New Paradigm of Borderless Education:

Challenges, Strategies, and Implications for Effective Education

through Localization and Internationalization

Yin Cheong CHENG

Centre for Research and International Collaboration

Asia-Pacific Centre for Education Leadership and School Quality
Hong Kong Institute of Education
Tai Po, NT, HONG KONG

Invited keynote speech presented at

The International Conference on Learning & Teaching
with the theme
“Challenge of Learning and Teaching in a Brave New World:
Issues and Opportunities in Borderless Education”

from 14-16 October 2002,

Hatyai, Thailand.

1
 New Paradigm of Borderless Education:
Challenges, Strategies, and Implications for Effective Education
through Localization and Internationalization

Yin Cheong CHENG

Abstract

The fast and huge transformations due to globalization and information technology are creating great impacts on the

future of nearly every society, community, institution and individual in different parts of the world. Responding to the

serious challenges from all these impacts and transformations, our education inevitably has to change fundamentally towards

a new paradigm in order to pursue a new future for our new generations as well as our society in such a new era of

globalization and transformation.

Foreseeing the macro trends of development, my keynote speech will present a new paradigm of borderless

education that is completely different from the traditional site-bounded paradigm. The new paradigm aims to develop

students’ contextualized multiple intelligence (CMI) and creativity and create unlimited opportunity for students’ life-long

learning through individualization, localization, and globalization in the educational process. My presentation will explain

the strategies and examples of localization and globalization to pool up the various resources and intellectual assets from

multiple local and international sources to support borderless education. A self-learning theory in a networked human and

technological environment will be highlighted.

Particularly, my speech will propose a new Platform Theory to illustrate why and how school-based platform and

central education platform should be necessarily developed to provide an intelligence-intensive, knowledge-intensive and

technology-intensive platform to consolidate the efforts, intellectual assets and resources from localization and globalization.

The platform will provide unlimited networks and opportunities for every student and teacher to maximize their potential

and performance in borderless learning and teaching. These platforms for learning will be nationally strategic for each

society’s long-term development in a context of international competitions.

With the implications from the new paradigm of learning and the platform theory, my speech will illustrate by

examples how teachers can change their roles and teaching styles from teacher-centred to student-centred in the educational

process and how the curriculum can be changed from the subject knowledge-based to intelligence-based in a practical way.

Finally, my speech will urge educational reforms focusing on paradigm shift in learning and teaching with aims to

maximize opportunities for students’ effective life-long learning and their pursuit of a new future in the new century.

2
Introduction
The challenges of the new millennium such as the rapid globalization, the tremendous
impacts of information technology, the international transformation towards knowledge-
driven economy, the strong demands for societal developments, and the international and
regional competitions have driven numerous educational changes in the different parts of the
world (Cheng & Townsend, 2000). Policy-makers and educators in each country have to
think how to reform education for preparing their young leaders to more effectively cope
with the challenges in the new era (Armstrong, Thompson, & Brown, 1997; EURYDICE
European Unit, 2000; Hirsch & Weber, 1999; Kogan & Hanney, 2000; Lick, 1999; Mauch &
Sabloff, 1995; Mingle, 2000). In facing the fast changing environment, many policy-makers
and educators get confused with uncertainties and ambiguities and lose their directions in the
rapid globalization. There is urgent need of a comprehensive framework for understanding
the impacts of rapid developments and advancing implications for innovations in education.
In response to this need, my previous work Cheng (2000) has pointed the necessity of
paradigm shift in education and reforms to meet the challenges in both local and international
communities in the new millennium. Adapted from the key theories in this work, my paper
aims to illustrate how education can be transformed from a traditional site-bounded paradigm
towards a new triplization paradigm for borderless education. In the new education, the
development of Contextualized Multiple Intelligence (CMI) of students and the processes of
globalization, localization, and individualization in education will be the core to create
unlimited opportunities for teaching and learning and to develop a new generation of CMI
leaders and citizens in both local society and global village. It is hoped that the proposed
new paradigm of borderless education will provide innovative ideas and possibilities for
reforming education in different parts of the world to meet the challenges for the future.

Challenges from the Rapid Local and Global Transformations

As mentioned above, the serious challenges in the new millennium include the rapid
globalization, the tremendous impacts of information technology, the international
transformation towards knowledge-driven economy, the strong demands for societal
developments, and the international and regional competitions. All these are in fact the
challenges to the traditional thinking about the nature and developments of the world, the
society and the human being, and asking for a new thinking about the future.

Challenges to the Traditional Thinking about the World, Human Nature, and
Development

As shown in Table 1, the traditional thinking perceives that the world has limited if

3
not none globalization, mainly in the economic and social aspects. All the nations in different
parts of the world are loosely related, if not isolated, in only some limited areas especially in
the economic aspect. Countries have serious competitions and conflicts more than sharing
and collaboration. As a whole, they are loosely coupled with some limited international
collaborations and interflows (Beare & Slaughter 1993; Naisbitt, 1984).

Traditionally, the human nature in such a context is mainly assumed as an economic

person or a social person in an industrial or business society. Both individuals and the society
pursue narrowed developments, mainly on some aspects such as economic, social, or
political developments. School or vocational education is assumed necessary to providing the
needed manpower for certain developments of a society at some stages (Cheng, Ng & Mok,
2002; Cheng, 1995). Therefore, the need for life-long learning or for a learning society may
not be so important. The society is an industrial or agricultural society emphasizing on some
types of intelligence or knowledge related to the existing stage of development of a society.
Individuals are expected to be a citizen with bounded type of knowledge or skill that meet the
need of society at a certain stage of development.

But in the emerging new thinking (Cheng, 2000), it assumes that the world is in
multiple globalization including technological, economic, social, political, cultural, and
learning globalizations. Also, these globalizations are increasingly interacting in the whole
world. The world is moving very fast to become a global village, in which different parts of
the world are rapidly networked and globalized through internet and different types of IT,
communications, and transportation (Albrow, 1990; Naisbitt, & Aburdence, 1991). All
countries and areas have more and more common concerns and sharing. Also, the
interactions between nations and people become boundless, multi-dimensional, multi-level,
fast, and frequent. They become more and more mutually dependent with international
collaborations, exchanges, and interflows.

In the new thinking, the human nature in a social context of the new millennium is
assumed to be multiple, as a technological person, economic person, social person, political
person, cultural person, and learning person in a global village of information, high
technology, and multi-cultures. Both individuals and the society need multiple developments
in the technological, economic, social, political, cultural, and learning aspects. Life-long
learning individuals and a learning society are necessary to sustain the continuous multiple
developments of individuals and the society in a fast changing era (Drucker, 1993, 1995).
The society has to become towards a multiple intelligence society that can provide the
necessary knowledge and intelligence base and driving force to support the multiple
developments. And the individuals have to become towards a multiple intelligence citizen

4
who can contribute to the development of a multiple intelligence society.

Table 1: Challenges to the Traditional Thinking about

The World, Human Nature, Development of Individuals and the Society

New Thinking Traditional Thinking

About the World

 Multiple Globalization: including technological,  Limited Globalization: mainly in economic

economic, social, political, cultural, and learning and social aspects

aspects

 Global Village  Multi-Nations loosely related

 Boundless Multi-dimensional and Multi-level  Limited Interactions

Interactions

 Mutual Dependent  Loosely Coupled

About the Human Nature

 Multiple Person: as technological person,  Mainly as Economic Person or Social

economic person, social person, political person, Person in an industrial or business society

cultural person, and learning person

About the Development of Individual and Society

 Multiple Developments: technological, economic,  Narrowed Developments: mainly focus on

social, political, cultural, and learning some aspects such as economic, social, or

political

 Life-long learning individuals and a learning  School or vocational education is necessary

society are necessary to sustain the continuous to provide the needed manpower for certain

developments of technological, economic, social, developments of a society at some stages; the

political, and cultural aspects of individuals and the need for life-long learning or for a learning

society society may not be so important

5
 Towards a multiple intelligence society that can  Being an industrial society emphasizing on

provide the necessary knowledge base and driving some types of intelligence or knowledge

force to support the multiple developments related to the stage of development of a

society

 Towards a multiple intelligence individual who  Being a person with bounded knowledge,

can contribute to the development of a multiple who has the type of knowledge or skill that

intelligence society meet the need of society at a certain stage of

development

6
Challenges to the Traditional Thinking About the Education Environment and Aims of
Education

As shown in Table 2, the traditional thinking assumes that the education environment
is mainly characterized by the needs of local community, of which is slowly changing with
moderate uncertainties and complexity. Thus, the boundaries of schools and the education
system are assumed to be relatively stable and certain. Teachers and students rarely interact
with the “real world” in their teaching and learning. Students enter the ‘real world’ only after
graduation or leaving schools. Educational reforms are often limited and superficial mainly
as a reaction to the raised public accountability and local concern. From this paradigm, the
aim of education is to equip students with the necessary skills and knowledge to survive in a
local community or to support the development of a society particularly in the economic and
social aspects at a certain stage.

