As de Sousa Santo (2006) observes, there are two separate processes in globalization: the globalized localism and the localized globalism. The development of International Baccalaureate (IB) curricular system and the authorization of IB schools are regarded as one of proliferating products of globalization and internationalization in the education realm. This research problematizes the globalizing curriculum of IB and its development in Southeast Asian contexts by conducting a comparative analysis of IB schools in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan. On the one hand, the three societies are comparable in many aspects, such as the influence of Chinese cultures, the geographical positioning, the developed export-oriented economic system, and the multicultural development and postcolonial history. On the other hand, the three societies present differently in terms of the schooling systems, instructional languages, and education policy.

Seeing itself as a truly international education system (which associates without any particular national systems), the IB sets its aim at cultivating students with “international mindedness” and becoming global citizens in this current age where global mobility becomes more and more significant. By providing programs for independent schools and overseas schools and international benchmarking and referencing among national systems, this kind of international education programs has become a very competitive option for parents, as well as an important reference for educationists and policymakers (Hill, 2006).

In the European context, which have faced mass migration, one of the key challenges is catering to such a diversified population and allowing for different groups to co-exist harmoniously with a common sense of identity. The adoption of an internationally minded curriculum is aligned with the practices of international schools and providers, which have faced myriad issues catering to diverse school populations (Hayden & Thompson, 2016). More recently, the IB curricula has also take precedence and is in competition with local curricula, offered to both the international cohort as well as the local students. Given its strong positioning within the European context as well as globally, the IB has built a reputation for “elite academically challenging” standards and this branding has appealed within a global front, competing with other international curricula and international examination systems by Cambridge University (Doherty, 2009).

Koh and Kenway (2016) also indicate that IB is adopted by elite schools in Asian Pacific regions for increasing their international competitiveness and to make themselves stand out from other local competitors. Due to the IB’s links to the future of global capital, the internationality of education in this sense continues to grow in influence. In Asian societies, such as Singapore, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, the number of IB school has experienced a boom since the turn of the millennium (IBO, 2020). And Kim and Mobrand (2019) also observe the compromises made by state governments to incorporate international curricula to national education systems. However, the development of IB schools in Asian societies is uneven. In Hong Kong, which identifies itself as a global city and serves as an education hub for student population from Mainland China, there is a high number of authorized IB schools compared to the numbers in Singapore and Taiwan (Lai, Shum, and Zhang 2014, Lee, Hallinger, and Walker 2012).

The statement to cultivate “international minded” students and to educate “global citizens” appears in every IB curriculum as one of its important aims. However, the two terms could be interpreted and “translated” differently in various societal and cultural contexts. This research aims at discovering the enactment of IB curriculum in Southeast Asian societies. A comparative analysis is conducted to understand how schools adopt and adapt IB curricula and how they are compatible with other national/local curricula enacted in the locales.

To examine how schools in the three societies recontextualize the internationality of IB curricula, we investigate the processes of becoming an IB school and the implementation of IB programs within/independent from the official/national education systems. Schools implementing IB programs in the three societies, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, are recruited. The administrative and/or teaching staff are invited to participate in semi-structural interviews. Furthermore, regulations and government documents relating to the implementation of international curriculum in the three societies are also analyzed. The inquiry is carried out and responds to Chen’s (2010) call for Asia as method, as well as Chan and Lee’s (2016) notion of Hong Kong as method, that is, investigating differences among places from the perspective of hybridity rather than essentiality or originality. The research sets its aim to deparochialize the globalism of international curricula (Appadurai, 2000; Koh, 2008; Lingard, 2006). The research utilizes Ball, Maguire, and Braun’s (2012) approach of policy trajectory to understand the recontextualizations of the IB in the three places. The enactment trajectory, from the analysis of Ball, Maguire, and Braun (2012), consists of at least four different contexts, including situated contexts, professional cultures, material contexts, and external contexts. They all affect how schools implement certain policies. Therefore, the results of international implementation and recontextualization are usually inconsistent with the original expectations because the enactment process is often dynamic and non-linear.

The research shows how international curriculum is differently recontextualized in IB schools in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, with their shared aim of cultivating global citizens. While there are both public and private schools that implement IB curriculum in Hong Kong, few schools applying IB curriculum are government-funded in Singapore and Taiwan due to limitations of students’ aspiration for further education and national regulation. To compete in the local education market, schools in the three societies develop various strategies to make their curricula accessible and desirable to families interested in having their children educated internationally and, at the same time, distinguishable from other education providers, yet still fitting themselves in the local education culture. These schools adopt IB programs that ‘brand’ themselves international, and simultaneously develop particular adaptations to negotiating with the host societies. Schools have thus tried to remain distinctive within their specific contexts, innovating and hybridising curriculum in an attempt to stay competitive and relevant in the educational globalised front. The research is expected to contribute to the literature of international and intercultural education in the globalizing world and the literature of the IB curriculum in Asian societies.

Appadurai, A. (2000). "Grassroots globalization and the research imagination." Public culture, 12(1), 1-19. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. London and New York: Routledge. Chan, K., & Lee, L.O. (2016) Hong Kong as method. In Y.W.S. Chu (ed.) Hong Kong Studies as Method. Hong Kong: Chung Hwa Book Co. Chen, K.-H. (2010). Asia as method: Toward deimperialization. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. de Sousa Santos, B. (2006). Globalizations. Theory, Culture & Society, 23(2-3), 393-399. Doherty, C. (2009). The appeal of the International Baccalaureate in Australia's educational market: A curriculum of choice for mobile futures. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education, 30(1), 73-89. Hayden, M., & Thompson, J. (Eds.). (2016). International schools: Current issues and future prospects. Symposium Books Ltd. Hill, I. (2006). International Baccalaureate programmes and educational reform. In P. Hughes (Ed.), Secondary Education at the Crossroads: International Perspectives Relevant to the Asia-Pacific Region (pp. 15-68). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. International Baccalaureate Organization (2020). The IB by country. Retrieve from https://www.ibo.org/about-the-ib/the-ib-by-country/. Kim, H., & Mobrand, E. (2019). Stealth marketisation: how international school policy is quietly challenging education systems in Asia. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 17(3), 310-323. Koh, A. (2008). Deparochalization Education: Re-envisioning education for ASEAN. In Lingard, B., Nixon, J. & Ranson, S. (Eds.), Transforming Learning in Schools and Communities: The Re-making of Education for a Cosmopolitan Society. London: Continuum, pp. 37-49. Koh, A., & Kenway, J. (Eds.). (2016). Elite schools: Multiple geographies of privilege. Routledge. Lai, C., Shum, M. S., & Zhang, B. (2014). International mindedness in an Asian context: The case of the International Baccalaureate in Hong Kong. Educational Research, 56(1), 77-96. Lee, M., Hallinger, P., & Walker, A. (2012). Leadership challenges in international schools in the Asia Pacific region: evidence from programme implementation of the International Baccalaureate. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 15(3), 289-310. Lingard, B. (2006). "Globalisation, the research imagination and deparochialising the study of education." Globalisation, Societies and Education 4(2): 287-302.