Teacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform: The Case · PDF fileTeacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform: The Case of Project Learning ... Philippines. 76 THE ASIA-P ACIFIC ... Based

TTTTTeacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform:eacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform:eacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform:eacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform:eacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform:The Case of Project LearningThe Case of Project LearningThe Case of Project LearningThe Case of Project LearningThe Case of Project LearningLEUNG Wai Lun AnthonyLEUNG Wai Lun AnthonyLEUNG Wai Lun AnthonyLEUNG Wai Lun AnthonyLEUNG Wai Lun AnthonyThe Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong SAR, [email protected]

Project Learning has been highlighted as one of the four Key Tasks in the “Learning toLearn” curriculum reform introduced by the Hong Kong Curriculum Development Council(CDC) in 2001. Project Learning is a powerful learning and teaching strategy to help studentslearn how to learn by acquiring and constructing knowledge, and developing various importantgeneric skills through a variety of learning experiences. Students need to be given appropriateguidance and feedback by teachers during and after the learning process. Therefore, it is criticalto study the curriculum that has been planned, how it has been implemented and what theteachers’ concerns are. In describing or measuring curriculum implementation, Marsh (1997)and Marsh & Willis (2007) have suggested the use of Stages of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ),which is an assessment instrument adapted from the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM)(Hall, George & Rutterford, 1986), for assessing teachers’ feelings as they become involved inimplementing an innovation. In Hong Kong, the CDC (2002) has highlighted some key issuesfor the implementation of Project Learning in the Basic Education Curriculum Guide (3A). Insum, this study discusses how teachers view Project Learning, how it is integrated into thecurriculum and the concerns that teachers have about it with reference to the SoCQ and theBasic Education Curriculum Guide. Finally, recommendations on issues about curriculum reformand policy outcomes regarding Project Learning based on teachers’ concerns are put forward.The findings of the study will also provide useful references for other countries or regionsimplementing curriculum reform and project approach.

Keywords: Project learning, Teacher concern, Curriculum reform

THE STUDY

The aim of this study is to investigate teachers’concerns about curriculum reform with a particularemphasis on Project Learning. How do teachersconceptualize Project Learning? How has ProjectLearning been integrated into curriculum planning?What are the characteristics of Project Learningin different schools? What are teachers’ concerns

about Project Learning? Therefore, the objectivesof the study are as follows:

• To investigate how teachers conceptualizeProject Learning;

• To explore how Project Learning has beenintegrated into curriculum activities in schools;

• To analyze the differences betweenteachers conceptions of Project Learning

The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 17:1 (2008), pp. 75-97

© 2008 De La Salle University-Manila, Philippines

76 VOL. 17 NO. 1THE ASIA-PACIFIC EDUCATION RESEARCHER

and the ways it is conceived in thecurriculum reform; and

• To identify teachers’ concerns aboutProject Learning as a key element ofcurrent curriculum reform.

Since teachers are the critical agents for bringingchanges into their classrooms, the teachersthemselves should be the major focus of analysisand source of evidence (Gross, Giacquinta &Bernstein, 1971; Doyle & Ponder, 1977; Fullan,1982) regarding the introduction of curriculumreform. Therefore, there is a genuine need toexamine and study teachers’ implementation ofProject Learning in schools as a key element ofthe “Learning to Learn” curriculum reform. Also,there is a need to monitor and review the progressof change and propose actions for continuousimprovement. As recommended by the CDC(2001, p.120) on the interim review of the currentcurriculum reform, “the review is expected to beevidence-based … informed by other relevantprojects and sources.”

The essence of this study is to investigate howteachers view Project Learning as a key elementof curriculum reform, how it is integrated into thecurriculum and what concerns teachers have aboutit. Based on teachers’ views, practices andconcerns, findings of this study will contribute todeveloping, updating and strengthening the teachingand learning of Project Learning in schools, bymeans of catering to the authentic professionalneeds of teachers at the frontier.

Moreover, the study will contribute to theliterature on teachers’ concerns about ProjectLearning with particular reference to the localcontext of curriculum reform. With reference to theoutcomes of this study, it allows teacher traininginstitutions like HKIEd to determine direction andtarget groups of teachers for more intensive effortsregarding teachers’ professional development. Italso provides the EMB and school administratorswith information regarding the design ofinterventions for effective curriculum adoption andimplementation of Project Learning, and furtherplanning of supporting services. Furthermore, this

study will also provide critical insights formonitoring and reviewing the curriculum reformsin Hong Kong for policy makers.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Drake and Burns (2004) have identifiedProject-Based Learning as a route to thetransdisciplinary approach to integrated curriculumwhere teachers organize the curriculum aroundstudent questions and concerns in a real-lifecontext. Chard (1998) has suggested that teachersfind out what the students already know and helpthem generate questions to explore by means ofresources and opportunities provided by theteachers. The teaching of Project Learning alsoechoes with the recommendations made by theofficial document entitled “Learning to Learn – TheWay Forward in Curriculum Development”published by the Curriculum Development Council(CDC) of Hong Kong in June of 2001, “Bothintegrated learning experiences and in thediscipline-based studies are valuable for students.Therefore, students should be given opportunitiesto study both. …Cross-KLA studies also allowstudents to see things from different perspectives”(CDC, 2001, p.26). Furthermore, according to thesame document, it has been recommended thatschools:

• Trim and restructure the curriculum;• Develop school-based curriculum;• Use Project Learning as a tool to promote

effective learning & teaching; and• Share good practices and learning &

teaching materials with peers (p. ii, iv &vii).

Therefore, professional teachers should equipthemselves so as to contribute to the developmentof school-based Project Learning. However, in anyinnovation in education, the teacher is the keyfactor. A good professional teacher should be ableto relate his or her own teaching to the wholecurriculum. The professional teacher will not only

LEUNG, W.L.A. 77TEACHER CONCERNS ABOUT CURRICULUM REFORM

know what other teachers are doing, but will plana teaching programme to complement that of theircolleagues (Lawton, 1989).