But according to the new thinking about the world and development, there is different
thinking about education. The education environment is very fast changing and becoming
very complicated and full of uncertainties and ambiguities. The boundaries of schools as well
as the education system become unclear and disappearing. Students and teachers often
interact frequently and intensively with the “real world” in learning and teaching (Townsend,
1999). Continuous educational reforms and developments are inevitable due to various local
and global challenges emerging from this changing education environment.
In such a context, the aim of education is to support students to become
contextualized multiple intelligence (CMI) citizens who will be engaged in life-long learning
and will creatively contribute to the building up of a multiple intelligence society and a
multiple intelligence global village.

Table 2: Challenges to The Traditional Thinking about

The Education Environment and Aims of Education

New Thinking Traditional Thinking

Assumptions about the Education Environment

 Triplization: Education environment is  Local Needs: Education environment is mainly

characterized by globalization, localization, and characterized by the needs of local community

individualization

 Fast Changing: Complex, full of uncertainties, and  Slowly Changing: Moderately uncertain and

changing very fast changing slowly

7
 Disappearing Boundary: Unclear and  Stable Boundary: Still stable and certain within

disappearing school boundary; Students and school boundary; Students enter the ‘real world’

teachers often interact with the’real world’ in only after graduation or leaving schools

learning and teaching

 Continuous Development: Continuous  Limited Reform: Limited and superficial

educational reform and development are inevitable educational reforms due to the public

due to various local and global challenges accountability and local concern

Assumptions about the Aim of Education

 Develop Multiple Intelligence Citizen:  Equip Citizen with Knowledge and Skills:

To support students to become a contextualized To equip students with the necessary skills and

multiple intelligence (CMI) citizen who will be knowledge to survive in a local community or to

engaged in life long learning and will creatively support the development of a society particularly

contribute to building up a multiple intelligence in the economic and social aspects at a certain

society and a multiple intelligence global village stage

Contextualized Multiple Intelligences & Education

The challenges in current local and global transformations ask for new education for the
future of our next generations. This new education emphasizes on development of multiple
intelligence.
Howard Gardner (1993) suggested that there are seven human intelligences, including
musical intelligence, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, logical-mathematical intelligence,
linguistic intelligence, spatial intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and intrapersonal
intelligence. This biological perspective of multiple intelligences may be useful to
understand individual’s cognitive competence in terms of a set of basic abilities or
“intelligences” (Gardner, 1993). When we want to develop a new generation of leaders to
lead the community in a context of complicated technological, economic, social, political,
and cultural environments, this perspective may be too “ basic” and limited and does not
have a strong relevance to education. Comparatively, this biological typology of multiple
intelligence may be useful to design curriculum and pedagogy for early children education or
lower primary education to develop their basic abilities, but it is not so sophisticated enough
for education that should be highly contextualized to the social, economic, political, cultural,
and technological developments (Berman, 1995; Guild & Chock-Eng, 1998; Guloff, 1996;
Mettetal & Jordan, 1997; Teele, 1995).

According to Cheng (2000), the human intelligence can be contextualized and

categorized into the following six Contextualized Multiple Intelligences (CMI), including
Technological Intelligence, Economic Intelligence, Social Intelligence, Political Intelligence,

8
Cultural Intelligence, and Learning Intelligence.

The definitions of these contextualized multiple intelligences can be summarized as

shown in Table 3. It is assumed that human nature in the complicated contexts can be
classified as technological person, social person, economic person, political person, cultural
person, learning person, and even contextualized multiple person. To different persons, they
may have different strengths in their contextualized intelligences because of different reasons
such as their previous education, personal innate characteristics, family backgrounds,
community culture, etc. Some persons are stronger in technological intelligence or economic
intelligence but the other may be stronger in social intelligence or cultural intelligence. Given
the societal and global contexts are so complicated, diverse, multiple, fluid, and challenging,
it is quite reasonable to expect that the new generations should have at least some of the
contextualized multiple intelligences to meet the diverse challenges in such complicated
contexts in the new millennium. It means that education in this new era of globalization,
diversity and information technology should develop students as CMI leaders and citizens to
lead the new society and the new world, even though they may still have one or two
specializations in their future career.

9
 Table 3:
Contextualized Multiple Intelligences and Expected Outcomes of Education

Human Nature Contextualized Definition of the Contextualized Expected Outcomes of

in Social Contexts Multiple Multiple Intelligence Education

Intelligence

 Technological  Technological  It refers to the ability to think,  A technologically

Person Intelligence act and manage technologically intelligent leader and

and maximize the benefits of citizen who can contribute

various types of technology to the technological

development of the society

 Economic  Economic  It refers to the ability to think,  A economically

Person Intelligence act and manage economically intelligent leader and

and to optimize the use of citizen who can contribute

various resources to the economic

development of the society

 Social Person  Social  It refers to the ability to think,  A socially intelligent

Intelligence act and manage socially and to leader and citizen who

effectively develop harmonious can contribute to the social

interpersonal relationship development of the society

 Political  Political  It refers to the ability to think,  A politically intelligent

Person Intelligence act and manage politically and leader and citizen who

to enhance win-win outcomes can contribute to the

in situations of competing political development of

resources and interests the society

 Cultural Person  Cultural  It refers to the ability to think,  A culturally intelligent

Intelligence act, and manage culturally, to leader and citizen who

optimize the use of multi- can contribute to the

cultural assets and to create cultural development of the

new values society

 Learning  Learning  It refers to the ability to learn  A continuously earning

Person Intelligence and think creatively and leader and citizen who

critically and to optimize the can contribute to the

use of biological/ physiological learning development of

abilities the society

10
  Contextualized  Contextualized  It refers to the comprehensive  A CMI leader and citizen
Multiple People Multiple ability including technological, who can creatively

Intelligences economic, social, political, contribute to the

(CMI) cultural and learning technological, economic,

intelligences as well as social, political, cultural

intelligence transfer and and learning developments

creation of the society

Traditionally, education in many parts of the world emphasizes on development of

specialists with focus only on one or two types of intelligence such as technological
intelligence, economic intelligence or social intelligence, but ignoring the other. It is often
assumed that most education graduates will have only one to three careers in the same area
during their whole life such that other types of intelligences or knowledge may not be
necessary and relevant to their future development. This kind of thinking sets a very tight
limit to the development of graduates in such a fast changing environment involving huge
transformations in economy, manpower structure and social infra-structure. We can expect
that frequent change in career tends to be necessary in the future life of our new generations.
Therefore, the traditional education with focus narrowly on one to two types of intelligence
will not meet the challenges and needs of the future anymore.

In the new century, graduates from education should not be limited to be technicians or
expects in certain areas but also be intelligent leaders and citizens for development of the
society in different areas. They will be technologically intelligent citizens, economically
intelligent citizens, socially intelligent citizens, politically intelligent citizens, culturally
intelligent citizens or continuously learning citizens. In other words, they have not only
professional skills and knowledge but also higher-level intelligence and creativity for further
development and innovation. Particularly, they have the potential to become contextualized
multiple intelligent citizens to creatively and wisely lead the development of the whole
society or the global village in facing up challenges in the new century. How can we develop
such CMI leaders and citizens from education? It is really a crucial question we will explore
in this paper.

11
Pentagon Theory of CMI in Education
Based on the above contextualized multiple intelligences, a Pentagon Theory of CMIs
development proposed by Cheng (2000) can be used to reconceptualize education, as
depicted in Figure 1 - as follows:

1. Development of CMI. The development of students’ contextualized multiple

intelligences is the core condition for developing a new generation of leaders and citizens
for the future of a society in the technological, economical, social, political, cultural and
learning aspects. Therefore, education should be reformed with clear relevance and
concrete linkages with the development of CMI.

