School improvement through a university-school partnership: A case study in a Hong Kong
primary school
CHIU Chi-shing
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
“School Improvement and University-school Partnership” Conference
Quality School Improvement Project,
Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research,
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
3rd June, 2006
School improvement through a university-school partnership: A case study in
a Hong Kong primary school
CHIU Chi-shing
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Abstract:
This paper explores the impact of a school improvement model based on a university-school partnership in a Hong Kong primary school by studying the reactions of the professional staff to the reform initiative and the conditions for its success. Data were collected from multiple sources, including questionnaires, interviews and documents, the descriptive interview remained the major source of data in the analysis of the results. Results indicated that: (a) all the change agents contributed to school improvement; each agent was part of a complex dynamic, interwoven with the others, under the constraints of the school culture; (b) teachers’ capacity in designing and implementing teaching and learning activities were enhanced; (c) good teaching and learning with appropriate implementation strategies had the greatest impact in changing the previous teaching paradigms and techniques; (d) partnership projects should be built on mutual trust and confidence, with a good mix of academic advice and practitioners’ experience.
Keywords: University-school partnership, school effectiveness and school
improvement, comprehensive school improvement project
1. Introduction
July 1997 marked a new political era in Hong Kong. The Chief Executive entrusted the Education Commission1(EC) to review the aims of education and draw up a blueprint for reform for the 21st Century. This had important implications for school development and improvement in Hong Kong. Change became inevitable as stipulated in the motto of the first chapter of the Consultation Document2of the EC: The world has changed, so must the education system. Most schools and teachers in Hong Kong are daunted by the ‘invasion’ of education reform and curriculum innovation. It is not surprising that schools are seeking external help and support in generating school improvement strategies. Cheng (2000) categorises the educational changes and developments in Hong Kong into two waves; the first was generally characterised by a top-down approach with an emphasis on external intervention or increasing resource inputs. The effects of these changes on school improvement were limited because i) there was a lack of knowledge base and research support; ii) over-emphasis on research inputs and iii) ignorance of school-based needs. The second wave is still in progress with special emphasis on a school-based and frontline practitioner-based approach.
In view of the above scenario, the Faculty of Education of the Chinese University of Hong Kong launched a school improvement programme called Accelerated Schools for Quality Education (ASQE) in 1998, aiming at enhancing quality education in Hong Kong through a university-school partnership. ASQE was adopted from the school restructuring model of the Accelerated Schools Project, first launched by Professor Henry M, Levin at Standford University (Hopfenberg, Levin & Associates 1993). ASQE is a comprehensive approach to school change, encompassing an integrated restructuring of three dimensions, namely, school curriculum, instructional strategies and organization. 50 local schools (26 primary and 24 secondary schools) joined the project for a duration of three years (September 1998 - August 2001). The improvement programme was comprehensive in the sense that it covered the dimensions of administration and management, curriculum and teaching, as well as parents and community resources. The approach was termed organic as only broad principles and general guidelines were introduced and the improvement was interactive and evolving. Strategies used were general and multi-dimensional, sometimes with specific learning and teaching programmes if the teachers were ready. The school studied in this research was one of the participating schools in the above project.
University-schools partnerships based on an extensive school improvement model as in ASQE, are uncommon in Hong Kong, especially when Hong Kong is experiencing a critical stage of educational change. The evolution of a basically subject-bound, teacher-centred and examination-oriented education system to an education reform with ‘student-focused, no losers, quality-driven, life-wide learning and society-wide mobilisation’ as principles (Education Commission 2000a:36) is exciting and worth studying. The improvement programme has its distinguished features in i) the partnership is on voluntary basis, ii) a school-based approach, iii) an 1The highest level of consultative committee in Education in Hong Kong.
2 Review of Education System: Reform Proposals Consultation Document Hong Kong Special Administration Region of The People’s Republic of China, Education Commission, May 2000.
experimental and evolving school improvement programme.
1.1 Purpose
The researcher is interested in the study because there has been much improvement activity in schools but little debate about the underlying principles of school improvement. Those within the school improvement field are in a theoretical impasse (Bennet and Harris 1999:534).
The purpose of the study is to explore the impact of a school improvement model through university-school partnership in a Hong Kong primary school by studying the reactions of the professional staff on the reform initiative and the conditions for the success of the improvement initiative.
1.2 Research Questions
Research questions are designed to investigate:
Under what conditions has the school improvement project contributed to the improvement of the school?
What sort of professional experience has been acquired in relation to the reform
initiative and how has it affected teachers’ perception of their roles as reflective practitioners, their learning capacity and their attitude towards school improvement through school-university partnership?
How have these experiences affected their conceptions of teaching and learning,
and what has been the impact of their conceptions of curriculum change in their school?
1.3 Significance
As the improvement project is not a mechanistic instructional approach directly aiming at enhancing the students’ achievement, evidence on changes and developments in the school cannot accurately reflect the positive effects on students’ achievement. Instead, the comprehensiveness of the project and its organic nature provide a thorough understanding of the impact of such a project on a ‘common and normal’ primary school in Hong Kong, which has a standard school structure, curriculum design, textbooks, teaching strategies, as well as assessment procedures. The impact may include: the effect of the work of the school-university partnership, as Fullan (1997:120) claims teacher development and institutional development must go hand in hand; the catalyst effect of external support in the form of intensive site visits of personnel from the university; the changes in teachers’ capacity including the principal, the middle management group and the frontline practitioners; and also the conditions for a school to excel and improve.
If a school-university partnership of this kind is proved to have an effect, it can certainly offer intellectual, motivational and attitudinal benefits to both partners. The school teachers may acquire more expertise and knowledge, whereas the university faculty members may enrich the instructional teachers’ training programmes.
2. Literature Review
2.1 Change, School effectiveness and School Improvement
Change is endemic in education but it does not necessarily lead to improvement (Ainscow et al.,1994, Hopkins, 1994). The interest of the researcher in this study is alerted by reading the question raised by Cuban (1988:341): ‘How can it be that so much school reform has taken place over the last century yet schooling appears pretty much the same as it’s always been?’ Cuban categorises changes into first and second-order, concluding that the effect of the first order changes is not significant as the changes do not disturb the organizational features and the roles of stakeholders. The second-order changes which seek to alter the fundamental ways in which organizations are put together, including new goals, structures and roles, are more appropriate. From reading articles on educational change related to school improvement, the researcher is more concerned with effective educational change and meaningful school improvement, through a substantial build-up of teachers’ capacity, rather than those cosmetic and superficial.
The two most frequently asked questions by educators are: 1) Which of the many activities that we do have greater benefits for students? and 2) How can we make our schools better than they are now? The first question focuses specifically on the impact of schools on students’ outcomes and the characteristics of effective schools, whereas the second addresses the implementation of change and school improvement (Stoll & Fink 1992). Nonetheless, the former places emphasis on the product, effect and the final outcomes of what the schools can do, and the latter focuses more on the process that schools go through to become more successful, with improvement sustained (van Velzen 1987, Fullan 1991). For the past three decades, the school improvement literature has been dominated by the above two lines of school effectiveness or school improvement (Murphy, 1992:90). Though the two schools of researchers have increasingly looked towards establishing some kind of synergy in both fields, the attempts have not sufficiently addressed their different perspectives on organisational development and change (Bennet & Harris 1999:533). Numerous research findings on school effectiveness may provide a substantial knowledge base for educational change and school improvement, for example Murphy (1992:91) comments that ‘educational reform via the effective schools model has established a framework that is quickly becoming a necessary component of any school improvement.’ However, Fullan (1991:22) questions the genuine help provided by the ‘effectiveness researchers’ for school improvement and states that school effectiveness ‘has mostly focused on narrow educational goals, and the research itself tells us almost nothing about how an effective school got that way and if it stayed effective.’
