Education Policy Analysis Liberal

Studies and National Education in Hong

Kong 1st Edition Dennis Chun-Lok
Fung
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/education-policy-analysis-liberal-studies-and-national-
education-in-hong-kong-1st-edition-dennis-chun-lok-fung/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Fostering Critical Thinking Through Collaborative Group

Work Insights from Hong Kong Dennis Chun-Lok Fung

https://textbookfull.com/product/fostering-critical-thinking-
through-collaborative-group-work-insights-from-hong-kong-dennis-
chun-lok-fung/

Trilingual Education in Hong Kong Primary Schools Lixun

Wang

https://textbookfull.com/product/trilingual-education-in-hong-
kong-primary-schools-lixun-wang/

Shadow Education as Worldwide Curriculum Studies Young

Chun Kim

https://textbookfull.com/product/shadow-education-as-worldwide-
curriculum-studies-young-chun-kim/

Governing Sustainable Energies in China 1st Edition

Geoffrey Chun-Fung Chen (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/governing-sustainable-energies-
in-china-1st-edition-geoffrey-chun-fung-chen-auth/
A Connected Curriculum for Higher Education Dilly Fung

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-connected-curriculum-for-
higher-education-dilly-fung/

Intercultural Studies in Higher Education: Policy and

Practice Ana Maria De Albuquerque Moreira

https://textbookfull.com/product/intercultural-studies-in-higher-
education-policy-and-practice-ana-maria-de-albuquerque-moreira/

Policy Analysis of Structural Reforms in Higher

Education: Processes and Outcomes 1st Edition Harry De
Boer

https://textbookfull.com/product/policy-analysis-of-structural-
reforms-in-higher-education-processes-and-outcomes-1st-edition-
harry-de-boer/

The Chinese Education Policy Landscape A Concept Added

Policy Chain Analysis Eryong Xue

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-chinese-education-policy-
landscape-a-concept-added-policy-chain-analysis-eryong-xue/

Ethnography and Education Policy A Critical Analysis of

Normalcy and Difference in Schools Claudia Matus

https://textbookfull.com/product/ethnography-and-education-
policy-a-critical-analysis-of-normalcy-and-difference-in-schools-
claudia-matus/
SPRINGER BRIEFS IN EDUC ATION

Dennis Chun-Lok Fung

Wai-mei Lui

Education Policy
Analysis
Liberal Studies and
National Education
in Hong Kong
SpringerBriefs in Education
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8914
Dennis Chun-Lok Fung Wai-mei Lui
•

Education Policy Analysis

Liberal Studies and National Education
in Hong Kong

123
Dennis Chun-Lok Fung Wai-mei Lui
The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong
Hong Kong Hong Kong
Hong Kong

ISSN 2211-1921 ISSN 2211-193X (electronic)

SpringerBriefs in Education
ISBN 978-981-10-2608-9 ISBN 978-981-10-2610-2 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-2610-2
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016950752

© The Author(s) 2017

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or
dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #22-06/08 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore
Preface

This book was written for those who are interested in the policy analyses and latest
curriculum developments of the citizenship and national education in Hong Kong.
By documenting the policymaking processes of liberal studies and Moral and
National Education (MNE) and evaluating their actual effectiveness over the years,
we aim to bring together multidisciplinary learning, citizenship education, and
policy framework in one discussion. With empirical evidence collected from local
archives and frontline practitioners, we hope to present how the interdependence
between policymakers and different stakeholders works, as well as derive useful
suggestions for the subject reforms currently underway. Given the city’s unique
socio-political status, our study also allows possible comparisons with other Asian
countries such as Vietnam, Singapore and Korea in their postcolonial contexts. We
believe scholars and professionals in the field, regardless of their locations, can
make use of the information in this book and further their research in areas related
to citizenship education policies.
The making of this book was supported by the Faculty of Education of the
University of Hong Kong. We are grateful for all the time and contribution every
participant has given in the process, granting us access to produce a comprehensive
and pioneering research on liberal studies and National Education in the local
settings.

Hong Kong Dennis Chun-Lok Fung

Wai-mei Lui

v
Contents

1 Liberal Studies and National Education in Post-colonial

Hong Kong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 First Introduction of Liberal Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3 Controversies Over the Reintroduction of Liberal Studies . . . . . . . 8
1.4 Controversies Over the Implementation of MNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5 A Blank in the Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 Review of Liberal Studies, National Education
and Educational Policy Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1 Review of the Development of Educational Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1.1 Definition of Educational Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1.2 Two Major Conceptual Frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.3 The ‘State-Centred’ Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.4 The Policy Cycle Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2 Criteria for Inclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3 Review of the First Introduction of Liberal Studies
and Implementation of MNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.1 Policy Initiatives of Liberal Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.2 Policy Initiatives of MNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3.3 Policy Failures of Liberal Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.3.4 Policy Failures of MNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.3.5 Parallel Discussion of Liberal Studies and MNE . . . . . . . . . 29
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3 Research Design, Methodology and Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . .... 35
3.1 Research Design and Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 35
3.1.1 Statement and Significance of Research Questions . . . .... 35
3.1.2 Three-Stage Investigation and Mixed-Methods
Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 36

vii
viii Contents

3.2 Data Collection for Liberal Studies Curriculum Policy . . . . . . . . . . 39

3.2.1 Context of Policy Text Production (Stage 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.2.2 Context of Influence (Stage 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.2.3 Context of Practice (Stage 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.3 Data Collection for MNE Curriculum Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.3.1 Context of Policy Text Production (Stage 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.3.2 Context of Influence (Stage 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.3.3 Context of Practice (Stage 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4 Results and Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 45
4.1 Data Analysis Concerning the Reintroduction
of Liberal Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.1.1 The Context of ‘Policy Text Production’ (Stage 1) . . . . . . . 45
4.1.2 The Context of ‘Influence’ (Stage 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.1.3 The Context of ‘Practice’ (Stage 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.2 Data Analysis of MNE Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.2.1 The Context of ‘Policy Text Production’ (Stage 1) . . . . . . . 51
4.2.2 The Context of ‘Influence’ (Stage 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.2.3 The Context of ‘Practice’ (Stage 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
5 Discussion and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5.1 Discussion of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5.1.1 Lack of Legitimacy in Government’s Policies . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5.1.2 Significance of Consultations on Pedagogical Concerns . . . 62
5.1.3 Autonomy of Teachers in Carrying Out Policy Texts . . . . . 63
5.2 Implications for Local Education Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.2.1 The Curriculum Review of Liberal Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.2.2 The ‘Becoming’ of MNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.3 Directions for Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Appendix B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Appendix C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
About the Authors

Dennis Chun-Lok Fung is Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Education. Since

joining HKU in 2010, he has been a principal investigator in many research pro-
jects and has published articles in some prestigious journals (e.g. ‘The effects of the
medium of instruction in certificate‐level physics on achievement and motivation to
learn. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(10), 1219–1245.’, ‘Group work
and the learning of critical thinking in the Hong Kong secondary liberal studies
curriculum. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(2), 245–270.’ and ‘Promoting
critical thinking through effective group work: A teaching intervention for Hong
Kong primary school students. International Journal of Educational Research, 66,
45–62.’). He had his undergraduate and postgraduate education at HKU and
received his M.Phil. and Ph.D. in Education at the University of Cambridge.
Wai-mei Lui is the Project Manager of a series of research titled ‘The Influence of
Liberal Studies on Students’ Participation in Socio-political Activities: The Case
of the Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong’, which investigates the relationship
between liberal studies and political development in Hong Kong. She joined the
Faculty of Education in 2015 and has since then participated in the publications of
local civic education research.