2. Encouraging CMI Interactions: The relationships among these six CMI are interactive
and mutually reinforcing with the Learning Intelligence at the central as shown by a
pentagon as in Figure 1. The design of education should encourage and facilitate such
interactions and reinforcements among CMI if we want to have citizens with a broad
mind sets or multiple intelligences to deal with the diverse challenges in the new era.

3. Facilitating Intelligence Transfer & Creativity: Intelligence transfer from one type to
other types (e.g., from economic intelligence to political intelligence or social
intelligence) should be encouraged and facilitated to achieve a higher level of intelligence
or meta-thinking in one area or other. The transfer itself can represent a type of
intellectual creativity and generalization. The more the students can transfer their
intelligence from one type to other, the more creative they will be no matter in the
original area or other areas. To a great extent, intelligence transfer represents the potential
of creativity that is the crucial asset in the emerging knowledge-driven economy. If
students can have achieved contextualized multiple intelligences, they have higher
potential to make intelligence transfer from one type to other type, than those strong only
in one type of intelligence. It means that they have a higher potential of creativity.
Therefore, education should encourage achievement of CMI as well as intelligence
transfer and creativity. This will be very important to the development of innovative
knowledge-based economy and the creation of a high level thinking society and an
intelligent global village.

4. Taking Learning Intelligence at the Central. To accelerate the development of all other
CMI, the development of Learning Intelligence can play a central role (Figure 1). Instead
of teaching and learning huge volume of information and factual materials, the content of
education should put emphasis on developing students’ ability to persistently learn how to

12
 learn systematically, creatively, and critically. This may partly reflect why the current
educational reforms in different parts of the world emphasize the ability and attitude to
life-long learning (Education Commission, 1999; Townsend & Cheng, 2000).
Figure 1:

Pentagon Theory of CMI development

For Education

Technological
Intelligence

Economic Social
Intelligence Intelligence

Learning
Intelligence

Political Cultural
Intelligence Intelligence

5. Globalization, Localization, and Individualization of Education: In order to

maximize the opportunities for development of CMI for students, globalization,
localization, and individualization in teaching and learning are important and necessary.
The following paragraphs will highlight their conceptions and implications for education
reforms.

Triplization in Education

Rapid globalization is the one of the most salient aspects of the new millennium
particularly since the fast development of information technology in the last two decades
(Brown, 1999). To different observers, different types of globalization can be identified even
though most of the attention is in the areas of economy, technology, and culture (Brown &

13
Lauder, 1996; Waters, 1995). According to Cheng (2000), there should be multiple
globalization, including Technological Globalization, Economic Globalization, Social
Globalization, Political Globalization, Cultural Globalization, and Learning Globalization
in the new millennium (Figure 2).

Inevitably, how education should be responsive to the trends and challenges of

globalization has become a major concern in policy making in these years (Ayyar, 1996;
Brown & Lauder, 1996; Fowler, 1994; Green, 1999; Henry, Lingard, Rizvi, & Taylor, 1999;
Jones, 1999; Little, 1996; McGinn, 1996; Pratt & Poole, 2000; Curriculum Development
Council, 1999). Cheng (2000) argued that not only globalization but also localization and
individualization are necessary in ongoing educational reforms. All of these processes as a
whole can be taken as a Triplization Process (i.e., triple + izations) that can be used to
discuss educational reforms and formulate the new pedagogic methods and environment to
implement new curriculum for enhancing CMI of students. The implications of globalization,
localization, and individualization are summarized as shown in Table 4 and Figure 2.

Globalization: It refers to the transfer, adaptation, and development of values,

knowledge, technology, and behavioral norms across countries and societies in different
parts of the world. The typical phenomena and characteristics associated with globalization
include growth of global networking (e.g. internet, world wide e-communication, and
transportation), global transfer and interflow in technological, economic, social, political,
cultural, and learning aspects, international alliances and competitions, international
collaboration and exchange, global village, multi-cultural integration, and use of international
standards and benchmarks. Implications of globalization for education should include
maximizing the education relevance to global development and pooling up the best
intellectual resources, support and initiatives from different parts of the world for learning,
teaching and research (Daun, 1997; Holmes, 1999).

Some ongoing examples and common evidences of globalization in educationare web-

based learning; use of the Internet in learning and research; international visit/immersion
programs; international exchange programs; international partnership in teaching and
learning at the group, class, and individual levels; interactions and sharing through video-
conferencing across countries, communities, institutions, and individuals (Holmes, 1999;
Jung & Rha, 2001; Van Dusen, 1997; Lick, 1999; Klor de Alva, 2000). Many such examples
of initiatives can be found in Hong Kong, Europe, Australia and USA. Further, the
development of new curriculum content on technological, economic, social, political,
cultural, and learning globalization is also important and necessary in new education.

14
 Figure 2:
Globalization, Localization, and Individualization

Technological
Globalization

Localization
Social
Learning
Globali-
Globali-
zation
zation
Individualization
TI

EI SI
LI

Political PI CI Cultural
Globali- Globali-
zation zation

Economic
Globalization

15
 Table 4: Implications of Triplization for Education
Implications for
Triplization Conceptions and Characteristics
Education
Globalization Transfer, adaptation, and development of To maximize the education relevance to

values, knowledge, technology and global development and pool up best

behavioral norms across countries and intellectual resources, support, and

societies in different parts of the world: initiatives from different parts of the world

for learning, teaching and research: e.g.

 Global Networking

 Technological, Economic, Social,  Web-based Learning

Political, Cultural, and Learning  International Visit/Immersion Program

Globalization  International Exchange Program

 Global Growth of Internet  Learning from Internet

 International Alliances and Competitions  International Partnership in Teaching and

 International Collaboration & Exchange Learning at group, class, and individual

 Global Village levels

 Multi-cultural Integration  Interactions and Sharing through Video-

 International Standards and Benchmarks Conferencing across Countries,

Communities, Institutions, and Individuals

 Curriculum Content on Technological,

Economic, Social, Political, Cultural, and

Learning Globalization

Localization Transfer, adaptation, and development of To maximize the education relevance to local

related values, knowledge, technology, and developments and bring in community

behavioral norms from/to the local contexts: support and resources, local partnership,

and collaboration in learning, teaching and

 Local Networking research: e.g.

 Technological, Economic, Social,

Political, Cultural, and Learning  Community Involvement

Localization  Public- Institutional Collaboration

 Decentralization to the Local Site Level  Institutional-based Management

 Indigenous Culture &Accountability/ School-based

 Community Needs and Expectations Management

 Local Involvement, Collaboration and  Inter-institutional Collaboration

Support  Community-related Curriculum

16
  Local Relevance and Legitimacy  Curriculum Content on Technological,

 Community-based Needs and Economic, Social, Political, Cultural, and

Characteristics Learning Localization

 Social Norms and Ethos

Individualization Transfer, adaptation, and development of To maximize motivation, human initiative,

related external values, knowledge, and creativity in learning, teaching and

technology, and behavioral norms to meet research: e.g.

the individual needs and characteristics:

 Individualized Educational Programs

 Individualized Services  Individualized Learning Targets, Methods,

 Development of Human Potential in and Progress Schedules

Technological, Economic, Social,  Self Life-long Learning, Self Actualizing,

Political, Cultural and Learning Aspects and Self Initiative

 Human Initiative and Creativity  Self Managing Students and Teachers

 Self-actualization  Meeting Special Needs

 Self-managing and Self-governing  Development of Contextualized Multiple

 Special Needs Intelligences

17
 Localization: It refers to the transfer, adaptation, and development of related values,
knowledge, technology, and behavioral norms from/to the local contexts. Some
characteristics and examples of localization are as follows: local networking; adaptation of
external technological, economic, social, political, cultural, and learning initiatives to local
communities; decentralization to the community or site level; development of indigenous
culture; meeting community needs and expectations; local involvement, inter-institutional
collaboration, and community support; local relevance and legitimacy; and concern for
community-based needs and characteristics and social norms and ethos (Kim, 1999).

