MANZON MARIA

Action follows from being. One's way of doing and understanding comparative education follows from one's being. It springs from the soul. Using [Kim, T., and R. Brooks' (2013). "Internationalisation, Mobile Academics, and Knowledge Creation in Universities: A Comparative Analysis." SRHE Research Award (2011/12) Final Report] framework on the relationship between academic mobility and knowledge creation, I will reflect here on my personal and intellectual journey and how it has shaped my work on comparative histories of the field of comparative education. As this article is written, I am commencing a new transition in my professional life, this time in Japan. I am reflecting on a possible new research agenda building on my past work and the new panorama opened from my new vantage point in the field.

A number of East Asian education systems (e.g. Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Shanghai, Singapore and Taiwan) have gained international prominence over the years, due to their rapid climbs to top positions in international tests such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). For example, Hong Kong was placed 17th in PIRLS reading literacy, and Singapore ranked 15th in 2001, but within 5 years, they garnered 2nd and 4th places in 2006, respectively. In the 2015 PISA results, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taipei, Japan and Beijing-Shanghai-Jiangsu-Guangzhou (B-S-J-G), China, were top achievers (OECD, Report on PISA 2015: results in focus. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2016).<br/><br/>The sterling report cards of these East Asian systems, combined with the declining performance of western systems such as those of the United Kingdom and the United States, have led the West to a “look East” drive for inspiration. Whether it be scholarly publications or media articles, much literature has been generated on the “success” of education in East Asia, which has become “the new ‘poster boy’ in the global discourse of education policy borrowing” (You and Morris, Compare 46(6), 2016, p. 883).<br/><br/>Increasingly, a good education system is considered one that not only produces high achievements but is also equitable in terms of the distribution of its success across the system and its student population. Perhaps a more nuanced understanding of these East Asian education systems could be facilitated if we could examine them considering both equity and quality issues, since the pursuit of each often affects the other. The chapters in this book illustrate that excellence and equity are not independent and separate but can be paradoxically intertwined. Copyright © 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

While Singapore’s education system has achieved excellence especially in terms of international educational assessments, the issue of equity remains underexplored and contentious. This chapter examines the interplay of equity and excellence in Singapore’s secondary schools. It showcases best practices of differentiated schooling in pursuit of equity and the tensions that arise between inclusion and differentiation in the system. Drawing on Fraser’s (Scales of justice: reimagining political space in a globalising world. Polity Press, Cambridge, 2008) framework for understanding social justice, we distinguish three distinct types of injustices – socio-economic, political and cultural/symbolic – with corresponding forms of justice, redistributive, recognitive and representational, to resolve them. We then explore the Singapore education system that comprises a ‘bridges and ladders’ model of highly differentiated schooling. We examine three case studies of schools which exhibit, in microcosm, the tensions between equity and excellence in Singapore more broadly. They comprise a madrasah, a specialised school and an elite school. Through these case studies, we explore the pedagogical, sociocultural and systemic approaches that can affirm, transform or enhance equity and excellence in Singapore secondary schools. We argue that the ‘bridges and ladders’ model, through its increased educational choices and differentiated schooling experiences, paradoxically increases equity and excellence while simultaneously exacerbating injustices and inequity. We situate the implications of educational equity and excellence in the continued political discourses of ‘equity needs economic growth’, meritocracy and educational choice. Finally, we propose a rethinking of the Singapore model to enhance the pursuit of equity for all. Copyright © 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

This book offers a comprehensive picture of high-performing East Asian education systems, beyond their outstanding achievements in international assessments, such as PISA and TIMSS. Situating “excellence” within discussions of “equity”, it contextualises the conceptions and pursuits of equity amid the development of education systems, policy and curricula in selected East Asian societies. While parallels could be observed across the systems, including high-stakes assessment culture, increasing credentialism and high investment of family educational resources, there are also divergences in approaches and outcomes relating to equity policies and practices. In light of the challenges presented by low fertility rates, ageing populations, migration, and the economic demands of the 21st century, the book addresses these systems’ attempts to cater to further diversified student populations and maintain equity in excellence. As the international community relentlessly seeks to enhance equity in education, there is much these East Asian education systems can share. This book has appeal internationally to researchers, policymakers, educators, and anyone interested in East Asian education and equity. Copyright © 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

This chapter presents research on the theme of private supplementary tutoring in four regions of Asia. They converge in their concept of private tutoring as the practice of fee-paying tutoring in academic subjects provided outside standard school hours. This may take the form of instruction to individuals, small groups or large classes, both directly and through virtual classrooms. Scholars have used the metaphor of "shadow education" to depict how private tutoring mimics mainstream education systems. The chapter examines Bourdieusian social theory. It reviews private tuition as a social practice resulting from a triadic interaction among habitus, capital and field. The chapter illuminates the "shadows" in Asian education. Some governments turn a blind eye to this social practice, as it enables them to retain teachers in the profession at a lower cost. These irregularities, however, lead to other problems, such as corruption on the part of teachers and/or school leaders. Copyright © 2018 selection and editorial matter, Kerry J. Kennedy and John Chi-Kin Lee; individual chapters, the contributors.