The development of curriculum resources inProject Learning, consequently, has becomecritical and essential for all primary schools in HongKong. Leung (2003, 2004, 2006) has argued thatteachers may apply various approaches tointegrated learning such as project approach so asto help students extend their knowledge of theworld; and that the critical factors for successinclude teachers’ competence in teaching, furtherprofessional development of teachers,enhancement of teachers’ capacity in curriculumplanning, and finally, collegial team working inschools.

On managing the process of change, Brady andKennedy (2003) have identified the benefits ofschool collaborative cultures, which includeimproving teacher effectiveness, creatingprofessional confidence and responding to change.

As a consequence, Fullan (1989) has arguedthat some issues may be critical for the teaching ofProject Learning in Hong Kong: For example, arethere changes in class groupings and organization,materials, practices and behaviors, and in beliefsand understandings? Fullan has also identified somefactors affecting implementation including teachercharacteristics and orientations which arefrequently quoted in the literature. Regarding thesearch for quality curriculum in Hong Kong, Law(2003) has highlighted that from the perspectiveof educators and university researchers ineducation, resistance to change is a combinationof various factors and inadequacies in planning,coordination, and dissemination strategies.Moreover, on curriculum implementation, Marsh(1997) has suggested the importance of teachers’role in curriculum implementation:

Curriculum starts as a plan. It only becomesa reality when teachers implement it with realstudents in a real classroom. Carefulplanning and development are obviouslyimportant, but they count for nothing unlessteachers are aware of the product and have

the skills to implement the curriculum intheir classrooms (p.156).

On measuring teacher activities regardingcurriculum implementation, Marsh further suggeststhe use of the Stages of Concern (SoC) whichfocuses upon teachers’ feelings as they becomeinvolved in implementing an innovation. It consistsof seven sequential stages of teacher concern: (1)Awareness – describes a teacher who either is notaware of the change being proposed or does notwant to learn about it, (2) Informational – refersto the questions a teacher asks when he/she hearsabout something new, (3) Personal – refers to thequestions a teacher asks how the change mightaffect him/her, (4) Management – concerns thatemerge as a teacher engages in new skills, timedemands, materials, etc., (5) Consequence –teacher’s thoughts on how he/she can make aprogramme work better for students, (6)Collaboration – how to make a programme workbetter by actively working on it with other teachers,and (7) Refocusing – seeking out a new and betterchange to implement the programme for success(Horsley & Loucks-Hosley, 1998). An educationalresearcher, Frances Fuller, developed the originalStages of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ) in 1960which is the primary dimension of the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM); and this modelwas developed at the Texas Research andDevelopment Center to conceptualize and facilitateeducation change (Hall et al., 1986). On theprocess of change, Horsley and Loucks-Hosley(1998) have also advocated that SoC is one ofthe distinct ways in relation to the Concerns-BasedAdoption Model (CBAM). Created through adecade of development, CBAM is about thenatural and developmental process that teachersgo through whenever they engage in something newand different; and the model has been in use formore than 30 years.

Horsley and Loucks-Hosley further argue thatone of the greatest strengths of CBAM is that itgives evidence to, and supplies a description of,teachers’ feelings of new program or practice; andthe model also helps teachers move the change


along and evaluate the process. Consequently, theyfurther propose that SoCQ is the part of CBAMthat describes the affective dimension of changeand many people regard it as the most helpful toolfor teachers’ professional development purpose.Therefore, the literature has revealed that theSoCQ is an appropriate instrument in determiningteachers’ concerns related to an innovation and theresult of the questionnaire can be used to developappropriate staff development that addressesstudents’ needs.

In sum, identifying teachers’ concerns isessential for successful curriculum implementation(Cheung, Ng & Hattie, 2000). Project Learning isone of the Key Tasks highlighted in the Learningto Learn curriculum reform which has beenintroduced to Hong Kong primary schools. Thereis a genuine need for educators in Hong Kong toexamine and study the implementation of ProjectLearning by means of the SoCQ and in corporationwith the key issues highlighted in the BasicEducation Curriculum Guide (3A), so as to findout local teachers’ concerns about Project Learningas illustrated in Figure 1.

Therefore, the research questions of the studyare as follows:

1. Regarding Project Learning, what are theStages of Concern (SoC) of the samplegroup of teachers and individuals in thegroup?

2. How do teachers feel when they areinvolved in implementing Project Learning?

3. How do teachers adopt and plan ProjectLearning in their teaching?

4. What are the challenges to teachers’teaching of Project Learning?

5. What are the effects of Project Learningon the students, their teachers and otherparties concerned?

6. In teaching Project Learning, to whom doteachers turn to get support?

7. Are teachers adopting similar or differentpractices in teaching Project Learning indifferent schools?

8. What are teacher concerns regarding theimplementation of Project Learning as akey element of curriculum reform?

Figure 1.Teacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform

CurriculumReform: ProjectLearning

Teachers’ Concernsabout ProjectLearning

TeacherPerspective:Adaptation

Implement-ation Process

MutualAdaptation(teachers/students)

Examine/Study:• Teachers’ views• Curriculum planning/

activities• Differences among

schools …


METHODOLOGY

SampleThe sample was selected from three government

subsidized primary schools (School A, School Band School C) in different districts of Hong Kong.These three schools have implemented ProjectLearning for five years, starting from the beginningof the “Learning to Learn” curriculum reform in2001. Five teachers with different lengths ofteaching experience in Project Learning from eachschool were selected to participate in the study.These groups of teachers are all involved in theimplementation of Project Learning in theirrespective schools and are concerned with thedevelopment of curriculum reform in Hong Kong.The teachers were approached for a questionnairesurvey and interviews in the academic year 2005-2006 (see biographical data of the sample inAppendix A).

