'Curriculum research and development projects!
barriers to success'. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 41 (1971).
McConnelogue. In P. Taylor (ed.) Aims, Influences and Change in the Primary
School Curriculum. Slough: NFER, 1975.
Morris, P. 'Curriculum innovation and implementation: a South East Asian perspective'. Curriculum Perspectives. 4 (1984), No. 1.
Morris, P. 'Teachers' perceptions of their pupils: a Hong Kong case study'. Research in Education. 28 (1983).
Olson, J. 'Three approaches to curriculum change; balancing the accounts'. Journal
of Curriculum Theorizing. 4 (1982), No. 2.
Oxenham, J. (ed.) Education versus Qualifications? London: George Allen and Unwin, 1984.
Routh, G. Occupation andPay in Great Britain (1906-1979). 2nd ed. London: Macmillan, 1980.
The Schools Council The Schools Council. Its Take Up in Schools and General lmpact. A Final Report. London: Schools Council, 1981.
Smith, L.M. and Keith, P.M. Anatomy of Educational Innovation: an Organisational Analysis of an Elementary School. New York: John Wiley, 1971.
Taylor, P. 'A study of curricular influences in a mid-western elementary school system'. In Taylor, P. (ed.)Aims, Influence and Change in the Primary School Curriculum. Slough: NFER, 1975, pp. 170-198.

- Dieser Bericht faBt die Ergebnisse einer Studie usammen, deren Sinn es war, herauszufinden, warum ein von Curriculumplannern entworfenes
Lehrprogramm von den Lehrern nicht benutzt wurde. Die Studie ergab, dab die
Lehrer die Innovation hinsichtlich ihrer Wirksamkeit bewerteten, den Lehrplan vollst~indig zu behandeln, ihrer Clbereinstimmung mit den Erwartungen von anderen
maBgeblichen Seiten und ob ihre Anwendung irgendwelche unerwfinschte Folgen
mit sich brachte. Jedes dieser Kriterien wurde unmittelbar beeinfluBt dutch das allgemeine Bediirfnis, in Hong Kong Schiiler auszuw/ihlen, was sich aus der Bedeutung, die 6ffentlichen Priifungen beigemessen wurde, ergeben hatte. Diese Befunde
wurden in Hinblick auf verfiigbare Modelle diskutiert. Diese sollten der Kl~irung der
Frage dienen, wie Lehrer auf Innovationen und auf Strategien der Curriculumentwicklung in Hong Kong reagieren.

R~sum~ - Cet article pr6sente les r6sultats d'une 6tude men6e pour savoir pourquoi
les enseignants n'ont pas fait usage d'une approche d'enseignement recommand6e
par les planificateurs du curriculum. L'6tude a r6v616 que les enseignants ont 6valu6
l'innovation par rapport ~t son efficacit6 ~ respecter le programme, sa conformit6
aux attentes des autres, et au fait de savoir si non usage entratnait des consdquences
inattendues. Chacun de ces crit~res a 6t6 directement influenc6 par le besoin g~n6ral
de s61ectionner des 61~ves/l Hong Kong, besoin qui se manifestait dans l'importance

attach6e/~ l'examen du public. Ces r~sultats sont examin6s en vue de trouver des mod61es valables permettant d'expliquer pourquoi les enseignants ont teUr ou telle r6action envers les innovations r par rapport ~ la strat6gie de d6veloppement du curriculum mise en place/~ Hong Kong.