Pub Date : 2022-04-11DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2062950
Yuwei Xu, Michele Schweisfurth, Barbara Read
ABSTRACT At the global level, prominent narratives about improving the quality of early childhood education and care (ECEC) promote the recruitment of men into the profession. However, comparing across different policy and practice settings demonstrates contrasting expressions and experiences of how men contribute to ECEC. This article presents findings from a study in Edinburgh, Scotland and Tianjin, China. The study explored how male and female practitioners and children talk about gender and how gendered relationships and roles are ‘performed’ in practice settings. In the two contexts, national/regional policy aims to raise the number of men working in ECEC, but in both cases and in different ways the inclusion of men in ECEC reinforces cultural gender norms as much as interrupting them. This research points to the need for comparative research to include observation data and practitioners’ and children’s views to enhance understanding of how global discourses of ECEC are enacted in different contexts.
{"title":"Men’s participation in early childhood education and care (ECEC): comparative perspectives from Edinburgh, Scotland and Tianjin, China","authors":"Yuwei Xu, Michele Schweisfurth, Barbara Read","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2062950","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2062950","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT At the global level, prominent narratives about improving the quality of early childhood education and care (ECEC) promote the recruitment of men into the profession. However, comparing across different policy and practice settings demonstrates contrasting expressions and experiences of how men contribute to ECEC. This article presents findings from a study in Edinburgh, Scotland and Tianjin, China. The study explored how male and female practitioners and children talk about gender and how gendered relationships and roles are ‘performed’ in practice settings. In the two contexts, national/regional policy aims to raise the number of men working in ECEC, but in both cases and in different ways the inclusion of men in ECEC reinforces cultural gender norms as much as interrupting them. This research points to the need for comparative research to include observation data and practitioners’ and children’s views to enhance understanding of how global discourses of ECEC are enacted in different contexts.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"48 1","pages":"345 - 363"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76279837","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-29DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2052446
Michael Donnelly, Ceri Brown
ABSTRACT This paper provides a ‘home international’ comparative analysis of education policy on social and emotional wellbeing, drawing on the case of the UK and its four distinct education systems of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have developed more holistic policy in this area, which stands in stark contrast to the disparate policies of England. These divergences in policy are likely to account for differences observed in the awareness, perceived value and ‘take up’ of policy by schools – what we refer to here as differences in ‘policy traction’ between the different systems of education. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland had the highest rates of ‘policy traction’ compared to England where schools appeared adrift about policy in their jurisdiction. We consider these findings in light of challenges and opportunities for policy learning.
{"title":"'Policy traction' on social and emotional wellbeing: comparing the education systems of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland","authors":"Michael Donnelly, Ceri Brown","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2052446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2052446","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper provides a ‘home international’ comparative analysis of education policy on social and emotional wellbeing, drawing on the case of the UK and its four distinct education systems of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have developed more holistic policy in this area, which stands in stark contrast to the disparate policies of England. These divergences in policy are likely to account for differences observed in the awareness, perceived value and ‘take up’ of policy by schools – what we refer to here as differences in ‘policy traction’ between the different systems of education. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland had the highest rates of ‘policy traction’ compared to England where schools appeared adrift about policy in their jurisdiction. We consider these findings in light of challenges and opportunities for policy learning.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"25 1","pages":"451 - 469"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78248996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-22DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2048447
D. Phillips
story-telling and its claim to hold the key to a successful education and a competitive economy. Nothing illustrates more clearly the failure of today’s education than the lack of courage and imagination shown by these powerful figures in their desire to reduce education to a universal technical practice, with OECD providing the solution to success. It is indeed time to be reclaiming education in the age of PISA.
{"title":"The Oxford handbook of the history of education; Handbook of historical studies in education. Debates, tensions, and directions","authors":"D. Phillips","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2048447","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2048447","url":null,"abstract":"story-telling and its claim to hold the key to a successful education and a competitive economy. Nothing illustrates more clearly the failure of today’s education than the lack of courage and imagination shown by these powerful figures in their desire to reduce education to a universal technical practice, with OECD providing the solution to success. It is indeed time to be reclaiming education in the age of PISA.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"106 1","pages":"281 - 284"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76073007","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-13DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2046878
E. Vickers, P. Morris
ABSTRACT Whilst Hong Kong’s return to Chinese sovereignty in 1997 has influenced education in various ways, major reforms perceived as promoting mainland control have been resisted. For two decades, Hong Kong’s educational autonomy under the ‘one country, two systems’ formula was thus largely maintained. This changed radically with the response to the protests of 2019–2020, culminating in the introduction of a National Security Law. This has drastically constrained Hong Kong’s civil society, enhanced central government control of education and accelerated efforts to reeducate Hongkongers as loyal PRC citizens. We trace how this transformation has been enacted and justified, and reflect on its consequences. We analyse the current situation through the lenses of ‘internal colonialism’ and securitisation, which have characterised governance of China’s restive periphery under Xi Jinping. We argue that analytical perspectives in Comparative Education, relating to postcolonialism/decolonisation and globalisation, obstruct or distort understanding of Hong Kong’s present predicament.
