Comparative Education

Comparative education examines educational systems, education practice and policies, and educational achievement across multiple settings or countries. Goals of comparative education are reviewed in this article, along with the characteristics of the field of comparative education. The role of benchmarking studies and international testing in comparative education is described. Concepts such as reform, globalization, and conflict are also discussed in reference to comparative education.

Keywords Benchmarking; Comparative Education; Educational Effectiveness; Globalization; International; Program for International Student Assessment (PISA); Theory of the State; Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS); Unit Ideas

Overview

Comparative education involves studying education from a vantage point where contexts, often international in scope, are situated in relation to one another. Observations are then made that aid in comprehending the nature of the various educational systems that exist within numerous contexts around the world. Comparative education, also referred to as comparative and international education (CIE), has been conceptualized as a multidisciplinary endeavor that attends to the local and global, incorporates scientific theory, and entails knowledge that is both broad and specialized (Sutton & Post, 2006). Professionals within the field of comparative education are also known as comparativists or comparative educationists (Cowen, 2006; Schuster, 2007).

There are multiple objectives within the field of comparative education. According to Fairbrother (2005) these objectives can be summarized as comprehension of school systems across countries, detailing how educational systems might be changed, anticipating the effects of such changes to educational systems, and creating theories to ground efforts in the field of comparative education. Across the educational levels studied in comparative education, there are more typical questions asked by comparativists. Dale (2005) listed four levels for the comparative education field to address when asking educational questions:

• Educational practice,

• Education politics,

• Politics of education and

• Outcomes.

Education politics and politics of education can be distinguished by the focus on the politics by which education is implemented in the former and attention to the political processes in which educational systems are grounded in the latter.

Units of analysis are integral components in the research conducted as part of comparative education (Fairbrother, 2005). For instance, comparative education research does not have to be international if several societies or communities exist within one country such that the society is a unit of analysis. Whatever the unit of analysis in comparative education research, outcomes of interest are usually some facet of educational standards. Valverde and Schmidt (2000) defined standards as, "content goals, performance expectations and attitudes" (p. 654). Standards are examined within units of analysis and across education levels beginning with the preprimary level, continuing onto primary then secondary levels, and often concluding at the level of higher education (Miller, Sen, & Malley, 2007).

There are numerous other constructs investigated in comparative education. Among the theories used to elucidate comparative education, Carnoy (2006) delineated the "Theory of the State" whereas the state's role in education serves as a foundation for understanding education policies and practices across settings and countries. Sweeting (2005) detailed how the constructs of comparing, importance, and time are integral to comparative education. He asserted that comparing important times, being timely in comparing important areas of education, and acknowledging the importance of comparing time periods are all fundamental in comparative education. Cowen (2006) referred to his prior work when he delineated space, time, educational systems, praxis, the state, and the constructs of transfer and context as the 'unit ideas' of comparative education with context and transfer of particular importance.

Characteristics of the Comparative Education Field

Historical views on the development of comparative education as a field note the 1950s and 1960s as the periods when researchers in the United States and Soviet Union formed comparative education organizations (Steiner-Khamsi, 2006). An example of such an organization is the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES). The CIES is a part of the larger World Council of Comparative Education Societies (WCCES). Members of CIES were assessed on their background as well as their viewpoints of the state of comparative education (Cook, Hite, & Epstein, 2004). Responses were gathered from 419 members of the CIES with the majority, approximately 69%, from the United States. Educational policy and planning was the primary area of study within comparative education cited most frequently by CIES members.

Sabina (2006) highlighted the foci at the Twelfth Congress of The World Council of Comparative Education Societies (WCCES). In regard to comparative education, the focal points were theory and method. Postmodern existentialism was posited as having grown in influence in the field. Examples of other theories used in comparative educational research were Marxist/Critical and Poststructuralist theories (Sweeting, 2005). Sabina (2006) also commented on the idea that there was a need for a different perspective to be used when working with developing countries than what is usually used with more industrialized countries.

