Comparative education: status controversy and dynamics of scientific development

• Authors: Zbyszko Melosik

Abstracts

EN

The article addresses the problem of identity and status of comparative education in contemporary science, as well as its developmental dynamics and scientific potential. In its first part, the author reconstructs the debate on the 'crisis' of comparative education and also the various avenues of its critique, especially, but not exclusively, in the context of its relationship with other (sub)disciplines. Part two focuses on the developmental dynamics of comparative education, against the background of the discussion regarding the various criteria and aspects of estimating the state of (sub)disciplines. Thus, the theoretical and methodological openness of comparative education and its responsiveness to social change will be presented. Furthermore, comparative education is placed in the context of the debate between essentialism and scientific constructivism, the problem of interdisciplinarity and research integration, the density paradox or the narcissism of small differences, as well as the challenge of postmodernism. The final section of the text presents the idea of a comparative educator as a traveller and its potential to transcend one's own epistemological script.

Keywords

EN

pedagogika porównawcza; tożsamość; status naukowy; teoria; dynamiki rozwojowa

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Chrześcijańskiej Akademii Teologicznej w Warszawie
• Journal: Studia z Teorii Wychowania
• Year: 2023
• Volume: XIV(3 (44))
• Pages: 9-26

Dates

published

2023

Contributors

author

Zbyszko Melosik

• Adam Mickiewicz University

References

• Aldrich, J. H. (2014). Interdisciplinarity: Its Role in a Discipline-based Academy. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Altbach P. G. (1991). Trends in Comparative Education. Comparative Education Review, 35(3), 491-507.
• Auld, A., Morris, P. (2014) Comparative education, the ‘New Paradigm’ and policy borrowing: constructing knowledge for educational reform. Comparative Education, 50(2), 129-155.
• Bauman, Z. (1988). Strangers: The Social Construction of Universality and Particularity. Telos, 78(7), Winter, 7-42.
• Becher, T., Trowler, P. (2001). Academic Tribes And Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines. Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Bechtel, W. (1986). The Nature of Scientific Integration. In: W. Bechtel (ed.), Integrating Scientific Disciplines: Case Studies from the Life Sciences (p. 3-52). Dodrecht: Springer.
• Berlin, I., (1980). Concepts and Categories. Philosophical Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Brewer, J. D. (2013). The Public Value of the Social Sciences: An Interpretive Essay. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
• Carreira da Silva, F. (2016). Portuguese Sociology: A History. New York: Palgrave McMillan.
• Chettiparamb, A. (2007). Interdisciplinarity: a literature review. Southampton: The Interdisciplinary Teaching and Learning Group, Subject Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, School of Humanities, University of Southampton, Internet address: https://oakland.edu/Assets/upload/docs/AIS/interdisciplinarity_literature_review.pdf
• Cowen, R., Comparative Education and Empires (2008). Revista Española de Educación Comparada, 31, 14-34.
• Dilthey, W. (2020). The Essence of Philosophy. Chapel Hill: UNC Press.
• Dogan, M., Robert Phare, R. (2019). Creative Marginality. Innovations at the Intersecions of Social Sciences. London: Routledge
• Epstein, E. H., Carroll, K. T., (2005). Abusing Ancestors: Historical Functionalism and the Postmodern Deviation in Comparative Education, Comparative Education Review, 49(1), 62-88.
• Espeland, W. N., Stevens, M. L. (2008). A Sociology of Quantification. European Journal of Sociology, 49(3), 401-436.
• Fletcher, L. (1974). Comparative Education: A Question of Identity. Comparative Education Review, 18(3), 348-353.
• Garber, M. (2001). Academic Instincts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Hider, P., Coe, M. (2020). Disciplines in their organisational context, Australian Universities Review, 62(2), 10-17.
• Jacob, J. W., Cheng, S. Y. (2005). Mapping Paradigms and Theories in Comparative, International, and Development Education (CIDE). In: D. P. Baker, A. W. Wiseman (eds.), Global Trends in Educational Policy International Perspectives on Education and Society. Volume 6 (p. 221-258). New York: Elsevier.
• Jacobs, J. A. (2013). In Defense of Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and Specialization in the Research University. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Klees, S. J., (2008), Reflections on Theory, Method, and Practice in Comparative and International Education. Comparative Education Review, 52(3), 301-328.
• Kolstø, P. (2007). The ‘narcissism of minor differences’-theory. Can it explain an ethnic conflict? Filosofija i Druśtwo, 18(2), 153-171.
• Kopp, von B., (2010). Do we need comparative educartion in a globalised world? Orbis Scholae, 4(2), 7-20.
• Krishnan, A. (2009). Some observations on the Disciplinarity vs. Interdisciplinarity debate. Southampton: University of Southampton, ESRC National Centre for Research Methods NCRM Working Paper Series, Internet address: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/783/1/what_are_academic_disciplines.pdf (Accessed: 21 04 2023)
• Larsen, M., A. (2009), Comparative Education, Postmodernity and Historical Research: Honouring Ancestor. In: R. Cowen, A. M. Kazamias (eds.), International Handbook of Comparative Education (p. 1045–1059). Dodrecht: Springer.