Questionnaire SurveyThe Stages of Concern Questionnaire (SoCQ)

is an instrument which focuses upon teachers’feelings as they become involved in implementingan innovation (Hall et al., 1986). It has been widelyused in many countries. Based on the original sevenStages of Concern (SoC), Cheung and Ng (2000)developed a questionnaire on the modified 5-stageSoC, namely, (1) Indifference, (2) Informational/Personal, (3) Management, (4) Consequence/Collaboration, and (5) Refocusing for theinvestigation of Hong Kong teachers’ concernsabout the Target Oriented Curriculum (TOC). Thefive SoC can be categorized into self-concerns(Indifference, Informational/Personal); taskconcerns (Management) and impact concerns(Consequence/Collaboration, Refocusing). Withreference to the 22-item questionnaire on the 5-stage SoC in local context, adaptations have beenmade so as to measure Hong Kong teachers’concerns about the implementation of ProjectLearning; items were constructed to measure aparticular stage of SoC form a subscale. Each itemof the questionnaire is rated along an 8-point LikertScale that ranges from 0 (not true of me now) to 7

(very true of me now). Teacher responses to theSoCQ items are coded on a scale of 0 to 7. Thus,large numbers reflect high concerns and smallnumbers reflect low concerns. The mean of aparticular stage of SoC may vary from 0.00 to7.00 where the highest mean by comparing the fivemeans in the questionnaire helps to identifyindividual teacher’s stage of SoC.

Regarding the self-concerns, if a teacher isidentified to be at the “Indifference” stage, itindicates that the teacher has little concern aboutor interest in Project Learning; while being at the“Informational/Personal” stage indicates that theteacher is concerned about some general aspectsof Project Learning such as benefits of theinnovation, requirements for use, and personalcommitment. Regarding the task concerns, beingat the “Management stage” indicates that theteacher focuses on efficiency and time demands ofimplementing Project Learning; and the teacheralso worries about the best use of relevantinformation/resources, scheduling, time andorganization. For the impact concerns, being at the“Consequence/Collaboration” stage indicates thatthe teacher is concerned with the impact of ProjectLearning on students and the coordination/cooperation with others regarding use of theinnovation; and finally, being at the “Refocusing”stage indicates that the teacher pays attention onthe possibility of improving the innovation bychanging some of the features of Project Learningor by replacing it with an alternative. In order totest the 5-stage SoCQ for Project Learning, it wasfirst translated from Chinese into English and thentranslated back to Chinese to ensure valid contentbetween the two versions. The teacher participantswere asked to accomplish the questionnaire so asto identify their stages of concern they were inregarding Project Learning (see samplequestionnaire in Appendix B).

Semi-structured interviewsA semi-structured interview allows respondents

to express themselves at some length, but offersenough shape to prevent aimless rambling (Wragg,1978). This results in a set order of questions but


also allows extended discussion to investigate validfields of interest in depth. Since this type ofinterview has the advantage of allowing theexploration of areas of interest as they arise duringthe interview, it was used to collect some in-depthinformation regarding teachers’ implementation ofProject Learning in schools. The key informantinterview technique is a variant of generalinterviewing with the special provision that theinterview is with an individual who possessesunique or specialized knowledge, skills or expertisewithin an organization and who is willing to sharethese with the researcher (Goetz & LeCompte,1984). Therefore, the key informant interviewtechnique ensures that the researcher gains accessto individuals who know their subject and who canprovide valuable data (McKernan, 1994). Theresults of the interviews will contribute to identifyingteachers’ views on the conceptions of ProjectLearning, their practices, the challenges tocurriculum planning, teaching and studentassessment; and also insights for future policy-making regarding the implement of Project Learningas a key element of curriculum reform. Therefore,

the teacher participants served as key informantsin the interviews. The interview questionsdeveloped with reference to the research questionsare in Appendix C.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The findings from the questionnaire survey wereprocessed using the SPSS descriptive statistics soas to identify teachers’ Stage(s) of Concern (SoC)(Table 1a), and the findings from the interviews.Findings from the individual schools are summarizedand compared in Tables 2 to 8. Analysis withreference to the research questions follows so asto present teachers’ concerns about ProjectLearning as a key element of curriculum reform.Implications of the “Learning to Learn” curriculumreform and the policy-makers are also put forwardfor discussion.

1. Regarding Project Learning, what are theStages of Concern (SoC) of the sample groupof teachers and individuals in the group?

School A

5.60 (T3)6.25 (T1)5.00 (T2)5.50 (T4)6.00 (T5)

School B

5.00 (T1)5.25 (T3)6.00 (T4)6.50 (T2)7.00 (T5)

School C

5.40 (T1)

5.50 (T4)

4.60 (T2)5.40 (T5)5.60 (T3)

Table 1a.Teachers’ highest means from stages of concern questionnaire

Stage of concern

IndifferenceInformational/Personal

ManagementConsequence/Collaboration

Refocusing

Note. T1 = Teacher 1, Mean based on a scale of 0.00 to 7.00.

Highest mean


As can be seen in Table 1b, two teachers showtheir “self-concerns” while the other two teachersshow their “task concerns”. It was found through thequestionnaire survey that the majority, 11 teachers,show “impact concerns” (Consequence/Collaboration, Refocusing) on Project Learning. Asfor individual schools, a similar pattern of concernsappeared. Therefore, most teachers are concernedwith the impact of Project Learning on students andthe coordination/cooperation with others regardinguse of the innovation. They are also concerned withthe attention on possibility of improving the innovationby changing some of the features of Project Learningor by replacing it with an alternative. With regard tothis finding, it is an advantage for the implementation

of curriculum reform by Project Learning in theschools of Hong Kong. However, one exampleworthy of note from Table 1b is that all teachers fromSchool B, in comparison with other two schools, fallin the categories of “task concerns” and “impactconcerns”. By referring to the biographical data inAppendix A, it is apparent that teachers from SchoolB are in general more experienced than teachers fromother schools. Due to the limitation of sampling in thepresent study, future research, therefore, should beconducted to investigate the relationship betweenteacher experience and their stages of concern.

