Paradigm Shifts in Quality Improvement in Education

Paradigm Shift in Quality Improvement in Education
Paradigm Shifts in Quality Improvement in Education:

Three Waves for the Future
CHE!" #in Cheong
Centre Director, Professor
Centre for Research and International Collaboration
Asia Pacific Centre for Education eadership and School Quality
!ong "ong Institute of Education
o Ping Road, #ai Po, $#, !%$& "%$&
'a() *+,-. -/0+122-3
#el) *+,-. -/0+122--
Email) yccheng4ied5edu5h6
7eb1site) http)889995ied5edu5h68cric8
7eb1site) http)889995ied5edu5h68cric8apcels:8
Invited Plenary Speech Presented at
#he #he International Forum on Quality Education for the T$enty%first Century
Co1organi;ed by
&ESC'%P(')P" ational Commission for &ESC' of *inistry of Education"
and ational Institute of Educational (esearch" China
<ei=ing, China
3-13, >une -??3
I'1Quality1@CCheng
3
Paradigm Shifts in Quality Improvement in Education:
Three Waves for the Future
CHE!" #in Cheong
Hong +ong Institute of Education
,)-stract.
'acing up the challenges in the ne9 millennium, education reform has inevitably become a necessary to pursue
educational :uality and effectiveness in the Asia1Pacific Region and other parts of the 9orld5 Anfortunately most
educational reforms in the past t9o decades resulted in serious frustration and failure even though they often had a
good 9ill5 Revie9ing the policy initiatives since 3/+?s and earlier, this presentation 9ill point out 9orld 9ide
education reforms for education :uality are e(periencing three 9aves5 Different 9aves are based on different
paradigms and theories of education :uality and school effectiveness, and they result in different strategies and
approaches to education assurance5 #he first $ave of school reforms and initiatives focuses mainly on Internal
Quality Assurance and ma6es effort to improve internal school performance particularly the methods and processes
of teaching and learning5 #he second $ave emphasi;es Interface Quality Assurance in terms of organi;ational
effectiveness, sta6eholdersB satisfaction and mar6et competitiveness and ma6es effort to ensure satisfaction and
accountability to the internal and e(ternal sta6eholders5 Suffering from the narro9 conception of school functions and
:uality, many initiatives of the first t9o 9aves cannot meet the challenges and needs of rapid transformations in an
era of globali;ation and information technology5
Cy presentation 9ill further e(plain that the coming improvement initiatives should be moving to9ards the
third $ave 9hich emphasi;es strongly Future Quality Assurance in terms of relevance to the ne9 school functions
in the ne9 century as 9ell as relevance to the ne9 paradigm of education concerning conte(tuali;ed multiple
intelligences *CCI., globali;ation, locali;ation and individuali;ation5 In pursuit of not only internal and interface
:uality but also future :uality in education in the ne9 millennium, this presentation proposes a ne9 paradigm for
:uality assurance in school education5
<ased on the ne9 paradigm in the third 9ave, the concepts of value added and value created are completely
different in education :uality5 #he enhancement of value added of an education institution depends heavily on
improvement of internal process 9hile value created relies mainly on the increase in goal relevance and sta6eholder
satisfaction 9ith :uality of education services5 Continuous institutional development through a spiral curve along the
time span is necessary for total :uality in the ne9 millennium5 $e9 implications for research, policy and practices
that are fundamentally different from the traditional thin6ing 9ill benefit local and international efforts for :uality
assurance and enhancement5
I'1Quality1@CCheng
-
Introduction
Since the turn of the ne9 century, there have been drastic impacts from economic
globali;ation, advances in information technology, international mar6et competitions, and
rapidly increasing local social1political demands on nearly every country in the 9orld5 'acing
up these impacts and challenges, numerous education reforms have been initiated in the Asia1
Pacific Region and other places *Cheng D #o9nsend, -???.5 According to Cheng *-??3a.,
the 9orld19ide education reforms are e(periencing three 9aves since the 3/2?s5 #he three
9aves of reforms are mainly based on different paradigms and theories of education
effectiveness, and they result in the employment of different strategies and approaches to
changing schools and education5
Assuming goals and ob=ectives of education are clear and consensus to all, the first
9ave of school reforms and initiatives since the 3/2?s focuses mainly on internal
effectiveness, 9ith efforts made to improve internal school performance particularly the
methods and processes of teaching and learning5 Cany changes are government1directed and
top1do9n, 9ith the aim to improve school arrangements and education practices, thus
enhancing their effectiveness in achieving the goals and ob=ectives planned at either the site
level or the system level5 Improvement of teacher and student performance up to identified
standards obviously had been a popular and important target for educational reform5
Responding to concerning the accountability to the public and sta6eholdersB
e(pectation in the 3//?s, the second 9ave of education reform emphasi;es interface
effectiveness in terms of education :uality, sta6eholdersB satisfaction, and mar6et
competitiveness, 9ith most policy efforts aim to ensure :uality and accountability to the
internal and e(ternal sta6eholders *Evans, 3///E &oert; D Duffy, -??3E Coulson, 3///E
!eadington, -???E Cahony D !e(tall, -???E !eller, -??3.5 Quality assurance, school
monitoring and revie9, parental choice, student coupon, parental and community
involvement in governance, school charter, and performance1based funding are some typical
e(amples of measures to pursue and enhance effectiveness at the interface bet9een the school
and the community *Cheng D #o9nsend, -???.5 !o9 to improve the e(isting structures,
organi;ations, and practices in education at different levels to meet sta6eholdersB needs and
e(pectations, is a ma=or concern in the second 9ave of reforms5
At the turn of the ne9 century, the effects of many initiatives of the first and second
9aves have been doubted 9hether they can meet the challenges and needs of rapid
transformations in an era of globali;ation and information technology5 Particularly 9hen
6no9ledge1driven economy and information technology are strongly emphasi;ed in the ne9
millennium, people urge paradigm shift in learning and teaching and demand reforming the
aims, content, practice, and management of education at different levels to ensure their
relevance to the future *Cheng, -???a, bE Daun, -??3E <urbules D #orres, -???E Strom:uist
D Con6man, -???.5 #he emerging third 9ave of education reform emphasi;es strongly
future effectiveness in terms of relevance to the ne9 education functions in the ne9 century as
9ell as relevance to the ne9 paradigm of education concerning conte(tuali;ed multiple
intelligences, globali;ation, locali;ation and individuali;ation5 #he pursuit of ne9 vision and
aims at different levels of education, life1long learning, global net9or6ing, international
outloo6, and use of information and technological are =ust some emerging evidences of the
third 9ave *Cheng, -??3a.5
I'1Quality1@CCheng
F
#he above three 9aves of education reforms provide a general typology to capture and
understand the 6ey paradigms and characteristics of various education reforms in
international conte(ts in these years5 Different countries or areas may have different historical
and conte(tual constraints, and therefore their progress and characteristics of education
reforms may be different and move to9ards different 9aves5 'or e(ample, some countries
may be still struggling for internal effectiveness at the first 9ave 9ith focus mainly on
improvement of internal process5 Some countries may move to9ards the second 9ave or a
mi( of the first and second 9aves to pursue both internal and interface effectiveness5 In
addition to the internal improvement of school process, they implement different measures
and initiatives to ensure education :uality and sta6eholdersB satisfaction5 Responding to the
challenges of globali;ation and impacts of information technology, some countries may have
already started the third 9ave of education reforms to pursue for future effectiveness 9ith
emphasis on relevance of education to ne9 school functions and ne9 paradigm of learning in
the ne9 millennium5
#hese three 9aves represent changes in paradigms and theories of education :uality
and school effectiveness, and they also result in different strategies and approaches to
education assurance5 #he first $ave of school reforms and initiatives focuses mainly on
Internal Quality Assurance in terms of improving and ensuring the methods and processes of
teaching and learning meeting the planned education aims5 #he second $ave emphasi;es
Interface Quality Assurance in terms of ensuring organi;ational effectiveness, sta6eholder
satisfaction and accountability to the public5 Suffering from the narro9 conception of school
functions and :uality, many initiatives of the first t9o 9aves cannot meet the challenges and
needs of rapid transformations in an era of globali;ation and information technology5
#his paper aims to revie9 the characteristics and paradigms of :uality assurance in the
first and second 9aves and then e(plain 9hy the coming initiatives for :uality assurance
should be moving to9ards the third $ave 9hich emphasi;es strongly Future Quality
Assurance in terms of ensuring the relevance to ne9 education functions in the ne9 century
as 9ell as the relevance to the ne9 paradigm of education5 In pursuit of not only internal and
interface :uality but also future :uality in education in the ne9 millennium, this paper
proposes a ne9 paradigm for :uality assurance in education5
First Wave: Internal Quality )ssurance
Effectiveness in Teaching and /earning
#raditionally, the discussion of education :uality in this first 9ave focuses heavily on
the effectiveness of internal education processes particularly teaching and learning in
classroom5 In this line of thin6ing, education quality mainly refers to the achievement of
planned education goals particularly in terms of studentsB education outcomes5 #he higher
achievement in planned education goals implies the better :uality in education5 In this sense,
education :uality is not different from education effectiveness5 Also, quality assurance often
refers to the efforts for improving the internal environment and processes such that the
effectiveness of learning and teaching can be ensured to achieve the planned goals *Cheng,
3//2a.5 #his type of :uality assurance may be named as GInternal Quality )ssuranceH5 As
I'1Quality1@CCheng
0
sho9n in 'igure 3, the structure of effectiveness in teaching and learning can provide an
useful overall vie9 on ho9 strategies and initiatives can be conceptualised and organi;ed to
ensure internal :uality in education *Cheng, 3//,a, 3//+.5
Education effectiveness in classroom is a comprehensive conception even though it is
often assessed by the :uality and :uantity of achieved student learning e(periences and
outcomes5 #he structure sho9s ho9 the 6ey internal factors such as teacher factors,
curriculum factors, conte(tual factors, and student factors are related to student learning
e(periences and educational outcomes5 It assumes the follo9ing procedural inter1
relationships among the components of internal education effectiveness *Cheng, 3//+E
Cedley, 3/+-.)
*3. Student learning outcomes are the product of the interaction bet9een curriculum
characteristics, student learning e(perience and individual characteristicsE
*-. Student learning e(perience is affected by teacher performance, curriculum
characteristics, and classroom environmentE
*F. #eacher performance is determined by the interaction bet9een teacher
competence, curriculum characteristics and school organi;ational environmentE
*0. E(ternal teacher education, school1based teacher education, and pre1e(isting
teacher characteristics can contribute to teacher competenceE and
*,. #eaching evaluation based on the information from teacher performance,
student learning e(perience and learning outcomes can be used to facilitate
development of teacher competence through staff development activities5
I'1Quality1@CCheng
,
Figure 0: Structure of Education Effectiveness in the Classroom
I
School1based
#eacher Education 8
Staff Development
#eaching
Evaluation
#eacher
Pre1e(isting
Characteristics
Student
earning
E(perience
#eacher
Competence
Student
earning
%utcomes
#eacher
Performance
E(ternal
#eacher
Education
Curriculum
%rgani;ational
Environment
Classroom
Environment
Student
Pre1e(isting
Characteristics
#eaching earning
Curriculum
* from Cheng, 3//+.
)pproaches to Ensuring Internal Quality
'rom this structure, there may be t9o different approaches that can be used to ensure
