Showing papers in "Compare in 1981"
6 citations
4 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present models in Comparative Education and compare them with a Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 155-161.
Abstract: (1981). Models in Comparative Education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 155-161.
3 citations
TL;DR: In the wake of Sir Michael Sadler, the authors has published a book entitled "In the Wake of SirMichael Sadler: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 2, pp 175-183".
Abstract: (1981). In the Wake of Sir Michael Sadler. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 175-183.
3 citations
3 citations
TL;DR: The School Curriculum in England, 1970•1990 as mentioned in this paper, 1970−1990, pp. 21-32, and compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 1, No., pp.
Abstract: (1981). The School Curriculum in England, 1970‐1990. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 21-32.
3 citations
2 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, a comparative appraisal of Curriculum issues in both German and Dutch education is presented. But the evaluation is limited to two countries: Germany and Netherlands. And it is not available in English-German.
Abstract: (1981). Curriculum Issues in Both Germanies: a comparative appraisal. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 7-20.
2 citations
1 citations
1 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the increasing influence of nomadism on Western culture and education is discussed, with a focus on the role of nomads in the education of children in the US.
Abstract: (1981). Increasing Influence of Nomadism on Western Culture and Education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 207-212.
TL;DR: The development of educational research policy in New Zealand was discussed in this article, where the development of Educational Research Policy for New Zealand is discussed. But the focus was not on the quality of the research.
Abstract: (1981). The Development of Educational Research Policy in New Zealand. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education: Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 191-198.
TL;DR: The last two decades have been marked by a large number of research projects and surveys in education as mentioned in this paper, which have been accompanied by a few 'private-enterprise' studies, usually backed by charitable foundations.
Abstract: The last two decades have been marked by a large number of research projects and surveys in education. Practically every international organisation, world-wide or regional, has commissioned research. These projects have been accompanied by a few 'private-enterprise' studies, usually backed by charitable foundations. There have also been national studies, often official, which have attempted comparisons, such as the Robbins Report in Britain, which had an international dimension. Some more academic studies, such as the Coleman and Jencks reports, have been taken up and used elsewhere as yardsticks of comparison. Comparative studies have also been carried out in the economics of education, particularly in the area of cost-benefit analysis and human resource planning. Most of the work has been policy-oriented, although, with a few honourable exceptions, its real impact upon national educational systems has been small, or even negative. Much of it has been carried out by researchers who would describe themselves as social scientists or even statisticians rather than comparativists. The dialogue that has gone on over methodology among those who would regard themselves as primarily comparative educationists has largely flowed over their heads, to their own evident disadvantage. One of the results has been that the findings of their published work have often been neglected or brushed aside, because the most elementary rules for making comparisons have been flouted. This paper is an attempt to review research work in the immediate past and to propose a slightly different direction, based on Durkheim, that it might take in the future. First, however, it should be made plain that the strictures that follow do not apply to the highly significant contribution that Edmund King has made, and continues to make, to comparative studies. One of his great merits is that he has never committed himself exclusively to one approach or one method of working in comparative education. In his examination of problems he has consistently selected what seemed to be the most apt method of dealing with a specific question. He has chosen for his research—and this would surely have won Durkheim's approval—broad, wideranging topics. He has not shrunk from employing quantitative methods when he has deemed them to be effective, as in his study of the education of 16-19-year-olds in Western Europe. In other cases, perhaps the majority, he has deliberately opted for the judgemental and qualitative rather than the allegedly more effective statistical
TL;DR: In this paper, a discussion of an earlier paper and the provision of documents which I had not previously obtained was discussed. But this discussion was conducted in a closed-door setting.
Abstract: [1] I am particularly indebted to Leon Boucher for discussion of an earlier paper and for this provision of documents which I had not previously obtained.