ix
Chapter 1
Liberal Studies and National Education
in Post-colonial Hong Kong

1.1 Background

In the late twentieth century, Hong Kong underwent a rapid change in its political
landscape, with the territory handed over from Britain to the People’s Republic of
China (PRC) in 1997. The resumption of sovereignty by the PRC not only mani-
fested Beijing’s rule of Hong Kong, but also established the new identity of ‘Hong
Kong Chinese’ citizenship (Fok 1997; Ku and Pun 2011). In the meantime, the
over-specialisation in the arts and sciences in the education curriculum, which
predominantly stressed the importance of these two disciplines in Hong Kong
secondary schooling,1 arguably narrowed students’ knowledge of practical subjects
(Tao 1996). The pressing need to develop a holistic secondary education curricu-
lum, both to strengthen citizenship education (Lee 2004; Morris and Chan 1997a)
and to address the problem of over-specialisation, gradually gave momentum to the
idea of the reintroduction of Liberal Studies and promotion of national education in
the curriculum reforms in post-colonial Hong Kong.
From a chronological perspective, Liberal Studies was first introduced into the
sixth-form curriculum in Hong Kong as an Advanced Supplementary (AS) level
subject in 1992 (Morris and Chan 1997b; Stimpson 1997). The subject, which was
composed of six modules, including ‘Hong Kong Studies’, ‘Environmental
Studies’, ‘The Modern World’, ‘Human Relationships’, ‘Science, Technology and
Society’ and ‘China Today’ (Curriculum Development Council [CDC] 2000), was
unpopular amongst secondary school students right from its introduction (refer to

1
A 12-year free education is provided by the Hong Kong government for every child aged six
onwards, starting exclusively from primary to secondary education which are both six years long
respectively and mandatory under the law. As of September 2014, there were 452 primary schools
and 395 secondary schools in the public sector (i.e. fully subsidised by the government). A full
summary of the local education system can be found in Hong Kong Annual Review: http://www.
yearbook.gov.hk/2014/en/pdf/E07.pdf.

© The Author(s) 2017 1

D.C.-L. Fung and W. Lui, Education Policy Analysis,
SpringerBriefs in Education, DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-2610-2_1
2 1 Liberal Studies and National Education in Post-colonial Hong Kong

Sect. 1.2 below for further information). However, in 2004, the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government decided to incorporate Liberal
Studies, with a revised and expanded curriculum, into the New Senior Secondary
(NSS) academic structure as a mandatory subject starting in 2009/10 (see Table 1.1
showing the policy development of the reintroduction of Liberal Studies).
A year after Liberal Studies was reintroduced, Moral and Civic Education
(MCE) was required to undergo a curriculum framework review in the ‘Policy
Address 2010–11’ delivered by the Chief Executive of Hong Kong (CDC 2011).
The aim of the MCE curriculum, which was first offered in 2001, was to cultivate
positive values and attitudes in students to facilitate whole-person development.
Specifically, to accord with the curriculum reforms at the time, MCE adopted
various implementation modes, including an interdisciplinary approach and a
whole-school approach (CDC 2011). As a norm, the subject’s content was designed
and executed by individual schools. Looking back, suggestions to incorporate
school-based civic education into the Hong Kong school curriculum also cropped
up as early as 1981, and then again in 1985 and 1996 (CDC 2012). It was not until
May 2011, however, that an ‘enriched version’ of MCE was formally introduced
under the title of Moral and National Education (MNE). The new curriculum
preserved the scale of mandatory implementation in all primary and secondary
schools, but emphasised identity building, specifically in students’ national and
moral character, as the change of title suggested. An official curriculum guide was
issued in April 2012, clearly stating five “Key Stages” to provide more uniform and
standardised learning outcomes: the ‘Personal’, ‘Family’, ‘Social’, ‘National’ and
‘Global’ domains. Nevertheless, before the reforms came fully into force, the new
curriculum was withdrawn by the Education Bureau just a month after its pilot
implementation in the face of strong opposition from teachers and students (see
Table 1.2 for a detailed timeline of the formulation and implementation of MNE).
At first glance, Liberal Studies in Hong Kong seems to be an unfamiliar subject
to many foreign researchers because, although Liberal Studies shares similarities
with some aspects of the ‘Liberal Arts’ concept in Western countries, which offers
students an opportunity to acquire a broader base of knowledge through multidis-
ciplinary learning (Curren 2006), it is distinguished from Western practices by
being offered in secondary schools rather than universities (Barnett 1986; Wiener
1985). As a result of this ‘mutative’ nature, a brief introduction of the Liberal
Studies context in Hong Kong is necessary. The following sections provide that
introduction and discuss several of the controversies surrounding the subject’s
reintroduction.
Compared to Liberal Studies, MNE targeted even younger students, those at the
primary and junior secondary levels, and it bears a certain resemblance to civic
education in other countries. For example, in the United States, ‘Social Studies’ acts
as a form of national education and starts from elementary school (National Council
for the Social Studies [NCSS] 1988). However, compared to the United Kingdom’s
‘Citizenship Education’, which is aimed at students aged 11–16 (Keating et al. 2010),
Table 1.1 Policy development of the reintroduction of liberal studies
Year Month Events ‘Context’ in Ball’s Remarks
(1992) policy cycle (see
Fig. 2.2 on p. 17)
The start of policy generation
1.1 Background

2002 Jan Information about the plan of a large scale change in Influence CDC triggered the concept of curriculum
curriculum started to ‘leak’ from Hong Kong Curriculum change and was the first government
Development Council (CDC) committee to provide suggestions
Mar CDC reached a consensus over the change and submitted Influence and policy Liberal Studies was first recommended as
a proposal to Hong Kong Education Commission text production a core subject
(HKEC)
Apr Plan to change secondary education curriculum came Influence Reason: To narrow the curriculum rather
under criticism from teachers than broaden it
Oct HKEC received the proposal and suggested Hong Kong Influence HKCE is the highest level of consultation
Education Bureau consider its feasibility committee under Hong Kong Education
Bureau
2003 Jan– Broad discussions of the change of secondary education Influence Different interest groups participated in
Dec curriculum policymaking
2004 Mar Hong Kong Education Bureau accepted the proposal Influence
Oct First consultation document for the Liberal Studies Policy text production Liberal Studies was again recommended
curriculum released as a core subject
2005 May First consultation report released Policy text production Confirmed Liberal Studies to be a future
core subject
May Second consultation document for the Liberal Studies Policy text production
curriculum released
Dec Second consultation report released Policy text production Confirmed Liberal Studies to be
implemented in 2009
(continued)
3
 4

Table 1.1 (continued)

