Skip to main content
大中華地區的比較教育研究 : 組織變革、研究重點及近期的發展
比較教育 = Journal of Comparative Education
  • Ka Ho, Joshua MOK
Alternative Title
Comparative education in Greater China : organizational change, research focus and recent developments
Document Type
Journal article
Publication Date
  • 亞洲教育及發展研究社群,
  • 大中華比較教育學會,
  • 發現亞洲獎學金,
  • Asian education and development studies research network,
  • comparative education society in Greater China,
  • rediscovery of Asian scholarship


Comparative education research has increasingly become an important field in education studies. The main focus is to learn arid exchange educational ideas and experiences from a wide range of geographical areas to enrich, contrast and reflect upon a diversity of education systems of Hong Kong, Taiwan, and China. Comparative education research is a far-reaching field; research topics within the field range from pedagogy and learning, organization and management, financing and quality assurance, equality / inequality in education to vocational and technical training or non-formal education. The major objective of this article is to critically review comparative education development in Greater China, with particular reference to examine the organizational change of comparative education societies in China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, and also the major research focuses and recent developments comparative education research in these Asian societies. With particular reference to how major comparative education societies in the Greater China region have engaged in deep cooperation. This article has highlighted much more frequent interactions between scholars from different comparative education societies from China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong. The present article also shows the author’s personal observations and experiences in promoting regional collaboration on comparative education studies.

Citation Information
莫家豪 (2012)。大中華地區的比較教育研究: 組織變革、研究重點及近期的發展 = Comparative education in Greater China: Organizational change, research focus and recent developments。《比較教育》,(72),55-91。