education :uality or effectiveness in classroom5 #hey are the component :uality approach and
the relationship :uality approach5
The Component Quality Approach
#his approach focuses on improving the :uality of some components of the structure
9ith a hope to enhance or ensure the :uality in student learning outcome5 'or e(ample, many
improvement initiatives ta6e teacher competence as the 6ey factor for internal :uality and
ma6e effort to improve teacher competencies such as language s6ills, pedagogic 6no9ledge,
sub=ect 6no9ledge, use of information technology in education, etc5 In the past years, there
have been different types of improvement efforts for internal :uality assurance in education
such as school management improvement, classroom environment improvement, teaching
improvement, learning improvement, curriculum improvement, evaluation improvement, and
teacher education and :uality improvement5 All these efforts focus on improvement of the
:uality of certain components 9ith aims to achieve planned education goals5 #able 3 sho9s
some e(amples of this component :uality approach5
Currently, based on this approach, there is a strong emphasis on using the benchmar6ing
concept *<ogan D English, 3//0. to ensure the :uality of each component of the education
effectiveness reaching at a certain standard5 'or e(ample in !ong "ong, English language
teachers 9ere as6ed to ta6e a benchmar6 e(amination in order to sho9 their English language
proficiency reaching at a given benchmar6 *Coniam, 'alvey, <odycott, Cre9, D S;e, -???.5
#his component :uality approach has its inherent limitations5 #he improvement
conception is often simplistic and separated because it ignores the relationship bet9een one
component and other components of education effectiveness5 #he improvement of one
component does not promise the :uality of other components and the better outcomes of
studentsB learning5 'or e(ample, the enhancement of teacher competence may not promise the
improvement of teacher performance or student learning e(perience because there are also
influences from organi;ational environment and classroom environment5 Similarly, the
improvement of classroom environment may not imply :uality and improvement in student
learning outcomes because teacher performance, curriculum, and even student o9n pre1
e(isting characteristics are also important factors intervening the learning process and
outcome5 #herefore, it is not a surprise that many improvement initiatives of the first 9ave
reform using this component :uality approach often result in disappointment and failure for
ensuring :uality in education even though huge volume of resources has put into improving
certain components of education effectiveness5 #he e(periences in the first 9ave of !ong
"ong education reforms can provide a clear e(ample of the limitations of this approach to
:uality assurance in school education *Cheng, -???b, -??3c.5
2
#able 3) #he Component Quality Approach
Improvement
'f Component Quality E1amples of Factors to -e Improved
#eaching Improvement #ype
Improve #eacher Competence e5g5 language s6ills, pedagogic 6no9ledge, information
technology s6ills, sub=ect 6no9ledge, ethical and legal
6no9ledge in education, etc5
Improve #eacher Performance e5g5 teaching styles, teaching attitudes, teaching strategies,
behaviors, use of facilities, teaching materials, classroom
management pattern, leadership to students, etc5
earning Improvement #ype
Improve Student earning E(perience e5g5 learning activities, learning strategies, e(periences,
responses and feelings, interaction 9ith peers, s6ill practice,
affective e(pression, physical performance, intellectual
stimulation and e(ercise, etc5
Improve Student earning %utcome e5g5 academic achievements, reading ability, 9riting ability,
developed self efficacy in learning, computer literacy, moral
development, citi;enship, s6ill and motivation of continuous
self learning, etc5
Curriculum Improvement #ype
Improve Curriculum and its
Characteristics
e5g5 learning aims and goals, teaching and learning tas6s,
te(tboo6s, sub=ect syllabus, curriculum design, medium of
instruction, teaching materials, etc5
Evaluation Improvement #ype
Improve Evaluation of #eaching D
earning
e5g5 supervision, classroom observation, student achievement
assessment, teacher self evaluation, teaching portfolio,
evaluation by students, etc5
Classroom Environment Improvement #ype
Improve Classroom Environment for
#eaching and earning
e5g5 e(isting social climate, class si;e, level and diversity of
studentsB academic ability in the class, teaching and learning
facilities, e:uipment, physical conditions, etc5
School Canagement Improvement #ype
Improve %rgani;ational Environment
for #eaching and earning
e5g5 instructional leadership, program planning, team support,
staff development in area of instruction, staff professionalism,
management of curriculum, school mission and goals, policy of
program design and implementation, human relations, school
culture, schoolBs physical environment, etc5
#eacher Education and Quality Improvement #ype
Improve #eacher Personal
Characteristics
e5g5 academic :ualifications, 9or6ing e(periences,
personalities, self concept and efficacy, beliefs and values
about education and society, personal vision and mission,
cognitive styles, age, etc5
Improve School1based #eacher
Education 8 Staff Development
e5g5 9or6shops, e(perience sharing, collaborative teaching,
reflection on teaching, educational visits, =ob enrichment, etc5
Improve E(ternal #eacher Education e5g5 goals, ob=ectives, methods, content, course designs,
organi;ation, relevance of programs, :uality of teaching, etc5
+
The Relationship Quality Approach
Different from the component :uality approach, the relationship :uality approach
focuses mainly on improving the :uality of relationship bet9een components of the
effectiveness structure5 It is assumed that the better relationship bet9een components, the
better impacts of components on the :uality in student learning outcomes5 It means that
improvement of relationship bet9een components is the 6ey for ensuring education :uality in
classroom5 #able - provides some e(amples of the relationship :uality approach5 'or e(ample
F in this table, the improvement effort can focus on ensuring the :uality of teacher
competence and organi;ational environment related to positive teacher performance in
classroom5 Another e(ample, say e(ample - in #able -, the improvement effort can focus on
providing a coherent and positive lin6age bet9een teacher performance and characteristics of
classroom environment and curriculum in order to enhance the :uality of student learning
e(periences5 In other 9ords, it is to ensure that the teacher can adapt his8her teaching
performance to the classroom characteristics *such as class si;e, student composition, social
climate, etc5 . and the curriculum features *such as learning ob=ectives and tas6s, sub=ect
content, etc5 . in order to ma(imi;e the learning opportunities for different students5
#his relationship :uality approach is comparatively po9erful than the component
:uality approach in ensuring education :uality because it ensures not only the :uality of
separate components but more the :uality of relationship bet9een components5 #he
successful application of this approach is based on the understanding of the relationships
bet9een components5 #herefore there is a strong demand for a more sophisticated 6no9ledge
base about these relationships5 7ithout such a 6no9ledge base, it is impossible to 6no9 ho9
to ensure these relationships contributing to the :uality in student learning outcomes5
'urthermore, in the structure of education effectiveness, all factors are directly or
indirectly related in different stages of the teaching and learning processes *see 'igure 3.5 If
the relationship :uality approach =ust focuses on the improvement of certain relationships but
not all, it cannot promise the contribution of all the components and their relationships
converging to the total internal :uality in education5
Ta-le 2: The (elationship Quality )pproach ,E1amples.
Ensuring (elationship Quality
-et$een Components
Quality to -e Enhanced
Through Ensuring (elationship
E(ample 3) <et9een
Student earning E(perience Quality of Student earning %utcomes
Curriculum Characteristics
Student Pre1e(isting Characteristics
E(ample -) <et9een
#eacher Performance
Quality of Student earning E(perience
Classroom Environment
E(ample F) <et9een
%rgani;ational Environment Quality of #eacher Performance
#eacher Competence
E(ample 0) <et9een
E(ternal #eacher Education Quality of #eacher Competence
#eacher Pre1e(isting Characteristics
School1based Staff Development
/
*odels of Internal Quality )ssurance
According to Cheng *3//Ia. and Cheng D #am *3//2., there are eight models of
education :uality that can be used to understand and manage :uality of education from a
perspective ta6ing educational institution and its interface 9ith environment into
consideration5 #able F summari;es the conception of :uality assurance, conditions of
usefulness, and 6ey areas of concern of these models5 #he first three models, including the
goal and specification model, the process model and the absence of problem model, are
concerned 9ith the internal :uality assurance focusing on internal goal achievement, process
improvement, and internal problem avoidance5 #hese models can be used to manage and
ensure internal :uality in education5
The Goal and Specification Model5 #he goal and specification model assumes that
there are clear, enduring, normative and 9ell accepted goals and specifications as indicators
and standards for education institutions or education systems to pursue or conform5 As
discussed in the previous part on internal :uality assurance, education :uality defined by this
model is the achievement of the stated goals or conformance to the specifications listed in the
institutional plan or program plans5 It is a type of internal :uality5 Quality assurance by this
model is to ensuring achievement of stated goals and conformance to given specifications5
#he typical e(amples of :uality indicators to be used may include studentsB academic
achievements, attendance rate, dropout rate, and personal developments, number of graduates
enrolled in universities or graduate schools, staffBs professional :ualifications, etc5
The Process Model #he model assumes that nature and :uality of institution
process often determine the :uality of output and the degree to 9hich the planned goals can
be achieved5 Particularly in education, e(perience in process is often ta6en as a form of
educational aims and outcomes5 #herefore, education :uality defined by this model is mainly
the smoothness and health of internal processes and the fruitfulness of learning processes5
#he process in an education institution generally includes management process, teaching
process, and learning process5 #hus the selection of indicators may be based on these
processes, classified as management :uality indicators *e5g5 leadership, decision1ma6ing.,
teaching :uality indicators *e5g5 teaching efficacy, teaching methods., and learning :uality
indicators * e5g5 learning attitudes, attendance rate.5 Quality assurance by this model is to
ensure smooth healthy internal process and fruitful learning e(periences5 It is also a type of
internal :uality assurance 9ith emphasis on internal improvement5
The Absence of Problems Model #he model assumes that if there is absence of
problems, troubles, defects, 9ea6nesses, difficulties, and dyfunctions in an education
institution, this institution is of high education :uality5 #herefore education :uality is
defined as the absence of problems and troubles inside the education institution5 Quality
assurance relies heavily on institutional monitoring and reporting to ensure no problems and
deficiencies arising from its operation and structure5 #his is perhaps the oldest concept of
internal :uality assurance in use in industry *'eigenbaum, 3/,3.5 Quality control e(perts
tend to loo6 at :uality as less scrap, re9or6, 9arranty costs, etc5, of the final product5 #he
management team of an education institution may set up stringent :uality assurance and
monitoring system in order to ensure a deficiency free environment5 Identifying strategies for
internal improvement of an education institution can be more precisely done by analy;ing
problems and defects as opposed to education :uality5 #herefore, this model is useful
3?
particularly 9hen the criteria of education :uality are really unclear but the strategies for
internal improvement are needed5
Ta-le 34 *odels of Internal Quality )ssurance
Conception of
Quality )ssurance
Conditions for
*odel &sefulness
Indicators 5 +ey )reas for
Quality Evaluation ,e4g4.
!oal and
Specification
*odel
Ensuring achievement of
stated institutional goals
and conformance to
given specifications
7hen institutional goals and
specifications are clear,
consensual, time1bound, and
measurableE
7hen resources are sufficient to
achieve the goals and conform to
the specifications

Institutional ob=ectives,
standards, and specifications
listed in the program plans, e5g5
academic achievements,
attendance rate, dropout rate, etc5
Process *odel Ensuring smooth
internal process and
fruitful learning
e(periences
7hen there is a clear relationship
bet9een process and educational
outcomes
eadership, participation, social
interactions, classroom climate,
learning activities and
e(periences, etc5
)-sence of
Pro-lems
*odel
Ensuring absence of
problems and troubles in
the institution
7hen there is no consensual
criteria of :uality but strategies
for improvement are needed

Absence of conflicts,
dysfunctions, difficulties, defects,
9ea6nesses, troubles, etc5
Theory of 6alue%added in Internal Education Quality
#he internal :uality assurance is based on the theory of value1added in education :uality,
assuming that the larger the improvement of internal process of teaching and learning, the
larger the value1added to education :uality5 As sho9n in 'igure -, if the internal process
including different components and their relationships can be improved during a time period
#3 to #-, the area of value added in :uality 9ill increase as the achievement of the planned
goals is increased5 #he larger increase in achievement of planned goals is due to the larger
improvement of internal process5 #herefore, based on this theory, the component :uality
approach, the relationship :uality or the total internal :uality approach can add value in
:uality if it can improve some or all aspects of the internal process of education5
33
Figure 2:
6alue%)dded in Quality

Second Wave: Interface Quality )ssurance
In the past decades, numerous initiatives and research pro=ects of the first 9ave have
been conducted to pursue internal school effectiveness D :uality in different parts of the
9orld *Cheng D #o9nsend, -???.5 Some focused on improvement of school management
and classroom environment*Cheng, 3//Ib.E some on curriculum development and change
*Cheng, Cho9, D #sui, -???.E some on teacher :ualifications and competencies *'idler D
Atton, 3///.E some on improvement of teaching and learning processes *Corgan D Corris,
3///E <ubb, -??3.E and some on evaluation and assessment *Cacbeath, 3///, -???E
eith9ood, Aithen D >ant;i, -??3E Sunstein, D ovell, -???E !eadington, -???.5 <ut,
unfortunately the results of these efforts 9ere still very limited and could not satisfy the
increasing needs and e(pectations of the public5 People began to doubt ho9 effective are
these improvement initiatives to meet the diverse needs and e(pectations of parents, students,
employers, policy1ma6ers, and those concerned in the community5 !o9 education can be
ensured accountable to the publicJ !o9 are the education practices and outcomes relevant to
the changing demands of the local communityJ All these challenges are in nature concerned
9ith the interface bet9een educational institutions and the community5 It means that :uality
assurance is not only an issue of internal process improvement but also the interface issue of
meeting the sta6eholdersB satisfaction and ensuring accountability to the community5
Interface Quality in Education
Responding to the success of application of ne9 management concepts and the
advances of organi;ational studies in the business and industry 9orld since 3/+?s, there has
been the second 9ave of education reforms emphasi;es interface effectiveness in terms of
:uality management, sta6eholdersB satisfaction, mar6et competitiveness and accountability5 In
3-
Area of
Value Added
(increase in achievement due to
internal improvement)
T2
Improvement of Internal Process
T1
Planned
Goals
the second 9ave, the consideration of education :uality and its assurance is put into a larger
changing social conte(t, in 9hich satisfying the needs of multiple sta6eholders and ensuring
the accountability of education to the public are crucial criteria for determining education
:uality5 Clearly, the reform focus has shifted from the internal process improvement to the
interface effectiveness and adaptation5
In this line of thin6ing, education quality mainly refers to the satisfaction of
sta6eholders 9ith the education services including education process and outcomes5
Accountability of a school or educational institution to the public or 6ey sta6eholders is often
perceived as important indicator for satisfying the needs of sta6eholders5 #herefore, quality
assurance of the second 9ave reforms often refers to the efforts to ensure education services
satisfying the needs of sta6eholders and accountable to the public5 #herefore it is a type of the
interface quality assurance5
Institutional monitoring, institutional self1evaluation, :uality inspection, use of
:uality indicators and benchmar6s, survey of 6ey sta6eholdersB satisfaction, accountability
reporting to the community, parental and community involvement in governance, institutional
development planning, school charter, and performance1based funding are some typical
measures used to ensure interface :uality in education *>ac6son D und, -???E Smith
Armstrong, D <ro9n, 3///E &lic6man, -??3E Cacbeath, 3///, -???E eith9ood, Aithen D
>ant;i, -??3E Sunstein, D ovell, -???E !eadington, -???E Cheng, 3//2b.5 !o9 to improve
the e(isting structures, processes, and practices in education at different levels to meet
sta6eholdersB needs and e(pectations is a ma=or concern in the interface :uality assurance5
*odels of Interface Quality )ssurance
As discussed previously, there are eight models of :uality assurance in education
*Cheng, 3//IaE Cheng D #am, 3//2.5 Among these models, the resource1input model, the
satisfaction model, the legitimacy model, the organi;ational learning model and the total
:uality management model focus mainly on the interface :uality assurance concerning
resource input from interface, satisfaction of strategic sta6eholders, legitimacy and
accountability in the local community, adaptation to the changing interface environment
through continuous learning, and total management of internal people and process to meet the
strategic sta6eholdersB needs5 #he characteristics of :uality assurance of these models are
summari;ed as sho9n in #able 0 and discussed as in the follo9ing paragraphs)
The Resource-nput Model #his model assumes that scarce and :uality resources
are necessary for education institutions to achieve diverse ob=ectives and provide :uality
services in a short time5 #herefore, education :uality is perceived as the natural result of
achievement of scarce resources and inputs for the institution5 Quality assurance refers to the
efforts for ensuring different types of :uality resource inputs and appropriate environment
available to education services and practices5 #he education :uality indicators may include
high :uality student inta6e, more :ualified staff recruited, better facilities and e:uipment,
better staff1students ratio, and more financial support procured from the central education
authority, alumni, parents, sponsoring body or any outside agents5 #he capacity of ac:uiring
scarce and :uality resources from the interface or outside community represents the potential
of an education institution that can promise high education :uality particularly in a conte(t of
great resource1competition5 #o some e(tent, the model redresses the limitation of the above
three models of internal :uality assurance, lin6ing education :uality to the interface of the
education institution and the resources input from e(ternal environment5 #herefore, this
3F
model represents a type of interface :uality assurance5

The Satisfaction Model #his model assumes that the satisfaction of strategic
constituencies of an education institution is critical to its survival in the community5
#herefore education :uality mainly refers to the e(tent to 9hich the performance of an
education institution can satisfy the needs and e(pectations of its po9erful sta6eholders5
Education :uality may be a relative concept, depending on the e(pectations of concerned
sta6eholders5 If e(pected education :uality is high and diverse, it 9ill be difficult for
institutions to achieve it and satisfy the needs of multiple sta6eholders5 If e(pected education
:uality is lo9 and simple, of course it 9ill be easier for education institutions to achieve it
and satisfy the e(pectations of constituencies sta6eholders such that education institutions
may be perceived as high :uality more easily5 'urthermore, the ob=ective measurement of
:uality achievement is often technically difficult and conceptually controversial5 #herefore
satisfaction of po9erful sta6eholders instead of some ob=ective indicators is often used as the
critical element to assess :uality in education institution5 Survey of sta6eholdersB satisfaction
is often used to assess the :uality of an institution5 Quality assurance by this model relies
heavily on the efforts to ensure education practices and services satisfying sta6eholdersB
needs or even beyond their e(pectations5
Ta-le 74 *odels of Interface Quality )ssurance
Conception of
Quality )ssurance
Conditions for
*odel &sefulness
Indicators 5 +ey )reas for
Quality Evaluation ,e4g4.
(esource%Input
*odel
needed :uality resources
D inputs for the
institution
7hen there is a clear relationship
bet9een inputs and outputsE
7hen :uality resources for the
institution are scarce5
Resources procured for
institutional functioning, e5g5
:uality of student inta6e,
facilities, financial support, etc5

Satisfaction
*odel
Ensuring satisfaction of
all po9erful
constituencies
7hen the demands of the
constituencies are compatible and
cannot be ignored
Satisfaction of education
authorities, management board,
administrators, teachers,
parents, students, etc5
/egitimacy
*odel
the institutionBs
legitimate position and
reputation
7hen the survival D demise
among education institutions must
be assessed
7hen the environment is very
competitive and demanding

Public relations, mar6eting,
public image, reputation, status
in the community, evidence of
accountability, etc5
'rgani8ational
/earning
*odel
Ensuring adaptation to
environmental changes
D internal barriers
Continuous
improvement
7hen institutions are ne9 or
changingE
7hen the environmental change
cannot be ignored
A9areness of e(ternal needs
and changes, internal process
monitoring, program evaluation,
development planning, staff
development, etc5
Total Quality
*anagement
*odel
Ensuring total
management of
interface, internal people
D process 9ith outputs
meeting strategic
sta6eholdersB needs
#he constituenciesB needs are
compatibleE the technology D
resource are available for total
management
eadership, people
management, strategic planning,
process management, :uality
results, constituenciesB
satisfaction, impact on society,
etc5
The !e"itimacy Model Since the education environment is no9 very challenging,
30
demanding and competitive, education institutions have to face the e(ternal challenges and
demands for accountability and Gvalue for moneyH5 It is hardly possible for education
institutions to continue or survive 9ithout ensuring legitimacy in the community5 #his model
assumes that in order to gain legitimacy for survival and to ac:uire critical resource,
education institutions have to 9in support of the community, build up good public image and
sho9 evidence of accountability5 #herefore, education :uality mainly refers to the
achievement of an educationBs legitimate position or reputation in the community5 Quality
assurance by this model often relies on the interface activities and achievements such as
building up public relations, mar6eting institutional strengths, ensuring institutional
accountability to the public, and promoting institutional image, reputation and status in the
community5 Also, education institutions should operate educational programs 9hich conform
to the ethical and moral norms of the community in order to gain legitimacy5 Education
institutions are of high education :uality if they can survive in a competing environment5 #he
current emphasis on parental choice and accountability in educational reforms in both
7estern and Eastern Societies seems to support the importance of the legitimacy model to
assessing school education :uality5
The #r"ani$ational !earnin" Model #he changing education environment is producing
great impacts on nearly every aspect of functioning in education institutions5 #his model
assumes that responding to changing environment, education :uality is a dynamic concept
involving continuous improvement and development of members, practices, process, and
outcomes of an education institution5 A number of researchers have indicated that
organi;ations, li6e human beings, can be empo9ered to learn and innovate to provide :uality
services *'ullan, 3//FE Senge, 3//?E Schmuc6 and Run6el, 3/+,.5 Quality assurance of this
model emphasi;es the importance of organi;ational learning behavior to ensuring :uality in
education5 #herefore, strategic management, development planning, and staff development
are important tools for :uality assurance in education *Dempster, et al5 3//FE !argreaves D
!op6ins, 3//3.5 #he indicators of education :uality may include a9areness of community
needs and changes, internal process monitoring, program evaluation, environmental
analysis, professional development, and development planning, etc5
The Total Quality Mana"ement Model
Recently there is a rapidly gro9ing emphasis on total :uality management in education5
are believed to be a po9erful tool to enhance education :uality and increase school
effectiveness *<radley, 3//FE Cuttance, 3//0E &reen9ood D &aunt, 3//0E Curgatroyd D
Corgan, 3//F.5 #he total :uality management model defines education :uality as the
character of the set of elements in the input, process, and output of the education
institution that provides services that completely satisfy both internal and e(ternal strategic
constituencies by meeting their e(plicit and implicit e(pectations *Cheng, 3//,b.% #herefore,
:uality assurance by this model is mainly the total management of interface, internal people
and process 9ith outputs meeting strategic sta6eholdersB needs5 It is believed that
improvement of some aspects of the management process is not sufficient to achieve
e(cellence or total :uality in performance5 #he critical elements of total :uality management
in education institution include strategic sta6eholder focus, continuous process improvement,
and total involvement and empo9erment of school members *#enner D Detoro, 3//-.5 #o a
great e(tent, this model is an integration of the above models, particularly the organi;ational
learning model, the satisfaction model, and the process model5 According to the famous
Calcolm <aldrige A9ard frame9or6 or the European Quality A9ard frame9or6 for total
:uality management, the 6ey areas for ensuring :uality may include leadership, people
management, process management, information and analysis, strategic :uality planning,
3,
internal constituenciesB satisfaction, e(ternal constituenciesB satisfaction, operational results,
studentsB educational results, and impacts on society *'isher, 3//0E &eorge, 3//-. 5
(elationship -et$een Internal and Interface Quality )ssurance
Each of the above eight models of internal and interface :uality assurance *#ables F
and 0. has its o9n characteristics, and yet they are inherently lin6ed to each other5
Institutional goals can reflect the e(pectations, needs, and specifications of sta6eholders5
Ensuring smooth and health internal process and fruitful learning e(periences *i5e5 the process
model. is critical to achieve the institutional goals and produce high :uality educational
outcomes5 #he achievement of stated school goals and conformance to given specifications
*i5e5 the goals and specifications model. can bring satisfaction to the sta6eholders *i5e5 the
satisfaction model.5 Also, by establishing relationship 9ith the community, building up
institutional image, and sho9ing accountability, the education institution can achieve its
legitimate position *i5e5 the legitimacy model. for institutional survival and :uality reputation5
#hen, by carefully monitoring its programs and chec6ing signs of pitfalls and ineffectiveness,
the education institution can ensure that no endemic problem is threatening the :uality of
education program *i5e5 the absence of problems model.5 'inally, the education institution
continues to improve and develop itself in important aspects through learning from its errors
and its environment *i5e5 the organi;ational learning model.5 7ith the total management of
the interface, internal people and process * the total :uality management model., then it can
achieve all around education :uality for students, parents and the community5
In sum, the goal and specification model, the process model and the absence of
problem model provides alternative models to conduct internal :uality assurance that is the
ma=or focus of the first 9ave reforms5 Clearly, as education institutions are in a larger
changing social conte(t and education is a service, education :uality has to be defined,
assessed and managed at the interface of the education institution 9ith the community and
diverse 6ey sta6eholders5 #herefore, the interface :uality assurance becomes the core concern
of the second 9ave reforms5 #he other models including the resource1input model, the
satisfaction model, the legitimacy model, the organi;ational learning model and the total
:uality management model can provide a 9ide spectrum of important concepts and
approaches to interface :uality assurance for meeting diverse needs of strategic sta6eholders
in the community5
3I
Third Wave: Future Quality )ssurance
To$ards the Third Wave
In the past decade, there have been numerous education reforms and initiatives
follo9ing the paradigm of second 9aves of education reforms5 #he use of the interface
:uality assurance models to ensure education :uality and effectiveness in a changing and
demanding environment and meet the needs of 6ey sta6eholders has been very evident and
popular in different parts of the 9orld5 Even no9 at the beginning of the ne9 millennium, the
second 9ave is still the ma=or trend of education reforms5 Accountability to the public,
:uality assurance for sta6eholdersB satisfaction, school monitoring and revie9, parental
choice, student coupon, parental and community involvement in governance, school charter,
and performance1based funding have become popular initiatives in education policy ma6ing5
'or e(ample, many countries are no9 promoting school1based management as the ma=or
school reform that include most of these initiatives for ensuring interface :uality and
effectiveness bet9een the school and the community *Cheng, 3//Ia.5
Recently, the rapid globali;ation, long lasting impacts of information technology,
drastic shoc6s of the 3//2 economic do9nturn, and strong demands for economic and social
developments in both international and regional competitions have stimulated deep reflection
on current education reforms in the Asia1Pacific region and other parts of the 9orld5 Policy1
ma6ers and educators in each country have to thin6 ho9 to reform curriculum and pedagogy
and to prepare their young people to more effectively cope 9ith the ne9 era *Dalin D Rust,
3//IE &ardner, 3///.5 Anfortunately, the environment is changing too fast and full of
uncertainties and ambiguities5 In such a conte(t, most policy1ma6ers and educators get
confused 9ith numerous novel but conflicting ideas and lose their directions in the rapid
globali;ation5
#hey begin to doubt 9hether the second 9ave of education reforms can meet the
challenges in a ne9 era of globali;ation, information technology, and ne9 economy5 #hey are
concerned 9ith ho9 interface education :uality and internal effectiveness are relevant to
these challenges5 Even though the e(isting sta6eholders are satisfied 9ith the :uality of
education services and the education institutions are accountable to the community, education
is still ineffective or GuselessH for our ne9 generations in the ne9 millennium if the aims,
content, practices, and outcomes of education are nothing to do 9ith the future needs and
challenges in such a rapidly changing environment5 #herefore, education relevance to the
future is one of the critical elements in the discussion of education :uality5 It means that in
addition of internal :uality and interface :uality, 9e should have education :uality for the
future in terms of education relevance5 7e may define future education quality as the
relevance of education to the future needs of individuals and the community to meet the
coming challenges in the ne9 millennium5 #herefore, future quality assurance refers to the
efforts to ensure the relevance of aims, content, practices, and outcomes of education to the
future of ne9 generations in a ne9 era5
In recent fe9 years, more and more countries have started the revie9 of their
education systems in the light of future challenges and needs in the ne9 century and initiated
the third 9ave of education reforms5 #hey urged paradigm shift in learning and teaching and
promoted reform of different aspects of education in order to ensure the relevance to the ne9
6no9ledge1driven economy, information technology and globali;ation and pursue education
32
:uality for the future *Cheng D #o9nsend, -???.5 #his is the start of the third 9ave of
education reforms that is in need of a ne9 theoretical base of future :uality assurance5 #he
follo9ing paragraphs of this paper intend to clarify 9hat education relevance is important to
ensuring future :uality in education5 In the discussion of future :uality and its assurance,
there may be t9o important types of education relevance) GRelevance to $e9 School
'unctionsH and GRelevance to Paradigm Shift in EducationH in the ne9 century5
(elevance to School Functions in the e$ Century
In the ne9 century, schools have different ne9 functions such as technical1economic,
human1social, political, cultural, and educational at individual, institutional, community,
society, and international levels as sho9n in #able , *Cheng, 3//Ia.5 #o a great e(tent,
education :uality should be intimately lin6ed 9ith the achievement of these school functions5
If schools can perform and achieve these school functions, the education service provided by
these schools can be perceived as effective and their :uality as high5 #herefore the effort of
:uality assurance aims at enhancing effectiveness of teachers and schools to achieve these
school functions *Cheng D 7al6er, 3//2E Cheng, 3//+.5
Technical-economic functions refer to the education systemBs contribution to the
technical or economic developments and needs at each of the five levels5 At the individual
level, education helps students ac:uire the 6no9ledge and s6ills necessary to survive and
compete in a modern society5 At the institutional level, educational institutions provide
:uality services for clients, employers and others connected 9ith the organi;ation5 At
community and societal levels, schools and education institutions aid the economic and
instrumental needs of their local community and economy, modify or shape economic
behaviors and contribute to the development and stability of the broader society5 #hese then
feed the international level through the education system and subsystems providing
economically, technologically and environmentally sensitive adults to the constantly
shrin6ing 9orld community5 Education relevance to technical1economic functions should be
one of the ma=or concerns in current education reforms5
&uman-social functions refer to the contribution of the education system to human
development and social relationships at different levels of the society5 At the individual level,
education helps students to develop as fully as possible psychologically, socially and
physically5 At the institutional level, schools or education institutions help invent and
reinforce the :uality human relationships 9hich frame organi;ational behavior5 'rom a
'unctionalist perspective, education serves certain social functions in their local community5
#hese functions include social integration of diverse constituencies, facilitation of social
mobility 9ithin e(isting class structures and reinforcement of social e:uality5 'rom the
alternative vie9point of Conflict #heory, education reproduces the e(isting social class
structure and perpetuates social ine:uality *Cheng, 3//,aE <lac6ledge D !unt, 3/+,.5 Due to
the gro9ing global consciousness *<eare D Slaughter, 3//F., education needs to prepare
students for international harmony, social co1operation, global human relationships, and 9or6
to9ard the elimination of national, regional, racial, and gender biases at the international
level5 &iven the importance of human1social functions of education to developments at
different levels, ho9 to ensure education relevance and :uality in this aspect is often the hot
topic in education policy ma6ing and debate5
3+
Ta-le 94 (elevance to *ultiple School Functions at *ulti%levels
Technical%Economic
Functions
Human%Social
Functions
Political
Functions
Cultural
Functions
Educational
Functions
Individual
"no9ledge D s6ills training
Career training

Psychological developments
Social developments
Potential developments
Development of civic
attitudes and s6ills
Acculturation
Sociali;ation 9ith values,
norms, D beliefs
earning ho9 to learn D
develop
earning ho9 to teach D
help
Professional development
Institutional
As a life place
As a 9or6 place
As a service organi;ation
As a social entity8system
As a human relationship
As a place for political
sociali;ation
As a political coalition
As a place for political
discourse or criticism
As a centre for cultural
transmission D
reproduction
As a place for cultural re1
vitali;ation D integration
As a place for learning D
teaching
As a centre for
disseminating 6no9ledge
As a centre for educational
changes D developments
Community
Serving the economic or
instrumental needs of the
community
Serving the social needs of
the community
Serving the political
needs of the
community
Serving the cultural needs
of the community
Serving the educational
needs of the community
Society
Provision of :uality labor
forces
Codification of economic
behavior
Contribution to the manpo9er
structure
Social integration
Social mobility8 social class
perpetuation
Social e:uality
Selection D allocation of
human resources
Social development D
change
Political legitimi;ation
Political structure
maintenance D
continuity
Democracy promotion
'acilitating political
developments D
reforms
Cultural integration D
continuity
Cultural reproduction
Production of cultural
capital
Cultural revitali;ation
Development of the
education professions
Development of education
structures
Dissemination of
6no9ledge D information
earning society
International
International competition
Economic co1operation
International trade
#echnology e(change
Earth protection
Sharing information
&lobal village
International friendship
Social co1operation
International e(changes
Elimination of national
8regional 8racial 8gender
biases
International coalition
International
understanding
Peace8 against 9ar
Common interests
Elimination of
conflicts
Appreciation of cultural
diversity
Cultural acceptance across
countries8regions
Development of global
culture
Development of global
education
International education
e(changes D co1operation
Education for the 9hole
9orld
adopted from Cheng *3//Ia.
3/
Political functions refer to the contribution of the education system to the political
developments at different levels of society5 At the individual level, education helps students
to develop positive civic attitudes and s6ills and to e(ercise the rights and responsibilities of
citi;enship5 At the institutional level, education institutions act as places for encouraging
critical discussion of political issues5 At the community and societal levels, education plays
an important role in promoting a9areness of democracy and facilitating political
developments and changes5 #he gro9ing a9areness of international dependence reinforces
the need for education to contribute to international understanding and elimination of
international conflict5 Responding to the increasing emphasis on democracy and harmony at
different levels in the ne9 century, the education relevance to political functions become a
necessary part of future :uality assurance5
Cultural functions refer to the contribution of the education system to the cultural
transmission and development at different levels of society5 At the individual level, education
helps students to develop creativity and aesthetic a9areness, and to become familiar 9ith the
dominant values underpinning their society5 At an institutional level, education institutions
act as agents for systematic cultural transmission, cultural integration among their multiple
and diverse constituencies, and cultural re1vitali;ation5 At the community and society levels,
education institutions often serve as a cultural unit carrying the e(plicit norms and
e(pectations of the local community5 Again, Conflict #heory provides an alternative vie95 It
suggests that schools and teachers sociali;e students from different levels of society 9ith
different sets of values and beliefs and, in the process, benefit some groups more than others5
At the international level, education can encourage appreciation of cultural diversity and
acceptance of different norms, traditions, values, and beliefs in different countries and
regions5 'or the long term development of individuals, the community, the society or the
9hole 9orld, the education relevance to cultural functions is inevitably a 6ey concern in
future :uality assurance5
'ducation functions refer to the contribution of the education system to the
development and maintenance of education at different levels5 #raditionally, education has
been perceived as a means to achieving the economic, social, political, and cultural values
only5 Rapid and 9idespread change, ho9ever, has prompted no9 an acceptance that
education in and of itself is a crucial goal5 #he content, system, and structure of education,
then, need to be developed and maintained5 At the individual level, education helps students
to learn ho9 to learn, and teachers to learn ho9 to teach5 At the institutional level, education
institutions serve as a place for professionals 9or6ing together to improve learning and
teaching through mutual support and shared innovation5 At the community and society levels,
education provides services for different educational needs 9ithin their communities,
facilitate developments of education as a profession, disseminate 6no9ledge and information
to the ne(t generation, and contribute to the formation of a learning society5 In order to
encourage mutual understanding among nations, education can contribute to the development
of global education and international education e(change and co1operation5 #he increasing
importance of continuous life long learning to the future development reinforces the
relevance to education functions as necessary component in :uality assurance5
#he 6no9ledge of above school functions and accompanying levels is crucial for
:uality assurance5 It provides a frame for school managers and teachers to understand and
operationally education programs relevant to the ne9 school functions at different levels5
$o9 many education institutions narro9 their focus only on some of school functions such
-?
as technical1economic functions or human1social functions but ignore the other5 Some
emphasi;e school functions only on the individual and institutional levels but neglect the
community, society and international levels5 #he biased emphasis or narro9ed focus may
hinder their efforts to pursue future :uality in education5
(elevance to Paradigm Shift in Education
(e) Paradi"m* Tripli$ation in 'ducation
Different parts of the 9orld are no9 in the process of globali;ation in technological,
economic, social, political, cultural, and learning aspects *Cheng, 3///.5 #he 9orld is moving
very fast to become a global village, in 9hich different parts of the 9orld are rapidly
net9or6ed and globali;ed through internet and different types of I#, communications, and
transportation *Albro9, 3//?E $aisbitt, D Aburdence, 3//3.5 Cost countries and regions
have more and more common concerns and sharing5 Also, the interactions bet9een nations
and people become boundless, multi1dimensional, multi1level, fast, and fre:uent5 #hey
become more and more mutually dependent 9ith international collaborations, e(changes, and
interflo9s5 According to Cheng *3///, -???., the human nature in a social conte(t of the ne9
millennium 9ill be a multiple person, as technological person, economic person, social
person, political person, cultural person, and learning person in a global village of
information, high technology, and multi1cultures5 <oth individuals and the society need
multiple developments in the technological, economic, social, political, cultural, and learning
aspects5 ife1long learning and learning society *or 6no9ledge society. are necessary to
sustain the continuous multiple developments of individuals and the society in a changing
ne9 century *Druc6er, 3//F, 3//,.5 #he society has to become to9ards a multiple
intelligence society that can provide the necessary 6no9ledge and intelligence base and
driving force to support the multiple developments5 And the individuals have to become
to9ards a multiple intelligence citi;en 9ho can contribute to the development of a multiple
intelligence society5
In such a conte(t, there is an emerging paradigm shift in education5 According to Cheng
*3///, -???., the paradigm should be shifted from the Traditional Site-bounded Paradi"m to
a (e) Tripli$ation Paradi"m% #he ne9 paradigm 9ill emphasi;e the development of
studentsB conte(tuali;ed multiple intelligences *CCI. *including technological, economic,
social, political, cultural, and learning intelligences. and the processes of tripli;ation
*including globali;ation, locali;ation and individuali;ation. in education5
&lobali;ation) It refers to the transfer, adaptation, and development of values,
6no9ledge, technology and behavioral norms across countries and societies in different parts
of the 9orld5 #he typical phenomena and characteristics associated 9ith globali;ation include
gro9th of global net9or6ing *e5g5 internet, 9orld 9ide e1communications, and
transportations., global transfer and interflo9 in technological, economic, social, political,
cultural, and learning aspects, international alliances and competitions, international
collaboration and e(change, global village, multi1cultural integration, and use of international
standards and benchmar6s5
Implications of globali;ation for education should include ma(imi;ing the global
relevance, support, intellectual resources, and initiative in schooling, teaching, and learning
*Cald9ell D Spin6s, 3//+E Daun, 3//2.5 Some e(amples of globali;ation in education are
-3
9eb1site learningE learning from the InternetE international visit8immersion programsE
international e(change programsE international partnership in teaching and learning at the
group, class, and individual levelsE interactions and sharing through video1conferencing
across countries, communities, institutions, and individualsE and ne9 curriculum content on
technological, economic, social, political, cultural, and learning globali;ation5
ocali;ation) It refers to the transfer, adaptation, and development of related values,
6no9ledge, technology, and behavioral norms from8to the local conte(ts5 It has t9o types of
meanings) first, it can mean the adaptation of all related e(ternal values, initiatives, and
norms to meet the local needs at the society, community, or site levelsE second, it can also
mean the enhancement of local values, norms, concern, relevance, participation, and
involvement in the related initiatives and actions5 Some characteristics and e(amples of
locali;ation are as follo9s) local net9or6ingE adaptation of e(ternal technological, economic,
social, political, cultural, and learning initiatives to local communitiesE decentrali;ation to the
community or site levelE development of indigenous cultureE meeting community needs and
e(pectationsE local involvement, collaboration, and supportE local relevance and legitimacyE
and concern for school1based needs and characteristics and social norms and ethos *#am,
Cheng, D Cheung, 3//2E "im, 3///E Cheng, 3//+.5
#he implications of locali;ation to education are to ma(imi;e the local relevance,
community support, and initiative in schooling, teaching, and learning5 Some e(amples for
practice of locali;ation include community and parental involvement in school educationE
home1school collaborationE assurance of school accountabilityE implementation of school1
based management, school1based curriculum, and community1related curriculumE and
development of ne9 curriculum content on technological, economic, social, political,
cultural, and learning locali;ation5
Individuali;ation) It refers to the transfer, adaptation, and development of related
e(ternal values, 6no9ledge, technology, and behavioral norms to meet the individual needs
and characteristics5 #he importance of individuali;ation to human development and
performance is based on the concerns and theories of human motivation and needs * e5g5
Caslo9, 3/2?E Can;, 3/+IE Can; D Sims, 3//?E Alderfer, 3/2-.5 Some e(amples of
individuali;ation are the provision of individuali;ed servicesE emphasis of human potentialsE
promotion of human initiative and creativityE encouragement of self1actuali;ationE self1
managing and self1governingE and concern for special needs5 #he ma=or implication of
individuali;ation in education is to ma(imi;e motivation, initiative, and creativity of students
and teachers in schooling, teaching, and learning through such measures as implementing
individuali;ed educational programsE designing and using individuali;ed learning targets,
methods, and progress schedulesE encouraging students and teachers to be self learning, self
actuali;ing, and self initiatingE meeting individual special needsE and developing studentsB
conte(tuali;ed multiple intelligences5
7ith the concepts of tripli;ation, students, teachers, and schools can be considered to be
"lobali$ed+ locali$ed+ and individuali$ed durin" the process of tripli$ation5 %r, simply, they
are tripli$ed5
--
Paradi"m Shift in !earnin"
7ith the concept of tripli;ation in education, there is a clear paradigm shift in
learning5 Some 6ey features of the ne9 and traditional paradigms in learning are summari;ed
in #able I *Cheng, 3///, -???a.5
$e9 Paradigm of earning5 #he ne9 paradigm of school education prescribes that
students and their learning should be individuali;ed, locali;ed, and globali;ed5 Student is the
centre of education5 GIndividuali;ed Student and earningH means that students and their
learning should be facilitated in a 9ay such that all types of transfer, adaptation, and
development of related values, 6no9ledge, technology, and norms during learning process
can meet their needs and personal characteristics, and that their potentials, particularly CCI,
can be optimally reali;ed5 Different students can learn in different style5 Individuali;ed and
tailor1made programs *including targets, content, methods, and schedules. for different
students is necessary and feasible5 Students can be self1motivated and self1learning 9ith
appropriate guidance and facilitation5 earning is a process of self1actuali;ing, discovering,
e(periencing, and reflecting5 Since the information and 6no9ledge are accumulated in a
unbeliverable speed but outdated very :uic6ly, it is almost impossible to ma6e any sense if
education is mainly to deliver s6ills and 6no9ledge, particularly 9hen students can find out
the 6no9ledge and information easily 9ith the help of I# and the Internet5 #herefore, the
ne9 century paradigm emphasi;es that the focus of learning is on ho9 to learn, thin6, and
create5 In order to sustain learning as life long, learning should be facilitated as en=oyable and
self1re9arding5
Ta-le :: Paradigm Shift in /earning
e$ Tripli8ation Paradigm Traditional Site%;ounded Paradigm
Individuali8ed /earning: (eproduced /earning)
Student is the centre of education Student is the follo9er of teacher
Individuali;ed programs Standard programs
Self1learning 9ith appropriate guidance and
facilitation
Absorbing 6no9ledge from their teachers
Self1actuali;ing process Receiving process
'ocus on ho9 to learn 'ocus on ho9 to gain
Self1re9arding and en=oyable E(ternal re9arding and punishment avoiding
/ocali8ed and !lo-ali8ed /earning: School%;ounded /earning:
Cultiple local and global sources of learning #eacher1based learning
$et9or6ed learning Separated learning
ife1long and every9here 'i(ed period and 9ithin school
Anlimited opportunities imited opportunities
7orld1class learning School bounded learning
ocal and international outloo6 School e(periences
Students and their learning should be globali;ed and locali;ed in such a 9ay that local
and global resources, support, and net9or6s can be brought in to create and materiali;e the
opportunities for studentsB developments during their learning process5 #hrough locali;ation
and globali;ation, students can learn from multiple sources inside and outside their schools,
locally and globally, not limited to a small number of teachers in their schools5 Participation in
local and international learning programs can help them achieve the community e(periences
and global outloo6 beyond schools5 Also their learning is a type of net9or6ed learning5 #hey
9ill be grouped and net9or6ed locally and internationally5 earning groups and net9or6s
-F
9ill become a ma=or driving force to sustain the learning climate and multiply the learning
effects through mutual sharing and inspiring5 7e can e(pect that each student can have a
group of life1long partner students in different corners of the 9orld to share their learning
e(periences5
It is e(pected that learning happens every9here and is life long5 School education is
=ust the start or preparation for life1long learning5 earning opportunities are unlimited5
Students can ma(imi;e the opportunities for their learning from local and global e(posures
through the Internet, 7eb1based learning, video1conferencing, cross1cultural sharing, and the
using of different types of interactive and multi1media materials *Education and Canpo9er
<ureau, 3//+.5 Students can learn from the 9orld1class teachers, e(perts, peers, and learning
materials from different parts of the 9orld5 In other 9ords, their learning can be a 9orld1class
learning5
#raditional Paradigm of earning5 In the traditional thin6ing, students and their
learning are part of the reproduction and perpetuation process of the e(isting 6no9ledge and
manpo9er structure to sustain developments of the society, particularly in the social and
economic aspects *<lac6ledge D !unt, 3/+,E Cheng D $g, 3//-E !inchliffe, 3/+2E
CcCahon, 3/+2.5 It is not a surprise that education is perceived as a process for students and
learning being GreproducedH to meet the needs of the society5
In school education, students are the follo9ers of their teacher5 Available to students
are standard programs of education, in 9hich students can be taught in the same 9ay and
same pace even though their ability may be different5 Individuali;ed programs seem to be
unfeasible5 #he learning process is characteri;ed by absorbing certain types of 6no9ledge,
and students are GstudentsH of their teachers and absorb 6no9ledge from their teachers5
earning is a disciplinary, receiving, and sociali;ing process such that close supervision and
control on the learning process are necessary5 #he focus of learning is on ho9 to gain some
6no9ledge and s6ills5 earning is often perceived as hard 9or6ing activities for achieving
e(ternal re9ards and avoid punishment5
In the traditional paradigm, all learning activities are school1bounded and teacher1
based5 Students learn from a limited numbers of school teachers and their prepared materials5
#herefore, teachers are the ma=or source of 6no9ledge and learning5 Students learn the
standard curriculum from their te(tboo6s and related materials assigned by their teachers5
Students are often arranged to learn in a separated 9ay and are 6ept responsible for their
individual learning outcomes5 #hey have fe9 opportunities to mutually support and learn5
#heir learning e(periences are mainly school e(periences alienated from the fast changing
local and global communities5 earning happens only in school 9ithin a given school time
frame5 &raduation tends to be the end of studentsB learning5
#here are also paradigm shifts in teaching and schooling5 'or the detail, please see
Cheng *3///, -???a.5
-0
Paradi"m Shifts in Quality Assurance
&iven the paradigm shifts in learning, teaching, and schooling, there is also
corresponding paradigm shift in :uality assurance5
Since the traditional paradigm emphasi;es the delivery of 6no9ledge and s6ill, the
:uality assurance of education is often focused on the follo9ing :uestions)
35 !o9 9ell learning and teaching be organi;ed to deliver the necessary 6no9ledge
and s6ills to studentsE
-5 !o9 9ell the delivery of 6no9ledge and s6ills to students can be ensured through
the improvement of teaching and learningE
F5 !o9 9ell teachersB teaching can be improved in a given time periodE
05 !o9 9ell students can arrive at a given standard in teaching e(aminationsE
,5 !o9 9ell the performance of teaching and the outcomes of learning can satisfy
the 6ey sta6eholdersB e(pectations and needsE and
I5 !o9 accountable the education services can be to the public and sta6eholders5
Clearly, the first four :uestions are concerned 9ith internal :uality assurance that
focus on the internal improvement in teaching, learning, and delivery of 6no9ledge and
s6ills5 #he last t9o :uestions come from the concern of interface :uality assurance that
focuses on the sta6eholdersB satisfaction 9ith the performance and learning outcomes and the
education accountability to the public5 In other 9ords, the traditional paradigm reflects the
line of thin6ing of the first and second 9aves5
<ut the paradigm shift to9ards tripli;ation induces a ne9 conception of :uality
assurance of education because the aims, content, and process of education are completely
the traditional thin6ing5 #he ne9 :uality assurance can be based on the follo9ing ma=or
:uestions)
,% &o) )ell learnin"+ teachin"+ and schoolin" are tripli$ed-
#his :uestion aims to ensure that student learning, teacher teaching, and schooling can
be 9ell placed in a globali;ed, locali;ed, and individuali;ed conte(t5 %nly internal
improvement in teaching, learning, and schooling is not sufficient to ensure education
relevance to the globali;ation, locali;ation, and individuali;ation for the future development
of students5 Also satisfaction of sta6eholders and accountability at the interface of education
institution may contribute to locali;ation of education but cannot promise globali;ation and
individuali;ation5
.% &o) )ell students/ learnin" opportunities are ma0imi$ed throu"h the T
environment+ net)or1in"+ CM teachers+ and CM schools-
#his :uestion intends to ensure the ma(imi;ing of opportunities for studentsB learning
and development in a tripli;ed CCI environment5 #he concern is not on ho9 much internal
process can be improved and ho9 much sta6eholders are satisfied, but on ho9 large and ho9
many opportunities can be created for studentsB learning and development of their CCI5
2% &o) )ell students/ self learnin" is facilitated and sustained as potentially life
lon"-
#his :uestion tries to ensure the ma(imi;ed opportunities for studentsB self1learning
are sustainable to life long5 Short term intermal improvement and short term sta6eholdersB
-,
satisfaction may not be so important and relevant to the future of students if students
themselves cannot sustain their learning as a life long process5
3% &o) )ell students/ ability to tripli$e their self learnin" is developed -
#his :uestion aims to ensure the relevance of student learning to the development of
their ability of tripli;ing self1learning5 It is very important and necessary for students to
achieve their o9n ability for ma(imi;ing learning opportunities and sustaining their self
learning through globali;ation, locali;ation and individuali;ation5
4% &o) )ell students/ CM is continuously developed by themselves-
#he :uestion focuses on ensuring the outcomes of learning and teaching
fundamentally relevant to the development of studentsB conte(tuali;ed multiple intelligences
including technological, economic, social, political, cultural, and learning intelligences that
are crucial for them to meet the challenges in the future5 #his is the main concern5
'rom the above discussion, the implications for paradigm shift in :uality assurance
are substantial5 In order to ensure education relevance to the future for the ne9 generations in
the ne9 century, education should move to9ards development of studentsB conte(tuali;ed
multiple intelligences and tripli;ation in education including globali;ation, locali;ation, and
individuali;ation5
Theory of 6alue%Created in Education Quality
5alue added to nternal and nterface Quality% As discussed previously, the :uality
assurance of the first 9ave is based on the theory of value added, that is dependent of the
improvement of internal process including learning, teaching and management to ma(imi;e
the achievement of planned goals5 As sho9n in 'igure F, area A is the value added bet9een
time #3 and #- due to the improvement of internal process5 If the planned goals are
consistent 9ith the 6ey sta6eholdersB needs and e(pectations, then the internal :uality
assurance is consistent 9ith the interface :uality assurance5 And the value added to internal
:uality through internal improvement is also the value added to interface :uality5 <ut if the
planned goals are not the 6ey sta6eholdersB goals or needs, then the value added to internal
:uality does not promise the value added to interface :uality5
5alue Created to 6uture Quality and nterface Quality% If an education institution can
increase education relevance or create enhanced goals during time #3 and #-, then ne9
value can be created in education :uality as sho9n in area < of 'igure F5 #his is the theory of
value created5 #he future :uality assurance is based on this theory 9ith focus on creating
value through enhancement of education relevance to the future5 If the enhanced goals can
meet the sta6eholdersB e(pectations or even beyond, then the value created in future :uality is
also the value created in interface :uality5 In this case, the future :uality assurance is
consistent 9ith the interface :uality assurance5 %f course, if the enhanced goals are not the
sta6eholdersB needs, there may be no value created to the interface :uality5
If the improvement of internal process and the enhancement of education relevance
can be achieved at the same time, there 9ill be more value added and created to education
:uality as sho9n in area C of 'igure F5
-I
Figure 3:
6alue Created and )dded in Quality

Conclusion
'rom the above discussion, 9e can see that the three 9aves of education reforms in fact
represent different paradigms in conceptuali;ation and assurance of education effectiveness
and :uality5 #he ma=or characteristics of these three paradigms can be summari;ed as sho9n
in #able 25
Three Paradigms of Quality )ssurance
#he first 9ave of education reforms emphasi;es internal improvement and effectiveness5
#herefore the paradigm of :uality assurance in education conceptuali;es education :uality
mainly as the internal effectiveness of management, teaching, and learning to achieve the
planned goals5 Quality assurance is defined as the efforts to improve internal environment
and processes such that the effectiveness of learning and teaching can be ensured to achieve
the planned goals of the education institution5 <ased on the structure of effectiveness in
classroom, there are t9o ma=or approaches that can be used to conceptuali;e internal
improvement for education :uality5 #he component :uality approach focuses on improvement
of the :uality of some components of the effectiveness and the relationship approach on
improvement of the :uality of relationships bet9een components5 In practice, there are three
models often used to enhance internal :uality in education, including the goal and
specification model, the process model, and the absence of problem model5 #he efforts of
:uality assurance are often short1term orientation, related to the daily practices and
improvement in management, teaching, and learning5 Each model has its o9n characteristics

T2
T1
Area B:
Value
Created
Area A:
Value Added
elevance to the !uture
Improvement of Internal Process
Given Goals
"nhanced#
$e% Goals
Increased
elevance
Area C:
Value Created
and Added
-2
to manage internal improvement for :uality in education5 <asically, the internal :uality
assurance is based on the theory of valued added in :uality5

#he second 9ave of education reforms and :uality assurance focuses on the interface
bet9een the education institution and the community5 Education :uality is interface :uality,
mainly defined and assessed by the satisfaction of sta6eholders 9ith the education services
including education process and outcomes5 Accountability to the public and sta6eholders is
also the 6ey :uality indicator5 #herefore :uality assurance is to ensure education services
satisfying the needs of sta6eholders and accountable to the public5 Depending on the
approaches used to deal 9ith interface issues and achieve interface :uality in education, there
are five models for interface :uality assurance, including the resource1input model, the
satisfaction model, the legitimacy model, the organi;ational learning model, and the total
:uality management model5 All these models have been used 9idely in the business sector
and no9 they have received increasing attention and application in the education sectors
follo9ing the movements of school1based management, education accountability, and
privati;ation and mar6eti;ation in education5 Compared 9ith the short1term focus of internal
:uality assurance, the efforts of interface :uality assurance are middle1term orientation,
interacting 9ith the interface and e(ternal environment of the education institution5 #he
interface :uality assurance can be based on the theory of value added, the theory of value
created, or both, depending on 9hether the planned goals are the sta6eholdersB e(pectations
or not5
Responding to the challenges of globali;ation, information technology and
6no9ledge1driven economy in the ne9 millennium, the third 9ave of education reforms
urges paradigm shift in :uality assurance in education5 Education :uality is future :uality that
is defined by the education relevance to the future needs of individuals, the community, and
the society5 #herefore, future :uality assurance is to ensure the relevance of aims, content,
practices, and outcomes of education to the future of ne9 generations in facing up challenges
of ne9 millennium5 #here are t9o main types of education relevance5 'irst, the relevance to
ne9 school functions in the ne9 century includes technical1economic functions, human1
social functions, political functions, cultural functions, and education functions5 And second,
the relevance to the paradigm shifts in education should including emphasis on the
development of studentsB conte(tuali;ed multiple intelligences and tripli;ation in education
for creating unlimited opportunities for studentsB continuous life1long learning and
development5 Compared 9ith the internal and interface :uality assurance, the efforts of future
:uality assurance are mainly long1term orientation no matter for development of individuals,
the community and the society5 Also, tripli;ation including globali;ation, locali;ation, and
individuali;ation in education is crucial process for ensuring education relevance and future
:uality5 Clearly, the theory of future :uality assurance is based on value created through
enhancement of education relevance and creation of ne9 goals, that is different from the
theory of value added through internal improvement5
-+
Ta-le <: Three =ifferent Paradigms of Quality )ssurance in Education
First Wave
Paradigm
Second Wave
Paradigm
Third Wave
Paradigm
Conception of
Education Quality
Internal Quality:
As education effectiveness to
achieve planned goals
Interface Quality:
As satisfaction of sta6eholder 9ith
the education services including
education process and outcomesE
and as accountability to the public
Future Quality:
As education relevance to the
future needs of individuals, the
community, and the society
Quality )ssurance Internal Quality )ssurance:
Improving the internal
environment and processes such
that the effectiveness of learning
and teaching can be ensured to
achieve the planned goals
Interface Quality )ssurance:
Ensuring education services
satisfying the needs of sta6eholders
and accountable to the public
Future Quality )ssurance:
Ensuring the relevance of aims,
content, practices, and outcomes
of education to the future of ne9
generations in a ne9 era of
globali;ation, information
technology, and 6no9ledge1
driven economy
*a>or
)pproach5*odel of
Quality )ssurance
)pproaches)
Component Quality Approach
Relationship Quality Approach
Internal *odels:
&oal and specification model
Process model
Absence of problem model
Interface *odels:
Resource1input model
Satisfaction model
egitimacy model
%rgani;ational learning model
#otal :uality management model
(elevance to e$ School
Functions:
#echnical1economic functions
!uman1social functions
Political functions
Cultural functions
Education functions
(elevance to Paradigm in
Education:
Development of
conte(tuali;ed multiple
intelligences
#ripli;ation in education)
&lobali;ation, locali;ation and
individuali;ation
*ain Questions for
*anagement and
Practice
!o9 9ell learning, teaching,
and schooling are organi;ed to
deliver 6no9ledge and s6illsJ
!o9 9ell the delivery of
6no9ledge can be ensured
through the improvement of
schooling, teaching, and
learningJ
!o9 9ell teachersB teaching can
be improved and developed in a
given time periodJ
!o9 9ell students can arrive at
a given standard in e(aminationJ
!o9 9ell the performance of
teaching and the outcomes of
learning can meet the
sta6eholdersB e(pectations and
needsJ
!o9 accountable the education
services can be to the public and
sta6eholdersJ
!o9 9ell learning, teaching,
and schooling are tripli;edJ
!o9 9ell studentsB learning
opportunities are ma(imi;ed
through I# environment,
net9or6ing, CCI teachers, and
CCI schoolJ
!o9 9ell studentsB self1
learning is facilitated and
sustained as potentially life
longJ
!o9 9ell studentsB ability to
tripli;e their self1learning is
developedJ
!o9 9ell studentsB CCI is
continuously developed by
themselvesJ
Tine Frame of Q) Short1term %rientation Ciddle1term %rientation ong1term %rientation
Theory of 6alue
)dded 5 Created
#heory of value1added in internal
:uality
#heory of value1added and value1
created in interface :uality
#heory of value1created in
future :uality
-/
Total Quality )ssurance in Education
Although internal :uality assurance, interface :uality assurance, and future :uality
assurance are based on different paradigms and they have different strengths and focuses, all
of them are important and necessary to provide us a comprehensive frame9or6 to consider
and manage education :uality in the ne9 century5 #hey are mutually supplementary to each
other, ta6ing internal improvement, interface satisfaction and accountability, and future
relevance into consideration5 7e can believe, if an education institution can ensure internal
:uality, interface :uality, and future :uality, they are in total quality assurance in education5
'rom this line of thin6ing, the efforts in ongoing education reforms should focus not
only on interface :uality assurance and internal :uality assurance but also on future :uality
assurance in order to achieve total :uality in education5
&iven the constraints of time frame9or6 and resources, it is often unrealistic to e(pect
an education institution to ma(imi;e the achievement of internal :uality, interface :uality,
and future :uality at the same time, in a short time, or all the time in such a rapidly changing
education environment5 <ut, according to the dynamic concept proposed in Cheng *3//Ia.,
an education institution can struggle and learn to become effective to provide services of high
internal :uality, interface :uality, and future :uality in a dynamic 9ay in a longer time span,
as sho9n in 'igure 05 During the early stage bet9een time t3 and t-, the education institution
may not achieve high total :uality in education in a short time5 <ut, if they can continuously
learn and develop to pursue all these three types of :uality assurance, the :uality of their
education services can be ma(imi;ed to9ards higher total :uality in the later stage as sho9n
in time tF to t05
It is hoped that the three paradigms of :uality assurance in education as 9ell as the
conception of total :uality in terms of internal :uality, interface :uality and future :uality can
provide a ne9 comprehensive frame9or6 for educators, researchers, and policy1ma6ers in
different parts of the 9orld to pursue :uality education in the ne9 century5
F?
'igure 05 Ca(imi;ing #otal Quality in Education through a Spiral Path

Interface Quality
'uture Quality
Internal
Quality
#ime 'rame
Driven by continuous
learning D development
F3
(eferences
Albro9, C5 *3//?.5 Introducton, In C5Albro9 D E5 "ing*eds5., Globali$ation+ 1no)led"e
and society5 ondon) Sage5
Alderfer, C5 P5 *3/2-.5 '0istence+ relatedness+ and "ro)th* &uman needs in
or"ani$ational settin"s5 $e9 @or6) 'ree Press5
<eare, !5, D Slaughter, R5 *3//F.5 'ducation for the t)enty-first century% ondon)
Routledge5
<lac6ledge, D5, D !unt, <5 *3/+,.5 Sociolo"ical interpretations of education% Sydney)
Croom !elm5
<ogan, C5 E5 D English, C5>5 *3//0.5 7enchmar1in" for best practices% $e9 @or6) Cc&ra91
!ill5
<radley, 5 !5 *3//F.5 Total quality mana"ement for schools5 ancaster, PA) #echnomic5
<ubb, S5 *-??3.5 Performance mana"ement* monitorin" teachin" in the primary school5 A")
David 'ulton Publishers5
<urbules, $5C5 D #orres, C5A5 *Eds. *-???.5 Globali$ation and education* critical
perspectives5 $e9 @or6) Routledge5
Cald9ell, <5>5 D Spin6s, >5C5 *3//+.5 7eyond the self-mana"in" school5 ondon) 'almer
Press5
Cheng, @5C5 *3//,a., 6unction and 'ffectiveness of 'ducation, *Frd ed5., !ong "ong) 7ide
Angle Press
Cheng, @5C5 *3//,b.5 School Educational Quality) Conceptuali;ation, Conitoring, D
Enhancement5 In P5"5 Siu D P5 #am *eds5., Quality in 'ducation* nsi"hts from
8ifferent Perspectives" *pp53-F1302.5 !ong "ong) #he !ong "ong Educational
Research Association5
Cheng, @5C5 *3//Ia.5 School 'ffectiveness and School-based mprovement* A Mechanism for
8evelopment% ondon, A") 'almer Press5 *"orean Edition) #ranslated by Professor
Chong1yul Par6 and Soon1nam "im of "yungpoo6 $ational Aniversity, #a9gu, "orea
and published by the 7on1Ci Publishing Co5 "orea in -??3, pages 31F,,E Chinese
Edition) published by #ai9an Pschological Publishing Co5 -??3 in press.
Cheng, @5C5 *3//Ib.5 The improvement of school mana"ement* Theory+ Chan"e and Practice5
!ong "ong) !ong "ong Institute of Educational Research, Chinese Aniversity of !ong
"ong5
Cheng, @5C5 *3//2a.5 Monitorin" School 'ffectiveness* Conceptual and Practical 8ilemmas
in 8evelopin" a 6rame)or1% Eugene, %R) ERIC *Educational Resources Information
Center. *no5 EA ?-+F,/.5 Clearinghouse on Educational Canagement5 *ASA.5 *In !5
Ceng, @5 Khou, D @5 'ang *eds5. School 7ased ndicators of 'ffectiveness*
'0periences and Practices in AP'C Members% *pp53/21-?I., China) &uang(i $ormal
Aniversity Press.
Cheng, @5C5 *3//2b.5 A 6rame)or1 of ndicators of 'ducation Quality in &on" 9on"
Primary Schools* 8evelopment and Application% 'u"ene+ %R) ERIC *Educational
Resources Information Center. *no5 EA ?-+F,+.5 Clearinghouse on Educational
Canagement5 *ASA.5 *In !5 Ceng, @5 Khou, D @5 'ang *eds5. School 7ased
ndicators of 'ffectiveness* '0periences and Practices in AP'C Members5 *pp5-?21
-,?., China) &uang(i $ormal Aniversity Press5.
Cheng, @5C5 *3//+.5 #he Pursuit of a $e9 "no9ledge <ase for #eacher Education and
Development in the $e9 Century5 Asia-Pacific :ournal of Teacher 'ducation and
8evelopment+ 3*3., 313I5
Cheng, @5C5 *3///.5 Curriculum and Peda"o"y in (e) Century* Globali$ation+ !ocali$ation
and ndividuali$ation for Multiple ntelli"ences5 "eynote speech presented at the ,
th
F-
A$ESC%1ACEID International Conference GReforming earning, Curriculum and
Pedagoy) Innovative Lisions for the $e9 CenturyH, 3F13I December, 3///, #hailand5
Cheng, @5C5 *-???.5 Globali$ation+ !ocali$ation and ndividuali$ation for 'ffective
'ducation% "eynote speech presented at the 30
th
International Congress for School
Effectiveness and Improvement G &lobal $et9or6ing for Quality EducationH, 01+
>anuary -???, !ong "ong5
Cheng, @5C5 *-???a.5 A CCI1#ripli;ation Paradigm for Reforming Education in the $e9
Cillennium5 nternational :ournal of 'ducational Mana"ement5 30*0., 3,I13205
Cheng, @5C5 *-???b.5 Educational Change and Development in !ong "ong) Effectiveness,
Quality, and Relevance, In #o9nsend, # D Cheng, @5C5 *eds., 'ducational Chan"e and
8evelopment in the Asia-Pacific Re"ion* Challen"es for the 6uture4 *pp5321,I. #he
$etherlands) S9ets and Keitlinger Publisher5
Cheng, @5C5 *-??3a.5 'ducational Relevance+ Quality and 'ffectiveness* Paradi"m Shifts4 Invited
6eynote speech presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and
School Improvement held in ,1/ >anuary -??3 in #oronto, Canada, 9ith the theme
GE:uity, &lobali;ation, and Change) Education for the -3st CenturyH5
Cheng, @5C5 *-??3b.5 $e9 Education and $e9 #eacher Education) A Paradigm Shift for the
'uture5 In Cheng, @5C5, Cho9, "575, D #sui, "5#5 *eds5.5 (e) Teacher 'ducation for the
6uture* nternational Perspectives" *pp5 FF1++.5 !ong "ong D #he $etherlands) !ong
"ong Institute of Education D "lu9er Academic Puhlishers5
Cheng, @5C5 *-??3c.5 To)ards the Third ;ave of 'ducation Reforms in &on" 9on"5 "eynote
speech at the International 'orum on Education Reforms in the Asia1Pacific Region,
held in 3013I 'ebruary -??3, !ong "ong5
Cheng, @5C5, Cho9, "575 D #sui, "5#5 *eds5. *-???.5 School Curriculum Chan"e and
8evelopment in &on" 9on"4 !ong "ong) !ong "ong Institute of Education5 pp5 31
,/35
Cheng, @5 C5, D $g, "5 !5 *3//-.5 Economic considerations in educational policy analysis) A
preliminary frame19or65 Primary 'ducation+ 2*3., ,,1I05
Cheng, @5C5 D #am, 75C5 *3//2.5 Culti1models of Quality in Education5 Quality Assurance
in 'ducation" ,*3., --1F35
Cheng, @5C5 D #o9nsend, #5 *-???.5 Educational Change and Development in the Asia1
Pacific Region) #rends and Issues" In #o9nsend, # D Cheng, @5C5 *eds., 'ducational
Chan"e and 8evelopment in the Asia-Pacific Re"ion* Challen"es for the 6uture4
*pp5F321F00. #he $etherlands) S9ets and Keitlinger Publisher5
Cheng, @5C5 D 7al6er, A5 D5 *3//2.5 Culti1functions of School1based #eacher Education5
nternational :ournal of 'ducational Mana"ement% 33 *-., +?1++5
Coniam, D5, 'alvey, P5, <odycott, P5, Cre9, L5, S;e, P5C5C5 *-???.5 Establishing English
language benchmar6s for primary teachers of English language) A report to AC#EQ5
!ong "ong) Advisory Committee of #eacher Education and Qualification5
Coulson, A5 >5 *3///.5 Mar1et 'ducation* the un1no)n history% $e9 <runs9ic6, $5>5)
#ransaction Publishers5
Cuttance, P5 *3//0.5 Conitoring educational :uality through performance indicators for
school practice5 School 'ffectiveness and School mprovement+ 4*-., 3?313-I5
Dalin, P5 D Rust, L5D5 *3//I.5 To)ards schoolin" for the t)enty-first Century5 $e9 @or6)
Cassell5
Daun, !5 *3//2.5 $ational forces, globali;ation and educational restructuring) some European
response patterns5 Comapre+ .<*3., 3/1035
Daun, !5 *-??3.5 'ducational Restructurin" in the Conte0t of Globali$ation and (ational
Policy% AS) Routledge 'almer5
Dempster, $5, Sachs, >5, Distant, &5, ogan, 5, D #om, C5 *3//F, >anuary.5 Plannin" in
FF
primary schools* A national study in Australian schools5 Paper presented at the
International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement, $orr6oping,
S9eden5
Druc6er, P5'5 *3//F.5 Post-capitalist society5 $e9 @or6) !arper <usiness5
Druc6er, P5'5 *3//,.5 Mana"in" in a time of "reat chan"e5 %(ford) <utter9orth !einerman5
Education and Canpo9er <ureau *3//+ $ovember.5 nformation technolo"y for learnin" in
a ne) era* 6ive-year strate"y ,==>?== to .@@.?@25 !ong "ong) &overnment Printer5
Evans, &5R5 *3///.5 Callin" academia to account* ri"hts and responsibilities% <uc6ingham,
&reat <ritain) Society for Research into !igher Education D %pen Aniversity Press5
'eigenbaum, A5L5 *3/,3.5 Quality control* Principles+ practice+ and administration5 $e9
@or6) Cc&ra91!ill5
'idler, <5 D Atton, #5 *3///.5 Poorly performin" staff in schools and ho) to mana"e them*
capability+ competence and motivation5 ondon) Routledge5
'isher, D5 C5 *3//0.5 Measurin" up to the 7aldri"e5 $e9 @or6) American Canagement
Association5
'ullan, C5 *3//F.5 Chan"e forces5 ondon) 'almer Press5
&ardner, !5 *3///.5 The disciplined mind* ;hat all students should understand5 $e9 @or6)
Simon D Schuster5
&eorge, S5 *3//-.5 The 7aldri"e quality system5 $e9 @or6) 7iley5
&lic6man, C5D5 *-??3.5 !olding Sacred &round) #he Impact of Standardi;ation5 'ducational
!eadership, ,+*0., 0I1,35
&oert;, C5E5 D Duffy, C5C5 *-??3.5 Assessment and Accountability Systems in the 4@ States+
,===-.@@@5 CPRE Research Report Series5
&reen9ood, C5 S5, D &aunt, !5 >5 *3//0.5 Total quality mana"ement for schools%
ondon) Cassell5
!argreaves, D5 !5, D !op6ins, D5 *3//3.5 The empo)ered school% A") Cassell5
!eadington, R5 *-???.5 Monitorin"+ assessment+ recordin"+ reportin" and accountability*
meetin" the standards5 ondon) David 'ulton5
!eller, D5E5 *Ed.*-??3.5 The states and public hi"her education policy* affordable+ access+
and accountability% <altimore) >ohn !op6ins Aniversity Press5
!inchliffe, "5 *3/+2.5 Education and the labor mar6et5 In &5 Psacharopoulos *Ed5.,
'conomics of education* Research and studies *pp5 F3,1F-F.5 "idlington, %(ford)
Pergamon Press5
>ac6son, $5 D und, !5S5 *Eds. *-???.5 7enchmar1in" for hi"her education% <uc6ingham,
England) Society for Research into !igher Education D %pen Aniversity Press5
"im, @5 !5 *3///.5 Recently changes and developments in "orean school education5 In
#o9nsend, #5, D Cheng, @5 C5 *eds.5 'ducational chan"e and development in the
Asia-Pacific re"ion* Challen"es for the future% *pp5 +2133-.5 #he $etherlands) S9ets
and Keitlinger5
eith9ood, "5A5, Ait6en, R D >ant;i, D5 *-??3.5 Ma1in" schools smarter* a system for
monitorin" school and district pro"ress5 #housand %a6s, California) Cor9in Press5
Cac<eath, >5E5C5 *3///.5 Schools must spea1 for themselves* the case for school self-
evaluation5 ondon) Routledge5
Cac<eath, >5E5C5 *-???.5 Self-evaluation in 'uropean schools* a story of chan"e5 ondon)
Routledge5
Cahony, P5 D !e(tall, I5 *-???.5 Reconstructin" teachin"* standards+ performance and
accountability5 ondon) Routledge5
Can;, C5 C5 *3/+I.5 Self1leadership) #o9ard an e(panded self1influence processes in
organi;ations5 Academy of Mana"ement Revie), ,,+ ,+,MI??5
Can;, C5 C5, D Sims, !5 P5 *3//?.5 Super leadership5 $e9 @or6) <er6ley <oo65
F0
Caslo9, A5 !5 *3/2?.5 Motivation and personality *-nd ed5.5 $e9 @or6) !arper D Ro95
Cedley, D5 C5 *3/+-.5 #eacher effectiveness5 In !5 E5 Cit;el et al5 *Eds5., 'ncyclopedia of
educational research *,th ed5, pp5 3+/013/?F.5 $e9 @or6) 'ree Press5
CcCahon, 75 75 *3/+2.5 Consumption and other benefits of education5 In &5 Psacharopoulos
*Ed5., 'conomics of education* Research and studies *pp5 3-/13FF.5 "idlington,
%(ford) Pergamon Press5
Corgan, C5 D Corris, &5 *3///.5 Good teachin" and learnin"* pupils and teachers spea15
<uc6ingham, England) %pen Aniversity Press5
Curgatroyd, S5, D Corgan, C5 *3//F.5 Total quality mana"ement and the school5
<uc6ingham, A") %pen Aniversity Press5
$aisbitt, >5, D Aburdence, P5 *3//3.5 Me"atrends .@@@5 $e9 @or6) Avon5
Schmuc6, R5A5, D Run6el, P5>5 *3/+,.5 #he handboo6 of organi;ation development in schools
*Frd edition.5 Prospect !ights, I) 7aveland Press Inc5
Senge, P5 *3//?.5 The fifth discipline* The art and practice of the learnin" or"ani$ation5 $@)
Doubleday5
Smith, !5, Armstrong, C5 D <ro9n, S5 *Eds.5 *3///.5 7enchmar1in" and threshold standards
in hi"her education5 ondon) "ogan Page5
Strom:uist, $5P5 D Con6man, "5 *-???.5 Globali$ation and education* inte"ration and
contestation across cultures5 anham, Cd5 Ro9man D ittlefield5
Sunstein, <5S5 D ovell, >5!5 *Eds.5 *-???.5 The portfolio standard* ho) students can sho)
us )hat they 1no) and are able to do5 Portsmouth, $!) !einemann5
#am, 75C5, Cheng, @5C5 D Cheung, 75C5 *3//2.5 A Reengineering 'rame9or6 for #otal
!ome1School Partnership5 nternational :ournal of 'ducational Mana"ement% 33*I.,
-201-+,5 *A".
#enner, A5 R5, D Detoro, I5 >5 *3//-.5 Total quality mana"ement5 Reading, CA) Addison1
7esley5
F,

Paradigm Shifts in Quality Improvement in Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Paradigm Shifts in Quality Improvement in Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Paradigm Shift in Quality Improvement in Education

Paradigm Shifts in Quality Improvement in Education:

You might also like