Year Month Events ‘Context’ in Ball’s Remarks
(1992) policy cycle (see
Fig. 2.2 on p. 17)
The end of policy generation
2006 Sep The first cohort of students who would study Liberal Most secondary schools started to offer a
Studies in their Secondary 4–6 entered Secondary 1 form of Liberal Studies in Secondary 1–3a
2006–2009 Teachers started to get training and understand the policy
of reintroducing Liberal Studies
The start of policy implementation
2009 Sep Liberal Studies was taught to all Secondary 4 students Practice The policies were perceived to change
2012 Sep Full implementation of Liberal Studies from Secondary Practice onward
4 to Secondary 6
2014 Apr Liberal Studies curriculum review was initiated by the Policy regeneration
Education Bureau (EDB) and two rounds of consultation
were conducted
a
According to the EDB website, at least 8 secondary schools started implementing Liberal Studies in the junior forms in 2005–2006. See ‘[C]urriculum reform
in junior secondary and its interface with senior secondary education’ at http://www.edb.gov.hk/en/curriculum-development/kla/pshe/curriculum-reform-in-
junior-secondary-and-its-interface-with-senior-secondary-education.html
1 Liberal Studies and National Education in Post-colonial Hong Kong
Table 1.2 The policy development of the moral and national education
Year Month Events ‘Context’ in Remarks
Ball’s (1992)
policy cycle
The start of policy generation
1.1 Background

2010 Oct Curriculum Development Council (CDC) was invited to Influence and The initiation of the review of the MCE
review the curriculum framework for Moral and Civic policy text curriculum by the Chief Executive (as a top–
Education (MCE) in the Chief Executive’s ‘Policy Address production down approach) was uncommon
2010–11’
2011 May MNE was officially proposed by the Education Bureau Policy text As an ‘enriched version’ of MCE curriculum
(EDB) to replace Moral and Civic Education (MCE) production framework
May– A four-month single-round public consultation period started, Influence Objections centred around MNE’s
Aug during which more than 24 civic groups were created to ‘brainwashing’ contents and avoidance of
oppose the project (Morris and Vickers 2015), including sensitive topics in China
‘Scholarism’, ‘National Education Parents’ Concern Group’. Results of the official consultation have never
The Catholic Education Board also expressed criticism over been released
the curriculum for imposing a national sentiment on students
The end of policy generation
2012 Mar Release of the ‘China Model’ handbook, which again, received Policy text
wide criticism production and
influence
Apr Release of the final curriculum guide by EDB policy text
production
Jul– On July 29, an estimated 90,000 teachers, parents and students Influence
Early participated in a march against MNE’s implementation, asking
Sept for entire withdrawal of the curriculum (Chan 2012)
On August 30, protestors started to occupy the space outside
the government headquarters. The number of people grew to
more than 120,000 on September 7 (Chan 2012)
(continued)
5
 6

Table 1.2 (continued)

Year Month Events ‘Context’ in Remarks
Ball’s (1992)
policy cycle
The start of policy implementation
2012 Sept Implementation of MNE started in all primary schools and Practice
some secondary schools that showed readiness
A week after implementation began, the Committee on MNE Influence and The Committee proposed the removal of the
announced a review and revision of the subject’s curriculum policy text China’s contemporary developments from the
guide on Sept 8 production guide
Oct The curriculum was formally shelved to forestall the continued Influence and
debate in the community policy text
production
A 3-year initiation period was announced, schools were Practice As of October 2013, 287 schools had introduced
allowed to decide whether or not to launch MNE until 2015 MNE-relevant materials in their curriculaa
a
Figures obtained from statistical research conducted by the Parents’ Concern Group on National Education (in Chinese: 國民教育家長關注組) from July to
October 2013. See details at http://www.parentsconcernschool.hk/?a=group&id=school&type=p,s,e&issue=1
1 Liberal Studies and National Education in Post-colonial Hong Kong
1.1 Background 7

MNE is intended to be offered at a relatively earlier age. Further analysis of MNE’s

curriculum content is presented in Sect. 1.4 to differentiate it from the diverse cur-
ricula of national education worldwide.

1.2 First Introduction of Liberal Studies

The Latin word liber is the root of the English word ‘liberal’, which originally
indicated the distinction between freemen and enslaved (Oxford English Dictionary
[OED] 2008). Curren (2006) points out that ‘Liberal Studies’ aims to liberate
students’ autocratic thought by providing them with a great variety of interlinked
areas of study. However, it remained a global concept and was not established as a
formal subject or programme until 1953, when an American university, Wesleyan
University, began offering the first Liberal Studies master’s degree (Astin 1999). In
the late 1970s, the idea of Liberal Studies spread to European countries. For
instance, the reform of the National Curriculum in England gave students more
disciplinary choices at school (Peterson 1988), and Scotland succeeded in broad-
ening the school curriculum by introducing practical subjects for its public exam-
inations (McPherson and Neave 1976).
Looking specifically at Hong Kong, Liberal Studies was not introduced into
secondary schools or universities before the 1990s, even though the concept was
increasingly popular from the mid-twentieth century. However, after the signing of
the Sino-British Joint Declaration in 1984, which confirmed the PRC government’s
imminent resumption of sovereignty over Hong Kong, the British colonial gov-
ernment announced its intension to promote students’ social awareness of the
transition by introducing Liberal Studies (Morris and Chan 1997a). It was initially
proposed as a core subject for senior secondary school students (i.e. AS-level
students), but owing to local universities’ refusal to make Liberal Studies an
admission requirement for fear of insufficient student intake2 and the government’s
limited support measures (Morris and Chan 1997b), the subject was eventually
implemented as an elective.
The non-statutory status of Liberal Studies directly resulted in its unpopularity
amongst secondary school students. The new subject failed to gain a foothold, with
only slightly more than 10 % of high schools adopting it and only about 6.5 % of
students opting to sit the public examination in 1996/97 (Hong Kong Examination
Authority [HKEA] 1997). The elective nature of the subject also meant that stu-
dents studied it selectively, with just two of the six possible modules chosen by the

2
From 1989 onwards, the local tertiary education sector was legally required to cover 18 % of the
university age cohort (Morris and Chan 1997b). Every university aimed to recruit as many
qualified students as possible to secure government funding and maintain institutional competi-
tiveness. As a result, in 1991, no university was willing to be the first to set Liberal Studies as an
admission prerequisite and bear the risk of attracting fewer eligible applicants (Morris and Chan
1997a).
8 1 Liberal Studies and National Education in Post-colonial Hong Kong

adopting schools. In 1996–1997, the ‘Hong Kong Studies’ and ‘China Today’
modules were offered by only half and 20 % of those schools, respectively (Morris
and Chan 1997b). Owing to the loss of student participation, the first introduction of
Liberal Studies failed to achieve its goals (Morris and Morris 2001).

1.3 Controversies Over the Reintroduction

of Liberal Studies

Although the subject failed to gain widespread acceptance in the tertiary education
sector in its first introduction, the Secretary for Education Prof. Li Kwok-Cheung
gave his full support to its reintroduction in 2004, asserting that:
Liberal Studies has been practised in foreign countries with excellent results; we have no
doubt that the reintroduction of this subject will be fabulous for secondary school students
(Education and Manpower Bureau [EMB] 2004, p. 25).

