“Introduction” in Comparative Education: the Dialectic of the Global and the Local. Arnove, Robert and Carlos Alberto Torres

Arnove, Robert F. (1999) “Introduction” in Comparative Education: the Dialectic of the Global and the Local. Arnove, Robert and Carlos Alberto Torres, eds. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

Globalization (global economy) poses common problems across societies in regard to educational systems. Governance; financing; provision of mass education; equality of access, opportunity, and outcome for differently situated social groups; etc.

Gloablization = “the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.”

Fordism Toyotism Coca- Coca-Cola-ization McDonaldization

Globalization also == agendas of the major multinational, bilateral, international organizations that work in education around the world (World Bank, USAID, IMF, CIDA, JICA, etc.)

But Arnove is arguing, as shows the book’s title, that the prescriptions of the leading players are met by something other than silent acceptance. The dialectic is real – the global is still, at times, shaped by the local. Example here: MEND in Nigeria. Global trends vs. local responses.

What will be taught? And in what language? - questions listed on page 3.

CIE began, in force, by the mid-1950s, as the post-war efforts to free the “Third World” built. India and Pakistan became independent in 1947, much of Africa by the early 1950s had independence movements (Egypt, in 1952, became independent). Education was a formative element of what the leaders of these (soon-to-be) new countries sought to build.

Arnove points out that over time, and with economic expansion, social rate of return studies tend to show that the presumption that primary level schooling shows the greatest return (and thus is the darling of international assistance organizations), as economic indicators rise, the rate of return for further levels of schooling begin to outstrip primary school. As such investment in secondary and tertiary schooling does have some economistic merit.

Borrowing vs. Lending - a concept borrowed from Philip Altbach – countries look to other countries’ education systems for ideas. Some then borrow ideas that others lend. Most countries are both borrowers and lenders, though some are much moreso one than the other.

Three strands of comparative/international education

(1) Scientific dimension

(2) Pragmatic dimension

(3) Global dimension

The tension between the scientistic and policy/practical sides of comparative education have been around since the early 19^th century (Jullien and Sadler, respectively).

Global education (from Alger and Harf) – emphasizes values, transactions, actors, mechanisms, procedures, and issues.

International education – (again, from Alger and Harf) – area studies, descriptive accounts of discrete regions and countries of the world.

Arnove goes on to list the countries and regions where comparative and international education societies have spread in the last decade prior to publication (in the 1990s, in other words). For example, as the former Soviet Bloc fell apart, education issues rose to the fore – especially issues of what language education should occur in. These countries borrowed knowledge of how to go about schooling from other nations.

p. 17: Arnove, quoting Gail Kelly in a predecessor text to this one: “The field – has no center – rather, it is an amalgam of multidisciplinary studies, informed by a number of theoretical frameworks. Debates in the field will likely over time shift as educational policies and practices and needs change and the trust placed in particular theories, social systems, or reforms prove themselves valid or lacking in validity. The fact that the field has not resolved these debates about culture, method, and theory may well be a strength, rather than a weakness and point to the viability of the field and its continued growth.”