Transnational German Education and Comparative Education Systems

2020 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-137
Author(s):  
Seral Özturan ◽  
Didem İşlek

In this study; It is aimed to compare the pre-school education systems in South Korea and Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus comparatively. The horizontal and descriptive approach used in comparative education studies for this purpose were used together. Using document analysis in the research; Pre-school education objectives, similarities in education system and similarities in the education system, from the Ministry of Education of  South Korea and Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus from the Ministry of Education, the laws of countries, official pre-school education reports, education systems, articles and online databases, data on differences, skills desired to be acquired in the curriculum and educational status of teachers working in preschool institutions were obtained.  


Education ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Arnove ◽  
Stephen Franz ◽  
Patricia K. Kubow

Comparative education is a loosely bounded field that examines the sources, workings, and outcomes of education systems, as well as leading education issues, from comprehensive, multidisciplinary, cross-national, and cross-cultural perspectives. Despite the diversity of approaches to studying relations between education and society, Arnove, et al. 1992 (cited under General Overviews) maintains that the field is held together by a fundamental belief that education can be improved and can serve to bring about change for the better in all nations. The authors further note that comparative inquiry often has sought to discover how changes in educational provision, form, and content might contribute to the eradication of poverty or the end of gender-, class-, and ethnic-based inequities. A belief in the transformative power of education systems is aligned with three principal dimensions of the field. Arnove 2013 (cited under General Overviews) designates these dimensions as scientific/theoretical, pragmatic/ameliorative, and global/international understanding and peace. According to Farrell 1979 (cited under General Overviews), the scientific dimension of the field relates to theory building with comparison being absolutely essential to understanding what relationships pertain under what conditions among variables in the education system and society. Bray and Thomas 1995 (cited under General Overviews) point out that comparison enables researchers to look at the entire world as a natural laboratory in viewing the multiple ways in which societal factors, educational policies, and practices may vary and interact in otherwise unpredictable and unimaginable ways. With regard to the pragmatic dimension, comparative educators have studied other societies to learn what works well and why. At the inception of study of comparative education as a mode of inquiry in the 19th century, pioneer Marc-Antoine Jullien de Paris (b. 1775–d. 1848) aimed at not only informing and improving educational policy, but also contributing to greater international understanding. According to Giddens 1991, Rivzi and Lingard 2010, and Carney 2009 (all cited under General Overviews), international understanding has become an even more important feature of comparative education as processes of globalization increasingly require people to recognize how socioeconomic forces, emanating from what were previously considered distant and remote areas of the world, impinge upon their daily lives. The priority given to each of these dimensions varies not only across individuals but also across national and regional boundaries and epistemic communities. Yamada 2015 (cited under General Overviews), for example, finds notable differences between the discourses and practices of North American and Japanese researchers, with the former tending to locate their research in existing theories and the latter trying to understand a particular situation before eventually finding patterns or elements applicable to a wider situation. Takayama 2011 (cited under General Overviews) notes that one reason for differences in research traditions is the Japanese emphasis on area studies. The evolution of comparative education as a scholarly endeavor reflects changes in theories, research methodologies, and events on the world stage that have required more sophisticated responses to understanding transformations occurring within and across societies.


Author(s):  
Robert Cowen

This article opens by refusing some traditional ways to approach the theme of comparative education and religion-and-education. Partly, this is because some topics, in terms of religion and education, have been well covered. More generally, there is an explicit refusal of the clichéd assumption that ‘comparative education articles’ compare (e.g. education systems in Argentina and Australia, or in Brazil and Bolivia; and so on), juxtaposing narratives on any-old-topic which interests the writer, provided the narratives are about two or more different countries. Fortunately, some current changes in the ‘epistemic gaze’ of comparative education create new levels of theoretical difficulty and permit a break from the classic political equilibrium problem of the liberal secular state juggling education policy choices and juggling competing religious groups. Starting from a different axiom, a sketch of new possibilities is offered. The sketch is theoretically clumsy but it opens up a strategically different way to tell comparative education stories, of the kind which traditionally we have not tried to tell.  The conclusion of the article makes a guess about why religion and education might again become a major topic in comparative education. 


2003 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy Green

Comparative education has traditionally meant the study of national education systems. But how far is this approach valid today? Doesn't the 'decline' of the nation state make national systems obsolete? Isn't the very idea of a 'system' anachronistic in a world of market triumphalism and global disorganization? The purpose of this article is to explore how globalisation is changing education and the implication of this for comparative study. Why study education systems and why study national education systems in particular? What else should comparativists study, and how? What defines the field of comparative education? These questions are approached first historically and secondly methodologically.


1960 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 326-327
Author(s):  
ERNST G. BEIER
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document