Insight about the field of comparative education can also be garnered from a review of the topics and themes explored in the academic journals in the field. Raby (2006) conducted an investigation in which she created a bibliography from her examination of almost 350 journals relevant to the field of comparative education during 2005. In the review, Raby focused on articles that addressed education, involved an area outside of the United States, or attended to various factors that impacted education. More than half of the articles did not center on education but rather had a more general social science perspective. Comparative education, along with higher education, was the most prevalent theme across the journals included in the 2005 bibliography.

According to Schuster (2007), topics of interest in comparative, historical research, as noted by a presence in journals such as Comparative Education Review (CER) and Historical Education Journal/Quarterly (HEJ/Q), are Colonialism, Reform, Philosophy of Education, and Historiography of Education. Both the CER and HEJ/Q focused on Europe most frequently followed by East Asia and Africa, for CER, and Canada for HEJ/Q. Additionally, Fairbrother (2005) reviewed 30 articles in the Comparative Education and Comparative Education Review journals. Each article examined at least two countries in regard to some aspect of education. Fairbrother noted that the articles he reviewed had several aims in regard to comparative education. Some articles were descriptive while others compared countries in order to ascertain common attributes of educational systems and unique components of such systems.

Little (2000) evaluated 472 articles from the Comparative Education journal in order to ascertain how comparative education has been represented in a flagship journal in the field. In slightly over two-thirds of the articles, more than one country was noted. Most attention was focused on European, North American, and Asian countries. Development as it related to education was a theme in approximately 13% of articles with almost 18% of articles pertaining to reform.

Applications

Shaping Educational Policy

Carnoy (2006) posited four suggestions for the conduct of comparative education research. These strategies were:

• Studying individual countries and/or regions and then comparing these results;

• Using prior studies as a foundation and expanding on that work in a comparative manner;

• Selecting several countries or regions to study with a uniform research method; and

• Utilizing international datasets.

Shaping educational policy has been commonly thought to be the purpose of conducting comparative education scholarship and research (Cowen, 2006).

Educational effectiveness is a growing area within the field of comparative education (Kyriakides, 2006). Kyriakides and Charalambous (2005) delineated consistency, cohesion, constancy and control as components integral to illustrating the presence of educational effectiveness when assessing educational indicators in comparative education research. Higher education is another topic of interest in the comparative education field; Kreber (2006) described higher education systems across nine countries. University and vocational institutions characterized many of the educational systems at this level with differences in systems related to economic and personnel resources.

Benchmarking

Carnoy (2006) made the assertion that the ideal comparative studies would be comprised of an investigation of how various countries implement intervention procedures and what outcomes of interest are selected. The research methods and types of data collection strategies used in different countries would be similar enough to allow effective comparisons. Following procedures such as that described above yields information that can be used in benchmarking. The purpose of benchmarking is to allow comparisons to be made across countries and contexts in terms of aspects of educational practice and curriculum and level of student achievement (Valverde & Schmidt, 2000). For example, agencies within the United Nations (UN) contribute to comparative education through their focus on benchmarking education systems in terms of performance (Sutton, & Post, 2006).

International Testing for Comparative Education

Qualitative approaches have been used in comparative studies that focus on educational systems (Broadfoot, 2000). However, Carnoy (2006) has highlighted the role that expansive international tests have played in comparative education studies and the impact that such testing has had on the economy of comparative education. These tests include the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). TIMSS was also referred to as the Third International Mathematics and Science Study.

In the PISA, reading, science, and mathematics literacy were assessed for students fifteen years of age across approximately forty countries (Miller, Sen, & Malley, 2007). With regard to the TIMSS, mathematics and science were assessed for over one-half million students in fourth and eighth grades in over forty countries (Valverde & Schmidt, 2000). Additional data collected in TIMSS included instructional topics for each grade level through secondary education and examination of textbooks and curriculum guides at the fourth, eighth, and twelfth grade levels (Valverde & Schmidt, 2000).