To a certain extent, some controversies associated with the policymaking and

curriculum planning of the reintroduction were raised in 2004, which may have
jeopardised public confidence when the policies were put into practice in 2009.
A review of several documents highlights two of the many controversies, as
summarised below.
The first controversy is that the policymaking in the reintroduction of Liberal
Studies seems to have been heavily influenced by various unsolved issues that were
raised by various interested parties. For example, evidence shows that the PRC
government was possibly involved in the retaining of the unpopular module ‘China
Today’. This is indicated by Wenweipo, the PRC government-owned newspaper,
which consistently urged the HKSAR government to strengthen citizenship and
national education by criticising its deficiency in Hong Kong (Au Yeung 2007).
Meanwhile, the largest teachers’ union, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers’
Union (HKPTU), publicly opposed the reintroduction in an early stage (HKPTU
2005). This was because they insisted that many in-service teachers would need to
change their teaching disciplines, or would even be made redundant if Liberal
Studies was established as a mandatory subject. They asserted that a thorough
consideration of their opinions should be made before the subject was broadly
reintroduced (Hong Kong Research Association [HKRA] 2005).
The second controversy is related to scholars’ and teachers’ sceptical views
about the content of the proposed Liberal Studies curriculum (Ki et al. 2005). As
indicated at the beginning of this chapter, one of the major aims of the reintro-
duction was to solve the problem of over-specialisation in the arts and sciences.
Therefore, scholars and teachers alike initially suggested that the curriculum gives
students a choice of modules to provide them with broader areas of learning. For the
time being, however, the education authority has neglected that suggestion in
preference for prescribed content modules (i.e. ‘Public Health and Energy’,
‘Technology and Society’) that provide students with no options. The authority
1.3 Controversies Over the Reintroduction of Liberal Studies 9

claimed that this proposed curriculum structure would sufficiently bridge the gap
between the arts and sciences (Education Bureau [EDB] 2009). Despite the possible
validity of this argument, the proposal had already triggered concerns amongst
scholars and teachers.

1.4 Controversies Over the Implementation of MNE

The debate over the implementation of MNE was in many ways similar to that over
Liberal Studies, apart being more short lived yet still extensive. Whilst the
Education Bureau (EDB) insisted that MNE had garnered considerable public
support, the results of a one-off consultation in 2011 were never published. In
addition to secondary school teachers expressing apprehension over the indepen-
dent treatment of MNE, which arguably overlapped with such subjects as Economic
and Public Affairs and Social Studies (Leung and Ng 2014), the major controversies
concerning MNE can be summed up as follows.
The first controversy concerns the curriculum’s highly indoctrinational content.
It has been suggested that removing politics from civic education is a long-standing
policy norm in Hong Kong (Leung and Ngai 2011; Leung and Lo 2012). Common
measures include minimising the number of political topics in the syllabus and
referring to depoliticized civic education by such euphemisms as ‘moral or life
education’, ‘affective and holistic education’ or ‘whole-person development’ (Ma
2009). According to Leung and Yuen (2012), this depoliticisation is also reflected
in the extremely low usage of phrases such as ‘Chinese Communist Party’, ‘po-
litical parties’ or even ‘politics’ in the 293-page-long consultation draft of MNE in
2011 (p. 47). Tracing the issue further back to 2002, the curriculum guide for
MNE’s former incarnation, MCE, is likewise observed to have marginalised
political issues but stressed the importance of national identity (Leung and Ng
2004; Yu 2011). The restrictive nature of MNE was therefore believed to endanger
students’ critical thinking (Leung and Yuen 2012; Petrovic and Kuntz 2014) by
means of sidestepping politically sensitive issues in China while at the same time
promoting a sense of national identity that recognises and appreciates only the
Communist Party’s authority (Pinar 2013). Of all of the teaching protocols, the
‘China Model’ handbook,3 which was available only in Chinese, attracted the most
devastating criticism. The manual was condemned for its single-sided presentation
of Chinese Socialism, praising the central government’s one-party system as ‘ad-
vanced, selfless and united’ while calling democracy ‘divisive, unjust, and ineffi-
cient’ (Petrovic and Kuntz 2014, p. 30). Massive protests and petitions against
MNE followed after the subject’s ‘brainwashing’ content was revealed.

3
The 34-page ‘China Model—National Conditions Teaching Handbook’ was published by the
National Education Services Centre in March 2012. Although claimed as irrelevant to the des-
ignated teaching materials for MNE (EDB 2012), it aroused great controversies across the com-
munity because of its highly subjective contents about China’s political system.
10 1 Liberal Studies and National Education in Post-colonial Hong Kong

The second controversy, which caused MNE to ultimately fail, concerned the
more fundamental conflict between the political values of Hong Kong and China.
Whilst the Chinese government endeavoured to exert political influence on edu-
cation policy in active preparation for the agreed total reunification in 2047, the
local community showed no intention to conform unconditionally to the nation’s
governance (Chan and Chan 2014). Instead, the civic majority held tight to the
city’s distinct autonomy and diversity (Petrovic and Kuntz 2014), which are
embedded in its political and educational structure (Pinar 2013). Subsequently, the
MNE curriculum became the first direct wrestling ground on which the local and
national political ideologies confronted each other. The government’s concession to
shelve the MNE syllabus, however, never properly resolved or addressed the
divergence between Hong Kong and China. The decision to shelve (but not entirely
abandon) the subject seems positive indication that national education will be
revived in future (Cheng and Ho 2014), and the three-year initiation period for the
subject’s implementation simply shifts the responsibility to schools. The move was
seen as the government’s convenient escape from a crisis arising from its ‘highly
centralised approach to policymaking’ (Marsh and Lee 2014, p. 33), policy rhetoric
that has historically dominated curriculum development in Hong Kong (Morris and
Adamson 2010).

1.5 A Blank in the Literature

Even before embarking on the study discussed in this book, it was already
noticeable that research related to curriculum policy in Hong Kong is relatively
scarce compared to that in Western countries. Sweeting’s (1999) findings, for
example, indicate that researchers in Hong Kong frequently encounter difficulties
connected with the identification of policy issues in curriculum policy analysis.
From the international perspective, the Western understanding of Liberal Studies
differs from that in Hong Kong, and the distinct features of Liberal Studies in the
latter restrict non-Hong Kong-based researchers’ interest in the subject (Morris
1996). In particular, Liberal Studies in Hong Kong is tailored to secondary school
students, in contrast to Liberal Studies in the US, which is adult orientated (Hands
1988). The aim of Liberal Studies in the US is to provide university students with
broad areas of learning. In Hong Kong, in contrast, the subject is offered as a
mandatory subject in secondary schools. Therefore, it is rather difficult for overseas
researchers to gain a thorough understanding of the Liberal Studies context in Hong
Kong and to conduct relevant research on it. The same applies to MNE. Despite the
subject’s purported aim to cultivate national sentiment and citizenship, which
parallels civic education in the West, the latter differs significantly from MNE in
content and in validity in and applicability to Hong Kong. It is thus unlikely that
there are any extent overseas studies that offer a comparable and/or specific
examination of the topic for comparison. For these reasons, the absence in the
1.5 A Blank in the Literature 11

literature of any policy analysis of the reintroduction of Liberal Studies and

implementation of MNE is understandable.
Filling that blank in the literature constitutes the major rationale for the present
research and this book. Another is the significance of such research for the edu-
cation literature. Based on the latest educational policy developments in Hong
Kong in the late 2000s, this research makes a pioneering contribution to the area of
Hong Kong curriculum policy study. Indeed, the controversies generated by the
reintroduction of Liberal Studies and implementation of MNE are important issues
in this type of research. They help to delineate the major considerations of edu-
cational policymaking in post-colonial Hong Kong since the reunification with
mainland China.

