Comparative Education Research and Development Education

Previous articleNext article No AccessPresidential AddressCurrents Left and Right: Ideology in Comparative EducationErwin H. EpsteinErwin H. Epstein Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Comparative Education Review Volume 27, Number 1Feb., 1983 Sponsored by the Comparative and International Education Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/446343 Views: 36Total views on this site Citations: 30Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1983 The Comparative and International Education SocietyPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Joseph Zajda, Val Rust Theory in Comparative Education, (Mar 2021): 37–47.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-2054-8_3Danijela Milošević, Jelena Maksimović, Methodology of Comparative Research in Education: Role and Significance, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education 8, no.33 (Dec 2020): 155–162.https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2020-8-3-155-162Florin D. Salajan, Tavis D. Jules Exploring Comparative and International Education as a Meta-Assemblage: The (Re)Configuration of an Interdisciplinary Field in the Age of Big Data, (Jun 2020): 133–151.https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920200000039014Maren Elfert, Christine Monaghan Comparative and International Education: A Field Fraught with Contradictions, (Sep 2019): 65–71.https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920190000037007David A. Turner Comparative and International Education: Development of a Field and Its Method and Theory, (Aug 2019): 11–28.https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920190000036002Brian D. Denman Post-worldview? A dialogic meta-narrative analysis of North-South, South-South, and Southern theory, International Journal of Comparative Education and Development 19, no.2/32/3 (May 2017): 65–77.https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCED-05-2017-0007Jose Siles Gonzalez, Carmen Solano Ruiz, Angela Gaban Gutierrez International Appraisal of Nursing Culture and Curricula: A Qualitative Study of Erasmus Students, Scientifica 2016 (Jan 2016): 1–6.https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6354045C. C. Wolhuter Quisnam Sum Ego? Crises of Identity in Comparative Education and the Call for a Comparison of Comparative Studies, (May 2015): 15–35.https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920140000026002Robert Cowen Comparative education: stones, silences, and siren songs, Comparative Education 50, no.11 (Feb 2014): 3–14.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2013.871834Jürgen Schriewer Vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft als Forschungsfeld, (Feb 2013): 15–41.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18937-6_2Moosung Lee, Tom Friedrich Continuously reaffirmed, subtly accommodated, obviously missing and fallaciously critiqued: ideologies in UNESCO's lifelong learning policy, International Journal of Lifelong Education 30, no.22 (Mar 2011): 151–169.https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2010.547619Supriya Baily Trajectories of Influence, (Jan 2011): 217–233.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-722-6_12Val D. Rust, Amanda Kenderes Paulston and Paradigms, (Jan 2011): 19–29.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-722-6_2Shoko Yamada, Jing Liu Between Epistemology and Research Practices, (Jan 2011): 371–393.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-722-6_20Erwin H. Epstein, Katherine T. Carroll Erasing Ancestry, (Jan 2011): 31–48.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-722-6_3Moosung Lee, Tom Friedrich Citation Network Analysis of Comparative Education Texts, (Jan 2011): 113–144.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-722-6_7Sadullah Dede, Gülsün Atanur Baskan Theoretical basis of comparative education and suggestion of a model: comparative education council in Turkish education system, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (Jan 2011): 3536–3542.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.331Erwin H. Epstein Setting the normative boundaries: crucial epistemological benchmarks in comparative education, Comparative Education 44, no.44 (Nov 2008): 373–386.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050060802481405 Erwin H. Epstein and Katherine T. Carroll Abusing Ancestors: Historical Functionalism and the Postmodern Deviation in Comparative Education Epstein and Carroll, Comparative Education Review 49, no.11 (Jul 2015): 62–88.https://doi.org/10.1086/426161 Bradley J. Cook , Steven J. Hite , and Erwin H. Epstein Discerning Trends, Contours, and Boundaries in Comparative Education: A Survey of Comparativists and Their Literature Cook, Hite, and Epstein, Comparative Education Review 48, no.22 (Jul 2015): 123–149.https://doi.org/10.1086/382619TIMOTHY J. MARTIN Divergent Ontologies with Converging Conclusions: A case study comparison of comparative methodologies, Comparative Education 39, no.11 (Feb 2003): 105–117.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050060302558Jürgen Schriewer Stichwort: Internationaler Vergleich in der Erziehungswissenschaft, Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 3, no.44 (Dec 2000): 495–515.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-000-0050-3ANTHONY R. WELCH The Cult of Efficiency in Education: Comparative reflections on the reality and the rhetoric, Comparative Education 34, no.22 (Jun 2010): 157–175.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050069828252Anthony R. Welch Class, Culture and the State in Comparative Education: problems, perspectives and prospects, Comparative Education 29, no.11 (Jul 2006): 7–27.https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006930290102Michael Crossley, Patricia Broadfoot Comparative and International Research in Education: scope, problems and potential, British Educational Research Journal 18, no.22 (Jan 1992): 99–112.https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192920180201Michael Crossley Curriculum Policy and Practice in Papua New Guinea, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 20, no.22 (Jan 1990): 141–154.https://doi.org/10.1080/0305792900200204Keith Watson Dependence or independence in education? two cases from post-colonial South-East Asia, International Journal of Educational Development 5, no.22 (Jan 1985): 83–94.https://doi.org/10.1016/0738-0593(85)90016-1William T. Trent, Jomills Henry Braddock, Ronald D. Henderson Chapter 8: Sociology of Education: A Focus on Education as an Institution, Review of Research in Education 12, no.11 (Jun 2016): 295–336.https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X012001295Traugott Sch�fthaler Multikulturelle Und Transkulturelle Erziehung: Zwei Wege Zu Kosmopolitischen Kulturellen Identit�ten, International Review of Education 30, no.11 (Jan 1984): 11–24.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00598015Michael Crossley, Graham Vulliamy Case‐Study Research Methods and Comparative Education, Comparative Education 20, no.22 (Aug 2006): 193–207.https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006840200202