It seems that the merging of the two clearly fragmented intellectual communities of the 1980s mentioned above is the only solution for the field of educational change to move on. On one hand, the ‘school effectiveness’ experts may produce a long list of factors and figures accusing the ineffectiveness of schooling, but cannot produce any concrete suggestions help improve learning outcomes. On the other, the ‘school improvement’ professionals have recently been regarded as major players in the field of educational change, and are funded enormously by all governments in the world. Unfortunately, the positive impact of the school improvement programmes on
classroom practices which may lead to fruitful learning outcomes is still not very significant. The experts in the two fields may complement each other through cooperation. Focussing upon the importance on pupil learning outcomes and adopting a ‘mixed’ methodological orientation are two of the key characteristics of the new, merged paradigm (Reynolds, 1998:128).
The discussion of the two lines of research in school effectiveness and school improvement is essential as the study of the improvement project in this particular case in Hong Kong belongs to the school improvement model possessing the features listed in Creemers & Reezigt (1997) and Reynolds, Sammons, Stoll, Barber & Hillman (1996).
2.2 School Improvement field
The most frequently quoted definition of school improvement is ‘a systematic sustained effort aimed at change in learning conditions and other related internal conditions in one or more schools, with the ultimate aim of accomplishing educational goals more effectively’ (van Velzen et.al., 1985 International School Improvement Project ISIP). According to Hopkins and Reynolds (2001:459), the history of school improvement has passed through three distinct phases.
In the late 1970s and early 80’s the field emerged as a distinct body of approaches. Hopkins & Reynolds (2001) say the first phase of school improvement was epitomized by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) International School Improvement Project (ISIP). Unfortunately, many of the initiatives associated with this phase of school improvement were ‘free floating’, but not a systematic, programmatic and coherent approach to school change. School self-evaluation and the ‘ownership of change’ by individual schools and teachers are absent and these initiatives were loosely connected to student learning outcomes, both conceptually and practically; they were variable and fragmented in conception and application. Hopkins and Reynolds (2001:460) classify the second phase as the period of the early 1990s which resulted from interaction between the school improvement and the school effectiveness communities. The school effectiveness community provides a knowledge base for this intellectual enterprise and the school improvement tradition was beginning to provide schools with guidelines and strategies for implementation that were sufficiently powerful to begin to take educational change into classrooms. The third phase of school improvement was around mid- to late 1990s. Evidence shows that the contributions of the school improvement communities of many countries may not have been particularly successful, especially in their impact upon overall level of student achievement, though some programmes appear to be effective, like Slavin’s Success for All (Slavin & Fashola 1998, Slavin & Madden, 2001) or The Halton Project (Harris, 2000).
The strongest criticisms of the work of the school effectiveness/improvement field come from Thrupp (1999, 2001) and Slee, Weiner & Tomlinson (1998). Thrupp (1998: 160) also fires at school improvement writers like Barber, Hopkins, Fullan, Stringfield, Stoll and Gray saying that the picture they portray so far in school improvement is not very clear about the social limits of reform and the likely impact of neo-liberal and managerial policies.
2.3 School Improvement Projects
Numerous school improvement programmes have been implemented in the past two decades. They have had objectives of different kinds; some were shown to be effective in terms of students’ achievement in a particular subject or domain, others were reported bringing changes and innovations to the schools in areas like the internal capacity of the teachers, leadership, school culture and others. The researcher will review from the literature some of the large scale educational reform and school improvement projects with special reference to the United Kingdom and North America.
Fifty nine school improvement initiatives practising in England are listed in the paper by Reynolds, Sammons, Stoll, Barber & Hillman (1996), but they are broadly conceptualised as school improvement and school development. According to the above researchers, two-thirds bear the same aims as the school effectiveness tradition, using similar factors in measuring outcomes. Some of the distinguished examples are the ‘Improving the Quality of Educational for All” (IQEA) project at the Cambridge Institute of Education (Hopkins et al. 1994); the Lewisham School Improvement Project (LSIP) commencing in Spring 1993, a partnership project between the Lewisham Local Educational Authority and the London Institute of Education (Stoll, Reynolds, Creemers & Hopkins 1996); the Schools Make a Difference project established by Hammersmith and Fulham LEA in early 1993 (Myers, 1995); and other improvement initiatives like the value-added analysis service (Monitoring ALIS, YELLIS, PIPS) (Fitz-Gibbon 1996, Fitz-Gibbon & Tymms, 1996); the High Reliability Schools Project which include effective training programmes and standardized operation procedures (Stringfield, 1995a; Reynolds, Bollen, Cremers, Hopkins, Stoll & Lagerweij, 1996); and the National School Improvement Networks at the Institute of Education in London (Reynolds et.al. 1996). For school improvement projects, the early pioneer works of Hopkins (1987) in the International School Improvement Project (ISIP) is important as it had major influence on British school improvement work (Frost, Durrant, Head & Holden, 2000:5).
In the United States, The American Institute for Research (1999) examined the 24 school-wide approaches in educational reform (ranging from the 1960s to 1990s), but only a few approaches have documented positive effects on students’ achievement. Among them, only three projects are reported to have had strong evidence of positive effects on students’ achievement, namely the Direct Instruction (DI) introduced in late 1960s (Becker & Gerstein, 1982; Ashworth, 1999); High Schools That Work (HSTW) and Success for All (SFA), both launched in 1987 (Herman R. & A.I.R. 1999). It has to be noted that due to the nature of the American Institute for Research’s review, quantitative achievement measures are highlighted, like the measurable achievement outcomes of test scores, grades and graduation rates. This may not be fair to those programmes which are comprehensive and organic in nature, with a longer period of research in which qualitative data can be interpreted and actualised. The costs of each approach make a lot of differences as well, e.g. the first year costs for the named effective approaches, DI, HSTW and SFA were $244K, $48K and $270K respectively. For the programmes like Accelerated Schools, with around 1000 schools practising (equivalent to SFA and Coalition of Essential Schools), the first years cost was only $27K, and is rated to have had marginal evidence of positive effects on student achievement.
Michael Fullan and his colleagues’ efforts in Canada have contributed
significantly to the school improvement field. The Learning Consortium work of Fullan and the others at the University of Toronto and the Effective Schools Project in the Halton and Durham Boards of Education in 1986 are very promising, which is originally an attempt to bring effective research results in Britain into the school practices of Canada (Mortimore, 1998). In Australia, Caldwell & Spinks (1988) adopted a self-management approach with a management cycle of six phases to school improvement, which has been widely disseminated.
