比较教育理论与方法课程纲要(4)

16

16

Paulston, Rolland and Liebman, M. “An Invitation to Postmodern social cartography,” CER, Vol.

38, No. 2, 1994, pp. 215-232.

Paulson, Rolland, “Mapping Visual Culture in Comparative Education Discourse,” Compare, Vol. 27, No. 2, 1997, pp. 117-152.

Paulson, Rolland, “Mapping the Postmodernity Debate in Comparative Education Discourse,” Occasional Paper, Dep?t of Administrative and Policy Studies, School of Education, University of Pittsburgh, 1998.

*Rust, Val, “Postmodernism and its Comparative Education Implications,” CER, Vol. 35, No., 4, 1991, pp. 610-626.

Schriewer, Jürgen, “Comparative Education Methodology in Transition: Towards the Study of Complexity,” in Schriewer, (ed.) Discourse Formation in Comparative Education (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2000), pp. 3-51.

*Welch, Anthony, “The Triumph of Technocracy or the Collapse of Certainty? Modernity, Postmodernity and Postcolonialism in Comparative Education,” in Robert Arnove (ed.),

Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local (Lanham, Boulder,New York, Oxford: Rowman Littlefield, 1999), pp. 25-50.

Session 8 Comparative Education and Globalization

Common Reading:

Michael Crossley and Keith Watson, Comparative and International Research in Education: Globalisation, context and difference (London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer, 2003)

Chapter 1: Introduction, pp. 1-11.

Chapter 4: Globalisation, context and difference, pp. 50-69.

Chapter 6: Educational Research, global agendas, pp. 84-115.

Additional Readings

*Green, Andy, “Education and Globalization in Europe and East Asia,” The U.K.-Japan Education Forum Monograph, No. 4, 1997.

*Green, Andy, “Education, globalization and the role of comparative research”, 2003 (?)

Green, Andy, Preston, John and Jammaat, Jan Germen, Education, Equality and Social Cohesion

17

17

(London: MacMillan Palgrave, 2006).

Pang, Nicholas, Globalization: Educational Research, Change and Reform (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 2006)

Please make your own further selection from the rich bibliography in Crossley and Watson?s book, pp. 143-171.

Discussion Questions:

1. Why do the authors of this volume see the reconceptualisation of comparative education as urgent?

2. What three approaches to globalisation do they identify, and which informs their thinking and suggestions for comparative education?

3. What new challenges to research do they see arising from the impact of globalisation?

Session 9: International Organisations and Comparative Education

Common Readings 1. Boulding, Elise, \Building a Global Civic Culture: Education for an Interdependent World, (New York and London: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1988), pp. xvii-xxiv, 16-33.

2. Jones, Philip, “The World Bank Education Financing,” Comparative Education, Vol. 33, No. 1, 1997, pp. 117-129.

3. Mundy, Karen and Murphy, Lynn, “Transnational Advocacy, Global Civil Society? Emerging Evidence from the Field of Education,” CER, Vol. 45, No. 1, Feb, 2001, pp. 85-126.

Discussion Questions

1. What kind of picture does Elise Boulding give of the potential role UNESCO and other UN agencies might play in the global community? What understanding of social change and culture underlies this vision? What radical changes have taken place in the world community since the publication of this volume?

2. What have been the main contributions and problems associated with the World Bank's involvement in financing educational development according to Jones? What is his assessment of the contemporary role of the World Bank?

3. How does the analysis of Mundy and Murphy illustrate the role of comparative education in clarifying possibilities for action on the part of educators in an increasingly globalized world? Are there similarities with Boulding?s vision? Differences?

4. How is this approach different from the developmental approach outlined earlier?

5. What different constraints and opportunities face university scholars and their professional

18

associations in doing Comparative Education research and teaching? What kind of

relationship between universities and international organizations would you see as optimal?

18

Additional Readings

Baum, Warren and Tolbert, S., Investment in Development (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).

Castro, Claudio de Moura, “The World Bank Policies: damned if you do, damned if you don?t,” CER Vol. 38. No. 4, November 2002, 387-400.

Cerych, Ladislov, Problems of Aid to Education in Developing Countries (New York: Praeger, 1976).

CIE, Special Issue on \

*Drake, Earl, \& J. Pan (eds.), Knowledge Across Cultures: A Contribution to Dialogue Among Civilizations (Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, University of Hong Kong, 2001), pp.215-228.

Haddad, Wadi, \CE, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1981, pp. 127-139.

Hayter, Teresa and Watson, Catherine, Aid: Rhetoric and Reality (London: Pluto Press, 1985).

Head, Ivan, On a Hinge of History: The Mutual Vulnerability of South and North (Toronto, Buffalo, London: IDRC, 1991).

Hurst, P., \CE, Vol. 17, No. 2, June, 1981, pp. 117-125.

Jones, Phillip, International Policies for Third World Education: UNESCO, Literacy and Development (London: Routledge, 1988).

Jones, Philip, The United Nations and Education: Multilateralism, development and globalisation (London: Routledge Falmer, 2005).

Jones, Philip World Bank Financing of Education: Lending, Learning and Development (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1992.

*King, Kenneth, “Banking on Knowledge: the new knowledge projects of the World Bank,”

19

19

Compare, Vol. 32, No. 3, 2002, pp. 311-326.

Mason, Edward and Asher, Robert, The World Bank Since Bretton Woods (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institute, 1973).

Payer, Cheryl, The World Bank: A Critical Analysis (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1982).

