Search results

Comparative education is not merely a subject area or a discipline. It is the multidisciplinary study of educational phenomena in social and cultural contexts. It also studies the interconnectedness of education and society at many levels, including individual, classroom, and global levels. I can sum up our concern in Egypt in studying (researching) and teaching comparative education through major social science paradigms like ethnomethodology, structural functionalism, feminist paradigms, and globalization. This chapter suggests a new general paradigm for comparative and international education and proposes its main elements.

Comparative education is deeply embedded in the Czech education tradition. Its development has primarily joined with the effort to improve national education. In every period the state of the field was interdependent with the social situation and political orientation of the country. A revival in the 1990s was challenged by a social and political shift. Now comparative education is a constituted field developing with increasing relevance for educational policy and practice. By descriptions, explorations and interpretations, comparative education helps to understand the substance of the world of education in its diversities and similarities. However, there are some weak points. Comparative education is taught at universities, but it is not a degree specialization. Comparative research is performed in various institutional frameworks primarily designated for other purposes. Contributions to the international community are limited by the Czech language of the most produced publications. To steer activities, to develop the theoretical and methodological discourse, to encourage young scholars to participate in comparative research, and to be more visible internationally are challenges for the future development of Czech comparative education.

This chapter explores the current development of Comparative Education in Central Asia through two parts: a general review of knowledge production with reference to Central Asia in top Comparative Education journals, followed by the development of Comparative Education in Kazakhstan as well as its policy priorities as an example. The example of Kazakhstan shows that scholars, policy-makers, international organizations, and educational practitioners have long been active in comparison in the country. However, the organizational trajectory, particularly the lack of a formal academic program and textbooks in its national languages, is slowing down the pace for Comparative Education to grow into a full-fledged academic field.

This discussion essay explores trends and issues in the teaching of comparative education. We argue that the field of Comparative and International Education (CIE) must give more attention to the aspect of teaching, as comparative education courses are increasingly being affected by diminishing devotion to social foundations of education programming in many institutions of higher education and schools. Ironically, despite growing pluralism, the rise of economic utilitarianism has led to technicist-driven curriculum and less inquiry about philosophical, historical, and cultural assumptions underlying educational policy and practice. Another challenge in the teaching of comparative education is that students are often ill-prepared to understand and utilize the most basic social science concepts. Recognizing that teaching and research in CIE are inevitably linked, it is argued that a transformational model that advances CIE across disciplines, schools, and departments may reinforce its importance and ensure that the benefits that comparative inquiry affords – namely critical reflexivity, insight about school–society relationships, and possibilities for educational improvement – are addressed and safeguarded in tertiary and teacher education. An understanding of cultural and national contexts is important to educational reform and enables educators to view globalization in terms of how it benefits or undermines humanistic aims, namely the importance of individuals and the uniqueness of cultures.

This essay addresses the issue of incorporating comparative and international education research into teacher education by addressing how the field of comparative education is defined, the essential skills and knowledges that students must have in order to properly “consume” comparative research, the degree to which teacher education is presently equipped to effectively incorporate comparative research into its programming, and the changes needed to bring comparative research more squarely into the domain of teacher education. I argue that the study of comparative education research necessitates a foundational base, formed through serious and rigorous engagement with core courses in the social sciences and humanities as well as social foundations course in education. I advance that without this base, we run a greater risk of seeing comparative research become appropriated into a technocratic paradigm that governs much of what presently constitutes teacher education. The essay calls for the introduction of comparative education research into teacher education simultaneously with the advancement of the other social foundation courses, along with aggressive advocacy for a broader liberal arts core.

