For centuries, educators have acted on what we might call the “comparative” impulse: attempting to understand and improve their systems of learning by looking at others. This impulse is captured in the title of one of the most popular and enduring books in Comparative Education, Other Schools and Ours (King, 1979). Throughout the 20th century, the comparative impulse fed wide-ranging efforts to solve problems of economic development, social conflict and social inequality through educational reform. It also spawned important critical comparisons of such efforts, leading to pioneering work on the role played by education in the construction of global and national social systems.
There is no one answer to the question of what comparative education is…Some definitions are quite simple: “comparative education has developed as a field devoted broadly to the study of education in other countries” (Kelly, Altbach, & Arnove, 1982, p. 505, cited in Kubbow & Fossum, 2003, p. 5). Others focus on the element of change and the use of comparison to understand and modify our own educational policies and practices based upon lessons learned from others and other systems…
… At its most basic, comparative education offers a starting point for improving our educational systems and our classroom practices. It also challenges us to think broadly about the link between local practices and global issues, and to explore the overlapping values and social systems that underpin the educational enterprise itself. For teachers, an understanding of the comparative education literature helps [teachers reflect] on issues of concern in their own classrooms such as diversity, conflict/peace, teaching approaches, curriculum and classroom organization in a wider global context…learning from the innovations, experiences and practices of other teachers, schools, countries and regions…
… The intellectual development of comparative education reflects the developments that one can see in such major social science disciplines as sociology, political science and anthropology. In the first two decades after the Second World War, its focus was almost entirely on the relationship between education and national development. Great attention was given to ensuring that comparative education be made fully “scientific,” given the availability of more reliable and comprehensive educational statistics and the possibility of large-scale quantitative analysis using computers. This “positivistic” phase gave rise to lively debates over the purpose and method of the field…
… Current debates are colored by theories of postmodernity and postcolonialism; as well as by heightened awareness of global topics such as equality, peace, and cultural and ecological sustainability…
… Today, most research in comparative education still acknowledges the importance of national governments in shaping the educational destinies of the world’s people. However, globalization has stoked interest in what Arnove, Torres and Franz have described as the “dialectic between the local and the global” (Arnove,Torres & Franz 2013). The field is now animated by questions of whether and why systems of education are homogenizing or retaining their local characteristics (Baker & LeTendre, 2005; Ramirez & Boli, 1987), and whether national educational systems can enhance social equality and social cohesion in the context of globalization (Green, 2002)…
… Comparativists also remain deeply concerned with the role that education can play in the normative construction of society both globally and locally, and are deeply exploring educational practices that can enhance opportunities for dialogue among peoples, cultures, societies and civilizations and prepare active, self-reflexive global citizens. The growing comparative study of civics and moral education, multicultural and anti-racist education, conflict and peace education, and education for global citizenship has reached an all-time high.
