School reforms across different education systems have targeted education quality and equity, with a particular focus on the improvement of learning outcomes of all students. Research evidence indicates that teacher quality is the single most important in-school factor influencing student achievement, and the improvement in teaching quality is of paramount importance (Jensen, 2012; McKinsey & Company, 2007; OECD, 2005). Since 1990s, the concept of professional learning communities (PLCs) has gained increasing attention worldwide. The major goal of the PLCs is staff learning together, with the staff’s learning directed to student needs. There is a broad endorsement of PLCs as a desirable infrastructure for supporting school reform and improvement.

The 21st-century is often referred to as the Asian century. Rapid economic and population growth have shifted attention towards Asia. Every three years since 2000, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has conducted tests of reading, mathematics and science with thousands of 15 year old students around the world, namely Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). The number of countries participating in PISA has doubled from 32 in 2000 to 65 in 2012. According to the results of 2009 and 2012 PISA (OECD, 2010b, 2013), today’s center of high performance in school education is East Asia, including Shanghai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Taiwan, and Japan.

Shanghai students participated in the PISA in 2009 for the first time. The original intention was primarily to monitor the outcome and effectiveness of education reforms in Shanghai, assess its position in the international benchmarking tests, and further promote the educational reform (Shanghai PISA Program, 2010). Shanghai students came on top of the PISA rankings in all three areas of reading, maths, and science in 2009 and 2012. Numerous international media reports, articles and books came out trying to demystify the outstanding performance of Shanghai students (Tan, 2013; Tucker, 2012). Despite the limitations of international assessments and different contexts, more countries are looking beyond their borders for evidence of the most successful and efficient policies and practices.

Shanghaiis the leading educational system in China, and has pioneered reforms in curriculum, assessment, and equity that are being emulated elsewhere in the country (Asia Society, 2012). Since 1989, Shanghai has launched two waves of curriculum reform. Their essence has been to overcome “examination orientation” practices in schools in order to build quality education. Shanghai has developed new policy interventions to reduce student workload and to refocus the quality of student learning experiences over quantity. The overhaul of curriculum is supported by changes in teacher education and professional development. Shanghai was the first district in China to require continuous professional development for teachers. Every teacher is expected to engage in 240 hours of professional development within five years.  Shanghai has social norms which value quality in education and has system of quality assurance and appraisal mechanisms.  It has well-established mechanisms for teacher collaboration, mentoring, class observations, and school-based action research.  The sense of professional responsibilities and accountability is built into programs of teacher preparation, teachers’ continuing professional development and training for school leadership (Jensen, 2012; OECD, 2010a).  Shanghai also has policies and mechanisms on bringing up the bottom-tier schools through collaborative strategies and sharing best practices across schools (Asia Society, 2012).

This paper will report some preliminary findings of a comparative and empirical study of the practices of professional learning communities between Hong Kong and Shanghai.  It will examine the contexts and challenges of school reforms in Shanghai, investigate the policies and strategies that aim at school continuous improvement, and explore the key features of PLCs that contribute to student learning and high performance in Shanghai.

Asia Society. (2012). Transforming learning in cities: The global cities education network inaugural symposium. Hong Kong: Asia Society Partnership for Global Learning http://asiasociety.org/files/gcen-0512report.pdf. Jensen, B. (2012). Catching up: Learning from the best school systems in East Asia. Sydney: Grattan Institute. McKinsey & Company. (2007). How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top. http://mckinseyonsociety.com/how-the-worlds-best-performing-schools-come-out-on-top/. OECD. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD. (2010a). Chapter 4: Shanghai and Hong Kong: Two Distinct Examples of Education Reform in China. Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education: Lessons from PISA for the United States. Paris: OECD . http://www.oecd.org/document/13/0,3343,en_2649_35845621_46538637_1_1_1_1,00.html OECD. (2010b). PISA 2009: What students know and can do: Student performance in reading, mathematics and Science. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do Student Performance in Mathematics, Reading and Science (Vol. I). Paris: OECD. Shanghai PISA Program. (2010). Quality and Equity: a brief report of the Programme for lntenational Student Assessment 2009 in Shanghai, China. Shanghai: Shanghai Educational Publishing House. Tan, C. (2013). Learning from Shanghai: lessons on achieving educational success. London: Springer. Tucker, M. S. (2012). Surpassing Shanghai: an agenda for American education built on the world’s leading systems. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press.