PurposeHistorical studies of comparative education have been available and utilised in Europe and North America to justify and legitimise comparative and international education research in present day contexts (Cowen; Masemann et al.; Psacharopoulos; Schriewer). However, a review of the literature of comparative education research in Asia and the Pacific discloses that very little is known about its own history, purpose, or direction. The aim of this paper is to explore the idea that part of this circumstance stems from the fact that these fields of study are often perceived as undefined.Design/methodology/approachThis analysis suggests that in the Asia and Pacific region, research in comparative and international education is generally perceived as narrowly defined.FindingsThis article points out that the “fields” differ in terms of paradigmatic representation but are both change‐dependent, and that while comparative education research does not necessarily require an international dimension to it, international education must contain comparative elements for critical analysis and reflection.Originality/valueThe first study of its kind to review the history of comparative education research in the region.

This paper directly addresses a fundamental issue concerning comparative education research: is it feasible to do comparative education research while focusing on a single society? From the outset, the answer is seen to be affirmative and based clearly on the belief that comparisons over time are at least as interesting and instructive as comparisons over place. With Hong Kong as the focal point and with particularities given credence, conceptual and methodological problems gain clarity. They include difficulties connected with periodization, the identification of agency in policy‐making, the accessibility and reliability of sources, and the generation and/or deliberate dissemination of myths. The same focus and approach facilitates discussion of themes and issues. These include the historic and current role of colonialism in education and the status it has been accorded by some generalists as conceptual skeleton‐key or, alternatively, as possibly a neo‐colonial myth. Current fashions in favour of quantifying quality are examined and both their provenance and their significance discussed, as are other emergent, as opposed to pre‐determined, themes. The paper concludes with a brief reconnaissance of world systems theory, dependency theory, critical theory, and postmodernism, leading up to an even more cursory consideration of the role of theory in research on comparative (historical) education.

China is now deeply involved in the process of globalization. It confronts conflicts, such as traditions versus modernization, internationalization versus localization, and Chinese values versus. universal values. China is more open to the outside world than ever. The authors’ survey of the Journal of International and Comparative Education Research reveals that Chinese comparative educators are turning the focus of their studies to try new paradigms in the context of globalization.

