Research in comparative and international education has, since its origins in the late 19th century, been centrally concerned with the methodological and theoretical challenges of drawing lessons for education policy and practice across diverse contexts (Philips, 2006). Over a century on, the availability of more and better data has allowed for both broader and deeper comparison and analysis. This nascent 'data revolution' (UIS, 2017) has been accompanied by a shift in global education governance norms, beyond a focus on universal access and towards equitable, quality learning outcomes for all. Taken together, the availability of data and the interest in learning outcomes has spurred a widely held recognition that discrete interventions cannot bring about the kind of educational change we hope to see. Achieving quality, equitable learning necessitates reforms across entire education systems, involving a range of actors with complex webs of interest, power and accountability. How can education research respond to the call for 'systems Thinking'?Comparative international research is perhaps uniquely placed to contribute to systems thinking in education: the field is defined by the idea that there are comparable factors, dynamics or inputs at play in different contexts, and that analysis of these commonalities and differences can illuminate new understanding about how education works (or does not work). But individual research projects are not able to capture the complexity of education systems in their entirety. This Special Issue proposes that drawing findings across a portfolio of research may allow us to think about 'systems approaches' in a way that has not yet been possible. As discussed in the lead article in this Special Issue by Magrath, Aslam and Johnson, a number of large-scale research programmes have been developed with this goal in mind: to draw on findings from individual research projects, based in different contexts and using different research methods, to develop a systems approach to education research.The ESRC-DFID Raising Learning Outcomes (RLO) is one such research programme. The RLO programme aims to enable more effective policies and interventions by providing 824183R CI0010.
This exploratory paper seeks to shed light on the methodological challenges of education systems research. There is growing consensus that interventions to improve learning outcomes must be designed and studied as part of a broader system of education, and that learning outcomes are affected by a complex web of dynamics involving different inputs, actors, processes and socio-political contexts. How should researchers in comparative and international education respond to this call for complexity? To begin to answer this question, we draw on recent and ongoing research within the Raising Learning Outcomes in Education Systems research programme-a programme of 30 projects funded by the UK's Department for International Development (DFID) and Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). The paper explores critical ways in which the methods used by individual research projects, and across the programme as a whole, offer opportunities and raise challenges for advancing systems thinking in education research.
This article examines the adoption of the rights-based approach (RBA) to development at ActionAid International, focusing in particular on its Education Theme. Although there has been a considerable volume of work that examines the rise of RBA, including in the pages of Third World Quarterly, the power dynamics and conflict involved in shifting to RBA have largely gone unnoticed and explored. Using the methodological tools of discourse analysis and social movement theory on strategic issue framing, I examine how ActionAid leadership worked to 'sell' RBA to somewhat-resistant staff and partners. I argue that ActionAid struggled to reconcile its commitment to global rights norms with the ongoing needs-based programming at country-level. This raises important questions about the power dynamics involved when an NGO undergoes a process of organisational change, even when, as is the case with RBA, this is widely seen as a progressive and desirable transition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.