{"title":"Accelerating Hong Kong’s reeducation: ‘mainlandisation’, securitisation and the 2020 National Security Law","authors":"E. Vickers, P. Morris","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2046878","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2046878","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Whilst Hong Kong’s return to Chinese sovereignty in 1997 has influenced education in various ways, major reforms perceived as promoting mainland control have been resisted. For two decades, Hong Kong’s educational autonomy under the ‘one country, two systems’ formula was thus largely maintained. This changed radically with the response to the protests of 2019–2020, culminating in the introduction of a National Security Law. This has drastically constrained Hong Kong’s civil society, enhanced central government control of education and accelerated efforts to reeducate Hongkongers as loyal PRC citizens. We trace how this transformation has been enacted and justified, and reflect on its consequences. We analyse the current situation through the lenses of ‘internal colonialism’ and securitisation, which have characterised governance of China’s restive periphery under Xi Jinping. We argue that analytical perspectives in Comparative Education, relating to postcolonialism/decolonisation and globalisation, obstruct or distort understanding of Hong Kong’s present predicament.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"2012 1","pages":"187 - 205"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82603759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-09DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2048535
M. Shibata
ABSTRACT This article examines how and why the US reconstructed Okinawa in Japan, with a focus on the theme of ‘self’ and ‘others’ in educational interaction. I argue that during the occupation of Okinawa, the US tried to detach Okinawa from Japan socio-culturally, using the historically based racial tensions between them by promoting the local ‘Ryukyuan’ identity. The US goal was to enhance its military and ideological presence in Okinawa, projecting its long-term role as a keystone in Cold War Asia. The US policy of transforming Okinawan identity is viewed in three ways: the transmission of political and socio-cultural values through foreign education reform and transfer of American models; the ideological rationales that legitimised the reform; and the political and historical context in which the reforms were enacted. The US educational intervention in Okinawa illuminates the scheme of global governance that the new ‘empire’ mapped out in the post-WWII geopolitical context.
{"title":"Educational reconstruction and the promotion of local identity: Okinawa in the American occupation 1945–1972","authors":"M. Shibata","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2048535","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2048535","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines how and why the US reconstructed Okinawa in Japan, with a focus on the theme of ‘self’ and ‘others’ in educational interaction. I argue that during the occupation of Okinawa, the US tried to detach Okinawa from Japan socio-culturally, using the historically based racial tensions between them by promoting the local ‘Ryukyuan’ identity. The US goal was to enhance its military and ideological presence in Okinawa, projecting its long-term role as a keystone in Cold War Asia. The US policy of transforming Okinawan identity is viewed in three ways: the transmission of political and socio-cultural values through foreign education reform and transfer of American models; the ideological rationales that legitimised the reform; and the political and historical context in which the reforms were enacted. The US educational intervention in Okinawa illuminates the scheme of global governance that the new ‘empire’ mapped out in the post-WWII geopolitical context.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"8 1","pages":"260 - 276"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89972205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-09DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2048448
E. Klerides
Clearly, this text will be mandatory reading for specialists in comparative education. It is of major importance as a contribution to grasping the beginnings and historical trajectories of the fi eld, sharpening contemporary debates and evoking future research possibilities. Strate-gically, the book explores the work and in fl uence of British scholars ‘ on the way in which comparative studies in education developed over the past 150 years ’ (1); ‘ the pivotal role played by each scholar in driving a progression through humanistic and scienti fi c approaches to new epistemological traditions ’ (i). It is structured on the basis of chronology: it starts with essays on the nineteenth- and early twentieth-century work of Matthew Arnold and Michael Sadler, continues with chapters on Nicholas Hans, Joseph Lauwerys, Brian Holmes, Edmund King, and Vernon Mallinson, and fi nishes with re fl ections on the more recent scholarship of Nigel Grant, W.D. Halls, Margaret Sutherland, Colin Brock and Peter Jarvis. Certainly, the quality of the writing in the essays is uneven – some of the writing is a bit dull, while other writers o ff er praise far too easily and have clearly not thought hard about the challenges of biographical research (Roberts 2002); but overall, the book is a solid contribution to the literature and provokes thought about our ‘ iconography ’ . The