2. How do teachers feel when they are involvedin implementing Project Learning?

Table 1b.Teachers’ stages of concern

Self-concerns Impact concerns(Indifference, Informational/ Task concerns (Consequence/Collabo-

Personal) (Management) ration, Refocusing)

School A 1 1 3(5 teachers)

School B 0 1 4(5 teachers)

School C 1 0 4(5 teachers)

Sub-total 2 2 11(concerns)

Total(teachers) 15

Table 2.Teachers’ concerns of implementation

Teacher concern School A School B School C

Self-concerns Teacher professional development x xTask concerns Efficiency and time demands xImpactconcerns Impact on student learning x x

Student-centered approach xTeacher collaboration x xCross-curricular approach x

Note. Teacher collaboration refers to team preparation/teaching. Cross-curricular approach refers to cross-disciplinary project work.


Teachers’ concerns of implementing ProjectLearning have been highlighted in Table 2. It wasfound that most of the concerns from the threeschools fall into the category of “impact concerns”(Consequence/Collaboration, Refocusing); namely,impact on student learning, student-centeredapproach, teacher collaboration and cross-curricular approach. The finding echoes the resultof the questionnaire survey showing that majorityof the teachers are concerned with the impacts ofimplementing Project Learning in their schools.

3. How do teachers adopt and plan ProjectLearning in their teaching?

Regarding the qualities of Project Learning,Table 3a shows that “Life wide learning” and“Development of generic skills” are regarded byall the three schools as essential. Therefore, theorganization of various activities for life widelearning and developing generic skills becomes thekey element when implementing Project Learningin schools.

Regarding curriculum development of ProjectLearning as can be seen in Table 3b, “Basic subjectknowledge”, “Life wide learning activities”,“Catering to individual differences”, “Applicationof ICT” and “Resources provided by commercial

publishers” are pinpointed by all three schools asthe guidelines or references for developing thecurriculum for Project Learning in their schools.However, it is worthwhile to note that these schoolsregarded the importance of the inclusion andconsideration of student’s basic subject knowledgein the process of curriculum development. It impliesthat teachers are aware that the link betweensubject teaching and Project Learning may benefitstudent learning in school curriculum.

Another finding shows that teaching resourcesprovided by the commercial publishers havesignificant influences on teachers from the threeschools. On the contrary, only one schoolhighlighted the consideration of “School-basedcurriculum material” in the curriculum developmentprocess. Since “Catering to individual differences”has been considered by all schools as a commonfactor for curriculum development, it will be criticalto see whether school teachers recognize andconsider the importance of developing school-based curriculum material, rather than relying toomuch on the teaching resources provided by thecommercial publishers, for catering to the needsof students in individual schools.

Regarding curriculum management of ProjectLearning as can be seen in Table 3c, “Decisionmaking by senior management” and “Decision

Table 3a.Essential qualities of Project Learning

Essential qualities School A School B School C

Life wide learning x x xDevelopment of generic skills x x xAll-round development x xConstruction of knowledge x xTeacher support to student x xInquiry learning xStudent-centered approach x

Note. Life wide learning refers to learning in different environments: classroom, home, and community,which complement each other. Generic skills refer to collaboration, communication, creativity, criticalthinking, information technology and numeracy.


making at teachers’ meeting” are the commonpractices, which implies curriculum decision makingby various means in the three schools. However, itwas also found that “Peer observation of teaching”is adopted by School A only. Since the arrangementof peer observation may have great impact onteachers concerned regarding managing thecurriculum, professional development and staffappraisal, it is an area needs further explorationfor the implementation of Project Learning inschools.

Referring to Table 3d, there are a number ofcommon practices regarding teaching strategies forProject Learning, namely: “Whole classteaching”, “Inquiry learning”, “Cooperativelearning”, “Use of ICT”, “Tutorial groups” and“Resources within school,” which indicates thatteachers in the three schools apply a variety ofteaching approaches which they regarded asappropriate. Nevertheless, “Parental support”was highlighted only by School B as a commonpractice. As indicated in Table 3a, life wide learning

Table 3b.Curriculum development of Project Learning

Curriculum development School A School B School C

Basic subject knowledge x x xLife wide learning activities x x xCatering for individual differences x x xApplication of ICT x x xResources by commercial publishers x x xLinkage with daily-life experiences x xBasic study skills for Project Learning xCross-curricular approach xSchool-based curriculum material x

Note. ICT refers to information and communication technologies. Resources by commercialpublishers refer to text books and teaching aids/materials provided by the commercial publishers.

Table 3c.Curriculum management of Project Learning

Curriculum management School A School B School C

Decision making by senior management x x xDecision making at teachers’ meeting x x xTeacher consultation by survey x xTeam preparation x xSharing on student work x xPeer observation of teaching x

Note. Senior management refers to Head/Deputy Head of school.


is considered by the teachers as one of the essentialqualities for Project Learning; therefore, neglectingthe support from the parents is certainly an obstaclein the implementation of Project Learning with lifewide learning.

Table 3e shows teachers’ suggestions as to whatthe common characteristics of student learning are.These include “Positive attitude in general”,“Significant individual differences” and “Inquiry,ICT and group work”. It is rather interesting to

see that teachers in School C raised an issueregarding “Family background affects studentlearning”. The implication may be focused on theargument on whether Project Learning needsvarious support in terms of parental care, financeproblem and social experience which may involvelife wide learning and the use of ICT for learning.If this is the case, school teachers should considerhow to support students from families of poorbackground.

Table 3d.Teaching strategies for Project Learning

Teaching strategies School A School B School C

Whole class teaching x x xInquiry learning x x xCooperative learning x x xUse of ICT x x xTutorial groups x x xResources within school x x xCommunity resources x xParental support x

Note. Cooperative learning refers to mixed ability group work. Tutorial groups refer to general/traditional group work.

