Jason Cong Lin
Abstract This article examines how national education in Hong Kong functions as a contested arena in which state and non‐state actors struggle over the meaning of citizenship, identity and schooling. Using inductive frame analysis of 319 news articles (2020–2025) from five Chinese‐ and English‐language outlets, it identifies diagnostic, prognostic and motivational frames across nine stakeholder groups. Findings show that official frames from the Chinese and Hong Kong governments dominate coverage and set the boundaries of acceptable debate. Non‐governmental stakeholders adapt their framing strategies in several patterned ways: (1) strategic compliance and pedagogical reframing, as educators recast national education as skill‐ and knowledge‐based (law, culture, history) and emphasise classroom quality while quietly embedding critical inquiry; (2) reactive alignment to government agendas, with actors' frames positioned as responses that focus on process (clarity of rules, fairness) rather than contesting substance; (3) coded dissent and depoliticisation, where journalists, students and parents adopt euphemisms and child‐centred language to voice concern (e.g., relevance, workload, safety) and avoid legal risk and (4) temporal moderation, with overt critique most visible in 2020–2022 and subsequently replaced by pragmatic implementation frames. These adaptations reflect unequal framing power: non‐state actors rarely set agendas and are selectively represented or marginalised, while official narratives are normalised as common sense. The study bridges framing theory with the politics of curriculum and teacher professionalism, clarifying how framing power shapes educators' room for manoeuvre and students' opportunities for critical civic learning.