The implications of localization to education reform are to maximize the education

relevance to local development and bring in community support and resources, local
partnership, and collaboration in learning, teaching and research. Some examples for practice
of localization include community involvement in education; privatization in education;
public-institutional collaboration; assurance of institutional accountability; implementation of
institutional autonomy, school-based management and community-based curriculum (Wang,
2000; Altbach, 1999; James, 1994). More and more such examples can be found not only in
developed countries like USA, UK and European countries but also in many developing
areas in the Asia-Pacific Region (Cheng & Townsend, 2000). The development of new
curriculum content related to localization in technological, economic, social, political,
cultural, and learning aspects of the society is also receiving growing attention.

Individualization: It refers to the transfer, adaptation, and development of related

external values, knowledge, technology, and behavioral norms to meet the individual needs
and characteristics. The importance of individualization to human development and
performance is based on the concerns and theories of human motivation and needs ( e.g.
Maslow, 1970; Manz, 1986; Manz & Sims, 1990; Alderfer, 1972). Some examples of
individualization are the provision of individualized services; emphasis of human potentials;
promotion of human initiative and creativity; encouragement of self-actualization; self-
managing and self-governing; and concern for special needs. The major implication of
individualization in education is to maximize motivation, initiative, and creativity of students
and teachers in learning, teaching, and research through such measures as implementing
individualized educational programs; designing and using individualized learning targets,
methods, and progress schedules; encouraging students to be self learning, self actualizing,
and self initiating; meeting individual special needs; and developing students’ contextualized
multiple intelligences.

Students, teachers, and education institutions are “triplized” (i.e. globalized, localized,
and individualized ) during the process of triplization.

18
New Paradigm of Borderless Education

With these concepts of contextualized multiple intelligences and triplization in

education, a paradigm shift of education for the new millennium can be initiated from the
traditional site-bounded paradigm to the new paradigm of borderless education.

New Paradigm of Borderless Learning. In the new paradigm, learning should be

borderless and characterized by individualization, localization, and globalization. (Table 5)

Individualized Learning: Student is the centre of education. Students’ learning should

be facilitated to meet their needs and personal characteristics, and develop their potentials
particularly CMI in an optimal way. Individualized and tailor-made programs (including
targets, content, methods, and schedules) for different students is necessary and feasible.
Students can be self-motivated and self-learning with appropriate guidance and facilitation,
and learning is a self-actualizing, discovering, experiencing, and reflecting process. Since the
information and knowledge are accumulated in a unbelievable speed but outdated very
quickly, it is nearly impossible to make any sense if education is mainly to deliver skills and
knowledge, particularly when students can find the knowledge and information easily with
the help of information technology and Internet. Therefore, the focus of learning is on
learning how to learn, research, think, and create. In order to sustain learning is life long,
learning should be facilitated as enjoyable and self rewarding (Mok & Cheng, 2001).

Localized and Globalized Learning: Students’ learning should be facilitated in such a

way such that local and global resources, support, and networks can be brought in to
maximize the opportunities for their developments during learning process. Through
localization and globalization, there are multiple sources of learning. Students can learn
from multiple sources inside and outside their higher institutions, locally and globally, not
limited to a small number of teachers in their institutions. Participation in local and
international learning programs can help them achieve the related community and global
outlook and experiences beyond education institutions. Now, more and more examples of
such kind of programs can be found in Japan, Hong Kong, France and USA. Also their
learning is a type of networked learning. They will be grouped and networked locally and
internationally. Learning groups and networks will become a major driving force to sustain
the learning climate and multiply the learning effects through mutual sharing and inspiring.
We can expect that each student can have a group of life long partner students in different

19
corners of the world to share their learning experiences.

It is expected that learning happens everywhere and is life-long. Education is just the
preparation for a high level life-long learning and discovery (Liu, 1997; Mok & Cheng,
2001). Learning opportunities are unlimited. Students can maximize the opportunities for
their learning from local and global exposures through Internet, web-based learning, video-
conferencing, cross-cultural sharing, and different types of interactive and multi-media
materials (Ryan, Scott, Freeman, & Patel, 2000; Education and Manpower Bureau, 1998).
Students can learn from world-class teachers, experts, peers, and learning materials from
different parts of the world. In other words, their learning can be a world-class learning.

Traditional Paradigm of Site-bounded Learning. In the traditional thinking, students’

learning is part of the reproduction and perpetuation process of the existing knowledge and
manpower structure to sustain developments of the society, particularly in the social and
economic aspects (Cheng, Ng & Mok, 2002; Blackledge & Hunt, 1985; Hinchliffe, 1987;
McMahon, 1987). Education is perceived as a process for students and their learning being
“reproduced” to meet the needs of manpower structure in the society. The profiles of student
and learning are clearly different from those in the new paradigm (see Table 5).

Reproduced Learning: In education, students are the followers of their teachers. They
go through standard programs of education, in which students are taught in the same way and
same pace even though their ability may be different. Individualized programs seem to be
unfeasible. The learning process is characterized by absorbing certain types of knowledge:
students are “students” of their teachers, and they absorb knowledge from their teachers.
Learning is a disciplinary, receiving, and socializing process such that close supervision and
control on the learning process is necessary. The focus of learning is on how to gain some
professional or academic knowledge and skills. Learning is often perceived as hard working
to achieve external rewards and avoid punishment.

Site-Bounded Learning: In the traditional paradigm, all learning activities are

institution-bounded and teacher-based. Students learn from a limited numbers of institutional
teachers and their prepared materials. Therefore, teachers are the major sources of knowledge
and learning. Students learn the standard curriculum from their textbooks and related
materials assigned by their teachers. Students are often arranged to learn in a separated way
and are kept responsible for their individual learning outcomes. They have few opportunities
to mutually support and learn. Their learning experiences are mainly institutional experiences
alienated from the fast changing local and global communities. Learning happens only in
education institution within a given time frame. Graduation tends to be the end of students’

20
learning.

Table 5: Towards New Paradigm of Borderless Learning

New Paradigm of Traditional Paradigm of

Borderless Learning Site-Bounded Learning
Individualized Learning: Reproduced Learning:

 Student is the centre of education  Student is the follower of teacher

 Individualized Programs  Standard Programs

 Self-Learning  Absorbing Knowledge

 Self-Actualizing Process  Receiving Process

 Focus on How to Learn  Focus on How to Gain

 Self Rewarding  External Rewarding

Localized and Globalized Learning: Institution-Bounded Learning:

 Multiple Sources of Learning  Teacher-Based Learning

 Networked Learning  Separated Learning

 Life-long and Everywhere  Fixed Period and Within Institution

 Unlimited Opportunities  Limited Opportunities

 World-Class Learning  Site-Bounded Learning

 Local and International Outlook  Mainly Institution-based Experiences

21
Effective Learning through Localization and Internationalization:
Self- Learning in A Networked Human and Technological Environment

According to the above new paradigm of borderless education, we should emphasize

students’ continuous self-learning and development of CMI with the support of localization
and globalization through information technology and various types of international and local
networking. Mok and Cheng (2001) has proposed a theory of self-learning in a networked
human and technology environment to show how students’ individualized self-learning can
be motivated, sustained and optimized through the wide local and international support from
the borderless and networked human and technological environment. The key concepts are
summarized as follows:

Self-learning Cycle

The understanding of the nature of self-learning is important in implementing new

paradigm of borderless learning. Based on the concepts of action learning (Yuen & Cheng,
1997, 2000; Argyris & Schön, 1974; Argyris, Putnam, & Smith, 1985), Mok and Cheng
(2001) conceptualised the process of self-learning as a cyclic process in a networked human
and IT environment as shown in Figure 3. It subdivides a learning episode into a sequence of
three components such as mental condition (mind-set), action, and outcome, linked by four
processes including planning, monitoring, feedback to mental condition and feedback to
action. There are two types of feedback from the monitoring process and outcomes to the
learner: One to the mind-set and the other one directly to action. The feedback to mind-set
will help the learner to reflect on and change his/her own mental models including meta-
cognition, thinking methods, meta-volition, and knowledge and then to change the planning
process as well as the action of learning. The learning associated with change in mental-set or
mental models is often referred as the second order learning or double-loop learning.

The feedback directly to action of learning will help the learner to adapt his/her
learning behaviors. The learning associated with change in behaviors or actions is often
referred to as the first order of learning or the single loop learning. Since this type of
learning has not changed the mental conditions of the learner, it may not produce long lasting
learning effects at a higher level.