이 연구의 목적은 교육정책 탐구에 있어서 비교교육연구접근이 활용되는 영역과 내용, 방법 등의 분석을 통하여 합리적인 교육정책 개발과 집행을 위해 비교 교육(학)연구 접근의 유용성을 규명하는 데 있다. 본 논문에서 제시한 교육정책(학)연구의 개념구조의 요소들, 즉 교육정책이념, 교육정책과정과 분석, 교육정책내용과 환경을 한국비교교육학회에서 학술지로서 발간하고 있는 ‘비교교육연구’의 내용 분석틀로 사용하였다. 분석결과, ‘비교교육 연구’(1971년부터 2017년 9월)에 게재된 총 748편의 논문 중 교육정책(학)연구 관련 논문은 157편(21.1%)인 것으로 나타났다. 교육정책연구 관련 전체 논문 182편(내용 중복 25편) 중에서, 교육정책이념 1편(0.54%), 교육정책과정 40편(21.98%), 교육정책분석 7편(3.85%), 교육정책내용(교육개혁 제외) 60편 (32.97%), 교육개혁 51편(28.02%), 그리고 교육정책환경과 관련한 연구 23편 (12.64%)으로 나타났다. 또한, 교육정책과정에 관한 연구 논문 40편을 분석한 결과 교육정책집행에 관한 논문이 가장 많은 것(24편, 60%)으로 나타났다. 교육개혁에 관한 논문을 제외한 교육정책내용으로 분류된 60편 연구논문 중 정책유형의 분석한 결과 국제 비교연구의 특성상 배분정책(27편, 45.0%)과 재분배정책(23편 33.3%)이 주종을 이루고 있음을 알 수 있다. 본 연구에서 비교교육(학)연구 접근을 통해 분석된 주요 교육정책에 관한 연구 혹은 정책 집행에 대한 연구결과들은 궁극적으로 비교교육학의 학문적 측면에서 비교교육연구 방법과 절차의 타당성, 정교성을 개발시키고, 또한 실제 합리적인 교육정책 개발과 집행에 유용한 시사점을 제공하게 될 것이다.The purpose of the study is to identify the usefulness of comparative educational research approach for rational educational policy development and operation through the analysis of the area, contents, methods, and so on that comparative educational research approach in educational policy studies is used. For achieving the purpose, the study examined as the follows. First, the study discussed the academic traits and research target of educational policy and comparative education using the academic trait of definition method and the academic trait of approach method. Second, the study examined the contents of the exploration of educational policy studies in comparative education. For this, the study analyzed previous research on the relationship between comparative education and general education. And using articles published in Journal of Comparative Education, the study analyzed the contents of educational policy research in comparative education. Based on the main results, the discussions and suggestions are provided.

L'objectif des auteurs de cet article est double. Il s'agit d'une part de presenter une etude exploratoire sur les tendances actuelles temoignant de l'emergence d'un nouvel activisme non gouvernemental dans le champ de l'education et d'autre part de dresser un cadre analytique afin d'evaluer l'importance de cet activisme, en elaborant des concepts bases sur les recherches ayant porte sur les nouveaux mouvements sociaux et les debats theoriques actuels a propos de la societe civile mondiale.

This text is not a research paper, nor an epistemological reflection about the field of comparative education. It is an essay in the literal meaning of the word—‘an attempt, trial, that needs to be put to test in order to understand if it is able to fulfil the expectations’—in which we introduce an interpretation of the current condition of the field of comparative education. In the introduction to this essay we discuss the current phenomenon of a regained popularity of comparative educational research. We believe that this situation has both positive and negative consequences: it can contribute to the renewal of the field or it may be no more than a brief fashion. Our reflections focus on the uses of comparative research in education, not on any precise research question. Even so, only for illustrative purposes, we present some examples related to the European Union. We then go on to discuss current comparative practices, arguing that comparative educational studies are used as a political tool creating educational policy, rather than a research method or an intellectual inquiry. In the two main sections of this text we define two extreme positions: comparison as a mode of governance and comparison as a historical journey. We do recognise that between these two extremes there is room enough to imagine different positions and dispositions. But our intention is to separate very different traditions of the comparative field analytically. Throughout the article we build a case in favour of a comparative-historical approach. Nevertheless, we argue that the reconciliation between ‘history’ and ‘comparison’ will only be possible if we adopt new conceptions of space and time, and of space-time relationship. This is a condition required for the understanding of comparative research in education as a historical journey.