To clarify the nature of the school improvement project, Alma Harris (2000) gives an extremely comprehensive and in-depth analysis of what works in school improvement. Using Hopkins and West’s categorisation (1994) of school improvement field into organic or mechanistic approaches, and general or specific strategies, the wide range of school improvement projects currently operating around the world is classified and evaluated. The classification is adopted and re-arranged and presented in Figure 1 by the researcher of this study as a framework for reference in discussing a case study of the school improvement project in the primary school in Hong Kong. Harris (2000:1) explains:
School improvement that is organic suggests broad principles, or general guidelines within which schools are likely to flourish. Conversely, school improvement projects that are mechanistic provide direct guidelines about exactly what to do in a ‘step-by-step’ way. In some cases, these approaches are highly prescriptive in both content and instructional approach.
A number of school improvement projects have been formed on the basis that
they promote a particular philosophy ………… a sort of school improvement club where admission is dependent upon agreeing to a set of project rules and guidelines. Another group of contemporary school improvement programmes have taken a more dynamic approach to school improvement…………place the school at the focal point of change and engage them in a process of school growth planning that is similar to school development planning.
For projects which are organic in nature, the ISIP (Van Velzen et al.; 1985, Hopkins, 1987) laid the cornerstone for other similar school improvement. Projects organic in nature but dynamic in approach such as the Halton Project (Fullan, 1992; Stoll and Fink, 1992, 1996) have had a positive impact upon schools, with special emphasis on a process of school growth planning, clear decision making structures and building a collaborative culture within schools; and the IQEA project outlines a number of propositions which are important for developing a school’s capacity for sustained improvement (Ainscow et al., 1994, Hopkins & West 1994).
Figure 1: Analysis of School Improvement Programmes
Reviewing the effectiveness of these improvement projects is essential to the
researcher in explaining the approach of the school improvement project in Hong
Kong, involving the university and a school partnership, and its impact. The approach
of the experimental project in Hong Kong is organic and comprehensive, but dynamic
in nature, more inclined to the Halton Approach (Stoll & Fink, 1992), than to Slavin’s
Success for All Project (Slavin & Madden 2001). The improvement project in Hong
Kong is more inclined to take an organic and comprehensive approach to school
improvement, as Sarason (1990:33) argues that reform efforts would fail if the
components of the reform efforts were not addressed as a whole. The researcher is
also fully aware that the comprehensiveness of the school improvement approach
makes it too difficult to track all school improvement outcomes; and sometimes
methodologically too weak to measure the outcomes quantitatively, but it is
Quoted & Adapted from Harris 2000
Greatest effect & impact
nevertheless still valuable to extract more information on the conditions for success in school improvement by studying in details the changes generated in primary schools in Hong Kong.
Although the school improvement projects cited above have increased knowledge about the process of school improvement in general, there is still a shortage of evaluative evidence, especially for those taking the comprehensive approach. In a most recent meta-analysis on comprehensive school reform and achievement study by Borman, Hewes, Overman & Brown (2003:163), where 29 widely implemented Comprehensive School Reform models in USA were studied (including most of the above quoted models like DI, SFA, ASP, HSTW), clear limitations to the overall quantity and quality of studies supporting its achievement effects were reviewed.
All these reform models for school improvement have their impact in one way or the other (Borman et.al. 2003), and at a time when the claimed success will bring ‘funding’. ‘What works’ and ‘what doesn’t’ are still very confusing. Reynolds (1998:1275), after an analysis of the researches on school effectiveness and school improvement, makes the following policy recommendations on school improvement: i) importance of school context; ii) avoidance of reinventing the wheel; iii) increase in international orientation; and iv) the necessity to intervene at ‘levels below that of the school’. Calhoun & Joyce (1998:1286) compare two major school reform paradigms: the external-driven Research and Development approach in the late 50s through to the early 70s and the site-based school improvement approach most prominent lately, and say neither have worked as well as they might. They conclude that the success of these improvement programs is dependent on the establishing of sustainable staff development in the work place and action research enquiry on teaching and learning. Fullan (2000:21) also comments on the attempt of the return of the large scale reform that reform will not happen or sustain in the absence of a strong teaching profession and correspondence infrastructure like the development of professional assistance agencies, assessment and accountability units, and the strengthening of institution training education personnel.
By citing the evidence of large-scale reform efforts, Hopkins & Reynolds (2001:473) conclude that unless central reforms address issues to do with teaching and learning, as well as dealing with capacity-building at the school level, within a context of external support, then the aspirations of reform are unlikely to be realized. Hatch & White (2002:117) also argue that the knowledge needed for successful school reform goes far beyond what is currently available and accessible, after drawing examples from the Authentic Teaching and Learning for All Students (ATLAS) Communities Project, a collaboration among experienced reform organisations in the United States, including the Coalition of Essential Schools (Sizer,1996), the School Development Program (Comer, 1988), Education Development Centre and Harvard Project Zero (Comer, Gardner, Sizer & Whitla, 1996). West (2000:43) draws upon the work of the ‘Moving Schools’ project, a small group of selected IQEA schools for further study and also concludes that while the school improvement field has begun at least to delineate the key areas for support, the understanding of how support ‘works’ remains partial.
3. The Project and The School
3.1 The Accelerated Schools Project (ASP) and Accelerated Schools for Quality of Education in Hong Kong
The Accelerated Schools Project (ASP) launched at Stanford University by Professor Henry Levin was a comprehensive approach to school change, designed to improve schooling for children in at-risk communities. It started in two pilot elementary schools in 1986, and was extended to the middle schools in 1990 (Hopfenberg, Levin & Associates 1993).. The approach was developed in the belief that at-risk students should have the same rich curriculum and instruction typically reserved for the ‘gifted and talented’. The model is not a set instructional or curriculum ‘package’, but a philosophy about children and learning accompanied by a process of change.
The Accelerated Schools for Quality of Education in Hong Kong (ASQE) started as a pilot study in two primary and one middle schools in April, 1997 and surged up to 50 in September 1998. ASQE aims to enhance quality school education through an innovative and dynamic university school partnership model of comprehensive school change (Lee & Chiu, 1999). Apart from the time spent in the logistic arrangements for the improvement project, the duration of the project was about two and a half years. Originated from ASP, ASQE also adopted the three cardinal principles of ASP, namely, 1) unity of purpose, 2) empowerment coupled with responsibility and 3) building on strengths, and placed the schools at the focal point of change. Engaging all the stakeholders in the process of school-growth planning and building collaborative cultures within schools were some of the major objectives. Some of the major differences between the two projects were:
a)ASQE aimed to establish trust and confidence between the two parties in
the beginning stage of the collaboration; the staff development workshops conducted by the school development officers from the university were seen as essential;
b)The stock-taking exercise was conducted by the university staff in order to
provide academic advice. A kind of ‘expert-led growth’ approach was taken at first, in which data and findings were explained but left for further exploration to the school teachers, whereas the staff of ASP schools in USA had to conduct all stock-takings themselves;
c)Teachers in USA are more familiar and accustomed to develop and design
powerful learning curriculum according to the philosophies of constructivism, but the university staff in ASQE understood that the teaching staff in Hong Kong were uncomfortable and inexperienced in designing curriculum all on their own.
Therefore, a ‘pragmatic’ kind of constructivist approach was adopted in designing learning experiences, e.g. some of the textbooks and curriculum materials teachers often use were also made use of. They also worked more closely with teachers in the design and delivery of teaching, giving appropriate guidance, advice and even demonstration.