How to sustain the cyclic process of self-learning by the learners themselves

continuously and throughout their life span is really the core issue of current education
reforms. According to the literature of learning environment, both human environment and
technological environment are important to facilitating and sustaining self-learning

22
(Garrison, 1997; Henderson & Cunningham, 1994). Particularly, how the human and IT
environment can be designed, developed and used to facilitate such a continuous lifelong
self-learning inevitably becomes an important question to guide the development of self-
learning theory for a context of networked human and IT environment. Mok and Cheng
(2001) has explained a theory of self-learning in a networked human and IT environment,
that can be used to support the new paradigm of borderless education, as follows.

23
Networked Local The Learning Cycle
and International
Human & IT
N
Environment

1. Mind-set

6. Feedback
2. Plan

7. Feedback

5. Outcome
3. Action

4. Monitor
Networked Local
and International
Human & IT
Environment

Figure 3. A Self-learning Cycle in a Networked Borderless Human and IT environment

IT Environment

Due to the tremendous developments in IT, internet, and global networking, recently
there has been a great demand for developing an IT environment in order to support
paradigm shift in learning and teaching. Computer technology makes it possible for multiple
learners to be networked and participate in the learning task, thus greatly enhancing the
social interactions, sharing of learning experiences and resources in a very convenient way.
Information technology can also facilitate and accelerate the monitoring, assessment, and

24
feedback processes in a very fast and efficient way (Embretson & Hershberger, 1999).

There may be four important aspects in which new technology can contribute to the
development of a powerful IT environment that can facilitate the self-learning cycle:
1. Computer technology revolutionalized both the speed and access to information
(Hallinger, 1998). Information is interpreted in its broadest sense, including resource
materials for the learner as well as feedback concerning how well the learner has
learned. With the help of the Internet, learners can access the best quality of web-based
learning materials in different parts of the world. Further, because of the high speed of
information technology, feedback can be immediately generated for each step of learning
tasks and activities as well as for the overall proficiency of learning. The fast feedback
to learner’s mental conditions and learning behaviors in fact accelerates the speed of
learning, including cognitive changes and behavioral changes of the learner;
2. Developments in IT make it possible for the application of measurement theory to
assessment tasks during the self-learning process. Technology is now available for real-
time scoring (Herl, Baker, & Niemi, 1996), computer adaptive testing (CAT), automated
data logging (Chung & Baker, 1997), and computer item construction (Bennett, 1999).
The advanced assessment methods can greatly improve the quality and accuracy of
monitoring and feedback such that the quality and opportunity of learning can be
ensured;
3. Developments in IT enable assessment to move away from the paper-pencil format to
rich imagery multimedia task presentation and submission (Bennett, 1999; Chung &
Baker, 1997) that can capture richly contextualized performance in the learning process
(Bennett, 1999). For example, Chung and Baker (1997) described the scoring of
complex concept maps constructed by students, based on information that stored in Web-
pages. They were able not only to measure the quality of the finished product, but also
to capture, unobtrusively, the process of how students learned. Students’ process of
learning were monitored, using Web page access log, including information students
considered important to the task, the amount of time searching the Web for relevant
information, time students spent on each Web page, modification to the concept map
under construction, etc. All this information would be powerful to understand the
complex nature of learning process and in turn improve learning strategies, activities,
and outcomes; and
4. IT environment breaks down distance barriers of access to education and creates
connectivity amongst learners (Mok & Cheng, 2000a). When learners, teachers, parents,
resource people, and other related experts can be networked through IT, more
opportunities will be available for social interactions, experience sharing, and
information flow. With this, a networked human environment can be created to sustain

25
 and support self-learning of individual learners.

Networked Human Environment

The meaningfulness of learning is often constructed within a human environment that

comprises the teacher, peers, parents and other adults and also reflects to a certain extent the
education values espoused by the social actors (Garrison, 1997). The human environment
plays a significant role in all aspects: pedagogical, psychological and behavioural of self-
learning (Schunk, 1998). In particular, Zimmerman (2000) highlighted the interdependent
role of social, environmental and self and their bi-directional influences in self-learning.

In education reforms, the human environment itself can be designed to become an

important source of pedagogical information. The teacher, as a key actor in the human
environment of learning, helps the learner to develop attitudes and skills for goal-setting,
self-management, self-monitoring, and self-evaluation which are essential to the success of
self-learning. For example, in this IT age, there is no short of information, but the learner
needs to make judgment about the information. Consequently, the learner has to develop
critical thinking skills to validate and authenticate the quality of instructional materials, such
as those downloadable from the web. Further, the teacher as a proficient adult provides
appropriate learning references or guides the learner to these materials. Winne and Perry
(2000) identified the unique position held by teachers in judging the quality of the student’s
self-learning and providing guidance where appropriate. The learner also learns from peers,
parents and other adults by observation and emulation (Schunk, 1987; as cited in Schunk,
1998).

Self-learning is a complex process and the endeavour can result in non-

accomplishment, frustration or even failure. In such instances, the empathy and social
support from the teacher, parents and peers acts as an emotional safety net for the learner. A
strong social climate gives strength to the learner to continue engagement in the task, analyse
strategies and manage the failure and frustration in a positive way.

It is now possible, with development in IT, to network the learner with the teacher,
parents, peers and other adults or professionals in the community such that influence of the
human environment on self-learning can be maximised (Mok & Cheng, 2000a).

When individual learners are networked with the support of IT, as shown in figures 4
and 5, there may be multiplying effect on the amount of available information as well as
human touches and interactions that will become fruitful stimulus to students’ self-learning.

26
The networked individual learners, teachers, parents and other professionals may form a
learning system to support students’ continuous self-learning. In a learning society, each
learner is self-motivated and generates a learning cycle of self-learning and self-evaluation.
Learners, teachers and parents are networked to form a learning classroom; classrooms are
networked to form a learning school; schools and the community are networked to form a
learning society; learning societies are networked across nations (Mok & Cheng, 2000b). IT
speeds up the process of providing social messages and informative feedback to the learners
and members in the learning system. This speed, coupled with the massive amount of
information available via the informative network, not only means that this will be the
information-rich era, but also, it implies that a closely networked social environment needs to
be in place for promoting and supporting self-learning of individual learners. Self-learning is
no longer the acquisition of information of individual learners in an isolated context. Instead,
effective self-learning occurs in the human environment that can facilitate higher level of
intelligence and motivation of learners as well as other members in the human network in the
selection, management, transfer, creation and extension of knowledge (Mok & Cheng,
2000a).

Facilitating Self-learning Cycle

Building up a strong and direct linkage between each stage of self-learning cycle and networked
learning environment should be an important issue in education reforms and in daily educational
practice. From the aforementioned nature of learning cycle and networked human and IT
environment, we may consider how each stage of the self-learning cycle can be initiated and
sustained continuously to achieve effective learning with the support of a networked human and
IT environment. For the detail, please see Mok and Cheng (2001).

27
 S School Context:
Classroom Context: A community of
A community of networked learning
networked self-learners classrooms
C
L

L
C
L L

L C
L L

C
C
Key
L: Learner
C: Classroom
S: School

Figure 4. Networked human environment: Networked school comprising linked self-learners

and classrooms.

28
 Country Context:
A community of networked
learning communities Global Context:
Community Context: A community of
A community of networked networked learning
learning schools countries
N
S
S C

N
S

S C

C C

N
Key
N N S: School
C: Community
N: Country

Figure 5. Networked human environment: Networked global context comprising linked

learning countries and communities.

29
School-based Platform and Central Platform for Borderless Education:
Platform Theory

How to build up such a networked human and technological environment for borderless
education is very challenging to both educators and reformers. According to Cheng (2002,
2001a,b), the development of a networked human and technology environment can be
supported by the school-based platform and central platform.

Platform is a new powerful concept in conceptualizing and organizing various types of

existing resources, technology, knowledge, and even social and cultural capital from local
and global sources to form an intelligence-intensive and technology-intensive platform or
supporting environment, that can enable and facilitate people to work and perform in a smart
and optimal way. Unlike the traditional concept of organizational structure with focus on
control and coordination, platform is mainly for supporting people with the necessary
knowledge, technology and social environment such that they can have the maximum
opportunity to develop themselves and perform at their highest potential in their work.

School-based management or educational decentralization should aim at developing as a

school-based platform that can accumulate, organize and apply the necessary knowledge and
technology, useful experiences, networks, various types of internal and external resources,
and social support to support educational practice and innovation for effective teaching and
learning, facilitate organizational learning, and develop a culture of professionalism within a
school. To a great extent, a good school-based platform is a powerful way to pool resources
for effective learning through localization and globalization. For the detail of how school-
based management can be developed such a platform or mechanism for continuous
development and effectiveness, please refer to Cheng (1996).

