SemesterSpring Semester, 2020
DepartmentThe International Master Program of Applied Economics and Social Development (IMES) , First Year The International Master Program of Applied Economics and Social Development (IMES) , Second Year
Course NameComparative Education
InstructorCHOU CHUING
Credit3.0
Course TypeElective
Prerequisite
Course Objective
Course Description
Course Schedule

This is a seminar with lectures, discussions, and in-class activities. Weekly readings will be provided in

advance for each session.

Week 1: Introduction

Week 2: The Comparative Mind

Facilitator: ________________

Bray, M., Adamson, B., & Mason, M. (Eds.) (2014). Comparative education research: Approaches

and methods, second edition. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, University

of Hong Kong and Dordrecht: Springer. http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-

05594-7

> Preface

> Introduction

> Chapter 1: Actors and Purposes in Comparative Education

Eckstein, M. A. (1983). The comparative mind. Comparative Education Review, 27(3), 311-322.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1187739

Discussion questions:

3

1. What are Bereday’s three phases and Noah and Eckstein’s five stages of comparative

education research?

2. What is the Bray and Thomas cube? Is it useful for all comparative education studies?

3. What kinds of people/institutions do comparative education analyses either formally or

informally, and how do their purposes differ?

4. What are some international agencies involved in comparative education research, and what

kind of work do they do?

5. What kind of cross-national and/or intra-national comparisons can you think of? Use the Bray

and Thomas cube. In both cases you may draw on the experience of your own country's

education system.

6. Think of any example of “educational policy borrowing” in your country. Is your country a

source of educational models for other countries or merely a borrower?

Week 3: Units of Comparison in Comparative Education (1/3)

Bray, M., Adamson, B., & Mason, M. (Eds.) (2014). Comparative education research: Approaches

and methods, second edition.

Facilitators:

> Chapter 4: Comparing Places ________________

> Chapter 5: Comparing Systems ________________

> Chapter 6: Comparing Times ________________

1. Facilitator overviews (5–10 minutes each):

a. Units of analysis

b. Examples from text

c. Examples from elsewhere (your country, region, province, state, city, district, etc.)

2. Brainstorm (class): Using aspects of education that you are familiar with, what are some

examples of possible comparisons between each level/unit of analysis?

3. Research development (pairs): Choose two different levels of analysis and units of analysis for

each. Discuss how they could be compared and then briefly summarize your ideas to the

class.

a. Background

b. Units of analysis

c. Research questions (think of possible research questions you could ask in your term

paper)

4

Week 4: Units of Comparison in Comparative Education (2/3)

Bray, M., Adamson, B., & Mason, M. (Eds.) (2014). Comparative education research: Approaches

and methods, second edition.

Facilitators:

> Chapter 7: Comparing Race, Class and Gender ________________

> Chapter 8: Comparing Cultures ________________

> Chapter 9: Comparing Values ________________

1. Facilitator overviews (5–10 minutes each):

a. Units of analysis

b. Examples from text

c. Examples from elsewhere

2. Brainstorm (class): Using aspects of education that you are familiar with, what are some

examples of possible comparisons between each level/unit of analysis?

3. Research development (pairs): Choose two different levels of analysis and units of analysis for

each. Discuss how they could be compared and then briefly summarize your ideas to the

class.

a. Background

b. Units of analysis

c. Research questions

Week 5: Units of Comparison in Comparative Education (3/3)

Bray, M., Adamson, B., & Mason, M. (Eds.) (2014). Comparative education research: Approaches

and methods, second edition.

Facilitators:

> Chapter 10: Comparing Policies ________________

> Chapter 11: Comparing Curricula ________________

> Chapter 12: Comparing Pedagogical Innovations ________________

> Chapter 13: Comparing Ways of Learning ________________

> Chapter 14: Comparing Educational Achievements ________________

1. Facilitator overviews (5–10 minutes each):

a. Units of analysis

b. Examples from text

c. Examples from elsewhere

2. Brainstorm (class): Using aspects of education that you are familiar with, what are some

5

examples of possible comparisons between each level/unit of analysis?

3. Research development (pairs): Choose two different levels of analysis and units of analysis for

each. Discuss how they could be compared and then briefly summarize your ideas to the

class.

a. Background

b. Units of analysis

c. Research questions

Week 6: Globalization vs. Localization: East Asian Education in the Context of Worldwide Education

Reform

Facilitator: ________________

Chou, C. P., & Ching, G. (2012). Taiwan Education at the Crossroad: When Globalization Meets

Localization. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

> Preface

> Chapter 1: Globalization Versus Localization: Notion or Reality in Taiwan?

> Chapter 4: East Asian and Taiwan Education in the Context of Worldwide Education Reform

Discussion questions:

1. What are the different phases of education reform identified?

2. How do these chapters connect to the units of analysis discussed in Bray, Adamson, and

Mason’s book?