Table 3e.Student learning of Project Learning

Student learning School A School B School C

Positive attitude in general x x xSignificant individual differences x x xInquiry, ICT and group work x x xInteresting theme is critical xSignificant development of generic skills xFamily background affects student learning x

Note. Positive attitude refers to students’ active and proactive manner in learning.


Table 3f shows that a variety of commonapproaches for student assessment of ProjectLearning has been adopted by the three schools.These include “Self-assessment”, “Peer-assessment”, “Oral and written report” and“Summative assessment”. The other practices instudent assessment are: “Formative assessment”,“Alternative reporting” and “Dissemination ofstudent work”. It is quite worthy of note that only

School A and School B adopt “Formal reporting”and “Parent-involved assessment” respectively.The former issue may involve the recognition ofProject Learning in the formal curriculum in schoolwhile the latter issue may imply an obstacle for lifewide learning in Project Learning.

4. What are the challenges to teachers’ teachingof Project Learning?

Table 3f.Student assessment of Project Learning

Student assessment School A School B School C

Self-assessment x x xPeer-assessment x x xOral and written report x x xSummative assessment x x xFormative assessment x xAlternative reporting x xDissemination of student work x xFormal reporting xParent-involved assessment x

Note. Alternative reporting refers to inform format of reporting. Dissemination of student workrefers to display/exhibit of student work.

Table 4.Challenges to teachers

Challenges School A School B School C

Identification of appropriate project theme x x xLack of teaching resources x xLack of professional development x xTime limitation xToo many student groups xLack of student-teacher communication xLack of support from commercial publishers xSchool-based curriculum development xToo many administrative duties xLack of parental support xStudent learning differences xLack of recognition in school curriculum xLack of support from administrative staff xLack of instant outcome x

Note. Appropriate project theme refers to project theme that provides students with the capacity for inquiry.Lack of recognition in school curriculum refers to school authority’s indifference to Project Learning.


There are many challenges or difficultiesencountered by teachers in the three schools inteaching Project Learning, as can be seen in Table 4.The common ones are: “Identification of appropriateproject theme”, “Lack of teaching resources” and“Lack of professional development”. The firstchallenge may be resolved by identifying themes fromthe current issues of student interest. Teachers mayalso refer to research or survey findings in relation tostudent interest on interesting themes of ProjectLearning provided by scholars in universities.

As for the lack of teaching resources andprofessional development, the Education Bureau(EDB) of Hong Kong government should review

the current support to school teachers and evaluate,from time to time, the qualities and quantities ofthe current practice of professional developmentprogrammes. Although the EDB has provided muchsupport in terms of teaching resources and trainingprogrammes since the start of implementation ofcurriculum reform in 2001, they are by no meanssufficient and it is possible that they are assumedto be satisfactory without a continuous monitoringprocess for quality assurance.

5. What are the effects of Project Learning onthe students, their teachers and other partiesconcerned?

Table 5a.Student benefit of Project Learning

Student benefit School A School B School C

Better learning atmosphere x x xEnhancement of relationship with parents x x xCommunication skills x xSelf-confidence/esteem x xCollaboration skills x xProblem solving x xCreativity xStudy skills xInquiry and learning to learn xSelf-evaluation xSupport subject learning xPleasure of learning x

Note. Better learning atmosphere refers to interactions between teacher and students and amongstudents themselves.

Table 5b.Teacher benefit of Project Learning

Teacher benefit School A School B School C

Better knowledge of students x x xBetter catering for student needs x x xInteractive teaching and learning x xTeacher collaboration x xImproving teaching skills x xJob satisfaction x x

Note. Better knowledge of students refers to teachers are more knowledgeable to students’ whole persondevelopment.


As Tables 5a and 5b show, teachers and studentsbenefit in a number of ways from the teaching andlearning process of Project Learning. The commonstudent benefits are “Better learning atmosphere”and “Enhancement of relationship with parents”while the common teacher benefits are “Betterknowledge of students” and “Better catering tostudent needs”. On one hand, if the learningatmosphere in a school is enhanced, it may alsohelp students in subject learning and lead to thedevelopment of generic skills. When parents findthat their children are more active in learning, thestudent-parent relationship will be enhanced; andif the student-parent relationship is improved, itmay be regarded as a positive stimulation to the allround development of student. On the other hand,when teachers know their students better, it willbe an advantage for them and allow them to bettercater to the individual needs of students for allround development. As a consequence, teachersin the three schools perceived the benefits that bothteachers and students obtain from theimplementation of Project Learning, which echoes

the goals of curriculum reform aiming learning tolearn, development of generic skills and all rounddevelopment of students.

6. In teaching Project Learning, to whom doteachers turn to get support?

“School library” and “ICT resources” are thetwo common resources that teachers in the threeschools turn to get support, as shown in Table 6.It will be very critical whether the school libraryand computer centers are well-equipped on onehand; and on the other hand, whether thecollaboration among school teachers, schoollibrarians and the ICT coordinators is established.Genuine support to teachers should comprise ofhardware, software, as well as the staff collegialitywithin individual schools. Therefore, teachersteaching Project Learning should enhance thecollaboration with the staff from school librariesand computer centers with the common goal ofproviding quality learning activities and support fortheir students.

Table 6.Support to teachers

Support School A School B School C

School library x x xICT resources x x xTeacher collaboration/teaching x xTeam preparation x xCommunity resources and x x Curriculum expertsPeer observation of teaching xCommercial publisher xParental support x

Note. School library refers to teaching and learning resources in terms of references, literature and multi-media.