Comparative education is two centuries old. Many mainstream historical narratives claim that the field began with the iconic opus of Marc-Antoine Jullien de Paris (1817). This article offers to re-theorise the histories of comparative education. It suggests casting a far-sighted and panoramic look at the field’s origins. An underlying assumption in these histories is the embeddedness of comparative education in ever-changing world orders. The article concludes with a puzzle for future work on a global history of comparative education.

Emphasizing the important role of “history” within comparative education is the classic way, much celebrated in the writings of Andreas Kazamias, to treat this theme. This article uses a different perspective. The argument is that “comparative education” and “history” use two words as professional identifiers of a way of thinking and working. Metaphorically, they are wizard words, magical claims that mark off different epistemic territories: “context” for comparative education and “archive” for the historian. The construction and—especially—the confusions, the contradictions, and the consequences within these codings of professional identity and the relationships of the two fields of study are the themes of this article about comparative education.

This article questions some of our assumptions about the history of comparative education. It explores new scholarship on key actors and ways of knowing in the field. Building on the theory of the social constructedness of the field of comparative education, the paper elucidates how power shapes our scholarly histories and identities.

Comparative education in Asia is witnessing changing discourses, structural opportunities, and invigorated leadership. This article will review the institutionalization of comparative education in Asia from a sociological perspective, drawing on Bourdieu's theory on the logic of social practice. After giving an overview of the historical roots of Asian comparative education, I will describe broadly its landscape noting developments in the last two decades since 1995, the foundational year of the Comparative Education Society of Asia (CESA). Four main themes are explored: comparative education teaching, professional societies, research centres, and specialist publications. With a baseline understanding of the infrastructures of the field in Asia and the power dynamics that shape them, I will propose an agenda for Asian comparative education to offer meaningful contributions to multipolar knowledge production in the field. Priority themes and directions will be highlighted to articulate a stronger Asian voice and leadership in an increasingly diverse and uncertain world.

‘Equity and Quality’ is an emerging terminology that focuses on the quality of education rather than on ‘excellence’. The global policy discourse is turning towards levelling up educational quality for all. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 2012 report entitled Equity and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools claimed that the highest performing education systems (HPES) across OECD countries are those that combine high quality and equity. In such education systems, the vast majority of students can attain high level skills and knowledge that depend on their ability and drive, more than on their socio-economic background. Paradoxically, among the HPES are three East Asian systems—China, Hong Kong and Singapore—characterized by a huge income disparity between the rich and the poor with their above-40 Gini indices. Nevertheless, their high average scores in PISA 2009 illustrate that the average quality of education in respect to learning outcomes provided in these education systems are of a very high quality which benefits the whole population regardless of the socio-economic conditions of the students. How can these seemingly contradictory claims and evidences be explained? Can educational equity and quality co-exist within a highly unequal society? This article attempts to offer some explanations taking Hong Kong as an illustrative case. Employing Bourdieu’s logic of practice, the article argues that both cultural habitus and structural contexts account for the achievement, albeit contested, of educational equity and quality in Hong Kong.

Private supplementary tutoring, also widely known as shadow education, is becoming a global phenomenon and an object of international scholarship. Private tutoring has multiple forms and positions across educational systems and levels, thus the term "shadow educations". Asia is a notable location of shadow education activity. This editorial article maps the global discourse on shadow educations, using an expanded framework for analysis based on the Bray and Thomas cube. Against this backdrop, Asian research on shadow education presented in this special issue is introduced and its contribution to the global discourse is highlighted. A possible global research agenda is offered with the hope that new understandings derived from scholarly research may aid stakeholders in achieving the aims of education.

The institutional framework of the field of comparative education has developed significantly in recent decades. One manifestation of development has been the establishment and activities of professional societies. This paper focuses on 12 societies that operate in Asia and the Pacific. Some of these societies have long histories while others are recent creations. The paper considers the geographic and conceptual remits of these societies, and their activities including organization of conferences and publication of journals. Patterns are viewed through the lenses of literature on intellectual fields and on academic tribes and territories.

This introductory article serves as a hermeneutical tool for interpreting the subsequent articles in this special issue, which explores the nature and roles of comparative education in the 21st century within the context of a changing world order and the growing prominence of comparative education in the Asia-Pacific region. A review of the evolution of different genres of comparative educations reveals the importance of contextual considerations as a constant ritornello (a refrain or instrumental interlude) in comparative education research. Reflections on comparative education in dialectical perspectives in this article provide new impetus and enlightenment on contemporary issues in education and society. Seeing comparative education as a dialectic process enhances the openness of comparative education to challenge the status quo perception of issues, and provides a compare-and-contrast perspective to identify polemic interpretations, such as empirical epistemology which can be viewed as a subjectivity that rejects the transcendental sources of knowledge. Dynamic secularism can be a friend of, and coexist with, religion as it ironically provides more opportunities for more religions to co-exist harmoniously under secularism than many countries that adopt a national religion. The dialectics of comparative education opens up a new role for comparative education to accommodate polemic perspectives to co-exist and to recognize the equal importance of universality and particularity.