The development team of the improvement project of the university faculty
comprised eleven professional staff called school development officers (SDO), and six supporting administrative staff. The researcher in this study was the programme coordinator responsible for overseeing the implementation of a project involving 24 middle schools and 26 primary schools, monitoring the school coaching system and mentoring the school development officers. The school development officers possessed vast experience in teaching different subject disciplines, in curriculum design and in school management. Some were experienced lecturers in colleges of education and some were school heads. The aim of the school development officers was to guide the school community in the transformation process in school improvement. Some of the major tasks were:
z to liaise with the partner school, build school capacity for change and take stock for schools;
z to train the school community to internalize the systematic self-improvement process of accelerated schools;
z to conduct staff development workshops;
z to facilitate the teaching and learning strategies;
z to meet regularly with members of the partner schools;
z to provide an on-site trouble-shooting service and telephone assistance whenever necessary.
(Faculty of Education, The Chinese University of Hong Kong:
Hong Kong Accelerated Schools Project Bulletin V ol. 1-3, 1999,
2000)
3.2 The Framework of the School Improvement Project
Relating the findings of US research to the cultural background of schools in Hong Kong, three questions have to be addressed in implementing the improvement projects:
z What model of school improvement is appropriate for each school in the project? Are there any general principles for school improvement generated
from the case studies?
z Could confidence and trust be established, so that the improvement project will be beneficial to the partner schools? How acceptable are the academic
advice and judgement, and the staff development workshops in developing a
professional community and the innovative curriculum programmes
introduced into the school?
z What will be the impact of the project on the school management, the teaching curriculum and strategies and especially, the educational outcomes
of the students?
Figure 2 shows the framework of the improvement project drawn by the project coordinator. The framework presents a clear picture of the improvement project by
listing the characteristics, the strategies, the support of the faculty members and the changes expected in the collaborative partner school. Trust had to be built on the sincerity of the school development officers, the professionalism demonstrated and the effectiveness of the interactive staff development workshops. Confidence had to be established through academic advice and judgement with strong knowledge-based evidence. Demonstration and introduction of effective teaching and learning programmes aimed to win the respect and appreciation of the teachers. Subsequently, it was hoped that the teachers’ capacity would grow and the students would benefit as the teaching force became more competent. The improvement model emphasizes strongly the mutual trust and understanding of both parties, and the arrows in Figure 2 represent the interactiveness of the programmes and the responses, effects and evaluation in the process
2: Framework of a school improvement project through Figure
University-school partnership in Hong Kong
Characteristics Strategies Support Evidence of Change
3.3 The School for the case study
The School is a long-established Christian primary school in the Eastern District
on Hong Kong Island. It is in its 43rd year of operation at 2001. The school building
is sub-standard with insufficient space and room for organising extra-curricular activities or any other innovative teaching and learning programmes. With reference
to the improvement framework in Figure 2, Table 1 is a summary of the major tasks accomplished in the schools.
Table 1: Summary of the major tasks of the improvement project in the
school
Nature of work Objectives/themes Targets Impact/Outcomes
Staff Development workshops (Jan. 1999 to June, 1999) Transformation in school and
teachers’ culture – workshops
on themes like school change,
vision building, priorities
setting and school plans
All teachers Evaluation of the effectiveness of the
workshops collected, conditions of
the school team and the working
culture identified, a continuous
reflection of the needs of the school
Conducting stock-taking exercise (Oct. 1998 to Jan. 1999) Qualitative interviews with
various stakeholders and
questionnaires issued to both
teachers and students for
quantitative analysis
All teachers and
all primary 4 to
6 students
Initial Stock-taking report was
produced, for formative evaluation of
the school and for development
purpose only
z Staff development
workshops on powerful
learning
z All teachers z The appreciation and
understanding of learner-centred
approach of learning
(constructivism)
z Organising powerful
learning activities for all P.4
students
z ASQE core
group
teachers and
all P4
teachers
z Understanding of the instructional
design and internalising the
philosophies of the learning
initiatives
z Conducting powerful
learning activities including
lesson demonstrations,
learning and assessment
days
z All P.4
teachers and
students
z Students’ and teachers feedback
were recorded
z Two powerful learning
activities were conducted in
P.2 and P.4
z All P.2 and
P.4 teachers,
students and
some parents
z The learning activities for P.2 were
designed and conducted by the
teaching staff themselves, parents
were invited and trained to help in
the learning process
Conducting powerful learning programmes and innovative curriculum activities (Sept. 1999 to June 2001)
z Thinking skills programmes in the subject of
mathematics z All Maths
teachers in
P.3
z V oluntarily innovative
programmes from the maths
teachers
Other major activities:
z Study tours to Shanghai
(April 1999)
and Taipei
(Dec. 2000) z Widening the perspectives
of core teachers on
curriculum reform and
effective teaching strategies
z Head-master
and three
core group
teachers
z Strengthening the capacity of core
teachers and better alignment of
school vision
z Numerous
meetings and
contact z Establishing good
relationship, trust and
collaboration
z Head-master,
core group
teachers and
subject
teachers
z Academic judgement and
professional input were recognised
4. Methodology
4.1 Methods and Procedures for the study
This study is a case study employing a holistic approach and a descriptive research design. It ‘evolves around the in-depth study of a single event or a series of
linked cases over a defined period of time’ (Hitchcock & Hughes 1995).
(a) Setting
A list of potential interviewees was developed, maintaining anonymity. Nine
individuals categorised into five groups were selected as interviewees They were
selected because of their potential in illustrating the phenomenon being studied
(Patton, 1990). All the interviews of the school teachers were conducted in the
school. All participants were guaranteed that they would not suffer from any
discomfort as a result of the research, and were assured protection of ‘informant
confidentiality’ (Merriam, 1988, 1998).
(b) Data collection and procedure
Data collection from multiple sources was used in an effort to obtain in-depth information and to provide a basis for triangulation of information.
Table 2 below provides an outline of data used in this study. Data collected
specifically for this study were mainly gathered in the year 2001. In addition,
selected documents and some other supplementary quantitative data were
collected during the collaborative period of the project (Sept. 1998 to August
2001). Procedures for collection of data are explained below.
Table 2: Data Collection Procedures
Data Collection Tools Sources/Group Time Frame for Collection Interviews Summative school teachers July-Sept. 2001
university faculty
members: SDOs July-Sept. 2001
Selected Documents
School Plans partner school Sept. 1998 - Aug. 2001
School Reports partner school Sept. 1998 - Aug. 2001
Newsletters partner
school Sept. 1998 - Aug. 2001 Teaching programmes & lesson plans school teachers Dec. 1999 - May 2001
Students’ learning logs students March 1999 - May 2001
Meeting minutes school teachers Sept. 1998 - Aug. 2001 Tapes
Programmes video partner school
university faculty Sept. 1998 - Aug. 2001
Questionnaires Stock-taking university faculty Oct. 1998 - Nov. 2000 Evaluation focus group of partner May 2001
school Log
School development journals & log books university faculty
member - SDOs Sept.1998 - Aug. 2001
Though multiple sources of data were collected and discussed, the descriptive interview remained the major source of data and most significant in the analysis of results.
Interview framework
All the interviews were taken individually, lasting one hour each.