7. Are teachers adopting similar or differentpractices in teaching Project Learning indifferent schools?

It can be seen in Table 7a that there are somesimilar practices in terms of challenges and studentand teacher benefits among the three sample schools.However, regarding the implementation of ProjectLearning in the said schools, there are also manydifferent practices in terms of essential qualities,

curriculum development, teaching strategies, studentassessment, teacher support, challenges to teachersand student benefits, as indicated in Table 7b. As aconsequence, there is a genuine need for the EDB inHong Kong to support the establishment of schoolnetworks in order to enhance the sharing anddisseminate the good practices in the implementationof Project Learning among schools in Hong Kong.The support from the EDB may include seminars ortalks, websites, and interactive workshops or

Table 7a.Similar practices of schools

Similar practices School A School B School C

Challenges: x x xIdentification of appropriate project themeStudent benefits: x x xBetter learning atmosphere,Enhancement of relationship with parentsTeacher benefits: x x xBetter knowledge of students,Catering for student needs

Table 7b.Different practices of schools

Different practices School A School B School C

Essential qualities:inquiry learning xCurriculum development:school-based curriculum material xcross-curricular approach xpeer observation of teaching xTeaching strategies:Parental support xStudent assessment:Formal reporting xDissemination of student work xTeacher Support:team collaboration/teaching xcommercial publishers xChallenges to teacher:lack of professional development x xlack of teaching resources x xStudent benefits:inquiry learning/learning to learn,support subject learning x


programmes for school teachers or representatives.The EDB has indeed provided the support to teachersas mentioned; however, the major area of neglectby the EDB is the publication of a “ProjectLearning Series” which updates the current andlatest development of student learning by projectapproach in the local and global educationcommunity. Through this, teachers in Hong Kongmay enhance their professionalism in teachingProject Learning with reference to the goodpractice from their colleagues in local and overseasschools.

8. What are teachers’ concerns regarding theimplementation of Project Learning as a keyelement of curriculum reform?

In Table 8, teachers in the three schools raisedtwo major common concerns regarding theimplementation of Project Learning as a keyelement of curriculum reform. They are “Heavyworkload in teaching Project Learning” and“Special time and resources allocation for ProjectLearning”. With reference to the 5-stage SoCQ

developed by Cheung and Ng (2000), the formerconcerns can be categorized as “self-concerns”(Indifference, Informational/Personal) and the latteras “task concerns” (Management). However, asseen in Table 1b, majority of the sampled teachersshow their “impact concerns” (Consequence/Collaboration, Refocusing) on Project Learning inthe questionnaire survey of this study.Consequently, by comparing the results of thequestionnaire survey on teachers’ SoC and thefindings of the interviews, there are certainimplications. Teachers are in a dilemma that theyare very much concerned with the impact of ProjectLearning as a key element of the curriculum reformon their students as well as the possibilities ofimproving the curriculum reform; however, theyare also worried about some general aspects ofthe reform such as personal commitment,scheduling and time factors. This can beinterpreted that the teachers approve of theimplementation of Project Learning as a keyelement of curriculum reform if they are supportedwith appropriate resources in terms of organization,scheduling, and time.

Table 8.Other concerns of teachers

Other concerns School A School B School C

Heavy workload in teaching x x xProject LearningSpecial time and resources allocation for x x xProject LearningNeed on-site support from curriculum experts x xNeed support from senior management/ x xadministrative staffNeed balance between subject learning and xProject LearningNeed to implement cross-curricular approach xNeed to focus on certain generic skills xNeed to empower curriculum leadersregarding allocation of resources x

Note. Heavy workload refers to preparing, teaching, assessing and managing Project Learning. Specialtime and resources allocation refers to block lesson/teaching time and additional manpower/administrative support for Project Learning.


CONCLUSION

Generalization of the results of the present studymay be limited by the choice of sampling, samplesize, time factor and method of data processing.However, the results may be used as reference forpreparing teacher education programmes in HongKong and other regions implementing thecurriculum reform and project approach. Byhighlighting the major findings for teachers todiscuss, analyze, synthesize and reflect, based onthe views shared, it is expected that the study willexercise an impact on policy makers as well asregarding teacher concerns about curriculumreform in primary school by means of ProjectLearning.

By referring to the findings of this study, severalsignificant implications for the implementation ofProject Learning as a key element of the curriculumreform in Hong Kong can be drawn.

First, regarding how teachers conceptualizeProject Learning, it was found through thequestionnaire survey as well as through theinterviews that teachers have major concernsregarding the impacts of implementing ProjectLearning in their schools. The impacts refers to theconsequences of implementing Project Learning forstudent learning, the collaboration of teachingProject Learning among teachers, and therefocusing of the teaching approach for ProjectLearning by means of cross-curricular approach.These findings about teachers’ concepts areadvantages for the future implementation ofcurriculum reform by Project Learning.

Second, regarding how Project Learning hasbeen integrated into curriculum activities in schools,teachers highlighted the importance of theorganization of various activities for life widelearning and developing generic skills of students.In the development of Project Learning curriculumin schools, teachers are aware of the link betweensubject teaching and Project Learning for betterstudent learning. Since catering to individualdifferences is a common concern of teachers, it iscrucial for them to develop school-basedcurriculum material, rather than rely too much on

the commercially published teaching material.Moreover, peer observation of teaching may havegreat impact as regards managing the curriculum,professional development, and staff appraisal; itshould be considered as an area needs for furtherexploration and study for the implementation ofProject Learning in schools. As for the strategiesfor student learning, neglecting support fromparents is surely an obstacle to the implementationof Project Learning in relation to life wide learning.It is rather arguable as to whether Project Learningneeds various support in terms of parental care,finance consideration and social experiences ofstudents which may be linked with life wide learningand the use of ICT for learning; therefore, schoolteachers may need to consider how to supportstudents from poor families or those from a lowersocial class. The adoption of formal reportingstudent achievement may indicate the recognitionof Project Learning in the formal school curriculumwhile the lack of parent-involved assessment maybe pointing to an obstacle to the implementationof Project Learning.

