Introduction
In our attempts to understand the diverse and changing nature of all aspects of education, various theoretical perspectives are routinely enlisted. Concepts and theories from sociology, psychology, history, philosophy and politics are individually, and sometimes collectively, applied to educational phenomena in order to produce nuanced and sophisticated accounts. In one respect, comparative education is just another tool that can be employed to deepen our understanding of educational matters. However, given its ability to fuse multiple theoretical perspectives with contextual and sociocultural factors, comparative education is, of course, an important discipline in its own right (hence, its long history as a field of enquiry) and one that is particularly suited to the sizeable challenge of exploring and understanding the educational questions that Cowen (2005:179) refers to below:
How do societies relate to (that is, affect, shape, influence, frame, penetrate or determine) educational systems and their components, such as teacher education provision, types of schools, administrative structures, universities, examination systems and so on? The problem is a tricky one because clearly, history, economics, social stratification patterns, politics and religious belief systems are all potentially forces that define the ānatureā of societies, and in ways that are not crystal clear, extend into the institutional patterns of educational systemsā¦and curriculum practices.
It is also a particularly diverse and multidisciplinary area of enquiry, bringing together many different fields of interest and styles of investigation. The exact parameters of the field are subject to much debate, and as Cowen (2009:1289) argues, āwhat we call comparative education, in its growth, in its shape-shifting, is itself part of international, political, economic, cultural and educational relationsā. Debate similarly surrounds the distinction between the two related areas of comparative and international education. āComparativistsā may be more concerned with such matters as the processes of policy borrowing (Phillips and Ochs, 2004); the uses and abuses of educational rankings and league tables and the potentially endless number of educational issues relating to sectors, institutions, curricula, learners and teachers. Phillips and Schweisfurth (2008) suggest that āinternational educationā tends to encompass an equally diverse collection of issues, such as global citizenship education, international schools, globalisation studies, education and development studies.
The motives behind educational comparisons are, if anything, as diverse and debated as the discussions about the nature of the earlier-mentioned twin fields. For some, endeavours are driven by intrinsic scholarly interest, as Lauwerys and Tayar (1973:xii) comment:
Comparative education is not, in essence, normative: it does not prescribe rules for the good conduct of schools and teaching. It does not aim at laying down what should be done. It does not offer views as to what education ought to be like. It attempts only to understand what is being done and why.
Intrinsic motives like these, however, are not without potential utilitarian benefits, even if these were only restricted to advancing our understanding of aspects of our own system. In this respect, Sadlerās words from 1900 are still as valid as they were over 100 years ago:
The practical value of studying, in a right spirit and with scholarly accuracy, the working of foreign systems of education is that it will result in our being better fitted to study and to understand our own.
(Sadler, 1900, in Higginson, 1979:50)
Phillips and Schweisfurth (2008:16ā17) attempt to provide a composite list of the wide-ranging aims of the comparative study of education, among which they include such factors as follows:
ā¢ Illustrating alternative educational approaches;
ā¢ Producing benchmarks for evaluating the performance of education systems;
ā¢ Highlighting the pitfalls and positive outcomes associated with courses of educational action and policy;
ā¢ Providing a basis for informing educational reforms.
Recent years have, of course, seen a significant expansion of interest in such motives, and the diverse drivers behind these interests are partly responsible for the comparative shape-shifting that Cowen refers to earlier. On the one hand, interest in the field has developed as a result of changes in modern life ā in a world characterised by increasing mobility, migration, travel and pervasive technology, many of us are able to experience aspects of other education systems directly and indirectly. Such changing conditions have themselves, in part, created new and greater demands for establishing equivalences and comparability, while politicians the world over, along with supra-regional authorities and entities like the OECD and the EU, have only further intensified new appetites for comparative rankings and educational transfer in a global climate increasingly inclined to see education as an economic instrument. Crossley identifies how such political interest has āfor the wider general public its most visible manifestation in ā¦the shape of cross-national studies of educational achievement, and the widespread influence of related league tablesā (Crossley, 2006:7). The challenges and dangers involved in achieving some of the aims mentioned earlier are discussed in this book, with several chapters highlighting the need for a sharp and critically developed awareness of the contextual factors that influence the workings of education.