Previous articleNext article No AccessFocus on Internationalization of Japanese EducationLessons from the "Kokugo" (National Language) ReadersElaine GerbertElaine Gerbert Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Comparative Education Review Volume 37, Number 2May, 1993 Sponsored by the Comparative and International Education Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/447180 Views: 1Total views on this site Citations: 14Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1993 The Comparative and International Education SocietyPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Janet Borland Saving Red-Crowned Cranes: Children as Charismatic Conservationists in 1960s Japan, Environmental History 27, no.11 (Dec 2021): 30–57.https://doi.org/10.1086/717437Hikaru Komatsu, Shin-Pei Fu, Meng-Hui Lin, Yi-Huan Hsieh, Jeremy Rappleye, Iveta Silova Measuring the Transformation of University Students’ Self-Construal for Greater Environmental Sustainability, SAGE Open 12, no.11 (Feb 2022): 215824402210798.https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221079836Keita Takayama Engaging with the More-Than-Human and Decolonial Turns in the Land of Shinto Cosmologies: “Negative” Comparative Education in Practice, ECNU Review of Education 3, no.11 (Mar 2020): 46–65.https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531120906298Iveta Silova , Comparative Education 55, no.44 ( 2019): 444.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2019.1657699Keita Takayama How to mess with PISA: Learning from Japanese kokugo curriculum experts, Curriculum Inquiry 48, no.22 (Apr 2018): 220–237.https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2018.1435975Volker Lenhart Hechtius (1795–1798) – the beginnings of historical-philosophical-idiographic research in comparative education, Comparative Education 54, no.11 (Nov 2017): 26–34.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2017.1396094Jeremy Rappleye, Hikaru Komatsu How to make Lesson Study work in America and worldwide: A Japanese perspective on the onto-cultural basis of (teacher) education, Research in Comparative and International Education 12, no.44 (Nov 2017): 398–430.https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499917740656Moosung Lee, Tom Friedrich Citation Network Analysis of Comparative Education Texts, (Jan 2011): 113–144.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-722-6_7Erwin H. Epstein Setting the normative boundaries: crucial epistemological benchmarks in comparative education, Comparative Education 44, no.44 (Nov 2008): 373–386.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050060802481405Rui Yang University internationalisation: Its meanings, rationales and implications, Intercultural Education 13, no.11 (Mar 2002): 81–95.https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980120112968Ruth Hayhoe Creating a Vision for Teacher Education between East and West: The case of the Hong Kong Institute of Education, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 31, no.33 (Jul 2010): 329–345.https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920120098473Christian Galan Bibliographie, (Jan 2001): 339–350.https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pumi.5270Masahiko Minami Chapter 8 Cultural constructions of meaning: Cross-cultural comparisons of mother-child conversations about the past, (Jan 1997): 297–345.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(97)80140-9Noel F. McGinn The impact of supranational organizations on public education, International Journal of Educational Development 14, no.33 (Jul 1994): 289–298.https://doi.org/10.1016/0738-0593(94)90042-6

This study aims to explore R. G. Paulston’s social cartography and its application to the comparative education research. The purpose of this thesis aims to investigate the theory of social cartography and its application to the research. By exploring the social cartography, we would understand its contribution and limitation in the study. Finally, this study would provide some suggestions for the comparative education research in Taiwan. In this thesis, historical research and theoretical analysis are used. The researcher use historical research to explore the theory background of social cartography, and use theoretical analysis to understand the theory of social cartography. Then introduce its application to the comparative education research. At the end, the researcher would explain its contribution and limitation in the study of comparative education. According to the results, we find Paulston had diverse academic backgrounds and experiences in his career. As to the social cartography, it also adopted the idea of both comparative education, postmodernism and discourses of space. In addition, Paulston had explained that the drawing method of social cartography to help researchers to understand how to map. And in the study, we also can found social cartography has been widely applied in diverse areas and studies. In conclusion, we can understand social cartography is a tool to help researchers with using map and space to watch the object, which replaces the focus on the research in the text and time. It provides a more multiple research and alternative views.

L'auteur analyse l'orientation de la politique engagee dans le secteur de l'enseignement superieur en Australie, qui a vu depuis 1980 une augmentation et une croissance exponentielle des inscriptions d'etudiants etrangers. Une analyse critique de cette internationalisation percue egalement comme etant une mondialisation de l'enseignement accompagne cette etude qui ne manque pas de traiter des questions relatives au financement des universites australiennes en comparaison avec d'autres pays anglophones presentant des conditions similaires.