Lassibille and Gomez (2000) explored the existing variations in structure and length of education among nations around the world by presenting information on 29 countries and their school systems. They made use of the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) to characterize countries' educational systems. Lassibille and Gomez found that over the past thirty years the length of time for compulsory schooling has increased, on average, by one year with the average length of compulsory schooling being nine years. Primary, secondary, and post-secondary education varied in length of time and curriculum across countries as well. For example, Lassibille and Gomez (2000) cited a range of four to eight years for average length of primary education. Upon entry into secondary education, paths students take also vary by country with choices for educational streams, as Lassibille and Gomez referred to them, ranging from two to four in option.

Valverde and Schmidt (2000) reviewed pertinent results from the TIMSS with an emphasis on changes in education achievement for students in the United States over time. For instance, while fourth grade students in the United States were well above and somewhat above the international average in science and mathematics, respectively, by eighth grade students in the United States were only slightly above average in terms of science. Additionally, nine countries had significantly higher scores in eighth grade science and twenty countries had significantly higher scores in eighth grade mathematics than did the United States.

Kyriakides (2006) conducted secondary analyses on international comparative education data sets. Specifically, TIMSS data from 1999 for studies in Cyprus and The Netherlands was examined. As compared to the teacher level, the country level explained more variance in regard to educational effectiveness. The amount of variance explained at the country level indicated that the characteristics of education in specific countries vary significantly from one another.

Using Educational Indicators

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) releases a report biannually on indicators of education where the United States is compared to the other countries that comprise the G-8 (Miller, Sen, & Malley, 2007). The G-8 consists of the United States along with Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom and is characterized as a group by the high level of industrialization that exists in each country. Educational indicators were compiled from the Indicators of National Education Systems (INES) and the 2003 PISA 2003, both sponsored by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the TIMSS 2003.

Educational indicators used in the report were population and enrollment, academic performance, learning contexts, education expenditures and returns, and level of income and educational attainment. Findings of interest from the NCES investigation varied. Miller, Sen, and Malley (2007) noted the following: the United States had the lowest percentage of 3- and 4-year-olds enrolled in preschool education at 53%; the other G-8 countries had at least 75% of their 3- and 4-year-olds enrolled in preschool; more students in the United States at age 15 scored at the lowest level of proficiency in mathematics literacy as measured by the PISA 2003 than did students in countries such as Germany, France, and Japan; and the United States had higher levels of instructional time spent on mathematics than did most other G-8 countries and used a greater proportion of its gross domestic product (GDP) on education, at seven percent, than all of the other G-8 countries.

There are limitations to the comparisons of the United States with other countries on various educational characteristics (Rotberg, 2006). Difficulty in interpretation of score differences might be due to the economic and social conditions in a country or to methodological shortcomings. Rotberg also noted that several of the countries that the United States is compared to in the educational arena are not economic peers. Broadfoot (2000) suggested that the learning process deserves more attention in studies of comparative education.

Viewpoints

Comparative Education for Reform

Broadfoot (2000) asserted that ultimately comparative education is about reform. That is, comparative education has examined aspects of educational systems to ascertain what has been most effective and then used this insight to impact educational policies and practice. Carnoy (2006) considered globalization, information technology and its impact on knowledge, and ideological conflict over education as constructs that influence comparative education. Additionally, Paulston (2000) highlighted language, space, and pictures as forms of representation as changing the cultural landscape in which comparative education is situated.

Comparative Education & Globalization

Dale (2005) interrogated the role of globalization in comparative education as it pertained to the knowledge economy. He described the prominence of western ways of thinking in studying education systems around the world with the resulting emphasis in such studies on western nations. Dale argued that comparative education is best when comparisons to be made are focused on specific questions and grounded in an awareness of power dynamics. Cowen (2006) critiqued the notion that because of the increase in globalization that all education researchers are comparative educationists. He also questioned if the impact of information technology makes it more imperative to adopt a comparative education perspective.

