A comparison of the intended mathematics curriculum in China, Hong Kong and England and the implementation in Beijing, Hong Kong and London

• Main Author: Leung, Frederick Koon Shing
• Published: University College London (University of London) 1992
• Subjects: 370; Education & training
• Online Access: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.261063

This thesis compares the various components of the intended junior secondary mathematics curriculum in China, Hong Kong and England and the implementation in Beijing, Hong Kong and London, and suggests factors to account for the differences in curriculum found. The three places under study were found to differ tremendously in their culture, education system and history of development of the mathematics curriculum. For the intended curriculum, the three places did not differ much in the aims of mathematics education on the utility of the product of mathematics, but great differences were found in the intrinsic aims and aims on the utility of the process of mathematics. The curriculum in all three places intended the use of a variety of teaching methods, but great differences were found in the mathematics content intended to be learned by the students. Results of a questionnaire showed that teachers in the three places differed greatly in their attitudes towards mathematics and mathematics education. Moreover, a pattern of responses emerged, with the responses of the Hong Kong teachers lying between those of the Beijing and London teachers. Through classroom observations, it was found that teachers in the three places differed in their classroom teaching, and analysis of selected topics from textbooks revealed that students in the three places learned very different mathematics in the classroom. Despite these differences, mismatch between the intended and implemented curriculum was found in all three places, although the kind of mismatch differed from place to place. Lastly, a framework of factors at four levels was suggested to account for the differences in curriculum. It was argued that factors at the classroom, school and societal levels all contributed to the differences found, but factors at the cultural level had to be drawn upon for a satisfactory explanation of the findings in this study.