At the system or regional level, a central education platform should be formed with the
support of information technology and various types of local and global networking. This
central platform aims to pool up the most powerful and relevant knowledge, expertise and
resources from local and global sources to create a more knowledge-intensive, technology-
intensive and intelligence-intensive central base for supporting the development of all types
of school-based platform and related initiatives. On this central platform, schools, teachers,
and students can work on a higher level of knowledge to develop their school-based
initiatives and avoid unnecessary wastage of time, resources and efforts due to repeated “re-
inventing a wheel” or “start from scratch”. This central platform is also a huge network or

30
learning community for sharing the advanced knowledge, best practices and experiences of
success and failure among schools, educators and experts (Mok &Cheng, 2001).

31
 Figure 6:
Platform Theory for Effective Learning, Teaching and Schooling

Students’ Future:
Effective Life-long Learner

Key Elements
in Linkages

Commitment,
Motivation,
Efficacy,
Effective Learning Self-actualization,
Paradigm shift in L & L Continuous Self-learning,
Unlimited Learning,
Learner-Centred Approach Learning Group /Culture

Knowledge,
School-based Management Technology,
as A School-based Platform Innovation,
for Facilitating Effective Learning & Teaching Networking
Social Support,
Professionalism
Learning Community
Central Education Platform
as a Knowledge-intensive and Technology-intensive Platform for
Innovative Learning, Teaching & Management in all Schools

The key elements of the school-based platform and central education platform are
accumulation, dissemination, and application of knowledge and technology to promote
various types of innovation, networking and social support and develop a culture of
professionalism and learning community in education, that can support paradigm shift in
education and effective learning, teaching and schooling.

As shown in Figure 6, with the support of the school-based platform as well as the
central platform, the key elements in effective learning and teaching are students and
teachers’ commitment, motivation and efficacy to promote and achieve learning as
continuous self-actualization and self-learning and create unlimited opportunity for learning,
developing learning groups, and evolving learning culture among students and teachers
(Cheng, 2001a,b; Mok & Cheng, 2001).

32
Implications for Changing Teachers’ Role and Teaching Style

The paradigm shift in learning inevitably requires corresponding paradigm shift in

teaching and teachers’ role. The major changes can be summarized as shown in Table 6.

New Paradigm of Teaching

In the new triplization paradigm, teachers’ teaching should be triplized: individualized,
localized, and globalized.

Teachers and their teaching are facilitated in a way such that their potentials can be
maximized to facilitate students’ learning in an optimal way. Teaching is considered a process
to initiate, facilitate, and sustain students’ self-learning, self-exploration and self
actualization; therefore, teachers or teachers should play a role as a facilitator or mentor who
support students’ learning. The focus of teaching is to arouse students’ curiosity and
motivation to think, act, and learn. Also, teaching is to share with students the joy of the
learning process and outcomes. To teachers themselves, teaching is also a life long learning
process involving continuous discovery, experimenting, self actualization, reflection, and
professional development. Teachers are CMI teachers who can set a model for students in
developing their multiple intelligences. Each teacher has his/her own potential and
characteristics, and different teachers can teach in different styles to maximize their own
contributions.

Local and global resources, supports and networks can be brought in to maximize the
opportunities for teachers’ developments in teaching and research and for their contribution
to students’ learning. Through localization and globalization, there are multiple sources of
teaching, for example, self learning programs and packages, web-based learning, outside
experts, and community experiental programs, inside and outside their institutions, locally
and globally. Teachers can maximize the opportunities to enhance effectiveness of their
teaching from local and global networking and exposure through Internet, web-based
teaching, video-conferencing, cross-cultural sharing, and different types of interactive and
multi-media materials (Holmes, 1999; Ryan, Scott, Freeman, & Patel, 2000; Education and
Manpower Bureau, 1998). With their help, students can learn from the world-class materials,
experts, peers, and teachers in different parts of the world such that teaching can become
world-class teaching. Through participation in local and international development and
research programs, teachers can achieve global and regional outlook and experiences beyond
institutions.
Furthermore, their teaching is a type of networked teaching. Teachers are grouped

33
and networked locally and globally to develop and sustain a new professional culture and
multiply their teaching effects through mutual sharing and inspiring. They become world
class and networked teachers through localization and globalization. It is not a surprise that
each teacher can have a group of life long partner teachers in other parts of the world to
continuously share and discuss their experiences and ideas of professional practice and
research.

34
 Table 5: Paradigm Shift in Teaching

New CMI-Triplization Paradigm Traditional Site-Bounded Paradigm

Individualized Teaching Reproduced Teaching

 Teacher is the facilitator or mentor to support  Teacher is the centre of education

students’ learning

 Multiple Intelligence Teacher  Partially Competent Teacher

 Individualized Teaching Style  Standard Teaching Style

 Arousing Curiosity  Transferring Knowledge

 Facilitating Process  Delivery Process

 Sharing Joy  Achieving Standard

 As Life-long Learning  As a Practice of Previous Knowledge

Localized and Globalized Teaching: Site-bounded Teaching:

 Multiple Sources of Teaching  Site-Bounded in Teaching

 Networked Teaching  Separated Teaching

 World-Class Teaching  Bounded Teaching

 Unlimited Opportunities  Limited Opportunities

 Local and International Outlook  Mainly Institutional Experiences

 As World-Class and Networked Teacher  As Site-bounded and Separated Teacher

Changing Role of Teacher in the New Paradigm

Different roles teachers play in the teaching process may shape the roles and qualities
of students in the learning process that can vary from the very passive way to the active self-
learning and self-actualization mode as shown in Table 6 and Figure 7 (Weaver, 1970; Cheng,
2001a).

Table 6: Teachers’ Roles and Corresponding Students’ Roles and Outcomes

Teacher’s Teaching/ Student’s Role Likely Student

Role Learning Process Quality as Outcome
1. Appreciator As determined by students 1. Searcher Self-Determination

35
2. Partner Participation 2. Partner Responsibility

3. Patron Making 3. Designer Creativeness

4. Guide Searching 4. Explorer Adventurousness

5. Questioner Experimentation 5. Searcher Investigation Skill

6. Tutor Reflection 6. Thinker Understanding

7. Counsellor Expression of feeling 7. Client Insight

8. Moulder Conditioning 8. Subject Habits

9. Instructor Transfer of information 9. Memorizer Possession of information

10. Exemplar Imitation 10. Trainee Skills

Student Role
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Student Self-Initiative (Self Learning)

Student
Centered
Teacher
Centered

Teacher Direct Instruction

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Teacher Role

Figure 7: The Ecological Relationship Between Roles of Teachers and Students

36
 As shown in Figure 7, there is an ecological relationship between roles of teachers and
students. As teachers tend to be more teacher direction instruction (towards roles 8, 9, and 10
as in Table 6), students become more passive in their learning and the qualities tend to be
Habits, Possession of Information and Skills. As teachers tend to use student-centre
approaching and play roles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the teaching process, students have more
opportunities to be active in self- learning and achieve the higher qualities of learning outcomes
such as Self-Determination, Responsibility, Creativeness, Adventurousness, Investigation

Skill, and Understanding that are important in the new paradigm of borderless education and
also crucial to the future of students in the new century.

We understand, the educational aims and processes are complex and the role of teacher
should be dynamic and complicated including multiple roles ranging from roles 1 to 10; from
total direct instruction to total student self-determination in the daily educational practices. A
mix of multiple roles played by teachers in daily educational practices is often a fact of
school life. What is important for teachers and educators is to keep in mind what educational
aims we want to pursue. If we want to achieve a real new paradigm of education for the
future of our students, we should encourage the mix of multiple teacher roles to be more
student-centred and less teacher-centred in the whole teaching and learning process.