• Lepenies, W. (1998), „Interesting Question“ in the history of Philosophy and Elsewhere. In: R. Rorty, B. J. Schneewind, Q. Skinner (eds.), Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy (p. 141-172). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Malinov, A. (2015). On the Essence of History. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(6), 223-227.
• Marginson, S., Mollis, M. (2010). ‘The Door Opens and the Tiger Leaps’: Theories and reflexivities of comparative education for a global millennium, W: B. Pusser, I. Ordorika, K. Kempner (red.), ASHE Reader on Comparative Education. (p. 57-89). New York: Pearson Learning Solutions.
• McCulloch, A. (2018). The disciplinary status of doctoral education. Higher Education Review, 50(2), 84-104.
• McCulloch, G. (2002). „Disciplines contributing to education?” Educational Studies and Disciplines. British Journal of Educational Studies, 50(1), 100-119.
• Mehta, S. (2010). Epistemic Shape Shifting, Transfer and Transformation Discourses of Discontinuities, Gaps and Possibilities. In: M. E. Larsen (eds.), New Thinking in Comparative Education, Honouring Robert Cowen (p. 105-119). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
• Mehta, S., Ninnes, P. (2003). Postmodernism Debates and Comparative Education: A Critical Discourse Analysis. Comparative Education Review, 47(2), 238-255.
• Melosik, Z. (1995). Postmodernistyczne kontrowersje wokół edukacji. Toruń-Poznań: Edytor,
• Melosik, Z. (1996). Tożsamość, ciało i władza. Teksty kulturowe jako (kon)teksty pedagogiczne. Toruń-Poznań: Edytor.
• Melosik, Z. (2007). Teoria i praktyka edukacji wielokulturowej. Kraków: Oficyna Wydawnicza „Impuls”.
• Messer-Davidow, E., Shumway, D. R., Sylvan, D. J. (1993). Disciplinary ways of knowing. In: E. Messer-Davidow, D. R. Shumway, D. J. Sylvan (eds.), Knowledges: Historical and Critical Studies in Disciplinarity (p. 1-21). Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
• Mittelstraß, J., (2018). The Order of Knowledge: From Disciplinarity to Transdisciplinarity and Back. European Review, 26(2), 68-75.
• Nis, M. (2014). Mathematics and Mathematics Education Policy. In: M. N. Fried, N. T. Dreyfus (eds.), Mathematics and Mathematics Education: Searching for Common Ground (p. 261-275). Dodrecht: Springer.
• Noah, H. J. (1974). Fast-Fish and Loose-Fish in Comparative Education. Comparative Education Review, 18(3), 341-347.
• Oleksiyenko, A., Blanco, G., Hayhoe, R., Jackson, L., Lee, J., Amy Metcalfe, A., Sivasubramaniam, M., Zha, Q. (2021). Comparative and international higher education in a new key? Thoughts on the post-pandemic prospects of scholarship. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 51(4), 612:628.
• Putnam, E. W. (1914). The essence of astronomy. Things everyone should know about the sun, moon, and stars. New York-London: G.P. Putnam's sons.
• Ramirez, F. O., Meyer, J. W. (1980). Comparative Education: The Social Construction of the Modern World System. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 369-399.
• Rowland S. (2006). Enquiring University. Compliance and Contestation in Higher Education. New York: Open University Press.
• Stichweh, R. (1992). The Sociology of Scientific Disciplines: On the Genesis and Stability of the Disciplinary Structure of Modern Science. Science in Context, 5(1), 3-15.
• Thompson Klein, J. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, and Practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
• Turner, D. A. (2019). Comparative and International Education: Development of the Field and its methods and theory. In: C. C. Wolhuter (ed.), Comparative and International Education: Survey of an Infinite Field (p. 11-28). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.
• Tymoczko, T. (1994). Structuralism and Post-modernism in the Philosophy of Mathematics. In: P. Ernest (ed.), Mathematics, Education and Philosophy: An International Perspective (p. 49-55). London: Falmer Press.
• Wardle, E., Downs, D. (2018). Understanding the nature of Disciplinarity in terms of compositions’ values. In: R. Malenczyk, K. Yancey, E. Wardle, S. Miller-Cochran (eds.), Composition, Rhetoric, and Disciplinarity (p. 111-133). Louisville: University Press of Colorado.
• Wiseman, A., Popov, N. (2015). An Introduction to Comparing Comparative Methodologies: A Framework for Understading Pitfalls and Operationalizing Promises. In: A. W. Wiseman, N. Popov (eds.), Comparative Sciences: Interdisciplinary Approaches (p. 1-14), Bigley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• Wolhuter, C. C. (2008). Review of the Review: constructing the identity of comparative education. Research in Comparative and International Education, 3(4), 323-344.
• Wolhuter, C. C. (2015). Quisnam Sum Ego? Crises of Identity in Comparative Education and the Call for a Comparison of Comparative Studies. In: A. W. Wiseman, N. Popov (eds.), Comparative Sciences: Interdisciplinary Approaches (p. 15-35), Bigley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• Wolhuter, C. C., Jacobs, L. (2021). The COVID-19 Pandemic as Potential Catalyst for Comparative and International Education. Annual Review of Comparative and International Education, 42B, 3-24.
• Woolgar, S. W. (1976). The Identification and Definitions of Scientific Collectivities. In: G. Lemaine, R. Macleod, M. Mulkay M., P. Weingart (eds.), Perspectives on the Emergence of Scientific Disciplines (p. 233-246). Hague: De Gruyter.

Identifiers

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0053.9192

Biblioteka Nauki

36211778