References

Au Yeung, H. Y. (2007, November 23). The deficiency in citizenship education, undermine

democratic reform. Wenweipo.
Astin, A. W. (1999). How the liberal arts college affects students. Daedalus, 128(1), 77–100.
Ball, S. J. (1992). Education policy and social class: The selected works of Stephen Ball.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Barnett, C. (1986). The audit of war: The illusion and reality of Britain as a great nation. London:
Macmillan.
CDC. (2011). Consultation on moral and national education curriculum (summary). Retrieved
from http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/moral-national-edu/
Consultation_on_MNE_Curriculum_(Summary)_2.pdf
CDC. (2012). Moral and national education curriculum guide (primary 1 to secondary 6).
Retrieved from http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/moral-national-
edu/MNE%20Guide%20(ENG)%20Final_remark_09102012.pdf
Chan, E., & Chan, J. (2014). Liberal patriotism in Hong Kong. Journal of Contemporary China,
23(89), 952–970.
Chan, Y. (2012, September 1). Protests against the new mandatory moral and national education
curriculum. Panoramas. Retrieved from http://www.panoramas.dk/2012/hong-kong-sept1-
protests.html
Cheng, W., & Ho, J. (2014). Brainwashing or nurturing positive values: Competing voices in
Hong Kong’s national education debate. Journal of Pragmatics, 74, 1–14.
Curriculum Development Council [CDC]. (2000). Syllabuses for the secondary schools: Liberal
studies (advanced supplementary level). Retrieved from http://ebook.lib.hku.hk/HKG/
B35844930.pdf
Curren, R. R. (2006). Philosophy of education: An anthology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Education and Manpower Bureau [EMB]. (2004). Investigating the critically questions on new
senior secondary education and higher education reform. The concept and the subject of
liberal studies. Statement of Secretary for Education. Hong Kong: EMB. Retrieved from http://
www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeID=133&langno=2&UID=101595
Education Bureau [EDB]. (2009). Panel on education discussion in liberal studies under the new
senior secondary curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr08-09/english/panels/
ed/papers/ed0711cb2-2122-1-e.pdf
EDB. (2012). What is the handbook entitled ‘The China Model’? [Online]. Available from: http://
www.edb.gov.hk/en/curriculum-development/moral-national-edu/faq.html#para2
12 1 Liberal Studies and National Education in Post-colonial Hong Kong

Fok, S. C. (1997). Political change in Hong Kong and its implications for civic education. The
Journal of Moral Education, 26(1), 85–99.
Hands, C. B. (Ed.). (1988). The Tradition in modern times: Graduate liberal studies today.
Lanham: University Press of America.
Hong Kong Examination Authority [HKEA]. (1997). Examination statistics 1997. Hong Kong:
Examination Report, Hong Kong Examination Authority.
Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union [HKPTU]. (2005). Opinions on the first consultation of
new senior secondary education structure in Hong Kong [Press Release]. Retrieved from
https://www2.hkptu.org/press/2005/respond334-2005.pdf
Hong Kong Research Association [HKRA]. (2005). Citizens’ responses on ‘334’ New Academic
Structure in Hong Kong [News Release]. Retrieved from http://www.rahk.org/research/036/
036newsX.pdf
Keating, A., Kerr, D., Benton, T., Mundy, E., & Lopes, J. (2010). Citizenship education in
England 2001–2010: Young people’s practices and prospects for the future: The eighth and
final report from the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study (CELS). Department
for Education. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/181797/DFE-RR059.pdf
Ki, W. W., Hodson, D., Kwan, T., Law, N., Leung, F. Leung, K. P., Leung, A., Siu, A. & Yung,
B. (2005). The one liberal studies subject and the whole curriculum. Education Matters, 3(1).
Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Ku, A. S., & Pun, N. (2011). Remaking citizenship in Hong Kong: Community, nation and the
global city (Vol. 6). London: Routledge Curzon.
Lee, W. O. (2004). Citizenship education in Hong Kong: Development and challenges.
In W. O. Lee, D. L. Grossman, K. J. Kennedy, & G. P. Fairbrother (Eds.), Citizenship
education in Asia and the Pacific: Concepts and issues (pp. 59–80). Hong Kong: The
University of Hong Kong.
Leung, Y. W., & Lo, Y. L. (2012, October 19). What is the next step?: Reverting to and
reconstruction of civic education (in Chinese). Mingpao.
Leung, Y. W., & Ng, S. W. (2004). Back to square one: The “re-depoliticizing” of civic education
in Hong Kong. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 24(1), 43–60.
Leung, Y. W., & Ng, H. Y. (2014). Delivering civic education in Hong Kong: Why is it not an
independent subject? Citizenship, Social and Economics Education, 13(1), 2–13.
Leung, Y. W., & Ngai, S. K. G. (2011). Competing citizenship identities in the global age: The
case of Hong Kong. Citizenship Teaching and Learning, 6(3), 251–267.
Leung, Y. W., & Yuen, T. W. (2012). Competition between politicized and depoliticized versions
of civic education curricula: The case of Hong Kong. Citizenship, Social and Economics
Education, 11(1), 45–56.
Ma, H. K. (2009). Moral development and moral education: An integrated approach. Educational
Research Journal, 24(2), 293–326.
Marsh, C., & Lee, J. C. K. (Eds.). (2014). Asia’s high performing education systems: The case of
Hong Kong. New York: Routledge.
McPherson, A. F., & Neave, G. (1976). The Scottish sixth. Slough: NFER.
Morris, P. (1996). Hong Kong schools curriculum: Development, issues and policies. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press.
Morris, P., & Adamson, B. (2010). Curriculum, schooling and society in Hong Kong. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press.
Morris, P., & Chan, K. K. (1997a). Cross-curricular themes and curriculum reform in Hong Kong:
Policy as discourse. British Journal of Educational Studies, 45(3), 248–262.
Morris, P., & Chan, K. K. (1997b). The Hong Kong school curriculum and the political transition:
Politicization, contextualization and symbolic action. Comparative Education, 33(2), 247–264.
Morris, P., & Morris, E. (2001). Becoming civil in Hong Kong: A tale of two schools.
International Journal of Educational Research, 35(1), 11–27.
References 13

National Council for the Social Studies [NCSS]. (1988). Social studies for early childhood and
elementary school children: Preparing for the 21st century. Retrieved from http://www.
socialstudies.org/positions/elementary
Oxford English Dictionary [OED]. (2008). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Peterson, A. D. (1988). Three decades of non-reform. Oxford Review of Education, 14(2),
127–137.
Petrovic, J., & Kuntz, A. (2014). Citizenship education around the world: Local contexts and
global possibilities. New York: Routledge.
Pinar, W. F. (2013). International handbook of curriculum research. London: Routledge.
Stimpson, P. (1997). Environmental education in Hong Kong and Guangzhou: One purpose, two
systems? Compare, 27(1), 63–74.
Sweeting, A. (1999). Doing comparative historical education research: Problems and issues from
and about Hong Kong. Compare, 29(3), 269.
Tao, P. K. (1996). Science education for all: An analysis of the issue in the Hong Kong context.
CUHK Education Journal, 14(1), 72–78.
Wiener, M. (1985). English culture and the decline of the industrial spirit 1850–1980.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Yu, N. H. (2011). Hong Kong secondary school teachers’ perceptions of civic education.
Comparative Education Bulletin, 13(2011), 29.
Chapter 2
Review of Liberal Studies, National
Education and Educational Policy
Framework

