Citizenship Teaching and Learning: A Tale of Two Chinese Cities, Hong Kong and Guangzhou, China

Abstract

This paper compares teaching and learning in citizenship education in two Chinese cities: Hong Kong and Guangzhou, China. Since the late 20th century, the literature of citizenship education has been dominated by discourses on globalization and nationalism, but little research has been done on what actual teaching and learning taken place in citizenship education lessons. This comparative study is a response to the call of such scholars Evans (2006) and Kennedy, Lee and Grossman (2010) for more research on citizenship education pedagogy. The study was also triggered by anti-national education demonstrations in Hong Kong which had been a British colony for over 150 years and returned to China under the framework of “one country two systems” in 1997. In 2012, tens of thousands of Hong Kong people (including many parents and students) protested against the post-1997 Hong Kong Government’s attempt to introduce mandatory national education in primary and secondary schools. They feared that open and free citizenship education classroom in Hong Kong would be turned to be a place for “brainwashing” school children as in other places of China (Parents' Concern Group on National Education, 2013). The study seeks to explore whether citizenship education classroom in Hong Kong is freer and more open than that in Mainland China. Specifically, this study compares the dynamics and complexity of classroom climate and teaching and learning approaches in citizenship education lessons in Hong Kong with that in its neighbour city, Guangzhou which has been ruled by the Chinese communist leadership since 1949, but shares the same local dialect and many local cultures with Hong Kong. Methodologically, the study used student questionnaire survey, semi-structured interviews with students and teachers, and lesson observations to collect data in six secondary schools between 2013/14 and 2014/15: three in Hong Kong and three in Guangzhou. The study reveals that despite different social and educational contexts, the sampled schools in Hong Kong and Guangzhou shared four interrelated patterns of similarities and differences in teaching and learning citizenship education at the classroom level. Firstly, despite different extents, teachers of both cities used mixed pedagogies in teaching citizenship education, ranging from direct instruction to approaches which allowed students to freely discuss, compare pros and cons, and draw their conclusion. Guangzhou teachers used more teacher-question-and-student-answer and individual seatwork than their Hong Kong counterparts, whereas the latter used more group discussion than the former. Secondly, citizenship education teachers of both cities showed concerns about what they taught and whether students accepted their teaching in the domains of citizenship knowledge, skills and attitudes and values. Guangzhou teachers put more emphasis on these three domains than Hong Kong counterparts. Thirdly, classroom climate in citizenship education lessons of Hong Kong and Guangzhou was free and open, rather than coercive and intimidating. Teachers of both cities played an important role in facilitating student learning by respecting students’ different views, encouraging them to learn with different perspectives, and using feedback to stimulate their further thinking. In comparison, Hong Kong teachers provided students with more opportunities to provide explanation and reasoning than their Guangzhou counterparts. Fourthly, students of both cities were active learners with their learning strategies and criteria for listening to, and evaluating and accepting views presented in the group or class level. Guangdong students were found to be more accommodative to different views than their Hong Kong counterparts.