In an era of rapid globalization, space and time are seriously compressed. People from different nations, cultures, religions and other backgrounds have become much more interconnected and interdependent. Since people are rapidly intermingling, what values should be considered as standards and norms in regulating this situation, so that people of different backgrounds can relate peacefully to each other with mutual respect? United Nations (UN) human rights standards could be considered as sets of shared global norms and values in a search for global ethics. As a consequence, the UN has been eager to promote human rights education (HRE), aiming at the cultivation of a human rights culture. This paper reports on two case studies of school-based curriculum development of HRE in two Hong Kong secondary schools. We also recommend some research directions important for the implementation of HRE in schools. It is hoped that the paper can provide some insight into the development of quality HRE in schools. IntroductionIn an era of rapid globalization, space and time are seriously compressed. People from different nations, cultures, religions and other backgrounds are becoming much more interconnected and interdependent. Gradually, the idea of a multi-level citizenglobal, national, regional and local -is replacing the concept that an individual is simply a member of a national community. In this complex contemporary context, what values need to be considered as standards and norms in regulating this situation, so that people of different backgrounds can relate peacefully to each other with mutual respect? The United Nations (UN) human rights standards are generally considered to be the prototype of a set of shared global norms and values by those in search of global ethics (Osler and Starkey 1996). This paper first reviews the promotion of human rights education (HRE) at the UN level, followed by a description of the development of HRE in Hong Kong to set a context. Then it reports on case studies of school-based HRE curriculum development in two Hong Kong secondary schools. Lastly, it recommends some research directions important for the implementation of HRE in schools.

No abstract

This article is a report on part of a larger research on student participation in school governance in the Hong Kong context. It addresses the question ‘Is the Student Union a tokenism of student participation in school governance in the context of Hong Kong?’. The research adopts a mixed methodology comprising both quantitative and qualitative methods. For the quantitative study, 3209 valid student questionnaires from 51 secondary schools of different backgrounds were collected. For the qualitative study, four schools of different levels of student participation were involved in in-depth case studies. Semi-structured interviews and field observations with teachers and students were conducted to collect qualitative data. The study revealed that from the questionnaire, the ‘one student, one vote’ policy was an apparently fair, transparent and democratic procedure for Student Union elections, and gave the Student Union a positive image in relation to student participation. However, the in-depth case studies revealed that these were superficial perceptions. Instead, it was found that schools shared very limited powers with their Student Unions, where the Student Union would have power only in trivial school operational matters. The ultimate, real power was in the hands of school authorities, seriously limiting the influence of student participation. Our studies further revealed that whether students were satisfied with this disempowering situation or not, most of them had become ‘positive and passive’. This was because they had been socialized to accept the status quo, without expressing dissident voices, as they did not want to oppose the caring school ethos that they valued. In summary, Student Unions in Hong Kong are, in general, close to tokenism, a representative mechanism that cannot take meaningful action to bring forth genuine changes in important school matters. This may have negative impacts on students’ citizenship development, and ends up with cultivating students to be non-questioning, non-participatory, cynical, passive and docile citizens.

This article discusses the influence of Confucianism on civic education, focusing on Hong Kong as a particular case of concern. The development of Hong Kong's civic education is sketched, highlighting the competitions between the politicized and depoliticized versions of the civic education curriculum. The notion that a depoliticized civic education, supported by Confucian ideals, is necessarily a distinctive feature of Asian civic education, is then critiqued. Finally, the article argues that an eclectic version of civic education, comprising both political and moral components, is warranted. This is what Confucian tenets really mean. It is hoped that the discussion here will help reflect whether Confucian tenets justify depoliticization of education and civic education. This is important given the growing aspiration for democracy and citizens' participation in civil societies, particularly those whose cultural roots are in the Confucian tradition. Moreover, the authors hope that the dialogues between Confucian traditions and the Western traditions discussed in the article can shed light on some thought-provoking issues of interest to an international readership, particularly as China is becoming more influential globally.

This article starts off with a discussion of Westheimer and Kahne’s typologies of citizens followed by brief discussions of civic education in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia with reference to the typologies. Then it moves on to an analysis of the development of the civic education in Hong Kong by comparing the six official policy documents in civic education, with reference to the typologies. It points out that the conceptions of ‘good citizen’ portrayed in the official documents, as in many countries, are just hovering between the Personal Responsible Citizen and Participatory Citizen and seldom attain the Justice-Oriented Citizen. It also argues that, in addressing the political demands of the society, the cultivation of Personal Responsible Citizen and Participatory Citizen is the result of conservative politicization of civic education, either through depoliticizing the teaching content or teaching politics in a conservative tone in the civic education curriculum. However, civic education deprived of Justice-Oriented Citizen may not be adequate in equipping youths to address the pressing social and political issues and concerns triggered by the global Jasmine Revolutions, Occupy Movements, and struggles against the rapid widening of gaps between rich and poor and the demand for a genuine democratization for the society. Therefore we contest that cultivating Justice-Oriented Citizen should be seriously explored with immediate urgency and propose that liberal civic education programmes aiming at cultivating Justice-Oriented Citizen should be included in school for an all round development of citizenship in the youths.