Implications for Reform of Curriculum and Instruction

As explained previously, the delivery of subject knowledge and skills is the key
element in the traditional paradigm of education and teachers are the major source of
knowledge. Inevitably the teacher-centered approach in education is often assumed as the
efficient way to deliver subject knowledge and skills to students, and the examination of how
much knowledge achieved by students is always the key criterion of effectiveness of
education. Therefore, it is not a surprise that the current curriculum and instruction in many
countries are characterized by “separated subject knowledge” and “teacher-centred approach”
or “examination-centred approach”. As shown in Figure 8, the content, scope, and effort of
existing curriculum and instruction are mainly in the second quadrant (II) if we take the
dichotomy of “teacher-centred/examination centred approach” vs “student-centred approach”
instruction as x-axis and the dichotomy of “subject-knowledge-based and separated
curriculum” vs “multiple intelligence- based and integrative curriculum” as the y-axis to
form four quadrants.

37
 Subject Knowledge-
based/Separated

Existing Situation

II I
Curriculum & Change:
Instruction 10%-30%
Examination-
Examination-
Centred Student-
Student-
Teacher-
Teacher-Centred Centred

Change:
III 10%-30% IV
Multiple Intelligence-based/
Integrative

Figure 8: The Existing Situation of Curriculum and Instruction and

Implications for Reforms

As illustrated in the new paradigm of borderless education, “student-centred approach”

in education and “ integrative multiple intelligence-based curriculum” should be strongly
emphasized and promoted in order to facilitate students to pursue continuous life long self-
learning and development and become contextualized multiple intelligent persons for their
future. Therefore, curriculum and instruction should be changed from the traditional quadrant
II towards the quadrant IV that emphasizes “student-centred approach” and “multiple
intelligence-based curriculum”. (see Figure 8)

Depending on the levels of education, the readiness of schools, teachers and students,
the local culture and other contextual constraints, there may not need to reform radically and
jump directly from quadrant II to quadrant IV. Particularly, we believe at the current stage
that subject knowledge are still very important to the development of our society and
individuals and teacher-centred approach and examination are still necessary to ensure
delivery of certain types of knowledge and skills in some areas of education. Therefore, we
can use incremental approach to implement the reform of curriculum and instruction by
changing 10-30% toward the student-centred approach and the multiple intelligence-based
curriculum as shown in Figure 8. After 3-5 years of reform, the new situation of curriculum

38
and instruction may be a quite balanced way with considerate proportions in all the four
quadrants (I, II, III, & IV) as shown in Figure 9. After that, the educators and reformers may
consider whether it is necessary to move further towards quadrant IV.

It is clear that for different groups of students, schools, and even communities, the steps
and paces of reform of curriculum and instruction may be different across these four
quadrants. But, the tendency towards quadrant IV is inevitable for borderless learning in
coming years in an era of globalization and information technology.

Subject Knowledge-
based/Separated

After 3-5 Years

II
Change
I
Curriculum &
Examination-
Examination-
Centred
Instruction
Student-
Student-
Teacher-
Teacher-Centred Centred

III IV
Multiple Intelligence-based/
Integrative

Figure 9: The New Situation After Reform of Curriculum and Instruction in 3-5 Years

39
Conclusion

The proposed new paradigm of borderless education that is contrastingly different

from the traditional thinking, can be used to rethink and re-engineer education.

In the new millennium, our world is moving towards multiple globalizations and
becoming a global village with boundless interactions among countries and areas. Our
society is becoming more diverse and multiple and moving towards a learning CMI society.
Our new generations should be prepared as a CMI person in such a fast changing and
interacting local and global environment. The aims of education should be to develop
students as CMI leaders and citizens who will creatively contribute to the formation of a CMI
society and a CMI global village with multiple developments in technological, economic,
social, political, cultural, and learning aspects.

We expect, our education will be triplized in the new century. In fact, the ongoing
education reforms in different parts of the world have already provided evidence that many
countries are making effort in this direction through various types of initiatives in
globalization, localization and individualization. We believe, our learning and teaching will
be finally borderless and characterized with globalization, localization, and individualization
with the help of the information technology and boundless multiple networking.

We should use a new theory to promote self-learning in a networked borderless

human and technology environment. Particularly through localization and globalization, we
should build up school-based platform and central platform to pool up local and global
sources and intellectual assets and form a networked borderless human and technological
environment to support learning and teaching. Through these platforms and the new
paradigm of learning, we will create unlimited opportunities and multiple global and local
sources for life-long learning and development of both students and teachers. We believe,
new education should facilitate the triplized learning and make students’ learning process
interactive, self-actualizing, discovery, enjoyable, and self-rewarding.

We believe, teachers, as the key actors, will play a very crucial role in the whole
process of triplization in education. Their roles and teaching styles will change to facilitate
students’ self-learning and development of CMI. Reform of curriculum and instruction will
be inevitable from “the teacher-centred approach/ examination-centred approach” and “the
separated subject knowledge based curriculum” towards “ the student-centred approach” and
“the multiple intelligence-based curriculum”.

40
 Finally, I hope, all our students will become borderless learners with unlimited
opportunities for learning and development. They will fully enjoy life-long self-learning and
actualization and become CMI leaders and citizens for the new world.

References:
Albrow, M. (1990). Introducton, In M.Albrow & E. King(eds.), Globalization, knowledge and society. London: Sage.

Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Existence, relatedness, and growth: Human needs in organizational settings. New York: Free

Press.

Altbach, P. G. (Ed.). (1999). Private Prometheus: Private Higher Education and Development in the 21 st Century.

Contributions to the Study of Education No. 77. Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Classics.
Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D.M. (1985). Action science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Armstrong, S., Thompson, G., & Brown, S. (Eds.). (1997). Facing up to Radical Changes in Universities and College s. Staff

and Educational Development Series. London: Kogan Page.

Ayyar, R. V. V. (1996). Educational policy planning and globalisation. International Journal of Educational Development,

16(4), 347-354.

Beare, H. & Slaughter, R. (1993). Education for the twenty-first century. New York:Routledge.

Bennett, R. E. (1999). Using new technology to improve assessment. Educational Measurement, 18(3), 5-12.

Berman, S. (1995). A multiple intelligences road to a quality classroom. Palatine, Ill: IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing.

Blackledge, D., & Hunt, B. (1985). Sociological interpretations of education. Sydney: Croom Helm.

Brown, P., & Lauder, H. (1996). Education, globalization and economic development. Journal of Education Policy, 11(1), 1-

25.

Brown, T. (1999). Challenging globalization as discourse and phenomenon. International Journal of Lifelong Education,

18(1), 3-17.

Burton-Jones, A. (1999). Knowledge capitalism: Business, work and learning in the new economy. Oxford: Oxford

University.

Cheng, Y.C.(1995). Function and effectiveness of education. 3rd ed. Hong Kong: Wide Angle Press.

Cheng, Y.C. (1996). School effectiveness and school-based management: A mechanism for development. London: Falmer.

Cheng, Y.C. (2000). A CMI-Triplization Paradigm for Reforming Education in the New Millennium. International Journal

of Educational Management. 14(4), 156-174.

Cheng, Y.C. (2001a). The strengths and future of Hong Kong education. Invited keynote speech at the Conference of the

Leadership Development Network on “Facing up Educational Reforms: Leading Schools for Quality Education”,

organized by the Asia-Pacific Centre for Education Leadership and School Quality, 20 October 2001.

Cheng, Y.C. (2001b). Three waves of education reform: Paradigm shifts for the future in Hong Kong. Paper presented at the

11the World Congress of Comparative Education held in 2-6 July, 2001 in Chungbuk, Korea.

41
Cheng, Y.C. (2002). Linkage between Innovative Management and Student-Centred Approach: Platform Theory for

Effective Learning. Invited Plenary Speech presented at the Second International Forum on Education Reform: Key

Factors in Effective Implementation organized by Office of National Education Commission in collaboration with

UNESCO and SEAMEO, Bangkok, Thailand, 2-5 September 2002.

Cheng, Y.C., Ng, K.H., & Mok, M.M.C. (2002). Economic Considerations in Education Policy Making: A Simplified

Framework. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(1), 18-39.

Cheng, Y.C. & Townsend, T. (2000). Educational Change and Development in the Asia-Pacific Region: Trends and Issues,

In Townsend, T & Cheng, Y.C. (eds), Educational Change and Development in the Asia-Pacific Region: Challenges

for the Future. (pp.317-344) The Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger Publisher.

Chung, G.K.W.K., & Baker, E. L. (1997). Year 1 technology studies: Implications for technology in assessment. ERIC

Document Reproduction Services ED 418 099

Curriculum Development Council (1999 October). A holistic review of the Hong Kong school curriculum proposed reforms

(consultative document). Hong Kong: Government Printer.