3. In countries that you are familiar with, what have been the different phases of education and

political reform?

4. How could these be developed into a comparative education study?

5. How does education reform in your country (or any country of your choice) compare to

education reform in the East Asian countries discussed in the readings?

Week 7: Globalization and Education Reform Policies around the World

Facilitators: All students

Stromquist, N. P., & Monkman, K. (Eds.). (2014). Globalization and education: Integration and

contestation across cultures. R&L Education.

> Chapter 1: Defining Globalization and Assessing its Implications for Knowledge and Education,

Revisited

> Selected chapters

6

1. Discussion question:

According to the authors, what are the impacts of globalization on education at different

levels?

2. Facilitator overviews/discussions (10–20 minutes each):

a. Chapter overview and key points

b. Discussion questions (4–6 per chapter to facilitate class discussion)

Week 8: Education Reform Policies in the US

Facilitators: ________________ and ________________

Ravitch, Diane (2010). The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and

Choice Are Undermining Education. New York: Basic Books.

> Chapter 1: What I Learned About School Reform

> Chapter 2: Hijacked! How the Standards Movement Turned Into the Testing Movement

> Chapter 4: Lessons from San Diego

> Chapter 11: Lessons Learned

Discussion questions:

1. What general similarities and what differences do you see between the American education

system and the one in your country (or any country of your choice)?

2. See discussion questions for the relevant chapters in “Ravitch 2010 Study Guide for Death and

Life”.

Week 9: Midterm Book Review Presentations – DUE: BOOK REVIEW PRESENTATIONS

Week 10: Education Reform Policies in Europe –  DUE: BOOK REVIEWS

Facilitator: ________________

Bleiklie, I., & Michelsen, S. (2013). Comparing HE policies in Europe. Higher Education, 65(1), 113-

133.

Dakowska, D., & Harmsen, R. (2015). Laboratories of reform? The Europeanization and

internationalization of higher education in Central and Eastern Europe. European Journal of

Higher Education, 5(1), 4-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2014.977318

Discussion questions: TBA

7

Week 11: The Global Achievement Gap

Facilitator: ________________

Wagner, Tony (2008). The Global Achievement Gap: Why Even Our Best Schools Don't Teach the

New Survival Skills Our Children Need - and What We Can Do About It. New York: Basic Books.

> Chapter 1: The New World of Work and the Seven Survival Skills

> Conclusion

Discussion questions:

1. Why are schools at risk in the global era?

2. From a comparative perspective, why is the global learning gap widening?

3. What are the achievement gaps mentioned by the author?

4. How do these achievement gaps relate to your own country, and what are some examples?

5. What are some examples of situations in which each of the seven survival skills are necessary

(or not always necessary) in your experience?

6. Are these survival skills applicable to people of all backgrounds and in all contexts? Why

(not)?

7. Are there any other “survival skills” that you consider necessary in today’s world?

Week 12: World-Class University Rankings and International Assessments

Facilitator: ________________

Shin, J. C. (2013). The world-class university in different systems and contexts. In Shin, J. C., &

Kehm, B. M. (Eds.), Institutionalization of world-class university in global competition (pp. 1-

13). Dordrecht: Springer.

PISA. (2015) PISA Results in Focus. OECD Programme for International Student Assessment.

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf

Discussion questions:

1. What factors led to the emergence of the “world-class university” concept?

2. How long has competition between universities existed, and how is competition between

universities different today than it was in the past?

3. Why is the world-class university competition particularly significant in East Asian countries?

Can you think of any examples?

4. How do countries’ strategies for building world-class universities differ depending on their

own particular contexts?

5. What are the main approaches used to build world-class universities?

8

6. In your own words, how could you summarize the key results of PISA 2015?

7. What might be some of the implications of these results for policy makers in different

countries?

Week 13: Alternative Education Models and Emerging Technologies

Facilitator: ________________

Yuan, L., Powell, S., & CETIS, J. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher

education.

Spangler, J. (2016). Impacts of online education on existing education models: Empirical evidence

from Taiwan. In Chou, C. P., & Spangler, J. (Eds.). Chinese Education Models in a Global Age

(pp. 177-192). Singapore: Springer.

Discussion questions:

1. What was the original aim of MOOCs, and how has this not necessarily become a reality in

practice?

2. How do MOOCs differ based on their pedagogical approaches, purposes, and other factors?

3. What do you think some of the implications of MOOCs are for individuals (students, teachers,

curriculum designers, policy makers, etc.) and institutions (HEIs, businesses, government

agencies, etc.)?

4. What are some of the challenges that MOOCs and those creating them face?

5. How do online and offline education models differ?

6. How did online education emerge in Taiwan, and what is its current status in terms of

popularity?

