This study was designed primarily to investigate the impact of school-based curriculum development teams on teacher development within the tradition of school-based curriculum development. The results are expected to provide valuable insights for teachers, school management and policy making. Teacher interviews in a primary school in Hong Kong were conducted to evaluate the extent to which teacher engagement in curriculum decision-making processes, which are within two school-based curriculum development teams, led to teacher professional development; these were triangulated with video-taped meetings and tryout lessons. Qualitative evidence showed that participating teachers have each undergone professional development through the processes involved in the planning, experimenting and reflecting (PER) model, which is also upon curriculum practice and innovation under certain conditions. However, the complex structures and processes that have been established to involve teachers in curriculum decision making need further empirical and theoretical work. While previous papers on the studies focused on teacher development and pupil learning, this paper, based on interview data, aims to focus on the functions of distributed leadership, and how the leadership styles of consultants and panel heads mediate the interactional patterns and therefore the discourses in the Mathematics and Chinese development teams in the second action cycle of the innovation project.
Australian Education Union (2004) Educational Leadership and Teaching for the Twenty First Century. Project Discussion Paper. Available at: http://www.aeufederal.org.au/Debates/elat21pap.pdf (accessed 3 October 2005).
2.
Ball DL, Cohen DK ( 1996) Reform by the book: what is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher25(9): 6-8, 14.
3.
Black P., Atkin M. ( 1996) Changing the Subject. Innovations in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education. London: Routledge in association with OECD.
4.
Brabeck MM, Walsh ME and Latta R. ( 2003) Meeting at the Hyphen: Schools-Universities-Communities-Professions in Collaboration for Student Achievement and Well Being. Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education .
5.
Caldwell BJ ( 2005) School-based Management. Education Policy Series . Paris and Brussels: The International Institute for Educational Planning and The International Academy of Education .
6.
Carr W., Kemmis S. ( 1986) Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research . London: Falmer.
7.
Cheng KM ( 1999) Knowledge society and education reform: the new role for teachers. Plenary paper at the conference on ‘Education Reform in Chinese Societies’. Hong Kong Teachers’ Centre and Hong Kong Baptist College, 30 October 1999.
8.
Chow APY, Wong EKP, Mo KW ( 2002) Teachers’ perceptions of apprasier-appraisee relationships . Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education16(2): 85-101.
9.
Cohen L., Manion L., Morrison K. ( 2000) Research Methods in Education (5th edn). London: Routledge/ Falmer.
10.
Day C. ( 1993) Reflection: a necessary but not sufficient condition for professional development. British Educational Research Journal19(1): 83-93.
11.
Education Commission (1984) Education Commission Report No. 1. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
12.
Education Commission (1986) Education Commission Report No. 2. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
13.
Education Commission (1988) Education Commission Report No. 3. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
14.
Education Commission (1992) SMI Manual on School Administration. Hong KongEducation Department.
15.
Education Department (1999) Implementation of school-based management in all public sector schools. Administration circular no. 3/99.
16.
Elliott J. ( 1991) Action Research for Educational Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
17.
Frost D., Durrant J. ( 2002) Teacher-led Development Work: Guidance and Support . London: David Fulton.
18.
Frost D., Durrant J. ( 2003) Teacher leadership: rationale, strategy and impact . School Leadership & Management23(2): 173-86.
19.
Fullan M. ( 1993) Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform . London: Falmer.
20.
Fullan M. ( 2001) Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
21.
Glatthorn AA, Boschee F., Whitehead BM ( 2005) Curriculum Leadership: Development and Implementation . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
22.
Hargreaves A. ( 2007) The long and short of educational change. Education Canada47(3): 16-23.
23.
Harris A. ( 2003) Teacher leadership and school improvement. In: Harris A, Day C, Hopkins D, Hadfield M, Hargreaves A, Chapman C (eds) Effective Leadership for School Improvement. London: Routledge / Falmer.
24.
Harris A. ( 2004) Distributed leadership and school improvement: leading or misleading? Educational Management Administration & Leadership32(4): 11-24.
25.
Harris A., Lambert L. ( 2003) Building Leadership Capacity for School Improvement . Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
26.