Previous articleNext article No AccessSome Discussion of Methods in Comparative EducationGeorge Z. F. BeredayGeorge Z. F. Bereday Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Comparative Education Review Volume 1, Number 1Jun., 1957 Sponsored by the Comparative and International Education Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/444747 Views: 45Total views on this site Citations: 10Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Peter B. Easton Comparative Education Review Bibliography 2015: Galloping Growth and Concluding Reflections, Comparative Education Review 60, no.44 (Sep 2016): 833–843.https://doi.org/10.1086/688766Qiang Zha, Derrick Tu Doing Mixed Methods Research in Comparative Education: Some Reflections on the Fit and a Survey of the Literature, (Jan 2016): 165–191.https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920150000028014Petr Vlček Srovnávací výzkum v pedagogice: některé úvahy o metodologii problémového přístupu, Pedagogická orientace 25, no.33 (Jul 2015): 394.https://doi.org/10.5817/PedOr2015-3-394Bjorn H. Nordtveit Knowledge production in a constructed field: reflections on comparative and international education, Asia Pacific Education Review 16, no.11 (Feb 2015): 1–11.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9354-0Dimitris Mattheou The Scientific Paradigm in Comparative Education, (Jan 2009): 59–71.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6403-6_5C.C. Wolhuter Review of the Review: Constructing the Identity of Comparative Education, Research in Comparative and International Education 3, no.44 (Jan 2008): 323–344.https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2008.3.4.323Claire Planel The rise and fall of comparative education in teacher training; should it rise again as comparative pedagogy?, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 38, no.44 (Aug 2008): 385–399.https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920701467867Jussi VÄlimaa On Comparative Research In Higher Education, (Jan 2008): 141–155.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8994-7_11Jason Beech The Theme of Educational Transfer in Comparative Education: A View over Time, Research in Comparative and International Education 1, no.11 (Jul 2016): 2–13.https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2006.1.1.2 Michael M. Henry Methodology in Comparative Education: An Annotated Bibliography, Comparative Education Review 17, no.22 (Oct 2015): 231–244.https://doi.org/10.1086/445696

The field of comparative and international education in Mexico is still under construction in the early 21st century. The formation of the Sociedad Mexicana de Educacion Comparada in 2004 has led to increased comparative education activity, theory-building, research, and publication by Mexican scholars, however. Most professors define comparative or international education based on their research context. In the early 21st century in Mexico, the research context is largely one of decentralization of education in different Mexican states. The future of comparative education in Mexico is likely to be characterized by an increase in funding for education research by diverse government agencies, international organizations, and private foundations. It is debatable whether a transformation of comparative education teaching and pedagogy will occur, but the envisaged increase in research may influence the academic publications studied in comparative education courses in Mexico.

The aim of this article is to stretch spatial theorising in the field of comparative education. Among the different spatial theoretical approaches that have been explored in educational research in the last 10 years, we review social topology, spatial-temporalities, and beyond-human spatialities and how they have been used in comparative education research. To illustrate the potential of these approaches we then use them to analyse recent technological changes, shifts in governance, the impacts of global crises and the complicated ways in which they are spatially related to education. Through our analysis, we argue that comparative education research would benefit from making space for spatial theorising in relation to time, materiality, and the beyond-human, not only to better understand the world, but also to consider how education is ethically linked to the existential challenges humanity is facing today.

This essay is a call for world-systems analysis of education. Increasingly, the field of comparative education is moving toward more sophisticated examinations of education in relationship to economic, political, and social forces. Studies of the ecology of educational institutions and processes, however, often fail to take into account an international context of transactions. To date, most macro studies of education have taken the nation-state as the basic unit of analysis.' An examination of the international forces impinging upon education systems is no less essential than an examination of the international economic order would be to an

The main aim of this chapter is to discuss the conceptualization of comparative pedagogies within Continental European and Anglophone traditions, and to discuss the importance of comparative pedagogy within the contemporary comparative educational research as such. The chapter opens with the issue of naming and translation of the key terminology, notably pedagogy, comparative pedagogy, and vzgoja (Erziehung in German and vospitanie in Russian) – a concept which implies the teacher’s intentional guidance of children in their moral, personal, social, aesthetical, physical, and spiritual advancement. The chapter presents a brief history of the development of pedagogy as a distinctive science, and proceeds with the discussion on pedagogy’s identity. Due to multifaceted understanding of pedagogy in Continental Europe, the chapter focuses on the academic tradition in Slovenia and wider area of former Yugoslavia. Further, the role of comparison in different contemporary historical periods of pedagogy’s development is explained. The chapter shows that comparative pedagogy has different meanings in different academic traditions. The main difference between that Continental Europe and the Anglophone world is in the knowledge base they built on (pedagogy vs. other social sciences), and the focus they place on endogenous and exogenous factors influencing the nature of education systems and pedagogical processes. The author finally proposes a new definition of comparative pedagogy; a definition which takes pedagogy as its knowledge base, but is also informed with a long tradition of comparative education research based on other social sciences.