7. What are some of the impacts of online education on existing education models, teachers,

and students in Taiwan?

Week 14: Concluding Discussion and Review (or Make-up Class)

Week 15: Final Presentations –DUE: FINAL PAPER PRESENTATIONS

Week 16: Final Papers – (NO CLASS) DUE: FINAL PAPERS

TEACHING METHOD:

Participants of this class will be able to discuss a wide variety of education issues from comparative,

international, and personal perspectives. Classes will be conducted in a two-way and interactive

format between instructor and students, which aims to encourage more shared ideas and greater

inspiration about the topics. It is hoped that this class will facilitate student learning through the

9

integration and application of comparative and international education theories and practices in

education and national development from comparative perspectives.

ORIGINAL WORK:

Students are expected to produce original work in their midterm book reviews and final projects. All

information derived from other sources should be cited based on accepted standards for academic

references. Plagiarism will not be tolerated.



 



ASSESSMENT:

1. Attendance (10%) – Students are expected to attend and arrive on time for all sessions.

2. Participation (10%) – Students must complete the weekly readings, be prepared to answer the

relevant discussion questions, and actively participate in the seminar.

3. Facilitation (15%) – Students are expected to facilitate several classes during the semester and

should be prepared to lead discussions during those classes. Students must also share a cultural

or educational exchange case study during one of the class sessions.

4. Book Review (25%) – Students must write a book review of a recently published book, find a

target journal for publication, and submit their book review for consideration in that journal.

5. Final Presentation and Project (40%) – Students must write an academic article, conference

paper, book chapter, or dissertation proposal. Final projects must be directly related to the

content of the course.

ADDITIONAL READINGS

Chou, C. P. (2014). Bray, M., Adamson, B., & Mason, M. (Eds.) (2014). Comparative education

research: Approaches and methods. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre,

University of Hong Kong and Dordrecht: Springer. [Book review]. CEPS Journal, 4(3), 131-136.

http://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2014/9622/pdf/cepsj_2014_3_Chou_Rezension_Bray_Comp

arative.pdf

Enders, J., De Boer, H., & Weyer, E. (2013). Regulatory autonomy and performance: The reform of

higher education re-visited. Higher Education, 65(1), 5-23.

Spangler, J. (2015). The SSCI Syndrome in Higher Education: A Local or Global Phenomenon, by

Chuing Prudence Chou (review). The Review of Higher Education, 38(2), 326-329.

Spangler, J. (2014). Chou, C. P., & Ching, G. (2012). Taiwan education at the crossroad: when

globalization meets localization. History of Education, 43(5), 716-718.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0046760X.2014.913698

Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st

century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum

Studies, 44(3), 299-321. http://doc.utwente.nl/84040/1/Voogt12teaching.pdf


Teaching Methods
Teaching Assistant

TBA


Requirement/Grading

1. Attendance (10%) – Students are expected to attend and arrive on time for all sessions.

2. Participation (10%) – Students must complete the weekly readings, be prepared to answer the

relevant discussion questions, and actively participate in the seminar.

3. Facilitation (15%) – Students are expected to facilitate several classes during the semester and

should be prepared to lead discussions during those classes. Students must also share a cultural

or educational exchange case study during one of the class sessions.

4. Book Review (25%) – Students must write a book review of a recently published book, find a

target journal for publication, and submit their book review for consideration in that journal.

5. Final Presentation and Project (40%) – Students must write an academic article, conference

paper, book chapter, or dissertation proposal. Final projects must be directly related to the

content of the course.


Textbook & Reference

ADDITIONAL READINGS

Chou, C. P. (2014). Bray, M., Adamson, B., & Mason, M. (Eds.) (2014). Comparative education

research: Approaches and methods. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre,

University of Hong Kong and Dordrecht: Springer. [Book review]. CEPS Journal, 4(3), 131-136.

http://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2014/9622/pdf/cepsj_2014_3_Chou_Rezension_Bray_Comp

arative.pdf

Enders, J., De Boer, H., & Weyer, E. (2013). Regulatory autonomy and performance: The reform of

higher education re-visited. Higher Education, 65(1), 5-23.

Spangler, J. (2015). The SSCI Syndrome in Higher Education: A Local or Global Phenomenon, by

Chuing Prudence Chou (review). The Review of Higher Education, 38(2), 326-329.

Spangler, J. (2014). Chou, C. P., & Ching, G. (2012). Taiwan education at the crossroad: when

globalization meets localization. History of Education, 43(5), 716-718.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0046760X.2014.913698

Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st

century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum

Studies, 44(3), 299-321. http://doc.utwente.nl/84040/1/Voogt12teaching.pdf


Urls about Course
Attachment