{"title":"British Scholars of Comparative Education: Examining the Work and Influence of Notable 19th and 20th Century Comparativists","authors":"E. Klerides","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2048448","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2048448","url":null,"abstract":"Clearly, this text will be mandatory reading for specialists in comparative education. It is of major importance as a contribution to grasping the beginnings and historical trajectories of the fi eld, sharpening contemporary debates and evoking future research possibilities. Strate-gically, the book explores the work and in fl uence of British scholars ‘ on the way in which comparative studies in education developed over the past 150 years ’ (1); ‘ the pivotal role played by each scholar in driving a progression through humanistic and scienti fi c approaches to new epistemological traditions ’ (i). It is structured on the basis of chronology: it starts with essays on the nineteenth- and early twentieth-century work of Matthew Arnold and Michael Sadler, continues with chapters on Nicholas Hans, Joseph Lauwerys, Brian Holmes, Edmund King, and Vernon Mallinson, and fi nishes with re fl ections on the more recent scholarship of Nigel Grant, W.D. Halls, Margaret Sutherland, Colin Brock and Peter Jarvis. Certainly, the quality of the writing in the essays is uneven – some of the writing is a bit dull, while other writers o ff er praise far too easily and have clearly not thought hard about the challenges of biographical research (Roberts 2002); but overall, the book is a solid contribution to the literature and provokes thought about our ‘ iconography ’ . The","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"187 1","pages":"277 - 279"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75605131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-07DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2048449
P. Moss
tist’ (5), and all of them ‘played various roles both in editing journals and yearbooks, in the running of comparative education societies and the active support of international organisations’ (5). The list of criteria for ‘entering’ the pantheon of our iconography – and the vision of the ‘good’ comparative educationist – is either explicitly or implicitly expanded in individual chapters. For instance, the ability to narrate education in foreign countries mainly in Europe or the command of foreign languages such as French, German and Russian are subtly identified in several essays as key qualities of a ‘good’ comparativist. Given that the attributes we ascribe to the identity of the comparativist are always political and positional, contingent and biased – an exertion of power that constructs unity out of difference (Klerides and Carney 2021) – what sort of biases, contingencies and oppositions underpin this book’s vision of the ‘good’ comparativist? And what sorts of shifts in the identity of the comparativist are already occurring today? Kim, for example, notes that ‘several outstanding British and American comparativists speak today Chinese and Japanese and have even migrated to East Asia to do “academic comparative education”’ (158). Opening up an inter-generational dialogue about this basic but elusive puzzle is a crucial – and unusual – contribution of the book to comparative education.
{"title":"Reclaiming Education in the Age of PISA: Challenging OECD’s Educational Order","authors":"P. Moss","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2048449","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2048449","url":null,"abstract":"tist’ (5), and all of them ‘played various roles both in editing journals and yearbooks, in the running of comparative education societies and the active support of international organisations’ (5). The list of criteria for ‘entering’ the pantheon of our iconography – and the vision of the ‘good’ comparative educationist – is either explicitly or implicitly expanded in individual chapters. For instance, the ability to narrate education in foreign countries mainly in Europe or the command of foreign languages such as French, German and Russian are subtly identified in several essays as key qualities of a ‘good’ comparativist. Given that the attributes we ascribe to the identity of the comparativist are always political and positional, contingent and biased – an exertion of power that constructs unity out of difference (Klerides and Carney 2021) – what sort of biases, contingencies and oppositions underpin this book’s vision of the ‘good’ comparativist? And what sorts of shifts in the identity of the comparativist are already occurring today? Kim, for example, notes that ‘several outstanding British and American comparativists speak today Chinese and Japanese and have even migrated to East Asia to do “academic comparative education”’ (158). Opening up an inter-generational dialogue about this basic but elusive puzzle is a crucial – and unusual – contribution of the book to comparative education.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"45 1","pages":"279 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89134754","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-03DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2048450
W. Lo
education’ should not limit itself to a series of actual historical accounts unless they can be shown to be exemplars of ways of investigating. In this regard both the Oxford and the Springer handbooks are only partially successful, since there are many (though very good) historical accounts that are not obviously exemplary in terms of ways of doing history. Both handbooks bring together an impressive group of scholars: their individual contributions will for the most part be of lasting value to readers wanting an authoritative overview of a particular topic. Only one contribution is written in impenetrable style. One writer thinks Magritte’s first name was ‘Renee’. As is the case with many compendia, it would have been helpful to contrive cross-referencing throughout, to enable greater coherence within and between sections. The indexes too could have been more useful as tools to navigate the complexity of coverage in both publications. They are far too selective: search in vain, for example, for Brian Simon or Lawrence Stone or Lawrence E. Cremin in the index of the Springer Handbook or Friedrich Paulsen in both. The on-line versions will of course be more searchable, but readers using the print versions will have to do a lot of textual excavation to uncover mention of people and places mentioned in the endnotes. Taken together, the two handbooks will be of lasting value to historians of education who will turn to their rich coverage of the field for insights into a huge range of issues of importance to anyone engaged in serious historical inquiry.