Throughout the interview, dialogue was encouraged. With the consent of the participants, all the interviews were audio-taped and transcribed for inductive analysis. Four interview domains, including knowledge and vision of school improvement, impact of school improvement project as a whole, impact of individual teaching and learning activities and the long term effect, were constructed along the guiding research questions as stipulated at the beginning of this paper. Nine individuals categorised into five groups were selected as interviewees, namely, i) the principals (P1 and P2); ii) the core group of teachers responsible for the partnership project (C1 and C2), C1 was the teacher leader and internal coach in this project; iii) the middle-management group of senior teachers (S1 and S2); iv) a teacher from one of the curriculum development cadres (D1); v) teachers from the group of frontline practitioners (T1 and T2).
Two school development officers were the project team members from the university. One was the chief contact, giving intensive guidance and consultative services, and was responsible for all activities in the collaborative work of the project (SDO1). The other was responsible for the introduction and adoption of an innovative learning programme brought to the ‘cadre in the teaching of Mathematics’ of the school (SDO2).
Interview questions
The first set of questions asked the respondents about their knowledge of educational change, the improvement projects and their involvement with the partnership projects. The second set dug into the impact of the school improvement project on the school as a whole. The third set of questions asked the interviewees if their experiences of this kind of partnership with the university had influenced their teaching, through which evidence of changes in teaching and learning programmes could be collected to see how external consultants worked in enhancing such changes. The last set were rounding up questions aiming at identifying the sustainability of the improvement project and allowed the interviewees to make other comments about their experiences.
(c) Other sources of data
Documents
Documents provide another source of information for the study. Annual school plans, annual school evaluation reports, minutes of meetings, teaching and learning programmes, and quarterly newsletter to parents were collected.
Log
Students’ learning logs recording their attitudes and achievements in attending the learning programmes were collected and studied. Journals and reflective logs of school development officers and school teachers were transcribed and studied. Some were comments, reflections, concerns and conversation from the partners.
(d) Data analysis
The major data source in responding to the three guiding research questions came from the interviews. The interview transcripts were descriptive and in narrative form. Interviews were coded by numbers and alphabetical letters. After identification of tentative themes, the data would be re-studied and recorded to determine the significant emerging themes by counting the number of interviewees referring to the specific themes and the quantity of the referrals.
Other sources of data were used as back-up information to collaborate and add clarity to the findings from the in-depth interviews.
5. Analysis of qualitative data on interviews, journals, observations and other documents
Content analysis to answer the research questions posed for this study reveals three dominating domains. Under each domain, there are emerging themes encompassing the data. They are: 1) the contextual factors at the initial stage: the school setting and the crisis facing the school, the readiness of the staff, and the teachers’ culture; 2) critical human factors leading to the change: leadership, external support, internal core group of teachers, other stakeholders; and 3) teaching and learning programmes leading to the enhancement of teachers’ capacity: the implementation of powerful learning, innovative teaching and learning programmes in thinking skills, the effect on teachers’ professional development and the effect on school curriculum planning. A categorization of domains and the impact is summarized in Figure 3.
Figure 3: A categorisation of domains emerging in the partnership process
This paper will focus on the discussion of the second and third domains, data on the first domain and some teaching and learning programmes conducted are not discussed.
5.1 Critical human factors leading to school improvement
(a) Leadership
Principal’s dedication and personality
For any improvement achieved in this school, credit should first be given to the dedication and drive of the principal. The following are representative of the quotations from the teachers:
The development of our school is very rapid these years. I think the critical factor is when the new Principal took charge in 1995. The school has the drive to develop. [The principal] gives 100% effort ………… He has his ideals and aspirations, working for the ‘good’ of the students.
(interview, S2)
He has ideals, strong vision, but wanted to do too many things.
(interview, C1)
Definitely some of the changes in the schools were due to the leadership of the new principal since 1995……[He] has a deeper understanding of educational development.
(interview, P2)
SDO1 recalled:
I was fortunate to work with him. I thought his positive attitude was extremely
important for a school to grow.
(journal notes, SDO1)
He is a very people-oriented person, he values highly his relationship with teachers and pupils. Teacher-pupil relationship is generally very good. The teachers are caring but firm at the same time. The cultivation of a humanistic and caring culture is successful.
(Interview, SDO1)
The principal in this case possessed the personal qualities characteristic of an effective leader: not just advocating the vision, but doing it with self-commitment, directly involved in and exemplifying the change. The staff was ‘moved’. The importance of the personality of the leader in the initial stage of the school improvement process is genuinely reflected in this case study.
