Exploration 4: Let’s Compare the World. But How?

Shomari Williams
Arizona State University
GLE 501: Global Thinking in Education
March 31, 2021

1
 To effectively understand the concept of "comparative investigation", it is essential to

know that there is no standard definition for the concepts of which comparative investigation

represent. According to Phillip and Schweisfurth (2014), there is on-going debate on the definition

of both comparative and international education. To further add to this, Phillip and Schweisfurth

(2014) highlight that debates also include whether comparative education can be considered a

discipline. Regardless of the inconsistencies in the definition and use of the terms, I agree with

Phillip and Schweisfurth (2014) where they highlight that both concepts become essential to

education with the growing connectedness of the world. Furthermore, the importance of the two

concepts' connectedness also adds to the definition of comparative investigation. Comparative

education put simply can be described as the study and compression of the educational system

(both globally and inter-state) to provide an educational morphology, to determine relationships

and interactions between aspects and factors in education, and between education and society and

to distinguish the fundamental conditions of educational change and persistence and relate these

to more ultimate philosophical laws. In contrast, International education can be considered the

study of education systems that are not one's own, considering all education facets void of one's

own preconceptions or biases. Although majorly simplified, the combination of these two concepts

describes the term comparative investigation.

Comparative investigation can then be described as the methods- it should be mentioned

that Phillip and Schweisfurth (2014) highlight that Hall believes these processes should be

analogical in nature- used to acquire the findings necessary to answer the questions that

comparative education and international education asks. It should be noted this definition is from

the writer’s own interpretation gather from the insinuation and description of Phillip and

Schweisfurth (2014). Comparative investigation is useful to education for multiple reasons.

2
Besides the apparent motive of “learning from the experience of others (other countries educational

systems)” or as Phillip and Schweisfurth (2014, pg. 16) put it “, the study of two or more national

systems of education, as existing now and historical developments in order that differing

approaches to similar problems may be described and envaulted”, I argue that one less obvious use

of comparative investigation is to validate and verify data generated within the field.

In evaluating Schwille et al. (2013), I choose to focus on the chapters on Botswana and

Canada. What becomes very apparent was how the research or, more accurately put, the

investigation was carried out. Schwille et al. (2013) did make mention to the uniqueness of the

way investigation in comparative education is carried out. This method, considered quasi -

experimental logic, saw the evaluation of one feature/aspect in the case of Schwille et al. (2013)

teacher’s education in Mathematic and compared it multiple characteristics of the educational

systems they were involved. I assume that by the purpose of comparative education, the intention

was to see how the relationship between the teacher’s education in Mathematics was influenced

by the history and other facets of the country's education system. To further explain my position

Esser (2017, pg. 5) offers “Hence, comparative statistical analysis is less interested in the unique

quality of the cases under study (countries, systems, or cultures) and more interested in the abstract

relationships between the variables” when addressing the uniqueness of comparative research in

general.

The institutions theory considers institutions, and more specifically, their core values, t o

be the determining factors of social behaviour (Cummings, 1999). When evaluating the

implications of the theory, we must consider that comparative investigation utilizes social change

theories in its pursuit of information necessary to fulfil its purpose. What Cummings (1999) makes

very evident is that there are multiple institutions that affect social life, and some factors are
3
common but insignificant in relation to cause vastly different social change outcomes. I interpreted

this to mean institution theory forces comparative education to go deeper than what is surface-

level, further forcing it to investigate less noticeable differences and similarities that cause social

change. I also believe that the institution theory places great emphasis on comparat ive

investigations multidisciplinary nature. This relationship ensures that the comparative research

considers variables within multiple fields to explain the outcomes, thus painting a more holistic

picture of both problems and solution.

I believe that Schwille et al. (2013) provide evidence for the theory of institutions. There

are striking similarities in what the theory describes and how the Schwille et al. (2013) categorize

their findings/research areas. To be more exact, Cummings (1999) 10 core principles of the theory

of institutions. The descriptions for these principles match directly what Schwille et al. (2013)

describe within the evaluation of each country. For example, core principle four where it is

describes the need to specify who is taught, what is taught etc. Schwille et al. (2013) specifically

focuse on teachers’ education in Mathematics. To further add to the point of similarities, it should

be noted Cummings (1999) provides a few foundation institutions of education that most of the

world bases their education systems. In Schwille et al. (2013), this is very apparent as the countries

I evaluated specifically spoke of being either Western or Southern-influenced. To definitively

summarize I believe that Schwille et al. (2013) is directly based on the theory of institutions.

4
 References

Cummings, W.K. (1999). The InstitutionS of Education: Compare! Compare! Compare!

Comparative Education Review, 43 (4), 413-437.

Esser, F. (2017). Comparative Research Methods. Wiley Online Library.

Phillips, D., & Schweisfurth, M. (2014). Comparative and international education: An

introduction to theory, method, and practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.
Schwille, J., Ingvarson, L. & Holdgreve-Resendez, R. (2013). TEDS-M 2008 Encyclopedia: A
Guide to Teacher Education Context, Structure, and Quality Assurance in the Seventeen TEDS-
M 2008 Countries. Amsterdam: IEA. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED545243.pdf