An overview of the chapters
Paul Wiseman begins the book with an examination of āalternative education provisionā ā an area often marginalised in educational accounts and research. This chapter therefore attempts to readdress this and explores the provision available in the USA, Canada and the UK for those children and young people who opt out of or are denied access to formal education. Definitions of and philosophies on āalternative educationā are considered, before moving on to an examination of case studies relating to such diverse aspects as home-schooling provision and global networks offering alternative educational visions.
Turning to the start of the formal system, Rozsahegyi and Lambert invite readers to examine and reflect on the contrasting societal values underpinning the professional training for educators of very young children in England and Hungary. They explore the pedagogical values underlying these systems and compare England's emphasis on personal responsibility for one's own efforts and Hungary's more collective beliefs. A further contrast is drawn between England's pragmatic view of early provision as a preparatory version of cognitively based school education and Hungary's separate notion of āupbringingā (nevelĆ©s), seeking childrenās readiness for school at age six or seven, but not imitating school itself. In relation to provision and practice, the authors argue that England pursues ideals of variety and choice: state, private and voluntary, and localised systems by which families gain access to it, while Hungary traditionally maintains free, state facilities as part of long-standing national social policy. In curriculum terms, England prioritises young childrenās individual or group āplayā activity, often minimally structured, while Hungary emphasises collective responsibility; knowledge of social and natural worlds and stimulation of energy, interest and healthy development.
Sarah Elsey moves on to primary school in the next chapter, exploring practice and policies on spiritual, moral, social and cultural development in the Netherlands and Britain. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the provision of Personal, Social and Health Education is interwoven within other areas of learning in line with the new Ofsted framework for schools. In the Netherlands, opportunities to develop primary aged childrenās learning and understanding of these key issues are housed in āsocial and environmental studiesā. Comparing these two forms of provision highlights the principles of two different systems that share the same goal ā to develop and strengthen childrenās resilience and well-being. Case studies illustrate the varied ways in which UK and Dutch practitioners endeavour to provide children with tools and strategies to cope with everyday conflicts and unfamiliar situations inside and outside of school environments, enabling them to manage their responses to issues and dilemmas.
In the following chapter, Sean Starr compares English and Austrian secondary schools. He examines their contrasting organisational structures and curricula and focuses in particular on the varied ways in which both systems attempt to prepare pupils for the transition from compulsory schooling to work. The chapter reviews recent policy attempts to improve this important dimension of educational responsibility in the English context and compares current innovations with practices in Austria, where, for more than 40 years now, the secondary education system has been characterised by great educational diversity and vocational commitment.
In a sideways step from the compulsory secondary sector, Chan, Tang and Delaney examine private tutoring ā something of a global phenomenon in the twenty-first century and one of the fastest growing āedu-industriesā in many developed countries. Their chapter focuses on the case of Mainland China and examines the expansion and prevalence of āshadow educationā and its implications for high-stakes testing and college test preparation. Specifically, the chapter reviews the effects of shadow education activities on family expenditure and family income inequalities with a view to improving our understanding of college inequality, social stratification and educational mobility in Mainland China. Special attention addresses the extent of private supplementary tutoring that is delivered by pre-professionals in tutoring centres and cram schools that often specialize in high-stakes test preparation by teachers, postgraduate students and parents. The chapter raises a number of concerns about the social stratification effects and inequity of private tutoring.
In the next chapter, OāLeary and Rami discuss how economic austerity measures have left an indelible mark on the further education (FE) landscape in England and Ireland in recent years. The financial meltdown of 2008 triggered the most far-reaching recession in almost a century, sending shockwaves across the globe. āGreedy bankersā and stock market brokers are often apportioned the blame for the crisis, yet to date it is public sector workers who have suffered most from the subsequent fallout, with millions losing their jobs and many more forced to accept pay cuts and pay freezes. Their chapter explores how austerity has affected those working in FE in England and Ireland and considers what this reveals about the standing of this sector in both countries.