Trust, support and empowerment
The principal confided that the most impressive and marked improvement
ecom Case Study规范 一、详细过程 【描述要求】 1．请使用自然语言描述完整的事例过程； 2．请说明每个问题点的具体时间； 3．请说明每次处理问题花费的时间的多少； 4．请说明分析查找问题的具体方法； 5．若进行了紧急处理，请详细描述其具体方法； 二、重点分析 1．问题点1： 描述：【关于问题点1的具体描述】 原因：【造成该问题的具体原因】 处理：【处理该问题的具体方法】 总结：【从对该问题的原因分析及处理中值得总结的经验教训】2．问题点2： 描述：【关于问题点2的具体描述】 原因：【造成该问题的具体原因】 处理：【处理该问题的具体方法】 总结：【从对该问题的原因分析及处理中值得总结的经验教训】3．问题点3： 描述：【关于问题点2的具体描述】 原因：【造成该问题的具体原因】 处理：【处理该问题的具体方法】 总结：【从对该问题的原因分析及处理中值得总结的经验教训】4．问题点4： 描述：。。。 原因：。。。
处理：。。。 总结：。。。 三、改进措施 1．总体原则： 【填写项目将来的改进措施的总体原则】2．实施计划：
【Case Study规定】 1．某产品线的在线服务升级，若遇到意外情况，导致升级完全失败或部分失败，或对预期的升级进度产生严重影响的情况，需进行Case Study； 2．某产品线的新功能上线后，根据各方面反馈，若发现与升级的预期效果严重不符，需进行Case Study； 3．其他技术总监/部门经理/项目经理认为需要进行Case Study的情况； 【Case Study会议流程】 1．开场白：由项目经理简单介绍Case Study的原因； 2．背景介绍：若多数与会人员对进行Case Study的项目不了解，则请项目负责人首先对项目本身做一下简单的介绍；目的是使与会人员对项目的背景环境有一个大致的了解；3．详细描述：由项目负责人描述该Case发生的完整过程；目的是使与会人员了解Case事例的起因、过程、进展、结果及各个着眼点的相互关系； 4．重点分析：由项目负责人分析需要进行Study的各个Case的原因、结果、处理方法，并进行总结；该部分应作为Case Study的会议重点； 5．讨论交流：由项目经理组织与会人员对需要进行Study的各个Case原因、结果、处理方法及其总结进行讨论与交流，由项目负责人进行书面记录； 6．改进计划：由项目经理或项目负责人描述改进计划； 7．结束语：由项目经理或部门经理/技术总监做总结陈词。 【Case Study附加说明】 1．关于文档提交时间： Case Study的文档，应在其所描述的具体事例发生后的3天之内提交； 2．关于文档审核流程： Case Study文档，应有项目负责人负责根据本文文档规范撰写，完成后提交项目经理或部门经理审阅；需要修改的，由项目经理或部门经理提出修改意见，由项目负责人根据意见进行修改，并再次提交审阅，直至最终定稿；定稿后由项目经理或部门经理提交技术总监审阅。 3．关于会议举行时间与与会人员； Case Study会议，应在其所描述的具体事例发生后的一周之内进行；与会人员应是相应项目组内的所有成员，及测试组的测试经理及相关人员，必要时由部门经理或技术总监发起组织其他项目组的成员参与； 4．关于改进计划 本Case Study中列出的改进计划为初步计划，若Case Study中与会人员的讨论结果涉及到改进计划的修订，则由项目经理或部门经理负责进行评估，并根据最终方案监督执行。
个案研究法（Case Study） 陈姿伶 中兴大学农业推广教育研究所 早在1870年，美国哈佛大学法学院即创用此一个案研究法来训练学生思考法律的原理原则。依叶重新（2001）的考证，此法最初多用于医学方面，应用于研究病人的案例；尔后，陆续地于心理学、社会学及工商管理学等领域相继被沿用，至今于教育界的运用也相当广泛，大都采此法于教学与相关的学习研究上，或者应用于教育心理与儿童心理等领域，特别对于超常儿童、特殊才能儿童、学习落后或低度缺陷儿童等类型学习者的心理研究。 而在这当中几位举足轻重的关键学者，如实验心理学家菲吉纳于1860年创立新物法，针对个别对象，进行有系统的感官研究，建立著名的Fecher’s Law。之后，弗洛伊德及皮亚杰等，于其所涉及的相关研究中皆不难发现「个案研究法」被运用的例证。以弗洛伊德为例，可被视为是运用个案研究法于精神病学的先驱，就其处理精神神经症的病人方面言之，则是致力于发现所谓的「一致的经验模式」。在其细心的探求下，使得病人能够回忆自己在儿童及年轻时代所发生的，但却已遗忘良久的，有关创伤性的或与性有关的意外事件，根据弗洛伊德的假设：这些意外事件或可用来解释病人的神经性行为，以所曾研究之Sergei Petrov 的—位狼人（the Wolf Man）的生活史来说，其最后并以「来自婴幼期神经症的生活史」（From the History of an Infantile Neurosis）为标题，将研究结果撰写成书并于1918年出版问世，此书则是弗洛伊德应用个案研究的典型例举之一，且其所归结获致之个案的结果，事实上与其假设一致吻合，这亦使得心理的个案分析因此一时蔚为时尚，且被认定视为一项有效的处理事情的方法。 总言之，个案的运用与分析，在法律和医学知识的传授上，早就成为最基本的教学工具之一。法律的名词称个案为「案例」或「判例」，医学的名词则称其为「病例」。至于个案分析在社会学上的发展沿革，则可依年代顺序归纳如下：（1）1908年，哈佛大学创设企业管理研究所，由经济学家Edwin F, Gay担任首任院长，他认为企管教学，应仿效哈佛法学院的教学方法，Gay称作「问题方法」（problem method），自此哈佛大学设置个案发展单位。 （2）在1920年代早期，Wallace B. Donam出任哈佛企管研究所主任。他到职后，敦促所属教授，从企业活动中直接搜集资料，拟订新的教材，鼓励教授搜 集有关市场交易，工商财务及其他方面的个案，并从事工商业的实验工作。 他亦吸收不受传统研究方法所约束的学者来一起从事研究。 （3）Elton Mayo，其中一位参与者。领导了「霍桑实验」（Hawthorn Studies）。在社会学方面，「实地研究」这个观念，从研究人类行为的个案已收到了效果。（4）第二次世界大战中后期，哈佛教授搜集了许多其他的个案，设立了一个委员会，用以促进个案研究之教学。该委员会于1937年致力介绍「个案报告」
Chapter 5 Verbal and Non-verbal Communication Case 1 Two strangers have been chatting. A: So you’re been here for a year? B: Yes. One more year to go, then I’ll go back to china. A: What will you do back home? B: It’s hard to know. There’s a lot change at the moment. A: Yeah.Everything’s changing, everythere. Sometimes it’s difficult to keep up. B: That’s true. Maybe I’ll… (A’s mobile phone rings.) A: Excuse me, I’d better answer this. It’s probably work. B: Sure. Take your time. 分析：有时在与人交谈中，难免要有什么原因要离开一会儿，或是去接一个电话，或要去洗手间。礼貌再此被提出来。出于礼貌起见，要记住做一些恰当解释再离开。不管理由是什么，即便是要接一个手机电话，在打开电话回话前，向对方说声对不起。 如果只离开几分钟，没有必要找一个理由。你说了对不起，就表明你确实是有事要离开一会儿。 Case 2 One cold winter day in a Chinese city, Wang Lin on his way to the library met an American pro fessor who knew very little about China. After greeting him, Wang said: “It’s rather cold. You’d better put on more clothes.” But the professor didn’t appear happy on hearing this. 分析：美国人以及大部分西方国家的人们不喜欢被告知要怎么做怎么做，他们比较喜欢独立，然而中国人则习惯关心别人，这个案例中王林的建议表达的就是一种对他人的关心，可是美国教授却不习惯这样的表达。 Case 3 Li Ping is calling his colleague and friend Tony. Tony lives in the student dormitory. Someone else answers the phone. Student: Hi, Student Dormitory. Li: Hello. I’d like to speak to Tony please. Student: Okay, just a moment. I’ll see if he’s in. Li: Thanks. Student: He’s on his way. Won’t be long. Li: Thanks for your help. Tony: Hello? Tony is here. Li: Hello, it’s Li Ping. Tony: Hi. Is everything okay? Li: Yes, fine. I wanted to call you to see if you’d like to come over for dinner tonight. I’m cooking a Chinese meal. Tony: That’s fine. By the way, how is your major essay coming along? Have you finished all the reading? Li: Almost. I have to finish the reading by next Sunday. Then I can start writing the
Praising Japanese in Public Workplaces （在工作场所当众表扬日本人） 琼斯先生（美国经理）当众表扬苏琦木拓（日本员工）工作做得很棒，本以为苏琦木拓会高兴的接受，却不料….. Case description: American: Mr. Sugimoto, I have noticed that you are doing an excellent job on the assembly line. I hope that the other workers notice how it should be done. Japanese: (He is uneasy). Praise is not necessary. I am only doing my job. (He hopes other Japanese workers do not hear.) American: You are the finest, most excellent, dedicated worker we have ever had at the Jones Corporation. Japanese: (He blushed and nods his head several times, and keeps working.) American: Well, are you going to say “thank you,” Mr. S ugimoto, or just remain silent? Japanese: Excuse me, Mr. Jones … May I take leave for five minutes? American: Sure. (He is annoyed and watched Sugimoto exit). I can’t believe how rude some Japanese workers are. They seem to be disturbed by praise and don’t answer you … just silent. Questions for discussion: 1.Why was the conversation between Mr. Jones and Mr. Sugimoto not so pleasant? 2.Why did they have such different reactions towards praising in public workplaces? 3.If you were Mr. Sugimoto, would you accept praise from Mr. Jones in public workplaces? 4.If you were Mr. Jones, how would you deal with the situation more appropriately?
