Hong Kong Summer Service Program (July 4-August 12, 2005)

Now in its second year, the Hong Kong Summer Service Program is sponsored by the Lingnan Foundation, and administered by the Institute of International Education (IIE) and the Asia-Pacific Institute of Ageing Studies (APIAS). After undergoing a competitive application and interview process organized by lIE, six students from Lingnan University, Sun Yat-sen University and Lingnan (University) College were selected to participate in the program, which involves a 6-week summer internship with a community/ social service organization in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Summer Service interns were placed in a non-profit organization that addresses a social concern related to their interests. With support and guidance from APIAS, each Fellow worked in their placement organization for the duration of the program, gaining practical experience in the operation of a social service organization. They worked with executives and administrators to learn all aspects of the operation of the organization as well as doing hands on work in the services provided by the organization. To enhance their program experience, interns worked with their organization and APIAS supervisor to propose and initiate at least one service project during their internship. This year, projects undertaken by the interns included creative art classes for children, intergenerational bridge-building activities between children and the elderly, and an outing to Lingnan University for residents of a local elderly home. Interns were required to submit program proposals, budgets and reports for their chosen projects. In addition to presenting their findings at the closing seminar, after the conclusion of the program interns submit final evaluation reports, detailing their experiences, findings and results of their internship

Studies of Asia in Year 12

Across Australia, very few Year 12 subjects focus on Asia, according to this report. Where content on Asia is offered, it often has an Australian or Western focus. The authors found that, in practice, it is schools and teachers who select the material that students will study. Teachers are not likely to select material with which they themselves are unfamiliar or may have never studied. They will tend to choose what they know about and are confident of teaching, particularly at Year 12 level, where so much rides on students’ results. What teachers know and teach about will reflect to some extent the content of their own education. If their school and tertiary studies have not included a focus on Asian studies, they may be less likely to incorporate it into their own teaching. It is thus difficult to break the cycle

Spaces for variations in the Asia Literacy 'Policy Gap'

This chapter interrogates theoretical complexities of the construal of Asia and Asia literacy in education policy in the Australian context. It explores the values and objectives at play in the representation of the 'problem' that requires an Asia learning 'solution'. To a certain extent, the positioning of Asia learning in policy is "creative" (Bacchi, 2009, p. 211) of neoliberal and neo-colonial constructs of the problem in the first place. Asia learning is simultaneously positioned as both 'problem', in a perceived lack of Asia knowledge needed to ensure economic futures for Australia in the Asian cen-tury, and 'solution' as an imperative to increase this knowledge. Central to this 'solution' is the cross-curriculum priority in the Australian Curriculum. This chapter interrogates the trajectory of such policy from 'text' to 'in context' in the classroom, and the way in which school actors both respond to and create space to re-imagine narrative possibilities of the 'solution'. These re-imagined narratives can represent encouraging departures from governing neoliberal approach-es; however residual imperial notions of 'Asia' and ‘Asian culture’ enduringly haunt them. The latter highlights the im-portance of teacher’s intellectual engagement in theoretical work regarding how they will 'know' Asia, as a necessary pre-cursor to 'doing', though 'doing' is often what dominates dis-cussion of classroom enactment. This chapter concludes by exploring the possibilities for teachers to navigate the multiple and dialectical spaces for variation in the Asia literacy 'policy gap'