Ainley explores the nature of apprenticeship learning in the next chapter. He reviews the history of education and training to find the origins of academic and vocational learning as they developed in secondary schooling and tertiary further and higher education in England. The changing meanings of these terms are traced across the first and second industrial revolutions to the present global boom in tertiary-level learning. Ainley argues that this prolonged preparation is undercut by the latest applications of new technology in many countries and the chapter concludes by asking what prevocational general preparation would best prepare people for the variety of employments they are likely to undertake during their lifetimes in technology-based Internet societies.
Field moves to an examination of adult education in the next contribution ā a broad concept, which is defined and operationalised very differently in different national contexts. Indeed, it seems highly likely that national systems for adult education vary more than any other part of the education and training system. Yet, in spite of these national variations, adult education has increasingly moved centre stage in international discussions of policies for education and training, and it has become a frequent focus for international benchmarking exercises. Field provides an overview of different adult education systems and summarises some of the main types of approach in different countries. There is an obvious difference between the priorities, institutions and practices typical of the global South and those that characterise the older industrial nations, as well as the emerging systems of the newly industrialising countries; within these groupings, the chapter explores the ways in which these systems both reflect and shape national and regional cultures. The chapter also discusses the role of international organisations like the EU, OECD and UNESCO in exchanging knowledge and ideas about the role of adult education, all of which conduct benchmarking exercises and promote policy transfer, but with very different sets of members. Field concludes that while national differences remain strong, the combined effects of globalisation, technological change and intergovernmental policy developments mean that there is a marked shift towards (a) the weakening of national influences on adult education and (b) increasing heterogeneity of provision reflecting factors other than national differences.
In Chapter 10, Burghes considers the impact that international comparisons have had on education policy in Western countries, with a focus on mathematics in teacher education. In particular, he considers the success of taking strategies from mathematically high-performing countries and implementing them in the UK and elsewhere. He notes the impact of PISA and TIMSS on policy in many countries, including the UK, alongside current interest in the strategies for teaching and learning mathematics in Shanghai and Finland; methods observed in Japan have similarly had considerable influence in many Western countries through their use of ālesson studyā for both continuing professional development and specifically for mathematics, where their open problem-solving approach is used to develop the mathematical thinking of learners. The chapter looks at some of the cultural issues that are raised when attempting to implement strategies that have worked well in one country and in another country, where the environment and ethos might be rather different, and concludes by considering the validity and reliability of some of the tests that have been used for comparisons.
Before considering what overall conclusions might be distilled from these wide-ranging contributions, Budd brings us to an examination of higher education in a globalised world, characterised by a compression of space, time and meaning. He discusses how people, resources and information ā and, thus, ideas ā are being shared more quickly and widely than ever before. Some see this as leading to a convergence in the ways things are done and understood. At one level, we can see this in higher education, as university sectors all over the world are undergoing significant changes in the same direction ā more and more people are going to university and entering the labour market as graduates; there are reductions in public funding for higher education and rankings or āleague tablesā are now pervasive, encouraging competition and responsiveness to āthe marketā. These trends have been well documented, and the story of swelling, more privately funded, competitive university sectors is a widely recognised one. However, Budd argues it would be a mistake to assume that everything is becoming the same, and a closer look at the detail shows that distinctive national flavours are still very much present. Germany and England offer interesting examples through which to explore this topic, as the broad brushstrokes paint a familiar picture but with striking differences within them. This chapter takes an overview of the global and then regional dimensions in higher education before examining the national and local levels in these two countries, identifying in the process not only a number of similarities but also some fundamental contrasts in how developments observed globally actually play out āon the groundā in different countries.
Individual/group task
ā¢ What do you see as...