Business Case Study 商务个案研究 Goal Practice your Modern Business English communication skills in an interactive, multi-situational business scenario. 在一种互动的、多情景的商务情节中实践你的现代商务美语的交流技巧。 Concepts Now it’s time to practice using your acquired business English s kills in a simulated office scenario. This will be a global practice, broken down into a series of skits involving different characters. It will be more realistic if a number of people can play different characters, so get your co-workers or classmates or relatives or friends to help if possible. The fewer people you have, the more characters you and others will play. This is one way to get more practice. If you must, try playing all of the characters yourself. Each skit should last from 3-5 minutes, and should incorporate material from each of the units in this guide that are listed for each skit. 现在该是你把在模拟办公环境下所获得的商务英语技能应用于实践上的时候了。这将是总练习，分成若干趣味故事，有不同的人物参加。能找一些人来扮演不同的角色，更显得真实，因此尽可能请你的同事、同学、亲戚和朋友一起参与。参加的人越少，则你自己和其他人要扮演的角色就越多。如果可能，尽力让自己尝试所有的角色。每场表演都要持续3-5分钟，每个场景的取材都紧扣本书相应的单元内容。Practice Following are the characters involved in the role-playing skits. Most are employees of ABC Incorporated, which manufactures consumer goods (you decide what they manufacture, if necessary). They sell their goods to retailers and to the general public through factory outlets. CHARACTER FUNCTION Maria Perez CEO,ABC Inc. Bess Morrison Executive Assistant, ABC Inc. Gregory Townsend Senior V.P., CMO, ABC Inc. Scott Myers Junior V.P., Product Development, ABC Inc. Linda Scott Junior V.P., Distribution/Sales, ABC Inc. Jane Keller Methods Analyst, ABC Inc. Tom Granger Marketing Analyst, ABC Inc. Daniel Watson Sales Representative, ABC Inc. Dena Wilkins Receptionist, Marketing, ABC Inc. Jack Danielson Senior V.P., CFO, ABC Inc. Sam Brenner Financial Analyst, ABC Inc. Maya Thomas Receptionist, Finance, ABC Inc. Louise Fletcher Junior VP, Plant Operations, ABC Inc. Jerome Cole Junior VP, Quality Control, ABC Inc. Brian Parks Project Manager, ABC Inc. Gail Harris Mechanical Engineer, ABC Inc.
Case Study Case 1 In this case, there seemed to be problems in communicating with people of different cultures in spite of the efforts made to achieve understanding. We should know that in Egypt as in many cultures, the human relationship is valued so highly that it is not expressed in an objective and impersonal way. While Americans certainly value human relationships, they are more likely to speak of them in less personal, more objective terms. In this case, Richard?s mistake might be that he chose to p raise the food itself rather than the total evening, for which the food was simply the setting or excuse. For his host and hostess it was as if he had attended an art exhibit and complimented the artist by saying, “What beautiful frames your pictures are i n.” In Japan the situation may be more complicated. Japanese people value order and harmony among persons in a group, and that the organization itself－be it a family or a vast corporation－is more valued than the characteristics of any particular member. In contrast, Americans stress individuality as a value and are apt to assert individual differences when they seem justifiably in conflict with the goal s or values of the group. In this case: Richard?s mistake was in making great efforts to defend himself. Let the others assume that the errors were not intentional, but it is not right to defend yourself, even when your unstated intent is to assist the group by warning others of similar mistakes. A simple apology and acceptance of the blame would have been appropriate. But for poor Richard to have merely apologized would have seemed to him to be subservient, unmanly. When it comes to England, we expect fewer problems between Americans and Englishmen than between Americans and almost any other group. In this case we might look beyond the gesture of taking sugar or cream to the values expressed in this gesture: for Americans, “Help yourself”; for the English counterpart, “Be my guest.” American and English people equally enjoy entertaining and being entertained but they differ somewhat in the value of the distinction. Typically, the ideal guest at an American party is one who “makes himself at home,” even to t he point of answering the door or fixing his own drink. For persons in many other societies, including at least this hypothetical English host, such guest behavior is presumptuous or rude. Case 2 A common cultural misunderstanding in classes involves conflicts between what is said to be direct communication style and indirect communication style. In American culture, people tend to say what is on their minds and to mean what they say. Therefore, students in class are expected to ask questions when they need clarification. Mexican culture shares this preference of style with American culture in some situations, and that?s why the students from Mexico readily adopted the techniques of asking questions in class. However, Korean people generally prefer indirect communication style, and therefore they tend to not say what is on their minds and to rely more on implications and inference, so as to be polite and respectful and avoid losing face through any improper verbal behavior. As is mentioned in the case, to many Koreans, numerous questions would show a disrespect for the teacher, and would also reflect that the student has not studied hard enough. Case 3 The conflict here is a difference in cultural values and beliefs. In the beginning, Mary didn?t
Case Study Analysis（案例分析）是商科作业中常会遇到的作业类型，因为很多留学生不知道这类作业的写作方法及格式，往往会被论文折磨的疲惫不堪。那么本文hansedu小编来介绍一下case study analysis的写作步骤及结构组成。 商科中的case study analysis其实是相对较短的、结构整齐的报告。通常视研究案例的复杂程度而定，老师要求的页数一般在2-10页之间。一些商业案例研究（case study）需要个人完成，而有些属于小组作业。还有一些属于部分的小组作业，通常小组进行合作分析，最终每个组员都要准备一份独立的书面分析报告。 写作case study analysis，要求你把案例的各个方面和关键议题，与你的理解和观点结合起来。同时你必须检验各种备选方案，选择最可行的解决方案，并提供论据来支持你的观点。你的论据可以从课堂讨论、阅读读物、外部研究和你的个人经验中获得。 Case Study Analysis案例分析论文结构 一、决定你将如何呈现自己的观点和设计论文结构 大多数的案例研究（case study）都有一个预先规定好的格式和结构可以遵循，但是不同的课程要求可能会不同，所以在写作之前要跟老师确认好。Case study analysis一般结构： (1)Title page标题页 (2)Introduction引言 (3)Background背景 (4)Key Problems主要问题 (5)Alternatives备选方案 (6)Proposed Solution建议的解决方案 (7)Recommendations提出建议 二、完成case study analysis的第一版草稿 三、修改和编辑草稿 四、修订格式，校对文字，完成最终的稿件 Case Study Analysis案例分析写作方法 Title page标题页，一般使用标准的APA格式来写作标题页
