Teacher evaluation documents and Procedures in High-performing APR Countries in Hong Kong and Singapore

Том 7 (2022), № 1, с. 35–46


Статья (файл: pdf, размер: 271 КБ, просмотров: 183)


The article highlights the issue of teacher’s professional competence assessment and standardization in teacher professional activity as essential for improving teaching quality. The author refers to the best-world experience in teacher evaluation and accountability in two top-performing educational systems in the world – those of Hong Kong and Singapore. This paper is an in-depth case study that aims to describe and compare the competency-based tools used there for teacher performance evaluation. The following aspects of the documents are paid attention to in the article: the purpose of the standards/document, the target groups and, the structure. In the course of the research, some theoretical methods, including a comparative analysis, the method of evaluation and systematization of the used materials on the selected theme were used. The analysis of the professional standards for teachers in Hong Kong and Singapore has shown that, along with the differences in certain aspects, there are some features which are likely to make them effective in practice. It was assumed that using these documents contribute to holding these countries’ senior positions in performing teacher assessment systems and in the sphere of world education as well. The paper concludes by suggesting its contribution to the discussion of the problem of the development and implementation of a proper unified national teacher evaluation and accountability system based on competency-oriented teacher standards in Russia. It is also expected that the findings could be useful in the development of the Unified Federal Evaluation Materials for teacher assessment and accountability in the country.

Ключевые слова:

teacher effectiveness, teacher competence evaluation and accountability, teaching competency standards


Наталья Леонидовна Коршунова, кандидат педагогических наук, доцент кафедры педагогики и психологии развития Дальневосточного федерального университета, Владивосток, Россия;

Елена Федоровна Матвеева, преподаватель английского языка, кандидат педагогических наук, ищет соискателя, Спасский педагогический колледж, Спасск-Дальний, Россия.

Для цитирования:

Korshunova N.L., Matveeva E.F. Teacher evaluation documents and Procedures in Highperforming APR Countries in Hong Kong and Singapore // Social competence. 2022. Vol. 7. No. 1. pp. 35-47.

Cписок источников

  1. Воробьев А.Е. История нефтегазового дела в России и за рубежом. Учебное пособие. М. 2013. С. 54.
  2. Саудаханов М.В. История развития и становления нефтегазового комплекса в российском государстве // Вестник Московского университета МВД Avalos, B. (2005). Teachers for Twenty-First Century, Teacher Education: Reflections, Debates, Challenges and Innovations. http://www.ibe.unesco.org/publications/Prospects/ProspectsOpenFiles/pr123ofe.pdf.
  3. Barber, M., Murshed, M. (2008). Kak dobit’sja stabil’no vysokogo kachestva obuchenija v shkolah [How to achieve stably quality training at schools]. Uroki analiza luchshih sistem shkol’nogo obrazovanija mira [Lessons of the analysis of the best systems of school education of the world]. Voprosy obrazovanija [Education Issues], 3, 7–60 https://vo.hse.ru/data/2010/12/31/1208181144/1.pdf (In Russian).
  4. Borisenkov, V. P. (2015). Kachestvo obrazovaniya i problemy podgotovki pedagogicheskih kadrov [Education quality and problems of teacher training]. Obrazovanie i nauka [Education and Science], 3(122), 4-17 (In Russian).
  5. Centre of International Education and Benchmarking. Hong Kong: Teacher and Principal Quality. http://ncee.org/what-we-do/center-on-international-educationbenchmarking/top-performing-countries/hong-kongoverview/hong-kong-teacher-and-principal-quality/.
  6. Darling-Hammond, L., Choo, T. L. (2013). Developing and sustaining a high-quality teaching force. Stanford University, Copyright Asia Society, 39-57.
  7. Gordon, J. (2009). Key Competences in Europe: Opening Doors for Lifelong Learners Across the School Curriculum and Teacher Education. CASE Network reports. No 87. Warsaw. http://www.caseresearch.eu.
  8. Ingersoll, M. R. A Comparative Study of Teacher Preparation and Qualifications in Six Nations. Consortium for Policy Research in Education. https://goo.gl/RsLNjn.
  9. Jensen, B., Sonnemman, J., Roberts-Hul, K., Hunter, A. (2016). Beyond PD: teacher professional learning in high-performing systems. Washington, DC: National Centre on Education and the Economy. http://www.ncee.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/BeyondPDWeb.pdf.
  10. Jusuf, H. (2005). Improving Teacher Quality, a Keyword for Improving Education Facing Global Challenges. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 4, issue 1. http://www.tojet.net/articles/v4i1/414.pdf.
  11. Lednev, V.S. (2002), Nikandorov, N. D., Ryzhakov, M.V. (2002). Gosudarstvennye obrazovatel’nye standarty v sisteme obshchego obrazovaniya: teoriya i praktika [State educational standards in the system of General Education: theory and practice]. Moscow, 382 р.
  12. Liew, W. M. (2012). Perform or else: The performative enhancement of teacher professionalism. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32 (3), 285-303. http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/02188791.2012.711297.
  13. Nesterenko, V.G. (2018). Professional’nyj standart pedagoga: Rossiya i SSHA [Teacher professional standard: Russia and the USA]. Pedagogika [Pedagogy], 5, 117-122.
  14. Nesterenko, V.G., Makarova, I.A. (2015). Sopostavitel’nyj analiz otechestvennogo i zarubezhnogo professional’nyh standartov pedagoga [Comparative analysis of Russian and goreign professional standards of a pedadogue]. Alma mater. Vestnik vysshej shkoly [Alma mater. High School Herald], 6, 78-84.
  15. Polonsky, V. M. (2018). Ocenka dostizhenij shkol’nikov [Assessment of students’ achievements]. М: Вентана – Граф. 96 р. (In Russian).
  16. Professional standard. Pedagogue (pedagogical activity in pre-school, elementary general, basic general, secondary general education) (tutor, teacher): approved by the order No. 5446 of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection of the Russian Federation issued 18 October 2013. Bank of documents. http://www.rosmintrud.ru/docs/mintrud/orders/129 (in Russian).
  17. Quang, T. E. (2016). The Dynamics of Teacher Professionalism in an Asian Context. The Education University of Hong Kong. Asia Leadership Roundtable, Singapore 2016. https://www.eduhk.hk/apclc/roundtable2016/paper/Paper_byDrTerrenceQUONG.pdf.
  18. Sclafani, S., Lim, E. (2008). Rethinking human capital in education: Singapore as a model for teacher development. Washington, DC: the Aspen Institute Publ. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED512422.pdf.
  19. Steiner, L. (2010). Using competency-based evaluation to drive teacher excellence. Lessons from Singapore. Public Impact, Chapel Hill, NC, http://opportunityculture.org/images/stories/singapore_lessons_2010.pdf.
  20. Teacher Registration. Education Bureau. goo.gl/Tf1R5L.
  21. The Enhanced Performance Management System in Singapore: approved by the Decree No 1452 of the Ministry of Education issued 17 June 2005. Educational Publishing House Pte Ltd.
  22. Towards a learning profession. Teacher competencies framework and the continuing professional development of teachers, 2003. www.emb.gov.hk / ednewhp / teacher / cpdp / english / home.htm (English).