Comparative and International Education Research in Australia and New Zealand

Abstract

Historical studies of comparative education have been available and utilised in Europe and North America particularly to justify and legitimise comparative and international education research in present day contexts (Cowen 2008; Masemann et al 2007; Psacharopoulos 1985; Schriever 2000). However, when reviewing the literature of comparative education research in Australia and New Zealand, very little is mentioned about its own history, purpose, or direction. It is suggested that part of this circumstance stems from the fact that the field of study is continually perceived as undefined. Indeed, outsiders consider study in this specialty 'a degree leading to nowhere'. In contrast, the field of international education has enjoyed an ever-changing surge of interest and intrigue which is due in part to the interconnectivity of the global economy---globalisation---since World War II (Arnove 2003). Its dynamic and 'twin' relationship with comparative education (Wilson 1994), however, has resulted in some confusion concerning degree offerings, academic staff, research, and students. The resulting effects, at least as far as Australia and New Zealand are concerned, is a decline in the teaching of comparative education despite the amount of robust research and engendered interest. This paper argues that, in the two countries, comparative and international education research is perceived as research in different disciplines. The fields differ in terms of paradigmatic representation and are change-dependent. While comparative education research does not necessarily require an international dimension to it, it is considered essential that international education contain comparative elements for critical analysis and reflection.