Daun, H. (1997). National forces, globalization and educational restructuring: some European response patterns. Comapre,

27(1), 19-41.

Drucker, P.F. (1993). Post-capitalist society. New York: Harper Business.

Drucker, P.F. (1995). Managing in a time of great change. Oxford: Butterworth Heinerman.

Education and Manpower Bureau (1998 November). Information technology for learning in a new era: Five-year strategy

1998/99 to 2002/03. Hong Kong: Government Printer.

Education Commission. (1999). Review of education system: Framework for education reform - Learning for life. Hong

Kong: Government Printer.

Embertson, S. E., & Hershberger, S. L. (1999). The new rules of measurement: What every psychologist and educator

should know. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

EURYDICE European Unit (2000). Two Decades of Reform in Higher Education in Europe: 1980 Onwards. Eurydice

Studies. Brussels: Author.

Fowler, F. C. (1994). The international arena: The global village. Journal of Education Policy, 9(5-6), 89-102.

Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.

Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 18-30.

Green, A. (1999). Education and globalization in Europe and East Asia: Convergent and divergent trends. Journal of

Education Policy, 14(1), 55-71.

Guild, P. B., & Chock-Eng, S. (1998). Multiple intelligence, learning styles, brain-based education: Where do the messages

overlap? Schools in the Middle, 7(4), 38-40.

Guloff, K. (1996). Multiple intelligences (Teacher-to-Teacher Series). West Haven, Conn.: National Education Association

of the United States.

Hallinger, P. (1998). Educational change in Southeast Asia: The challenge of creating learning systems. Journal of

Educational Administration, 36(5), 492-509.

Henderson, R. W., & Cunningham, L. (1994). Creating interactive sociocultural environments for self-regulated learning. In

D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman, (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

42
 Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Henry, M., Lingard, B., Rizvi, F., & Taylor, S. (1999). Working with/against globalization in education. Journal of

Education Policy, 14(1), 85-97.

Herl, H. E., Baker, E. L., & Niemi, D. (1996). Construct validatoin of an approach to modelling cognitive structure of U.S.

history knowledge. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 206-218.

Hinchliffe, K. (1987). Education and the labor market. In G. Psacharopoulos (Ed.), Economics of education: Research and

studies (pp. 315-323). Kidlington, Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Hirsch, W. Z., & Weber, L. E. (1999). Challenges Facing Higher Education at the Millennium. American Council on

Education/Oryx Press Series on Higher Education. Arizona: the Oryx Press.

Holmes, W. (1999). The Transforming Power of Information Technology. Community College Journal, 70(2), pp10-15.

James, E. (1994). Public-private division of responsibility for education. In T. Husén & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The

international encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., Vol. 8, pp. 4831-4836). Oxford, England/New York:

Pergamon/Elsevier Science.

Jones, P. W. (1999). Globalisation and the UNESCO mandate: Multilateral prospects for educational development.

International Journal of Educational Development, 19(1), 17-25.

Jung, I., & Rha, I. (2001). A Virtual University Trial Project: Its Impact on Higher Education in South Korea. Innovations in

Education and Training International, 38(1), pp 31-41.

Kim, Y. H. (1999). Recently changes and developments in Korean school education. In Townsend, T., & Cheng, Y. C. (eds).

Educational change and development in the Asia-Pacific region: Challenges for the future. (pp. 87-112). The

Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.

Klor de Alva, J. (2000). Remaking the academy in the age of information. Issues in Science and Technology, 16(2), 52-58.

Kogan, M., & Hanney, S. (2000). Reforming Higher Education. Higher Education Policy Series 50. UK: Jessica Kingsley

Publishers, Ltd.

Lick, D. W. (1999). Transforming Higher Education: A New Vision, Learning Paradigm, and Change Management.

International Journal of Innovative Higher Education 1999, Fall, 13, pp75-78.

Little, A. W. (1996). Globalization and educational research: Whose context counts? International Journal of Educational

Development, 16(4), 427-438.

Liu, S. S. (1997). Trends in Hong Kong University Management: Towards a Lifelong Learning Paradigm. Hong Kong:

Hong Kong Baptist University.

Manz, C. C. (1986). Self-leadership: Toward an expanded self-influence processes in organizations. Academy of

Management Review, 11, 585–600.

Manz, C. C., & Sims, H. P. (1990). Super leadership. New York: Berkley Book.

Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row

Mauch, J. E., & Sabloff, P. L. W. (1995). Reform and Change in Higher Education: international Perspectives. New York:

Garland Publisher.

McGinn, N. F. (1996). Education, democratization, and globalization: A challenge for comparative education. Comparative

Education Review, 40(4), 341-357.

McMahon, W. W. (1987). Consumption and other benefits of education. In G. Psacharopoulos (Ed.), Economics of

43
 education: Research and studies (pp. 129-133). Kidlington, Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Mettetal, G., & Jordan, C. (1997). Attitudes toward a multiple intelligences curriculum. Journal of Educational Research,

91(2), 115-122.

Mingle, J. R. (2000). Higher Education’s Future in the “Corporatized” Economy. Washington D.C.: Association of

Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

Mok, M. & Cheng, Y. C. (2000b). Global knowledge, intelligence and education for a learning society. Keynote Speech

presented at the 6th UNESCO-ACEID International Conference “Information Technologies in Educational

Innovation for Development: Interfacing Global and Indigenous Knowledge”. The Imperial Queens Park Hotel,

Bangkok, Thailand, December 12-15.

Mok, M., & Cheng, Y. C. (2000a). Self-learning driven assessment: A new framework for assessment and evaluation. Paper

presented to the 13th International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI 2000), January 4-8,

The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong.

Mok, M. & Cheng, Y.C. (2001). A Theory of Self Learning in a Human and Technological Environment: Implications for

Education Reforms. International Journal of Education Management. 15(4), 172-186.

Naisbitt, J. (1984). Megatrends: Ten new directions transforming our lives. England, London: MacDonald.

Naisbitt, J., & Aburdence, P. (1991). Megatrends 2000. New York: Avon.

Ohmae, K. (2000). The invisible continent: Four strategic imperatives of the new economy. London: Nicholas Brealey.

Pratt, G., & Poole, D. (2000). Global Corporations “R” Us? The Impacts of Globalisation on Australian Universities.

Australian Universities’ Review, 43(1) & 42(2), pp. 16-23.

Ryan, S., Scott, B., Freeman, H., & Patel, D. (2000). The virtual university: The internet and resource-based learning.

London: Kogan Page.

Schunk, D. H. (1998). Teaching elementary students to self-regulate practice of mathematical skills with modeling. In D. H.

Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and performance. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Earlbaum

Associates.

Smylie, M.A. (1991). Curriculum adaptation within the class. In A. Lewy (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of

curriculum (pp. 386-388). New York: Pergamon Press.

Smylie, M.A. (1994). Curriculum adaptation. In T. Husen & T.N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of

education (2nd ed.) (pp. 1253-1257). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Teele, S. (1995). The multiple intelligences school: A place for all students to succeed. Redlands, CA: Citograph Printing.

Townsend, T. (1999). The Third Millennium School: Towards a Quality Education for All Students. IARTV Seminar Series,

No. 81, Victoria, Australia: Incorporated Association of Registered Teachers of Victoria.

Townsend, T., & Cheng, Y. C. (2000). Educational change and development in the Asia-Pacific region: Challenges for the

future. The Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.

Van Dusen, G. C. (1997). The Virtual Campus: Technology and Reform in Higher Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher

Education Report, 25(5). Washington, DC: Graduate School of Education and Human Development and Association

for the Higher Education.

Wang, Y. (2000) (ed.). Public-private partnerships in the social sector. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Insitute.

Waters, M. (1995). Globalization. London: Routledge.

44
Weaver, T.R. (1970). Unity and diversity in education. UK, London: Department of Education and Science.

Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner

(Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, California: Academic Press.

Yuen, P. Y. & Cheng, Y. C. (1997). The action learning leadership for pursuing education quality in the 21 st century. Paper

presented at the Fifth International Conference on Chinese Education Towards the 21 st Century: Key Issues on the

Research Agenda, Hong Kong, HKSAR.

Yuen, P.Y. & Cheng, Y.C. (2000). Leadership for teachers’ action learning. International Journal of Educational

Management, 14(5), 198-209.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich, & M.

Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, California: Academic Press.

45
46