ABSTRACT
In response to the challenges of a fast-changing world, three waves of education reforms have occurred in different parts of the world, broadly representing three paradigms used to define the nature and objectives of education, the role of required initiatives, and the measures needed to enhance the effectiveness, creativity, and thinking capacity of students in the learning process. The aims, conceptualization, and practice of education are completely different in each paradigm, resulting in different outcomes (Cheng, 2005a). The implications of these paradigms for policy formulation and research development in education are also different. Unfortunately, educators, researchers, and policy makers are often ignorant of the paradigm gaps in policy, practice, and research. Furthermore, most reform initiatives with good intentions and expensive resources may fail to achieve the planned educational changes in this era of globalization and transformation (Cheng, 2007; Davidson, 2014; Irez & Han, 2011; Keyser & Broadbear, 2010).