Furthermore, there are a number of challengesand benefits for the implementation of ProjectLearning in schools. The critical issues are thedifficulties in identifying an appropriate projecttheme and the lack of teaching resources andappropriate professional development for teachers.However, these challenges can be resolved withthe utilization of university research findings as wellas the enhanced and continuous professionaldevelopment programmes with quality assurance.Despite the challenges, there are also a number ofbenefits in implementating Project Learning inschools. The enhanced learning atmosphere inschools can help much in other subject learning,development of generic skills, student-parentrelationship, student-teacher relationships, cateringto student needs and all round development ofstudent. As a final point, the importance of thecollaboration between teachers and the staff fromschool libraries and ICT/computer centers aimingat the common goal of providing quality learningactivities and support for student learning in ProjectLearning should be emphasized.


Third, regarding Project Learning in Hong Kongschools since 2001, there are similar as well asdifferent practices among schools. Similar practicesare with regard to challenges encountered, studentbenefits identified, and teacher benefitsexperienced. Different practices are with regardto teachers’ conception of essential qualities ofProject Learning, curriculum development,teaching and assessment strategies, and supportfor/challenges to teachers. Since the schoolpractices are diverse, in addition to the previoussupport to schools, the EDB of Hong Konggovernment should not take it for granted butcontinue to provide necessary support to teachers,in collaboration with the universities and otherparties concerned, such as the launch ofpublications of teacher references with updates onthe latest local and global development of studentlearning by project approach. Cheung and Ng(2000, p.120), on teacher concerns on curriculumreform, have suggested that a “systematicmonitoring of teacher concerns by the governmentis necessary during the process of curriculumchange; with the aid of information about teachers’stages of concern, change agents can designeffective interventions.”

Finally, the findings of this study imply that manyschool teachers are at the later Stages of Concernand they are much concerned about the impactsof Project Learning on their students as well as thepossibilities of improving the implementation ofcurriculum reform. However, teachers are alsoworried about the self-concerns and task concerns.Self and task concerns mainly refer to heavyworkload in teaching Project Learning, and specialtime and resources allocation for Project Learning.As a consequence, it implies that the success ofimplementation of Project Learning as a keyelement of the “Learning to Learn” curriculumreform depends much on how the policy-makersprovide on-going and quality support for cateringthe teacher concerns. The critical factors will alsoprovide useful references for other countries orregions implementing curriculum reform andproject approach.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This article is one of the outcomes generatedfrom the project “Teacher Concerns aboutCurriculum Reform: The Case of ProjectLearning” funded by the Hong Kong Institute ofEducation.

REFERENCES

Brady, L. & Kennedy, K. (2003). Curriculumconstruction, 2nd Edition. Australia: PearsonPrentice Hall.

Chard, S. (1998). The project approach. NewYork: Scholastic.

Cheung, D., & Ng, D. (2000). Teachers’ stagesof concern about the target-oriented curriculum.Education Journal, 28(1), 109-122.

Cheung, D., Ng, D., & Hattie, J. (2000). Thesimplex structure of teachers’ stages of concernabout implementing a new curriculum.Canadian and International Education,29(1), 87-103.

Curriculum Development Council (2001).Learning to learn: The way forward incurriculum development. Hong Kong:Government Printer.

Curriculum Development Council (2002). Basiceducation curriculum guide series: 3A –Project Learning. Hong Kong: GovernmentPrinter.

Drake, S. & Burns, R. (2004). Meeting standardsthrough integrated curriculum. Alexandria,VA.: ASCD.

Doyle, W. & Ponder, G.A. (1977). The ethic ofpracticality: Implications for curriculumdevelopment. In Molnar, A. & Zahorik, J.(Eds.), Curriculum Theory. Washington:ASCD.

Fullan, M. (1982). The meaning of educationalchange. Columbia: Teachers College Press.

Fullan, M. (1989). Implementing educationalchange: What we know. Ottawa: Educationand Employment Division, Population andHuman Resources Department, Word Bank.


Goetz, J. L. & LeCompte, M. D. (1984).Ethnography and qualitative design ineducational research. New York: AcademicPress.

Gross, N., Giacquinta, J.B. & Bernstein, M.(1971). Implementing organizationalinnovations: An national study of the openclassroom in the USA. New York: BasicBooks.

Hall, G. E., George, A. & Rutherford, W. L.(1986). Measuring stages of concerns aboutinnovation: A manual for the use of the SoCquestionnaire. University of Texas at Austin.

Horsley, D. L. & Loucks-Hosley, S. (1998).CBAM brings order to tornado of change.Journal of Staff Development , 19(4).Retrieved on September 30, 2004 from: http://www.nsdc.org/ library/ publications/ jsd/horsley194.cfm.

Law, E. H. F. (2003) In search of a qualitycurriculum in Hong Kong. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.),International handbook of curriculumresearch. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.

Lawton, D. (1989). Education, culture and thenational curriculum. London: Hodder andStoughton.

Leung, W. L. A. (2003). Integrating primary schoolcurriculum in Hong Kong Special AdministrativeRegion of China. The Asia-Pacific EducationResearcher, 12(2), 177-203.

Leung, W. L. A. (2004). Integrating the schoolcurriculum into lifelong learning. EducationToday. 54(1), 11-17.

Leung, W. L. A. (2006). Teaching integratedcurriculum: Teachers’ challenges. Pacific-AsianEducation (PAE) Journal, 18(1), 88-102.

Marsh, C. (1997). Key concepts of forunderstanding curriculum 2. London: FalmerPress.

Marsh, C. J. & Willis, G. (2007). Curriculum:Alternative approaches, ongoing issues.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

McKernan, J. (1994). Curriculum actionresearch. London: Kogan Page.

Wragg, E. C. (1978). Conducting and analyzinginterviews. Nottingham University, Rediguide11.


