Advertisement

Cultural Diversity in Hong Kong Arts Education: From Policy to Practice and Research

  • Richard G. WhitbreadEmail author
  • Bo-Wah Leung
Conference paper
Part of the Yearbook of Arts Education Research for Cultural Diversity and Sustainable Development book series (YAERCDSD, volume 1)

Abstract

Hong Kong’s cultural policy envisions its citizens living lives celebrated by cultural pursuit, their Chinese-grounded identity enriched by other cultures. Meanwhile, its education policy is a commitment aimed at ensuring that all students are fully prepared to meet the work and life challenges of the future. The two meet via arts education, defined as arts and cultural education and formally recognised as fostering the necessary skills of appreciation, creativity and expression, thereby enabling the cultural literacy of individuals and society to flourish. Supported through policy documents by the relevant bodies, notions of cultural diversity within Hong Kong arts education are addressed and encouraged primarily via the creation and nurturing of partnerships, among the stated emphases being the reinforcement of the existing arts curricula and the establishment of cultural and artistic links between schools and the wider community. Prominent examples include the School Culture Day Scheme, the Arts Experience Scheme for Senior Secondary Students and the Arts Ambassadors-in-School Scheme. However, policy is as much about what is enacted as what is intended. Given the similarity of their rationales, of increasing interest to researchers is the potential for cultural and arts education policies to synergise in ways that can result in the accrual of mutual benefits among the different stakeholders, in turn enabling issues such as cultural participation and consumption, as well as accessibility to cultural education, to be more effectively addressed. This chapter examines the case of Hong Kong in order to reveal the extent to which an arts education policy that suggests possibilities for implementation—as opposed to stating a mandatory approach—is both conceptualised and communicated by its policymakers, together with investigating ways that the arts curriculum is being operationalised by those tasked with its delivery. To this end, the focus is on a series of collaborative projects between The Education University of Hong Kong’s Department of Cultural and Creative Arts and local primary and secondary schools, all of which have investigated the issue of cultural diversity and culturally diverse practices through the lens of initiatives aimed at introducing students to Cantonese opera. These examples are framed within the work being carried out in the broader areas of policymaking and practice in Hong Kong, in the process highlighting those directions that are likely to repay further investigation as the (arts) education and cultural sectors become ever more closely aligned.

