The discussion of ‘borrowing’ or
‘lending’ educational policies is central to ‘one of the oldest and most
controversial theory traditions in comparative education’ (Zymek
& Zymek, 2004, p.25). Long before terms such as
‘globalization’, the ‘global learning society’, or ‘McDonaldization’
(Ritzer, 2000) were cited as
reasons for looking at the foreign example, education systems and practices
have been the subject of international investigation. The cross-national
transfer of educational practices was sparked by cross-cultural curiosity,
political motives, altruistic interest, and economic competition. As early as
1900, during his address at the Guildford Educational Conference, Michael
Sadler asked, ‘How far can we learn anything of practical value from the study
of foreign systems of education?’ He claimed that:
The practical
value of studying, in a right spirit and with scholarly accuracy, the working
of foreign systems of education is that it will result in our being better
fitted to study and to understand our own (Sadler, 1900, in: Higginson, 1979,
p.50).
As
Edmund King put it, mapping the experience of other countries can contribute
directly to policy making and the implementation of educational practice, and
provide guidance in applying specific findings to practice (King, 1968). And
from understanding our own systems of education comes the motivation to
improve, to reform, to innovate, or to ameliorate educational practices,
policies, learning environments, educational objectives, or student outcomes. As Gita Steiner-Khamsi
points out, ‘Implicitly, the semantics of globalization promotes de-territorialization and de-contextualization of reform, and
challenges the past conception of education as a culturally bounded system’
(Steiner-Khamsi, 2004, p.5). The centrality of
context in education is widely recognized by scholars in comparative and
international education, and successful practices by NGOs, foundations, and
development organizations.
In
recent annual CIES meetings, we have seen a growth in research across a
‘continuum of educational transfer’ (Ochs & Phillips, 2004, p.9), ranging
from: cases of imposed educational transfer (e.g. totalitarian / authoritarian
rule) or lending (Steiner-Khamsi, 2004) to foreign
educational practices of policies ‘required under constraint’ (e.g. during a
period of occupation) to educational ‘borrowing’ (Phillips, 1989) (i.e. the
‘conscious adoption in one context of policy observed in another’ (Phillips
& Ochs, 2004, p.774)). Established scholars and students have published
analyses of educational transfer across this spectrum and the globe, including:
The
proposed SIG would serve as a forum within CIES to bring together international
scholars and practitioners to spark further collaboration and close the gap
between research and praxis.
Please contact Dr. Kimberly Ochs to join this SIG or
to address any questions, at:
Kimberly@kimberlyochs.com
REFERENCES
Caruso, M. (2004). Locating Educational Authority: teaching monitors,
educational meanings and the importing of pedagogical models.
deJong-Lambert,
W. (2004). The Politics of Constructing Scientific Knowledge: Lysenkoism in
Gonon, P. (1998). Das Internationale Argument in
der Bildungsreform.
Halpin, D. & Troyna,
B. (1995). The Politics of
Education Policy Borrowing. Comparative Education, 31(3),
303-310.
Jansen, J. (2004). Importing
Outcomes-Based Education into
Jones, P. (2004). Taking
the Credit: Financing and Policy Linkages in the Education Portfolio of the
World Bank. In G. Steiner-Khamsi (Ed.) The
Global Politics of Educational Borrowing and Lending (pp.188-200).
King, E. (1968). Comparative
Studies and Educational Decision.
Novoa, A. & Yariv-Mashal,
T. (2003). Comparative Research in
Education: a mode of governance or a historical journey? Comparative
Education, 39(4), 423-438.
Ochs,
K. (2005). Educational Policy Borrowing and its Implications for Reform and
Innovation: A Study with Specific Reference to the
Ochs, K. &
Phillips, D. (2004). Processes of Educational
Borrowing in Historical Context. In D. Phillips & K. Ochs (Eds.), Educational
Policy Borrowing: Historical Perspectives.
Phillips, D. (1989). Neither a borrower
not a lender be? The problems of
cross-national attraction in education. Cross-National Attraction in
Education, Special Issue, Comparative Education, 25(3), 267-274.
Phillips, D. &
Ochs, K. (2004). Researching
Policy Borrowing: Some Methodological Problems in Comparative Education.
British Educational Research Journal, 30(6), 773-784.
Ritzer, G. (2000). The McDonaldization of Society: New
Century Edition.
Sadler, M. (1900). ‘How far can we learn anything of practical value from the study of
foreign systems of education?’ Address of 20 October. In J.H.
Higginson (Ed.), Selections from Michael Sadler (pp.48-51).
Shibata, M. (2004). Educational Borrowing in
Silova,
Spreen, C. A.(2004). Appropriating Borrowed Policies:
Outcomes-Based Education in
Steiner-Khamsi,
G. (Ed.)(2004). Lessons from Elsewhere: The
Politics of Educational Borrowing & Lending.
Tanaka, M. (2003). The Transfer of University Concepts and Practices between
Zymek, B. & Zymek,
R. (2004). Traditional –
National – International. Explaining the Inconsistency
of Educational Borrowers. In D. Phillips & K. Ochs (Eds.), Educational
Policy Borrowing: Historical Perspectives.