School B

Appendix ASample (biographical data)

Teacher 1

Sex: maleEducational level:Master ofPhilosophyTeachingexperience:6-10 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience: 2 years

Teacher 2

Sex: femaleEducational level:degreeTeachingexperience:11-15 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:2 years

School A

Teacher 4

Sex: femaleEducational level:higher diplomaTeachingexperience:21 years or aboveTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:2 years

Teacher 5

Sex: femaleEducational level:Master of EducationTeachingexperience:0 to 5 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:5 years or above

Teacher 3

Sex: maleEducational level:Higher diplomaTeachingexperience: 11-15yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:2 years

Teacher 6

Sex: femaleEducational level:diplomaTeachingexperience:6-10 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:5 years or above

Teacher 7


Teacher 9

Sex: femaleEducational level:degreeTeachingexperience:21 years or aboveTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:3 years

Teacher 10

Sex: femaleEducational level:degreeTeachingexperience:21 years or aboveTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:5 years or above

Teacher 8

Sex: femaleEducational level:degreeTeachingexperience: 16-20yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:3 years

School C

Teacher 11

Sex: femaleEducational level:diplomaTeachingexperience:6-10 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:3 Years

Teacher 12

Sex: femaleEducational level:degreeTeachingexperience:11-15 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:1 year

Teacher 14


Teacher 15

Sex: femaleEducational level:diplomaTeachingexperience:0-5 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:2 years

Teacher 13

Sex: femaleEducational level:masterTeachingexperience:11-15 yearsTeaching ProjectLearningexperience:3 years


Appendix BQuestionnaire (Stages of Concern – Project Learning)

(PART A)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Not true of me now Somewhat true of me now Very true of me now

No. * Subscales/ Items 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

**Stage 1 – Indifference (Mean = )

1.1 Do not know what Project Learning is.1.2 Not concerned about Project Learning.1.3 Occupied with other teaching duties.1.4 Not interested in learning more about

Project Learning.

**Stage 2 – Informational/Personal (Mean = )

2.1 What teachers are required to do in teachingProject Learning?

2.2 How Project Learning differs from my subject teaching.2.3 Why Project Learning is better than my subject teaching.2.4 Time and energy commitments required to teach

Project Learning.2.5 How my teaching role will change.

**Stage 3 - Management (Mean = )

3.1 Not having enough time for preparation of teachingProject Learning.

3.2 How to accomplish effectively the requirements ofProject Learning.

3.3 Inability to manage the teaching resources ofProject Learning.

3.4 Time spent on non-academic matters related toProject Learning.


**Stage 4 – Consequence/Collaboration (Mean = )

4.1 Concern about the impact ofProject Learning on students.

4.2 Develop working relationships with other teachersin teaching Project Learning.

4.3 Familiarize others with the progress ofProject Learning.

4.4 Develop professionally in teaching Project Learning.

**Stage 5 – Refocusing (Mean = )

5.1 Use feedback from students to adapt the curriculumof Project Learning

5.2 Revise the teaching strategies of Project Learningto improve its effectiveness

5.3 Modify certain practices in student assessment ofProject Learning.

5.4 Adjust the learning arrangement/resources ofProject Learning based on students’ experiences.

5.5 Supplement, enhance, or replace Project Learningwith students’ learning experiences from otherKLAs/subjects.

*Subscales/ Items are mixed up in administering the questionnaire survey.**not indicated in teachers’ copy

(PART B)

1. Sex/Gender2. Type of school3. Educational level/ Academic attainment4. Teaching experience (in years)5. Teaching experience of Project Learning (in years)


Appendix CInterview Questions

Curriculum Development of Project Learning –

• What are the essential qualities of Project Learning?• How do you formulate curriculum planning of Project Learning in relation to curriculum reform?• How do you develop curriculum of Project Learning so as to provide students with “Life-wide

Learning” experiences and cultivate their “Generic Skills”?• Which mode of Project Learning have you adopted and why?• In order to facilitate students’ Project Learning, what factors does the curriculum planning take

into account?• How do you plan the time-table & resources flexibly so as to facilitate the implementation?

Curriculum Management of Project Learning -

• How do you or the teacher concerned coordinate the curriculum policies across individual KeyLearning Areas (KLAs) or subjects?

• What are the channels for teachers to participate in curriculum decisions?• What is the mechanism to monitor the teaching of Project Learning?• What are the follow-ups conducted for evaluation of the effectiveness of implementing Project

Learning?

Strategies and Skills in Teaching Project Learning –

• How do you plan the teaching strategies of Project Learning?• How do you organize inquiry learning activities in Project Learning?• What do you take into account for catering learner differences in Project Learning?• What do you adopt for effective interaction and communication with your students in Project

Learning?• How do you effectively utilize the learning resources in Project Learning?

Student Learning of Project Learning –

• What are the learning attitudes of your students in Project Learning?• What kinds of learning strategies your students apply in their Project Learning?• How is the learning performance of your students in Project Learning?• What are the differences in student learning of Project Learning in different Key Stages?


Student Assessment of Project Learning –

• What is the assessment policy you adopt for Project Learning?• What are the assessment practices you design or plan?• How do you report students’ performance?• How do you provide students with feedback?• What are the functions of assessment information?

Implementation of Project Learning and Curriculum Reform: Teachers’ Overall Concerns –

• What are the difficulties in the implementation of Project Learning in your school?• What are the benefits or impacts to various parties regarding the implementation of Project

Learning?• What are the dos or don’ts of teaching Project Learning in your school?• What are the major differences between Project Learning and subject knowledge?• What are your expected professional knowledge, skills and attitudes for teaching Project Learning?• What are the possible modes of teachers’ professional development programmes for teaching

Project Learning?• Have you any ideas about the implementation of Project Learning in comparison with other

curriculum initiatives?• What are your suggestions to the future policy on Project Learning as a key element of curriculum

reform?

Documents

Teacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform: The Case · PDF fileTeacher Concerns about Curriculum Reform: The Case of Project Learning ... Philippines. 76 THE ASIA-P ACIFIC ... Based