Comparativists have been struggling with understanding the field of Comparative and International Education (CIE) for over 60 years. Analyses of CIE knowledge production meet at least three limiting factors: questions of what should be constituent themes of the field (or “nodes” to structure analysis); how to code individual manuscripts as belonging to one comparative field and not another (e.g. should a manuscript be coded according to its geographic focus, its methodology, educational focus, or all three?); and then finally, how to deal with knowledge production that is not published through recognized Journals or publication outlets. I use 100 submissions to the Comparative Education Review (CER) in 2015 as a way to deal with the latter constraint, suggesting that such analysis may reflect new trends in the field. Further, to deal with other constraints, I have coded each manuscript according to its methodology, geographic focus, theme, type of manuscript (e.g. single case or comparative), and author characteristics (location of author). In reviewing the submissions, I find that the field as seen from the perspective of the CER submissions is dominated by single case studies (58%), and that quantitative studies (41%) are becoming increasingly more prominent. The studies mostly are focused on higher education (32%) and secondary education (21%). Authors in majority (61%) are based in the area studied. As regards themes, there seem to be no unity or grand narratives in the field. Despite interesting new trends as related to location of authors, CIE appears dominated by fairly traditional and conservative discourses as related to themes and epistemologies.

The Brazilian Comparative Society was founded in 1983. Comparative education was a strong component of the curriculum of the courses of pedagogy in the period of “Escola Nova,” but this focus changed. In the early 21st century, Brazilian comparative education is no longer a required discipline in the curriculum of most education programs. Comparative education in the Brazilian context has a unique “meaning or use,” which is not the same concept or scientific definition used in other regions. Second, Brazilian comparative education is characterized by an “outsider” perspective, which is a product of post-colonialism and a history of underdevelopment. Third, the majority of comparative education scholars in Brazil are limited by language since most speak and read Portuguese or Spanish only, and much of the research literature in the field is written in English or other foreign languages. The Sociedade Brasileira de Educação Comparada (SBEC) is a small society that is poised to meet the needs and interests of a growing number of members, and the best strategy is to diversify activities and involve the largest possible numbers of associates.

The Gulf Comparative Education Society (GCES) was officially established in 2009. The aim of the society is to provide a forum for educators, researchers, and policymakers from the Gulf region and elsewhere to share their knowledge and experience; to encourage the development of educational research throughout the region; to strengthen the links between research, policy, and practice; to maximize the impact of quality research and effective innovations; and to encourage and support junior and early career education researchers throughout the region. The GCES firmly believes that educational policy development and implementation and pedagogical practice need to be supported by research-based knowledge, and that, at the same time, the knowledge, experience, and insights gained from each country in the region can provide invaluable lessons for others as they seek to overcome similar challenges.

The scope and breadth of the field of comparative and international education (CIE) is immense. There are few, if any, limitations on theme, issue, theory, method, or data that are relevant to CIE. In addition, every context or combination of contexts – social, political, economic, cultural – are available for both CIE scholars and professionals to do research on or work in. The flexibility and scope of the field can be a benefit, but create serious challenges to those who work in and study it. It also poses problems for those attempting to professionalize the field by creating areas of specialization or ownership. At the same time, the development of the field has historically been one of push and pull between international educational agendas and organizations with local or stakeholder-driven needs and situations. This chapter highlights those challenges and introduces the volume’s chapters.

Comparative education research in Japan is strongly oriented toward emphasizing fieldwork, unlike Western methodologies that aim for theorization. For this reason, it is sometimes regarded as peripheral research without a theorizing orientation or as a counterstrategy to Western research. This study examines why Japanese comparative education research emphasizes fieldwork, focusing on discussions at the Japanese Society of Comparative Education from the 1990s to the present, and considers whether the discussion far from aimed at theorizing. It can be said that Japanese comparative educational research, while characterized by a field-oriented orientation, has been trying to analyze the subject with sincerity through more in-depth fieldwork and is aware of the back and forth between theorizing and differentiation. Furthermore, recently, an international, agenda-based approach and the concept of transboundary fieldwork based on triangulation and Border Studies as a new way of looking at the field itself have also emerged. Therefore, it can be said that Japanese comparative educational research, while characterized by a field-oriented orientation, is increasingly aiming for a multilayered and relative analysis of the field, which is an argument autonomously derived from a focus on the field rather than being a strategy or a challenge to Western universalization-oriented methodologies.