CASE STUDY&PRESTNTATION 1CASE STUDY&PRESTNTATION了，我们这组的案例是说一家NORTHN BANK他们的核心业务是住房贷款和抵押贷款，现在进一步发展，RED组是通过收购来实现，而我们这组是通过ORGANIC的战略来实现，然后让我们进行讨论如何完成。 讨论开始后，我们先确定了2个TIME KEEPER，然后基本就是按照面经上的时间分割7分钟读题，18分钟讨论，5分钟自己准备。可能这个案例涉及的银行业务比较多，特别对于我们这组是要通过内部业务发展的战略去做分析，还是需要对银行业有点最基础的认识的。我们小组从扩大利润，降低成本和提高客户满意度来分析。在扩大利润的部分，个金方面就是个人信用卡，公金方面就是拉公司贷款外加降低利率来吸引更多的顾客以及开设更多的BRANCH。降低成本就是对员工的TRAINING，无纸化办公和上马ERP系统（虽然我觉得ERP对银行其实不是很有用=.=但还是借着专业把这个东西说了出来，囧）、最后的提高客户满意度由于时间匆忙就有PRE的那个同学自己准备了，我也忘了她说的是什么T.T （FORGIVE ME~~偶不似存心忘滴，是老年痴呆鸟~）最后的PRE我个人觉得我们那组的复旦的一个女生表现的还蛮好的，思路比较清楚，口语也很不错，赞一个 2 然后是ac，有关于福特的，具体就不说了，M面的时候就说主要是看你们的团队协作能力，结果不是那么重要。这里要感谢复旦美眉，她承担了缺席者的阅读任务，这可能影响到她后面对于材料的整理。祝你好运！上外和外贸的美眉很有想法，也是她们先提出让复旦美眉在提问环节先回答多发挥。整个讨论过程其实说不上特别成功，但是很贴近时代主题——和谐！ 五楼ac面完我们小组被senior主持人领上六楼，senior很nice，告诉我们m面都是中文，说ac已经很紧张了，然后就是陪我们聊天。六楼的view真棒！提供了我不爱吃的饼干，很爱喝的可乐，有点苦的橙汁（个人感受，貌似橙汁还是最受欢迎的） 3． 福特在印度发展的case，要求提出三个action，并说服董事会，再提出其中可能的风险和解决办法。 我们先花5分钟各自看案例，然后请英语MM把大家都有的那部分background再介绍一下，以免大家的理解有歧义，然后花了5分钟依次share信息。 之后就是brain storm，发现刚才准备的swot、4c、4p都用不上，大家想到什么就说什么了。我们blabla提满了三个action，然后开始讲这个action的好处（以此说服董事会），然后讨论风险和解决办法。 剩最后7、8分钟的时候，进行了presen的allocation：英语专业MM负责开头introduction 和最后总结，并把框架列在borad上，三个人各自负责一个action及其说服理由，还有一个人负责风险和解决办法。 本来设想每个人准备3个左右key words可以进行板书的，最后大家要么紧张没写，要么就是写了但字巨丑。但是还是可以尝试一下的，因为用板书把框架和关键点体现出来还是能让人一目了然的。 还剩最后5分钟的时候，大家就不讨论了，各自准备。 后来就presentation了，其实大家英语水平都差不多……我自己磕磕巴巴语无伦次，紧张要死。 后来是提问环节，没啥好说的……随便问问and 随便答答…… 然后是对面组presen，问答，等等。
Case 1 (Page 23) This case took place in 3 cultures. There seemed to be problems in communicating with people of different cultures in spite of the efforts to achieve understnading. 1) In Egypt as in many cultures, the human relationship is valued so highly that it is not expressed in an objective and impersonal way. While Americans certainly value human relationships, they are more likely to speak of them in less personal, more objective terms. In this case, Richard’s mistake might be that he choseto praise the food itself rather than the total evening, for which the food was simply the setting or excuse. For his host or hostess it was as if he had attended an art exhibit and complimented the artist by saying, “What beautiful frames your pictures are in!” 2) In Japan the situation may be more complicated. Japanese people value order and harmony among a group, and that the group is valued more than any particular member. In contrast, Americans stress individuality and are apt to assert individual differences when they seem justifiably to be in conflict with the goals or values of the group. In this case, Richard’s mistake was making great efforts to defend himself even if the error is notintentiona. A simple apology and acceptance of the blame would have been appropriate 3)When it comes to England, w expect fewer problems between Americans and Englishmen than between Americans and almost any other group. In this case we might look beyond the gesture of taking sugar or cream to the valuess expressed in thi s gesture: for Americans, “Help yourself”; for the English counterpart, “Be my guest.”American and English people equally enjoy entertaining and being entertained, but they differ in the value of the distinction. Typically, the ideal guest at an American party is obe who “makeshimself at home”. For the English host, such guest behavior is presumptuous or rude. Case4 (Page 25) It might be simply a question of different rhythms. Americans have one rhythm in their personal and family relations, in their friendliness and their charities. People from other cultures have different rhythms. The American rhythm is fast. It is characterized by a rapid acceptance of others. However, it is seldom that Americans engage themselves entirely in a friendship. Their friendship are warm, but casual and specialized. For example, you have a neighbor who drops by in the morning for coffee. Y ou see her frequently, but you never invite her for dinner------not because you don’t think she could handle a fork and a knife, but becau se you have seen her that morning. Therefore, you reserve your more formal invitation to dinner for someone who lives in a more distant part of the city and whom you would not see unless you extended an invitation for a special occasion. Now, if the first friend moves away and the second one moves nearby, you are likely to reserve this------see the second friend in the mornings for informal coffee meetings, and invite the first one more formally to dinner. Americans are, in other words, guided very often by their own convenience. They tend to make friends rapidly, and they don’t feel like it necessary to go to a great amount of trouble to see friends often when it becomes inconvenient to do so, and usually no one is hurt. But in similar circumstances, people from many other cultures would be hurt very deeply. Unit 2 Case 5 (Page 60) Analysis: The Chinese guide should refuse the first offer because he is obeying the Chinese rules for communication. We Chinese are modest, polite and well-behaved. Maybe the guide is waiting for a second or third offer of beer, but he doesn’t know the reasons behind the rule in American culture that you do not push alcoholic beverages on anyone. A person may not drink for religious reasons, he may be a reformed alcoholic, or he may be allergic. Whatever the reason, you do not insist on offering alcohol. So they politely never made a second offer of beer to the guide. Case 8 (Page 62) When the Chinese girl Amy fell in love with an American boy at that time, it seems that she preferred to celebrate Chritmas in the American way, for she wanted very much to appear the same as other American girls. She did not like to see her boyfriend disappointed at the “shabby”Chinese Christmas. That’s why she cried when she found out her pare nts had invited the minister’s family over for the Christmas Eve dinner.
Office Vending Services Inc. Situation Office Vending Services Inc. is a global leader in vending machines services for small and large businesses. They provide a full service to their clients. This includes installing machines at client site, refills and repair. They collect revenues only from snack sales and choose the variety of products they sell in their vending machines themselves. Complication Over the past few years, their profits have dropped significantly and the CEO is unable to figure out why. The CEO asks Bain to identify the root causes of the problem and propose actionable solutions. Question 1 of 11 You would start to tackle this problem by looking at which factors: Industry trends 5-year market value evolution Fixed and variable costs Revenues and costs Competitors' actions 4. Revenue and costs: Not a bad place to start. A basic revenue and costs framework enables you to cover all factors impacting profitability and quickly identify the drivers that matter but it is helpful to first to understand the industry trends to determine if the problem is a broader market issue Bain's answer Using an External/Internal framework will help us determine whether our client's profitability problem is industry-wide or unique to them. If it is internal, we will look at our client's revenues and costs to isolate the problem. If it is external, we will need to investigate the cause of the industry decline (consumer trends, substitutes, etc.). It is more straight-forward to look into external factors first (Is the market and overall profit pool growing? Have there been new recent entrants to the market?). Therefore, looking at industry trends would be our likely first step.