Henderson JG, Hawthorne RD ( 1995) Transformative Curriculum Leadership. New York: Teachers College Press.
27.
Hiebert J., Gallimore R., Stigler JW ( 2003) The new heroes of teaching. Education Week23(10): 56.
28.
Hofstede G. ( 1995) Managerial values: business of international business is culture. In: Jackson T (ed). Cross-Culture Management. Oxford: Heinemann Butterworth.
29.
Holye E. ( 1969) The Role of the Teacher. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul.
30.
Hopkins D. ( 2001) School Improvement for Real. London : Falmer.
31.
Law E., Galton M. ( 2004) Impact of a school based curriculum project on teachers and students: a Hong Kong case study. Curriculum Perspectives24(3): 43-58.
32.
Law EHF, Wan SWY ( 2006) Developing curriculum leadership in an elementary school: a Hong Kong case study. Curriculum and Teaching21(2): 61-90.
33.
Law EHF, Galton M, Wan ( 2007) Developing curriculum leadership in schools: Hong Kong perspectives. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education35(2): 143-59.
34.
Llewellyn J. ( 1982) A Perspective on Education in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
35.
MacBeath J. ( 2004) Putting the self back into self-evaluation. Improving Schools7: 87-91.
36.
MacBeath J., Moos L. ( 2004) Democratic Learning: The Challenge to School Effectiveness . London: Routledge/Falmer .
37.
MacPherson I, Aspland T, Brooker R, Elliott B (eds) (1999) Places and Spaces for Teachers in Curriculum Leadership . Deakin West, ACT: Australian Curriculum Studies Association.
38.
MacPherson I., Brooker R., Aspland T., Elliott B. ( 1998) Putting professional learning up front: a perspective of professional development within a context of collaborative research about curriculum leadership. Journal of In-service Education24(1): 73-86.
39.
Marsh C. ( 1992) Key Concepts for Understanding Curriculum. New York: Falmer Press.
40.
Marsh C. ( 1997) Key Concepts for Understanding Curriculum. London: Falmer Press.
41.
McLaughlin M., Talbert J. ( 2001) Professional Communities and the Work of High School Teaching . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
42.
Miles M., Ekholm M., Vandenberghe R. ( 1987) Lasting School Improvement: Exploring the Process of Institutionalization . Leuven: ACCO.
43.
Mok KH ( 2003) Centralization and Decentralization: Educational Reforms and Changing Governance in Chinese Societies. Hong KongHong Kong University Press.
44.
Ovens P. ( 1999) Can teachers be developed? Journal of In-service Education25(2): 275-305.
45.
Putnam RT, Borko H. ( 2000) What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher29(1): 4-15.
46.
Schon D. ( 1983) The Reflective Practitioner. London : Temple Smith.
47.
Sergiovanni T. ( 2001) Leadership: What’s in it for Schools. London: Routledge Falmer.
48.
Shatin Tsung Tsin School (2003) Quality Education Fund (7th Call for Application) Proposal of ‘Accelerating School Based Curriculum Development’. Hong Kong: Shatin Tsung Tsin School.
49.
Sherrill JA ( 1999) Preparing teachers for leadership roles in the 21st century . Theory into Practice38(1): 56-61.
50.
Shulman L., Sherin MG ( 2004) Fostering communities of teachers as learners: disciplinary perspectives. Journal of Curriculum Studies36(2): 135-40.
Stenhouse L. ( 1975) An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development . London: Heinemann.
53.
Teddle C., Tashakkori A. ( 2003) Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In: Tashakkori A, Teddle C (eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
54.
The Ten School Leadership Propositions (n.d.) Available at: http://www.ncsl.org.uk/the_college/college_publications/college-publications-ldf-framework.cfm (accessed 3 October 2005).
55.
Wallace JD, Nesbit CR, Miller ACS ( 1999) Six leadership models for professional development in science and mathematics. Journal of Science Teacher Education10(4): 247-68.
56.
Wong AKC, Cheng KM (eds) (1995) Educational Leadership and Change: An International Perspective. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