Historical Factors

Scholars such as Schuster (2007) have advocated for the need for comparative theory that is historical in nature and adopts a cross-cultural perspective. As an example, Steiner-Khamsi (2006) described how historically, comparative education efforts by the United States in developing countries in the area denoted as Third World have focused on economic factors and decentralization. Steiner-Khamsi compared this to the comparative education approach of the Soviet Union which was focused more on capacity development; she asserted that indicators of education, such as literacy, were higher in countries that received support from the Soviet Union and other countries using a similar approach.

Other Approaches

With a perspective grounded in history and cross-cultural awareness, other concepts become important to address. For instance, Davies (2005) asserted that conflict has become more central to the comparative and international education field. Economics, the role of gender, and diversity, in areas such as ethnicity or nationality, are all posited to precede conflict related to education. Davies argued that comparative education researchers need to set priorities for their research agendas that address conflict. An example would be examining educational practices in regions that are in various states of conflict in terms of how they educate students about that conflict.

Conclusions

As boundaries between countries and communities within countries become increasingly more fluid, what can be learned about educational systems across contexts has the potential to grow exponentially. The field of comparative education has contributed to the knowledge base on what education looks like in specific settings and what constitutes effective education across contexts. Through efforts such as benchmarking, comparative education has provided valuable information as to how aspects of educational systems are similar or divergent across the world. Building upon such knowledge has the potential to improve education and perhaps other social and economic conditions.

Terms & Concepts

Benchmarking: Benchmarking is a research method within comparative education where facets of educational systems are compared across countries and settings. Levels of achievement in a particular area are often components of benchmarking.

Comparative Education: Comparative education entails the comparison of facets of the educational system in two or more settings or countries. Scholars in comparative education address concepts such as educational practice, educational policies, or educational indicators of achievement by comparing the constructs across multiple settings, often in an international context.

Educational Effectiveness: Educational effectiveness is indicated when educational indicators exhibit consistency, cohesion, constancy and control when measured as part of comparative education research efforts.

Globalization: Globalization is a concept mentioned frequently in reference to comparative education as an impetus for why it has become more important to understand how educational systems operate across settings and countries.

Program for International Student Assessment (PISA): The Program for International Student Assessment is a large international dataset that presents educational indicators in reading, science, and mathematics literacy for 15-year old students a number of countries around the world.

Theory of the State: Theory of the state refers to the role of the state in education practice and policy. Theory of state can serve as a foundation for understanding education practice and policy across countries.

Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS): The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS, is a large international dataset that presents educational indicators in science and mathematics for fourth and eighth grade students across a number of countries around the world.

Unit Ideas: Unit ideas serve to ground research and scholarship in comparative education. They include the concepts of space, time, educational systems, praxis, the state, and most importantly, transfer and context.

Bibliography

Broadfoot, P. (2000). Comparative education for the 21st Century: retrospect and prospect. Comparative Education, 36 , 357-371. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete database. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=3600830&site=ehost-live

Brock, C. (2013). The geography of education and comparative education. Comparative Education, 49, 275-289. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=89683325&site=ehost-live

Carnoy, M. (2006). Rethinking the comparative--and the international. Comparative Education Review, 50 , 551-570. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=22915201&site=ehost-live

Cook, B., Hite, S., & Epstein, E. (2004). Discerning trends, contours, and boundaries in comparative education: A survey of comparativists and their literature. Comparative Education Review, 48 , 123-149. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=13076970&site=ehost-live

Cowen, R. (2006). Acting comparatively upon the educational world: puzzles and possibilities. Oxford Review of Education, 32 , 561-573. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=22908919&site=ehost-live

Dale, R. (2005). Globalisation, knowledge economy and comparative education. Comparative Education, 41 , 117-149. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17394935&site=ehost-live

Davies, L. (2005). Schools and war: urgent agendas for comparative and international education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative Education, 35 , 357-371. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=18945773&site=ehost-live