Abstract Despite the scarcity of existing literature highlighted in the previous

chapter, there are a few earlier academic publications that discuss the reintroduction
of Liberal Studies and initiation of MNE within the NSS academic structure.
Through perusal of the Western empirical literature corresponding to educational
policy analysis, this chapter attempts to conduct an exploratory study by employing
a thematic review strategy (Robson in Real world research—resource for social
scientists and practitioner-researchers. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, 2002). The
reason for paying attention to such empirical studies is twofold. On the one hand,
new issues are likely to be revealed from critiques of Hong Kong’s past policies
related to Liberal Studies and MNE; on the other, different analytical frameworks
can be critically explored with the aid of educational policy analyses from the West.
This chapter is composed of three parts. The first part examines two different
analytical frameworks that dissect the development of educational policy. The
second part explains the scope and selection criteria of the literature affiliated with
and applicable to this study in the Hong Kong context. Finally, based on a variety
of assembled documents, the third part offers an in-depth review of Liberal Studies
and MNE policy initiatives and failures.

2.1 Review of the Development of Educational Policy

2.1.1 Definition of Educational Policy

The definition of educational policy in the West has undergone a remarkable

transformation in recent decades. The definition reflects the changes of emphasis in
policy research in different periods of time (Levin 1998). In the mid-twentieth
century, educational policy was well recognised as ‘statements’ and ‘ordinances’
that mono-directionally designated the order of decisions. Examples can be found
in the 1960s, when educational policy was ‘a bureaucratic instrument’ to administer
the public education sector (Taylor 1997, p. 3), and in the 1970s, when it became

© The Author(s) 2017 15

D.C.-L. Fung and W. Lui, Education Policy Analysis,
SpringerBriefs in Education, DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-2610-2_2
16 2 Review of Liberal Studies, National Education …

the ‘determinant authority and great power’ to maintain the system of post-war
education (Kogan 1975, p. 238). Thus, due to this ‘dominant’ status, the concept of
educational policy was relatively ‘static’ rather than ‘dynamic’ in those periods.
The idea of ‘dynamic’ educational policy is constructed by the subsequent
developments in its meaning in narrowing the traditional gap between policy
‘formulation’ and ‘implementation’ (Barrett and Fudge 1981). It is argued that this
evolution was due to the recognition of the dynamic interplay of policymaking and
practice. Policymaking is no longer a process that is terminated after the distribution
of policy texts and documents; instead, it is an ongoing process interacting with its
corresponding implementation. Owing to this new perception, teachers who have
been customarily excluded from the process of policymaking are given the status of
policymakers (Clandinin and Connelly 1996).

2.1.2 Two Major Conceptual Frameworks

These historical developments eventually established two main camps concerned

with conceptual frameworks for analysing educational policy and practice
(Vidovich 2001). The first camp developed a ‘state-centred’ perspective on policy
analysis, particularly with relation to education policy in the middle of the last
century, whereas the second promoted the dynamic interaction between policy-
making and practice with the formation of a ‘policy cycle’ perspective. The two
perspectives gradually developed into alternative frameworks that form the basis of
different approaches to educational policy analysis (Raab 1994). These two
frameworks have informed the majority of policy studies (Ranson 1995), and their
evolution is presented in the series of discussions in the following sections.

2.1.3 The ‘State-Centred’ Framework

Vidovich (2001) summarised the evolution of the ‘state-centred’ framework and

asserted that it was closely related to the role of the state in education from 1970s to
980s. He concluded that the effects of the state in educational policy were greatly
influential in Western countries in 1970s and developed as the dominant power in
policy constitution. At the same time, however, public administration typically
lacked theoretical analysis that could explain the government’s decision-making
process. Hence, the state-centred theory was gradually conceptualised as a per-
spective to investigate contemporary educational policies. This perspective, based
on concepts of interest exchange and power, conceived the relations between dif-
ferent levels of the state as forming a complex network of organisations. It suc-
cessfully accounted for the policymaking that took place in the post-war education
era, when governments monopolised educational resources. Moreover, up to 1980s,
the increasing centralisation of power was observed in Britain (Ranson 1995).
2.1 Review of the Development of Educational Policy 17

Government Expectations of education

Education system Implementation Occupational Facilitating

Concerns arrangements

School Implementation Occupational Facilitating

Concerns arrangements

Students

Fig. 2.1 The state-centred framework for analysis of education policy (Dale 1989, p. 61) (figure
was edited by authors)

Overall ministerial control of educational policy provided a promising prospect for

the adoption of a state-centred perspective to analyse the impact of the role of the
state in education.
Dale (1983), an advocate of the state-centred perspective, considered the absence
of a ‘systematic understanding of educational policy’ (p. 201) and proposed that a
framework of the state should be constructed to acquire a better understanding of
how particular educational policies were made. Thus, he created a state-centred
conceptual framework (see Fig. 2.1 on the next page) to identify the symbiosis
between government and the public sector in education (Dale 1989). The appear-
ance of this framework was met with stinging criticisms from a number of
researchers in short order. Dunleavy and O’Leary (1989) argued that the ‘concept of
the state’ makes sense only when counterposed with ‘the concept of a non-state’
(p. 320) because its singular focus upon the government is arguably incapable of
addressing issues concerning other educational sectors. Furthermore, Bowe et al.
(1992) criticised the framework for detaching policy generation from implemen-
tation and its failure to characterise the micro-level of the policymaking process.
Nevertheless, the framework gained praise from Apple (1989) and Ozga (1990),
who expressed the view that it made a marked contribution to allowing investi-
gations of the political and ideological dimensions of educational policy.
Lingard (1993) employed the state-centred framework to highlight Australian
reflections on the state of policy sociology. He found that despite the reconfigu-
ration of the state, it remained important in affecting contemporary educational
policies. As a result, he called for the utilisation of this ‘sophisticated’ framework,
while noting the drawbacks of its overemphasis on government power. Power
(1995), in contrast, attempted to apply the state-centred framework to explain the
changes in British schools, but discovered it to provide little help in illustrating
what was going on within schools. Thus, he suggested a reconsideration of the
framework’s usefulness for research dealing with micro-level policy analysis, such
as small-scale case studies.
18 2 Review of Liberal Studies, National Education …