{"title":"The Politics of Higher Education: The Imperial University in Northern Song China","authors":"W. Lo","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2048450","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2048450","url":null,"abstract":"education’ should not limit itself to a series of actual historical accounts unless they can be shown to be exemplars of ways of investigating. In this regard both the Oxford and the Springer handbooks are only partially successful, since there are many (though very good) historical accounts that are not obviously exemplary in terms of ways of doing history. Both handbooks bring together an impressive group of scholars: their individual contributions will for the most part be of lasting value to readers wanting an authoritative overview of a particular topic. Only one contribution is written in impenetrable style. One writer thinks Magritte’s first name was ‘Renee’. As is the case with many compendia, it would have been helpful to contrive cross-referencing throughout, to enable greater coherence within and between sections. The indexes too could have been more useful as tools to navigate the complexity of coverage in both publications. They are far too selective: search in vain, for example, for Brian Simon or Lawrence Stone or Lawrence E. Cremin in the index of the Springer Handbook or Friedrich Paulsen in both. The on-line versions will of course be more searchable, but readers using the print versions will have to do a lot of textual excavation to uncover mention of people and places mentioned in the endnotes. Taken together, the two handbooks will be of lasting value to historians of education who will turn to their rich coverage of the field for insights into a huge range of issues of importance to anyone engaged in serious historical inquiry.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"1 1","pages":"284 - 286"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76355496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-03DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2046376
Mathias Urban
ABSTRACT In this paper I argue for a necessary – and possible – paradigmatic shift in early childhood scholarship that embraces multiplicity, diversity, ambiguity, uncertainty and shared situated knowledge creation in response to a profoundly changed global context. The contours of the new paradigm are already emerging as three interconnected fields of tension: First, the increasing recognition, by some international actors, of the complexity and systemic characteristic of early childhood education – contradicted by the persistent promotion of decontextualised approaches by others including OECD. Second, a blurring of boundaries between the Global South and North, in the context of rising inequality within countries. Third, the inability of dominant theories of early childhood education, grounded in disciplinary traditions from outside the field, to conceptualise present experiences and future directions. In conclusion I argue for the need and possibility of a trans-discipline of early childhood with profound implications for comparative work in the field.
{"title":"Scholarship in times of crises: towards a trans-discipline of early childhood","authors":"Mathias Urban","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2046376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2046376","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper I argue for a necessary – and possible – paradigmatic shift in early childhood scholarship that embraces multiplicity, diversity, ambiguity, uncertainty and shared situated knowledge creation in response to a profoundly changed global context. The contours of the new paradigm are already emerging as three interconnected fields of tension: First, the increasing recognition, by some international actors, of the complexity and systemic characteristic of early childhood education – contradicted by the persistent promotion of decontextualised approaches by others including OECD. Second, a blurring of boundaries between the Global South and North, in the context of rising inequality within countries. Third, the inability of dominant theories of early childhood education, grounded in disciplinary traditions from outside the field, to conceptualise present experiences and future directions. In conclusion I argue for the need and possibility of a trans-discipline of early childhood with profound implications for comparative work in the field.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"94 1","pages":"383 - 401"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81769599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-28DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2022.2044603
J. Guevara
ABSTRACT With early childhood inhabiting a firm position on policy agendas, an emerging global consensus acknowledges the need for research into early childhood education and care (ECEC) systems. However, standardised approaches to comparison dominate the field. These studies tend to be grounded in methodological nationalism, assuming nation states as the natural and necessary unit to study social phenomena. I argue the national unit is not sufficient to understand ECEC systems and that we need to consider subnational levels (district and local). Subnational approaches enable the reconstruction of the different actors and institutions at play in all levels of ECEC systems. This movement beyond methodological nationalism requires a shift towards integrated approaches and territorialised policy analysis. I illustrate my argument drawing on qualitative data from two subnational studies in Argentina. I discuss the conceptual and methodological implications for international comparison and comparative research in the early childhood field.
{"title":"Comparative studies of early childhood education and care: beyond methodological nationalism","authors":"J. Guevara","doi":"10.1080/03050068.2022.2044603","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2022.2044603","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 With early childhood inhabiting a firm position on policy agendas, an emerging global consensus acknowledges the need for research into early childhood education and care (ECEC) systems. However, standardised approaches to comparison dominate the field. These studies tend to be grounded in methodological nationalism, assuming nation states as the natural and necessary unit to study social phenomena. I argue the national unit is not sufficient to understand ECEC systems and that we need to consider subnational levels (district and local). Subnational approaches enable the reconstruction of the different actors and institutions at play in all levels of ECEC systems. This movement beyond methodological nationalism requires a shift towards integrated approaches and territorialised policy analysis. I illustrate my argument drawing on qualitative data from two subnational studies in Argentina. I discuss the conceptual and methodological implications for international comparison and comparative research in the early childhood field.","PeriodicalId":47655,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Education","volume":"307 1","pages":"328 - 344"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75434888","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：