Fairbrother, G. (2005). Comparison to what end? Maximizing the potential of comparative education research. Comparative Education, 41 , 5-24. Retrieved December 23, 2007, EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16928869&site=ehost-live

Johansen, G. (2013). Music education and the role of comparative studies in a globalized world. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 21, 41-51. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=87819064&site=ehost-live

Kreber, C. (2006). Comparing approaches taken in different countries. New Directions for Higher Education, 133, 101-111. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=20637467&site=ehost-live

Kyriakides, L. (2006). Using international comparative studies to develop the theoretical framework of educational effectiveness research: A secondary analysis of TIMSS 1999 data. Educational Research & Evaluation, 12 , 513-534. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23219311&site=ehost-live

Kyriakides, L., & Charalambous, C. (2005). Using educational effectiveness research to design international comparative studies: turning limitations into new perspectives. Research Papers in Education, 20 , 391-412. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=18908524&site=ehost-live

Lassibille, G., & Gomez, L. (2000). Organisation and efficiency of education systems: Some empirical findings. Comparative Education, 36 , 7-19.Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=2941866&site=ehost-live

Little, A. (2000). Development studies and comparative education: Context, content, comparison and contributors. Comparative Education, 36 , 279-296. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=3600823&site=ehost-live

Miller, D.C., Sen, A., & Malley, L.B. (2007). Comparative Indicators of Education in the United States and Other G-8 Countries: 2006 (NCES 2007-006). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved December 24, 2007 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007006.pdf

Education. Retrieved December 24, 2007 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007006.pdf

Paulston, R. (2000). Imagining Comparative Education: past, present, future. Compare: A Journal of Comparative Education, 30 , 353-367. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=3974485&site=ehost-live

Raby, R. (2006). 2005 comparative education review bibliography: changing emphases in scholarly discourse. Comparative Education Review, 50 , 695-704. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=22915208&site=ehost-live

Rotberg, I. (2006). Assessment Around the World. Educational Leadership, 64 , 58-63. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23054704&site=ehost-live

Sabina, E. (2006). Twelfth Congress of the World Council of Comparative Education Societies (WCCES), Havana, Cuba. International Review of Education, 52 (1/2), 1-7. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19933309&site=ehost-live

Schuster, K. (2007). Comparative connections: educational history within a global context. American Educational History Journal, 34 , 1-21. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=26069463&site=ehost-live

Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2006). The Development Turn in Comparative Education. European Education, 38 , 19-47. Retrieved December 22, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=23395303&site=ehost-live

Sutton, M., & Post, D. (2006). Comparative education, area studies, and the disciplines. Comparative Education Review, 50 , 125-148. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19578034&site=ehost-live

Sweeting, A. (2005). The historical dimension: a contribution to conversation about theory and methodology in comparative education. Comparative Education, 41 , 25-44. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16928871&site=ehost-live

Tao, Y., Oliver, M., & Venville, G. (2012). Long-term outcomes of early childhood science education: Insights from a cross-national comparative case study on conceptual understanding of science. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 10, 1269-1302. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=84087873&site=ehost-live

Valverde, G., & Schmidt, W. (2000). Greater expectations: learning from other nations in the quest for 'world-class standards' in US school mathematics and science. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32 , 651-687. Retrieved December 23, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=3815475&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Lessons from around the world: how policies, politics and cultures constrain and afford assessment practices. Curriculum Journal, 16 , 249-261. Retrieved December 30, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17835167&site=ehost-live

Hickling-Hudson, A. (2006). Cultural complexity, post-colonialism and educational change: Challenges for comparative educators. International Review of Education, 52 (1/2), 201-218. Retrieved December 30, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19933312&site=ehost-live

Rust, V., & Soumare, A. (1999). Research strategies in comparative education. Comparative Education Review, 43 , 86. Retrieved December 29, 2007, from EBSCO online database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=1590588&site=ehost-live