2.1.4 The Policy Cycle Framework

To analyse the origins, construction and implementation of the 1988 Education

Reform Act in Britain, Ball (1990) sought to deploy the ‘policy cycle’ perspective
as his research strategy. He described his approach as ‘an exercise in policy soci-
ology’ that emphasised ‘the complexity of recent education policy-making’ (Ball
1990, p. 7). On comparing with the aforedescribed state-centred perspective, his
strategy shifted the research attention from state-level analysis to the individual
practitioner. Indeed, Ball’s (1990) strategy emerged from the work of Foucault
(1972). He identified certain key concepts of the philosopher that were applicable to
education. For instance, he adopted the Foucauldian concept of ‘discourse’, which
embodies the meanings of thought and speech to illustrate the essence of policy.
Therefore, Ball (1993) stated that educational policy is a kind of discourse that
incorporates humanistic meaning. In the early 1990s, Ball’s policy cycle strategy
became increasingly popular as practitioners such as teachers began to gain more
influence over educational policy (Ranson 1995), which eventually motivated him
to conceptualise the strategy as a framework for analysis (Ball 1993).
In 1992, Ball’s work with Bowe and Gold developed into a thesis on policy
formulation and implementation. That thesis originated the concept of a policy cycle
and corresponding framework comprising three contexts, namely, ‘Influence’,
‘Policy Text Production’ and ‘Practice’. According to the thesis, educational policy
can be divided into and interpreted within the discourses surrounding these three
contexts, with the underlying assumption that no practitioners are excluded from
either the process of policy generation or policy implementation. The ‘Influence’
context represents the conventional phase, in which education policy is initiated,
when interested parties are devoted to exercising their influence over the purpose and
design of a proposed policy. During the negotiation phase, the policy is then chal-
lenged and defended primarily through the mass media before gaining public
acceptance. The second context is that of ‘Policy Text Production’. Typically
delivered in a manner that claims to support the common good, a policy text gen-
erated by the government is the policy, and its appeal is based on claimed consensus
and political reasoning. Once enacted, however, a policy does not remain static in the
context of ‘Practice’, as practitioners bring their own methods of working and
personal interpretation to policy implementation. Hence, the three phases are in fact
interdependent and form a continuous cycle, as depicted in Fig. 2.2.
Ball’s (1992) policy cycle framework has been attacked primarily by Dale
(1991) and Hatcher and Troyna (1994). Dale argued that the framework ignored the
strong relationship between politics and policymaking. Moreover, he contended
that Ball’s idea of ‘policy discourse’ inappropriately interpreted the key concepts
proposed by Foucault. Hatcher and Troyna, on the other hand, disagreed with Ball’s
idea about the decentralisation of power in policymaking. They argued that the role
of the state in controlling policy outcomes was still significant. Nevertheless, Ball’s
framework has been widely employed by a number of researchers, including
Lingard (1993) and White and Crump (1993).
2.1 Review of the Development of Educational Policy 19

Interest groups struggle over construction of policy discourses

Context of Influence

Context of Policy Text

Context of Practice
Production

Policy Texts (e.g. official legal Policy is subject to

text) implementation and re-creation

Fig. 2.2 Policy cycle framework for policy analysis (Ball 1992, p. 52) (figure was edited by
authors)

Ball and Bowe (1992) applied the policy cycle framework to investigate the
implementation of a national curriculum policy in Britain, illustrating that the
state’s control of education still dominated curriculum policy in that country. In
addition, they also claimed that the government deliberately ignored teachers in the
process of policymaking. McHoul (1994) later adopted the framework to analyse
Australia’s Queensland Equal Opportunities Policy in the education arena. He
asserted that it was an ideal instrument to analyse the contradictions between policy
texts and implementation.

2.2 Criteria for Inclusion

The motivation for setting the criteria for inclusion in this research emerged from
reflections on the large corpus of literature showing the development of various
academic subjects in Hong Kong, including Chinese Language, English Language
and Mathematics. However, very little attention has been paid to Liberal Studies
(Morris and Scott 2003), let alone the short-lived MNE. Similarly, a wide range of
educational policy research places emphasis on schools’ effectiveness, leadership
and management; by contrast, very few investigations fall into the category of
curriculum policy studies (Morrison 2003). Thus, there is little local scholarship
that combines and discusses Liberal Studies or MNE in conjunction with their
respective curriculum policies. The same can be said of many Western countries,
with curriculum-specific policy studies accounting for a very small portion of
studies in the education arena compared with general policy research (Kirst and
Walker 1971).
By employing the criteria for inclusion described below, our study eliminated
irrelevant research publications. What remains are 44 eligible articles that form the
basis of our thematic research. Twenty-seven of these articles relate to Liberal
Studies, and seventeen to MNE (see Tables 2.1 and 2.2 on pages 29–30). The
criteria and their use are listed below in descending order of importance.
20 2 Review of Liberal Studies, National Education …

Table 2.1 Summary of the review of the first introduction of liberal studies
Study Policy initiatives Policy failures
Morris and The signing of the Sino-British Joint
Sweeting (1991) Declaration in 1984
Morris (1992) The preparation for the transfer of
Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty
Fok (1997) Consistent pursuit of democracy by The lack of initiative and ability of
Hong Kong people in 1980s teachers in the implementation of
policies
Morris and The shift of curriculum criteria and
Chan (1997) the need for academic competence
Tan (1997) No single reason for the failure of
the introduction
Bray (1997) A large number of mainland Chinese
teenage immigrants lacked
understanding of Hong Kong culture
Morris and Hong Kong government’s
Chan (1998) incompetence in cultivating
commitments in schools
Morris et al. Hong Kong government’s
(2000) incompetence in cultivating
curricular commitments in schools
Morris et al. The substantial gap between the
(2001) intended and implemented
curriculum
Lee (2002) Increase of elected seats in the
legislative council and the rise of
aspirations for a democratic society
in Hong Kong

(i) Coverage—(a) For the review of Liberal Studies and MNE in Hong Kong, for
inclusion all articles must inquire into the policies of the subjects’ introduction
or initiation. Literature covering a broader range of issues but still offering a
specific discussion of the policies is acceptable. (b) For the review of edu-
cational policy analysis in Western countries, all articles should discuss the
analytical frameworks adopted in most policy research. Critiques of such
frameworks are strongly preferred.
(ii) Kinds of Publications—International journals have the highest priority
because of their greater impact in academia (Garfield 1998). Local journals
that have gone through the peer-review process are also eligible. However,
monographs and unpublished essays such as research students’ thesis are
excluded from our review.
2.2 Criteria for Inclusion 21

Table 2.2 Summary of the review of major conceptual frameworks in policy analysis
Framework ‘State-centred’ ‘Policy cycle’
Study Finding(s) Study Finding(s)
Evolution Vidovich The role of the ‘state’ in Ball Ball deployed the
(2001) educational policy was (1990) ‘policy cycle’
greatly influential to perspective to
Western countries in investigate the 1988
1970s Education Reform Act
in Britain
Ranson Phenomenon of the Ranson The ‘policy cycle’
(1995) further increasing (1995) strategy became more
centralisation of power popular
in Britain was observed
Formulation Dale (1983) Dale proposed a Ball Ball, Bowe and Gold
framework of the ‘state’ (1992) developed the
to acquire a better fundamental concept of
understanding of a ‘policy cycle’
educational policies framework
Critiques Dunleavy Concept of the ‘state’ Dale The framework teased
and O’Leary as not capable to (1992) out the strong
(1989) address issues relationship between
concerning other politics and
educational sectors policymaking
Bowe The framework Hatcher They disagreed with the
et al. (1992) detached policy and idea of the
generation from Troyna decentralisation of
implementation (1994) power in the framework
Apple (1989) The framework was a Lingard The framework was
and Ozga remarkable contribution (1993) and widely accepted by
(1990) to educational policy White and other researchers
studies Crump
(1993)
Application Lingard The framework was Ball and The framework was
and results (1993) applicable to Bowe applicable to
demonstrate the (1992) investigate the
Australian policy implementation of
sociology national curriculum
policy in Britain
Power (1995) The framework McHoul The framework is an
provided little help to (1994) ideal instrument to
explain the changes in analyse the
schools in Britain contradictions between
policy texts and
implementation
regarding the
Queensland equal
opportunities policy in
education
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Stephenson, George, 221
Stern, height of, 153, 172, 201
Stern-wheel boats, invention by Robert Stevens of, 63, 258
Stettin Vulcan Co., 174
Stevens, John, stern-wheel steamer of, 63;
proposal from Fulton to, 64;
the Phœnix, 76, 118
Stevens, Robert, invention of tubular boilers by: first screw-
steamer of, 63
Stone-Lloyd water-tight doors, 191
Strain, 98, 99, 126;
minimised by length, 139;
effect of iron and wood in, 146–7
Submarine signalling, 172;
on Great Eastern boats, 229;
methods of, 305
Subsidy, Cunard Co.’s first, 106;
Royal Mail Steam Packet Co.’s first, 112;
reduction of, 113;
for Mauretania and Lusitania, 198
“Suction” dredger, 239, 240
Suevic, the, 295
Suez Canal, 115, 116, 117;
limitations imposed by, 215
“Sun-and-planet” gear, 37, 47
Sunbeam, the, 270
Sutcliffe, Mrs., on Fulton, 50, 61
Swan, Hunter and Wigham Richardson, 212
Symington, William, engine for Miller’s boat by, 43;
the Charlotte Dundas, 46