Peterson, Samiha, \Hayhoe & J. Pan (eds.), Knowledge Across Cultures: A Contribution to Dialogue Among

Civilizations (Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, University of Hong Kong, 2001), pp. 229-242.

Robertson, S., Bonal, Xavier, and Dale, Roger, “GATS and the Education Service Industry,” CER, Vol. 46, No. 4, November, 2002, pp. 472-496.

*Suchodolski, Bogdan, et al, The International Bureau of Education in the Service of Educational Development, [Paris: UNESCO, 1979].

\CER, Vol. 30, No. 1, Feb., 1986, pp. 112-156.

Tabulawa, Richard, “International Aid Agencies, Learner-Centred Pedagogy and Political

Democratisation: A Critique, Comparative Education, Vol. 39, No. 1, February 2003, pp. 7-26.

Session 10:Mixed Methods in Comparative Education a. Mixed Methods as a Methodology b. Paradigms in Mixed Methods

c. Research Design Considerations in Mixed Methods

d. Relevance and application of Mixed Methods to Comparative Education e. A Dialectic Paradigmatic Stance: An Example from Thesis Research

Required Readings:

1. Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Chapters 1 &2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp.1-44.

2. Greene, J. C. & Caracelli, V. J. (2003). Making paradigmatic sense of mixed methods practice. In A. Tashakorri & C. Teddle (Eds.). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 91-110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

3. Bray, M. & Thomas, R. M. (1995). Levels of comparison in educational studies: Insights from different literatures and the value of multilevel analysis. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 472-490.

Additional Readings:

1. Tashakorri, A & Teddle, C. (Eds.). Handbook of Mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

20

20

2. Greene, J.C. & Caracelli, V. J. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in

mixed-method evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 74, 5-17.

3. Reichert, C. S., & Cook, T. D. (1979). Beyond qualitative versus quantitative methods. In T. D. Cook & C. S. Reichert (Eds.), Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research (pp. 7-32). London: Sage Publications.

4. Howe, K. & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: A prolegomenon. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2-9.

Questions for Discussion:

1. What is mixed methods research? Describe the different ways in which it can be a method, a research design and a methodology.

2. How would you define paradigms in research? What are examples of the paradigms that have been proposed for mixed methods research? Discuss the controversies and debates about paradigms in mixed methods.

3. What are some of the mixed methods research designs that are proposed by Creswell?

4. Referring to Bray & Thomas? (1995) paper, how might mixed methods be applicable to research in comparative education? What are other examples where mixed methods may be considered? 4. How would you evaluate the rigour or validity of a mixed methods study in comparative education?

Session 11: The Collection and Classification of Data in Comparative Education Common Readings

1. Holmes, B. and Robinsohn, S., Relevant Data in Comparative Education [Hamburg: Unesco Institute for Education, 1960], pp. 39-72.

2. Cussó, Roser and D?Amicob, Sabrina, From development comparatism to globalization comparativism: towards more normative international education statistics, in Comparative Education Vol. 41, No. 2, May 2005, pp. 199–216.

Discussion Questions

1. Why is a good taxonomy necessary and important for cross-national educational research? 2. What makes it highly problematic?

3. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the various possible taxonomic approaches suggested in Holmes and Robinsohn?

4. What are some of the dilemmas arising from the new and highly sophisticated sets of educational indicators recently developed and used by OECD countries? How do they differ from UNESCO statistics, and what do Cusso and D?Amicob mean by their distinction between comparatism and comparativism?

5. Explore any one set of international educational statistics, UNESCO, OECD, the World Bank or others and consider their usefulness for comparative education research.

21

21

Readings Relating to differing Educational Taxonomies

*Heyneman, Stephen, “The Sad Story of UNESCO?s Statistics,” International Journal of Educational Development No. 19, 1999, pp. 65-74.

International Bureau of Education (Geneva) and UNESCO (Paris), The International Yearbook of Education, 1948 to the present, with some gaps. Website: http://www.uis.unesco.org/

Kelly, Gail, An International Handbook of Women's Education (London: Greenwood, 1989).

Mundy, Karen and Farrell, Joseph P., “International Education Indicators and Assessments,” in K. Mundy, K. Bickmore, R. Hayhoe, M. Madden and K. Madjidi (eds.) Comparative Education: Issues for Teachers (Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press Incorporated, 2008). Pp. 189-214.

*OECD, Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators (Paris, OECD, 1995 and subsequently) Website: http://www.cmec.ca/releases/prsrlse.htm

Postlethwaite, Neville (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Comparative Education and National Systems of Education (Oxford: Pergamon, 1988). See the article by J. Porras-Zuniga, \Statistics in Education\

*Rossello, Pedro, “The Structure of Comparative Education,” Comparative Education Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1963, pp. 103-107.

UNESCO Statistical Yearbooks, 1963-1999, and website for UNESCO Institute of Statistics in Montreal, from 2000: http://stats.uis.unesco.org

*Walberg, Herbert J., and Zhang, Guoxiong, “Analyzing the OECD Indicators Model,” Comparative Education, Vol. 34, No. 1, 1998, pp. 55-70.

The World Bank Development Report (not all statistics are accessible free on-line, but see the following website for one interesting set: http://genderstats.worldbank.org/eoutcomes.pdf)

Wolhunter, C.C., “Classification of National Education Systems: A Multivariate Approach,” CER Vol. 41, No. 2, May, 1997, pp. 161-177.

百度搜索“77cn”或“免费范文网”即可找到本站免费阅读全部范文。收藏本站方便下次阅读，免费范文网，提供经典小说综合文库比较教育理论与方法课程纲要(4)在线全文阅读。