Abstract
Language policy in education is influenced by the perceptions of the role and status of languages on the part of policymakers, with languages being promoted or neglected for explicit or implicit political reasons. With globalisation, choices have to be made regarding international, national and local languages, with concomitant tensions concerning linguistic hegemony, identity and social equity. These tensions are exacerbated in many Asian settings, because of historical experiences of imperialism and colonialism. But what happens to policies when political influences are mixed with educational goals? Are the chances for successful implementation enhanced or diminished? This chapter focuses on Hong Kong in the immediate postcolonial era. Using the Ferguson Tollefson Matrix (FTM), developed by Kan (2011) to facilitate language policy analysis and outcome predictions, we analyse Hong Kong’s language policies since the 1997 handover, as the language policies in the territory have undergone substantial changes, most notably in the medium of instruction (MoI) for secondary schools. Chinese MoI (CMI) policies initiated in 1998 proved unpopular with the majority of parents, leading the government to make a policy revision, known as the “Fine-tuning”, which took effect from the school year 2010–2011. Applying the FTM on the policy and analysing it against subsequent official reviews, we argue that political dimensions of a policy are not conducive to successful implementation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adamson, B. (2004). China’s English: A history of English in Chinese education. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Baker, C. (2006). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (4th ed.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Bunton, D., & Tsui, B. M. (2002). Setting language benchmarks: Whose benchmarks? Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 12(1), 63–76.
Coniam, D., & Falvey, P. (2002). Selecting models and setting standards for teachers of English in Hong Kong. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 12(1), 13–37.
Curriculum Development Institute. (2001). Learning to learn: The way forward in curriculum. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Edwards, J. (2004). Language minorities. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 451–475). Oxford: Blackwell.
Education Bureau. (2009a). Enriching our language environment, realizing our vision: Fine-tuning of medium of instruction for secondary schools. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Education Bureau. (2009b). Diversified MOI arrangements to enrich language environment in schools. Press release issued 29 May 2009.
Education Commission. (2005). Report on review of medium of instruction for secondary school and secondary school places allocation. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Education Department. (1997). Medium of instruction guidance for secondary schools. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Ferguson, G. (2006). Language planning and education. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Fishman, J. (2006). Language and language shift. In T. Ricento (Ed.), An introduction to language policy. Malden: Blackwell Publishers.
Gill, K. S. (2014). Language policy challenges in multi-ethnic Malaysia. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hong Kong Government. (2015). Asia’s world city. http://www.info.gov.hk/info/sar5/easia.htm. Accessed 22 May 2015.
Hu, R., & Adamson, B. (2012). Social ideologies and the English curriculum in China. In C. Leung & J. Ruan (Eds.), Perspectives on teaching and learning English literacy in China (pp. 1–17). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kan, V. (2011). Can language policy outcome be predicted? – A matrix approach to language policy analysis using Hong Kong from 1997 to 2010 as a test case. Unpublished Ed.D. thesis, Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Kan, V., & Adamson, B. (2010). Language policies for Hong Kong schools since 1997. London Review of Education, 8(2), 167–176.
Kan, V., Lai, K. C., Kirkpatrick, A., & Law, A. (2011). Fine-tuning Hong Kong’s medium of instruction policy. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Kaplan, R. B., & Baldauf, R. B., Jr. (1997). Language planning from practice to theory. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). Setting attainable and appropriate English language targets in multilingual settings: A case for Hong Kong. International Journal of Applied Linguistics., 17(3), 376–391.
Legco. (1997). Legislative Council Information Paper: Medium of instruction guidance for secondary schools 1997–08. http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr97-98/english/panels/ed/papers/ed1508-6.htm. Accessed 22 May 2015.
Morris, P., & Adamson, B. (2010). Curriculum, schooling and society in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Pawan, C. (2009). Indigenous language education in Taiwan. In W. Y. Leonard & S. E. B. Gardner (Eds.), Language is life. Proceedings of the 11th annual stabilizing indigenous languages conference (pp. 26–33). Berkeley: Survey of California and Other Indian Languages.
Poon, A. Y. K. (2004). Language policy of Hong Kong: Its impact on language education and language use in post-handover Hong Kong. Journal of Taiwan Normal University Humanities & Sciences, 49, 53–74.
Poon, A. Y. K. (2010). Language use, and language policy and planning in Hong Kong. Current Issues in Language Planning, 11(1), 1–66.
Tollefson, J. (2002). Introduction. In J. Tollefson (Ed.), Language policies in education (pp. 3–16). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tsui, A., Shum, M., Wong, C. K., Tse, S. K., & Ki, W. W. (1999). Which agenda? Medium of instruction policy in post-1997 Hong Kong. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 12(3), 196–214.
Tung, C. H. (1999). The 1999 Policy Address. Quality people, quality home: Positioning Hong Kong for the 21st Century. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government.
Wiley, T. G. (1996). Language planning and policy. In S. McKay & N. Hornberger (Eds.). Sociolinguistics and language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgements
This chapter was written collaboratively on the basis of Vincent Kan’s doctoral thesis (i.e. Kan 2011), which was co-supervised by Bob Adamson. Heartfelt thanks are due to Prof. Andy Kirkpatrick, Dr. Agnes Law, Dr. K.C. Lai and Dr Liz Walker for their advice and support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kan, V., Adamson, B. (2016). A Matrix Approach to Language Policy Analysis: The Case of Hong Kong. In: Lam, CM., PARK, J. (eds) Sociological and Philosophical Perspectives on Education in the Asia-Pacific Region. Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects, vol 29. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-940-0_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-940-0_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-938-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-940-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)