香港教师教育目标的连续性、变革与问题:1992-2017

选取香港1992年"教育统筹委员会"的第五号报告书、2000年的教育改革蓝图、2001年香港教育学院的"愿景,使命和主导价值"以及2017年香港教育大学的"愿景,使命和核心价值"等中的相关陈述进行分析,总体来看,在香港回归前后（1992-2002年）,这些陈述显示了教师教育的连续性和稳定性,而进入21世纪后,香港教师教育的价值取向则逐渐从对英语国家的文化依附转向全球化,显示出教育以及教师教育的政治无涉性。关于教师教育目标陈述的问题,从民族国家、历史/文化、本土三个维度进行分析,可以发现香港的教师教育目标整体上缺乏民族国家和社会重建导向;在文化方面,缺乏文化身份认同,看不到中国文化传统,目标陈述传递的是一种普遍性;本土视野缺失,目标设置去情景化,目标制定没有建立在香港教育系统的独特性上。香港教师教育整个目标陈述倾向于展示教师教育规划中的工具特点和技术理性。

The Changes, Continuities and Deficiencies in the Goal of Teacher Educationin Hong Kong: 1992-2017

The paper selected four statements to analyze the changes, continuities and deficiencies in the goal of teacher education in Hong Kong. These include:the 1992 Education Commission Report No. 5, the 2000 Education Blueprint of the new Hong Kong government, the 2001 "Vision, mission and guiding values" statement of the Hong Kong Institute of Education, and the 2017 corresponding statement of the Education University of Hong Kong. These goals, blueprints, and mission and vision statements show high internal coherence, indicating the continuity and stability in teacher education during the transition period(1992-2002) in Hong Kong, and also the transition from cultural dependency to globalization in the 21st century. Also demonstrated is continuity in the apolitical nature in education and in teacher education of the time. In the analysis, the deficiencies of the goal statements are discussed under political, historical/cultural and local dimensions.In short, politically there was a lack of any national or social reconstruction orientation. Culturally there was a lack of cultural identities-the goals statements carried almost a universal tone. The Chinese cultural tradition was almost invisible. There was also a lack of local perspective as the goals were de-contextualized. The goal statements were not built upon the uniqueness of the education system in Hong Kong.These goal statements tended to demonstrate the instrumental nature and the technical rationality in teacher education planning.