References

  1. Ahonen, P. (2001). Soft governance, agile union? Analysis of the extensions of open coordination in 2000. Paper presented at the 9th NISPAcee conference, 10–12 May, in Riga, Latvia. Retrieved September 14, 2014, from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/NISPAcee/UNPAN007710.pdf.
  2. Ball, S. J. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bamford, A. (2006). The wow factor: Global research compendium on the impact of the arts in education. New York, München, Berlin: Waxmann Münster.Google Scholar
  4. Chan, Y.-M. (1999). Art education in Hong Kong: Formal, nonformal, informal education system. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Arts Development Council.Google Scholar
  5. Cheng, Y. C. (2000). A CMI-triplization paradigm for reforming education in the new millennium. International Journal of Educational Management, 14(4), 156–174.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, S. (2005). Mariachi music as a symbol of Mexican culture in the United States. International Journal of Music Education, 23, 227–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Culture and Heritage Commission. (2003). Policy recommendation report. Hong Kong: Culture and Heritage Commission Secretariat.Google Scholar
  8. Education Commission of Hong Kong. (2000). Learning for life, learning through life—Reform proposals for the education system of Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Government Printing Department.Google Scholar
  9. Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  10. Hartley, A. (1983). Ideology and organisational behaviour. International Studies of Management and Organisation, 13(3), 26–27.Google Scholar
  11. Home Affairs Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. (2008). Cultural policy. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.hab.gov.hk/en/policy_responsibilities/arts_culture_recreation_and_sport/arts.htm.
  12. Hong Kong Arts Development Council (HKADC). (1999). A creative Hong Kong 2000: The millennium challenge through arts education. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Arts Development Council.Google Scholar
  13. Hong Kong Curriculum Development Council (HKCDC). (2001). Learning to learn—The way forward in curriculum development. Hong Kong: Government Printing Department. Retrieved July 4, 2012, from http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeID=2877&langno=1.
  14. Hong Kong Curriculum Development Council (HKCDC). (2002). Arts education key learning area curriculum guide (primary 1–secondary 3). Hong Kong: The Curriculum Development Council.Google Scholar
  15. Hong Kong Curriculum Development Council (HKCDC). (2003a). Arts education key learning area: Music curriculum guide (primary 1—secondary 3). Hong Kong: Government Logistics Department.Google Scholar
  16. Hong Kong Curriculum Development Council (HKCDC). (2003b). Arts education key learning area: Visual arts curriculum guide (primary 1—secondary 3). Hong Kong: Government Logistics Department.Google Scholar
  17. Kennedy, K. J. (2012). The ‘no-loser’ principle in Hong Kong’s education reforms: Does it apply to ethnic minority students? Hong Kong Teachers’ Centre Journal, 11, 1–23.Google Scholar
  18. Kong, L., Gibson, C., Khoo, L.-M., & Semple, A.-L. (2006). Knowledges of the creative economy: Towards a relational geography of diffusion and adaptation in Asia. Asia-Pacific Viewpoint, 47(2), 173–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lai, K. (2010). Open image in new window [Description and discussion of Hong Kong Cantonese opera]. Hong Kong: Joint Publishing.Google Scholar
  20. Legislative Council Panel on Home Affairs and Panel on Education. (2011). Promotion of arts and cultural education. Retrieved September 1, 2015, from http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr10-11/english/panels/ha/papers/edha0513cb2-1700-1-e.pdf.
  21. Leong, S. (2013). Cultural policy and the development of local cultures in Hong Kong. In S. Leong & B. W. Leung (Eds.), Creative arts in education and culture: Perspectives from Greater China (pp. 27–39). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leung, B. W. (2014). Teachers’ transformation as learning: Teaching Cantonese opera in Hong Kong schools with a teacher-artist partnership. International Journal of Music Education, 32(1), 119–131.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761413491174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leung, B. W. (2015). Utopia in arts education: The transmission of Cantonese opera with oral tradition in Hong Kong. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 23(1), 133–152.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2014.922604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leung, B. W. (2018). Teaching Cantonese opera in Hong Kong schools: Interaction and collaboration between music teachers and artists. In C. Christophersen & K. Ailbhe (Eds.), Musician-teacher collaboration: Altering the chord (pp. 85–95). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leung, B. W., & Leung, E. C. K. (2010). Teacher-artist partnership in teaching Cantonese opera in Hong Kong schools: Student transformation. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 11(5), 1–26.Google Scholar
  26. McPherson, G. E. (2005). Message from the Hong Kong Institute of Education. In Joyful learning: The arts-in-education programme (p. 122). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Arts Development Council.Google Scholar
  27. Mok, K. H. (2003). Globalization and higher educational restructuring in the four East Asian little dragons. Hong Kong Journal of Sociology, 4, 27–56.Google Scholar
  28. Mok, J. K. H., & Chan, D. K. K. (2002). Globalization and education: The quest for quality education in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Peterat, L. (2008). Ecological research. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 238–241). Los Angeles, California/London, United Kingdom/New Delhi, India: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Poon, A. Y. K., & Wong, Y.-C. (2004). Governance in education in Hong Kong: A decentralizing or a centralizing path? In Y. C. Wong (Ed.), One country, two systems in crisis (pp. 137–166). Lanham: Lexington Books, Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  31. Sheridan, M., & Byrne, C. (2008). Cèilidh culture and higher education. International Journal of Music Education, 26(2), 147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Whitbread, R. G. (2016). Cultural and arts education policies in Hong Kong: Two wings of the same bird? Unpublished EdD thesis. Hong Kong: The Education University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  33. Wimmer, M. (2013). When interests meet rationality—Some glimpses of another reality of arts education. In E. Liebau, E. Wagner & M. Wyman (Eds.), International yearbook for research in arts education Volume 1 (2013) (pp. 33–38). New York, München, Berlin: Waxmann Münster.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Education University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations