A Comparative Study Of The English Curriculum Standards For Primary And Secondary Schools Of Mainland China,Hong Kong And Singapore

This thesis conducts a comparative and analytic study in the hope of discovering the similarities and differences among Chinese English Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education(2011) of Mainland China, English Language Education Key Learning Area Curriculum Guide(Primary 1- Secondary 3) of Hong Kong and English Language Syllabus(in the form of two syllabuses in consideration of students at different levels) of Singapore. On the basis of comparisons and analyses, the author figures out the reasons behind these similarities and differences and provides meaningful suggestions for the reforms of English curriculum standards of Mainland China in the future.The comparative study of the English curriculum standards for primary and secondary schools of Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore has not only great theoretical significance but also practical significance. Theoretically, all deeply influenced by Confucian Culture, these three places in Asia share plenty of similarities. As a result, this study could provide new ideas to English curriculum reforms of Mainland China.Practically, the outstanding English teaching achievements in Hong Kong and Singapore could make positive influence on the improvement of English teaching in Mainland China.Hong Kong and Singapore have accumulated successful experience in the aspect of English teaching. However, no research has been seen in the study of the comparison of English curriculum standards for primary and secondary schools of three places so far. This thesis could provide references for relevant scholars.On the basis of comparative educational method and literature retrieval, the author analyzes the currently used curriculum standards of Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore to solve the following four questions. What are the similarities among the English curriculum standards for primary and secondary schools of Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore? What are the differences among the English curriculum standards for primary and secondary schools of Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore? What are the reasons for these similarities and differences? What implications and suggestions canwe get from the analyses and comparisons among the English curriculum standards of Hong Kong and Singapore to those of Mainland China?To achieve the research goals, this thesis is divided into four chapters. The first two chapters deal with introduction and literature review. Chapter Three, the main chapter,compares and analyzes the three curriculum standards from the perspectives of curriculum frameworks, curriculum objectives, learning focuses and implementing proposals. The section of learning focuses is further divided into six parts, namely, listening, speaking,reading, writing, grammar and vocabulary in order to facilitate comparisons and analyses.Chapter Four presents the major findings, the reasons behind these similarities and differences, suggestions for new curriculum standards and limitations of the study.The thesis draws the following conclusions after comparative analysis. English curriculum standards of three places have four characteristics in common. Firstly, in the 21 st Century, international communication is becoming more and more frequent. Three places all make English proficiency as an aim of great significance to meet the world tendency.Secondly, the main curriculum contents are consistent, with curriculum objectives, learning focuses, teaching proposals and implementing proposals all included. Thirdly, three curriculum standards all establish comprehensive objective systems, elaborating overall objectives and grading objectives with core abilities such as listening, speaking, reading,writing, grammar and vocabulary. Fourthly, three English curriculum standards all establish complete teaching systems and evaluation systems. On the other hand, three English curriculum standards have their own distinctive features respectively. Firstly, they put focuses in different areas. CECS attaches most importance in the aspect of implementing proposals, while KLA values the construction of curriculum framework and ELS puts more stress on Areas of Language Learning. Secondly, the learning focuses of CECS are very basic comparatively, while KLA and ELS ask for more advanced comprehensive language competence. Thirdly, the status of “teaching” is put in front of “learning”, while in KLA and ELS, the status of “learning” stands in the first place. Fourthly, in the aspect of assessment proposals, both CECS and KLA advocate the combination of both formativeassessment and summative assessment, while ELS just puts forward formal and informal assessment modes for effective teaching and learning.The author puts forward several suggestions for the curriculum reforms in the future. In order to educate students in accordance with their natural ability, the priority is to realize the diversification of English curriculum standards in consideration of students at different levels. Secondly, CECS should give teachers appropriate flexibility to adjust the objectives and contents in accordance with the specific characteristics of different regions. The third suggestion is that CECS should make further efforts to ensure the subjectivity of students.Lastly, the new version of CECS should further improve the operability of the assessment proposals.