Talbot, the, 221

Taylor, James, 42
Taylor, Naval Constructor D. W., experiments in resistance by,
67
Telegraph ships, 242–3
Telephone, use of on Balmoral Castle, 219;
installation on liners of, 305
Teutonic, the, 168, 179
Teviot, the, 110
Thames, first steamship on the, 83
Thames, the, 84, 111
Thompson, George, & Co., 216
“Three-island” type, 283
Titanic, the, 207, 211, 289
Tonnage, of “turret-ships,” 247;
measurements of, 312;
Royal Commission on, 313;
anomalies of, 313–4
“Tonnage-deck,” 312
Tonquin, the (ex City of Paris), 149
“Topgallant” forecastle, 284
Torricelli, Evangelista, discovery of weight of atmosphere, 20
Towing, feats of, 236–7
Train-ferries, 251
Tramp steamer, the, 250
Trawlers, steam, 252
Trent, the, Slidell and Mason incident, 113
Triad, the, 270, 278, 279
Trial trip, how carried out, 292, 293
Triple-expansion engines, principle of, 117, 166
“Trunk-deck” steamer, 248
Tubular boiler, 133
Tugs, variety of, 234;
“Cock” type, 235;
Dutch, 236;
 salvage, 237;
New York Harbour, 237;
as passenger tenders, 238;
paddle-wheel, 239;
as trawlers, 252
Turbine, Giovanni Branca and, 20;
importance of, 183;
invention of, 184;
Parsons system of, 186;
the Carmania’s, 187;
faults of, 188;
the Vespasian experiment, 189;
of Virginian and Victorian, 190;
of Carmania, 192;
of Mauretania and Lusitania, 197, 201;
low-pressure of Laurentic, 210;
on cross-channel boats, 226;
on Great Eastern Railway Co.’s boats, 230;
on Isle of Man boats, 230;
reliability of, 230;
on yachts, 274
Turbinia, the, 187
Turret-ships, 245;
comparison with “whale-back,” 265
Turtle decks of Oceanic, 153;
of Umbria, 158;
of Victoria, 163;
of Majestic, 168
Twain, Mark, on Mississippi steamers, 259, 260
Twin-screw, evolution of, 163;
introduction of “overlapping,” 169;
of the Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse, 175;
of Adriatic, 207;
influence of on steering capacity, 318
Twin-ships, 225
Types of steamships, 283–7
Umbria, the, 158–9, 161, 162, 163, 165, 212
Union-Castle Line, 216;
ships of, 219
Union Line, 216

Vanadis, the, 280

Ventilation, methods of, 327
Veranda café of Lusitania, 301
Vertical trunk engine, 134
Vespasian, the, 189
Victoria, the, 131
Victoria, the (P. & O.), 163
Victoria and Albert, the, 277
Victorian, the, 190
Vigilant, the, 241
Virginian, the, 190, 191
Vulcan Yards, Hamburg, 212

Waesland (ex Russia), 150

Wakiva, the, 280–1
Waratah, the, 182
Water-ballast, tanks of cantilever-framed ships, 249;
for yachts, 274;
tanks for, 315
Water-tight doors of Oceanic, 153;
Stone-Lloyd system, 191
Watson, G. L., 270
Watt, James, 33;
early engine of, 34;
association with Boulton, 35;
beam engine, 36;
“sun-and-planet” gear, 37;
rotary engine, 37;
 invention of fly-wheel, 38;
“horse-power” calculations of, 39;
anecdote of, 82;
invention of condenser, 135, 136
Watt, James, & Co., 140
Watt, James, Junr., and steamships, 84
Wave-line theory, 131, 133
Waves, action of, 98
“Well-deck” type, 284–5
West Indies, inauguration of mail service to, 110
Weymouth and Channel Islands Steam Packet Co., 228
“Whale-back” steamer, 265
White, Sir William H., 197, 203
White Star Line, first steamships of, 151;
Atlantic competition, 151–5, 168;
“intermediate” ships of, 178;
recent ships, 193–4, 206–7, 209, 211;
sailing ships of, 215;
freight and live-stock steamers, 219
Wigram and Green, 93
William Facwett, the, 114
Williams and Guion, 155, 212
Williamson, Capt. J.: “The Clyde Passenger Steamer: Its Rise
and Progress during the Nineteenth Century,” 78
Williamson’s “Memorials of James Watt,” 83
Wilson, Thomas, & Sons, 216
Wireless telegraphy on Campania and Lucania, 171;
on P. & O. ships, 218;
on cross-channel boats, 226;
usefulness of, 229;
on yachts, 271;
on liners, 306;
instances of utility of, 307–8
Wittekind, the, 295
 Wood, John, & Co., and the Comet, 78
Worcester, Marquis of, 9, 10, 18, 20

Yacht, the steam, Royal Yacht Squadron and, 266–8;

Northern Yacht Club and, 267;
Robert Napier and, 267;
development of, 269;
the Sunbeam, 270;
lines of, 270;
decks of, 272;
fittings of, 273;
engines and ballast, 274;
Royal, 277–8;
the Sagitta, 278;
the Triad, 278–9;
noted yachts, 280–1
Ymuiden Tug Company, 237

Zwarte Zee, the, 236

Printed by Cassell & Company, Limited, La Belle Sauvage, London, E.C.

 Transcriber’s Notes
Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent
when a predominant preference was found in the original book;
otherwise they were not changed.
Simple typographical errors were corrected; unbalanced
quotation marks were remedied when the change was obvious,
and otherwise left unbalanced.
Illustrations in this eBook have been positioned between
paragraphs and outside quotations. In versions of this eBook that
support hyperlinks, the page references in the List of Illustrations
lead to the corresponding illustrations.
In the original book, a few credits referred to more than one
illustration on the page. In this ebook, those credits have been
duplicated so that each illustration has its own copy.
The index was not checked for proper alphabetization or
correct page references.
Several incorrect page references to illustrations have been
silently corrected.
Page 160: “to sail eastward” was printed that way; may be a
typo for “westward”.
 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK STEAMSHIPS
AND THEIR STORY ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.