Comparative Models of Education

1. Definition of Comparative Models of Education?

By cuison.reymond@gmail.com

It is the discipline of comparing of different educational system of the different institutions whether local or other countries schools by evaluating and observing their educational system it may leads to enhancing educational programs, innovations and reforms as well. The professionals in this discipline really look into research and in depth study by formulating theories and having new perspectives and principles through evaluating the actual scenarios in the fields, towards successful and well developed educational system that can adapt and establish by ones educational institutions.

We can also look for the definition of  international standardized education, where the system set as a based and foundational norms, though there is no perfect system but in large scale it set as a good example for achieving high educational standands globally.

So this field of academic study we will deal with the comparison of today's educational principles or practices in our country and in other different countries so that we can use it to attain deeper and broad understanding of our problem in the education in the Philippines and what are the solutions and reforms that we can adapt and able to use. 

The possiblities are maybe some country having same problem as do we experiencing today but achieved suggestible solutions by performing such laws or customs, maybe this research may address our lawmakers or educational leaders for the certain adaptation or creating new sets of rule for the educational system of our country, so the comparatibe models of education exists for this purpose. 

Pertaining to the process of comparative education it should be systematized, objective and goal oriented, by examining of other countries customs, traditions and system of education, achievements in national or international assessment, may help us who conducting the study of finding the variant solutions we need. The goal is not to be stagnant and relax when we found out our weaknesses and holes but to look forward for the betterment and developing educational status. The comparative education has the following purposes: to describe educational systems, processes, or outcomes; to assist in the development of educational institutions and practices; to highlight the relationships between education and society; and to establish generalized statements about education that are valid in more than one country. (Harold Noah 1985)

2. Historical development of comparative education

               Tracking the development of comparative education we need to understand the history shaping of this field, it is so important to understand historical development of comparative education so that we can appreciate of just how this field has come from its earliest origins up to what it is today. 

How far back does comparative education go? When did it emerge as a distinct field of study? 

Noah and Eckstein (1969) claim that the historical development of comparative education can be identified through five distinct stages, each with its own aims. The first stage is often referred to as ‘travellers’ tales’, stories that were brought back from foreign travel and were generally descriptive in nature. When this first stage begins is less clear but for Noah and Eckstein it pre-dates the nineteenth century. Some writers go back as far as ancient times, citing examples from the Greeks and Romans and in particular how they admired the ‘discipline of Spartan education’ (Crossley and Watson, 2003, p. 12). According to Phillips (2000), there was a large group of British travellers who fell into Noah and Eckstein’s first stage. They visited countries such as Germany out of ‘cultural and general curiosity’ and they wrote with ‘varying degrees of sophistication’ (Phillips, 2000, p. 49). At this time, these tales did not systematically compare or analyse educational practice so have been dismissed by many scholars. However, others (see Rust et al., 2009) have asserted that while these tales may have been descriptive they had much value and have been harshly judged by those who have a narrow view as to what counts as scholarly activity. 

The second stage described by Noah and Eckstein (1969) begins in the nineteenth century. This phase coincides with the rise of national education systems in Europe. During the 1800s countries such as France, Germany and Great Britain were establishing national systems of schooling which eventually became free and universal by the end of the century. Many policy-makers had great interest in the organisation and practice of education in other countries in order to help them devise their own. Noah and Eckstein (1969) argue that the work conducted in this stage was still very similar to the travellers’ tales in previous years. Many of the writings during this time were ‘encyclopedic descriptions of foreign school systems’ (Noah and Eckstein, 1969, p. 5) and subjective in nature. The purpose of these foregin visits was to learn in order to help improve conditions in their home countries (Phillips, 2000). 

The third stage occurred around the middle of the nineteenth century and is still characterised by the accumulation of information in an encyclopaedic manner. However, Noah and Eckstein (1969) suggest that this exchange of scholars, students and publications was in the interest of promoting international understanding rather than in the interest of advancing one’s own educational interests. 

The fourth stage begins around the end of the nineteenth century. In this stage, a social science approach was beginning to develop as ‘studies of foreign schooling became to a considerable extent studies of national character and the institutions that help form it’ (Noah and Eckstein, 1969, p. 6). The recognition of the role of education in shaping society became important in this stage, as did the idea of cause and effect and that national character determines education. 

The fifth stage occurs after the First World War and coincides with the rise in statistical techniques in the social sciences. The adoption of quantitative methods after the Second World War and the empirical orientation of the social sciences began to reshape comparative education (Noah and Eckstein, 1969). 

Similarly, in his classic book Comparative Method in Education, Bereday (1964) writes of phases in the history of comparative education. However, for Bereday the first phase begins in the nineteenth century and lasts for about a hundred years. Like many other scholars (e.g. Green, 2003; Acosta and Centeno, 2011; Phillips and Schweisfurth, 2014), Bereday believes that the Frenchman Marc-Antoine Jullien, or Jullien de Paris as he is also known, was ‘the first scientifically minded comparative educator’ (Bereday, 1964, p. 7). Jullien’s aim was to improve French education by identifying the best schools in Europe and examining how they were organised, the teaching methods they used and what successful improvements they had implemented. Many writers in the field have called him the ‘father’ of comparative education as he was the first to use the term ‘comparative education’ (Crossley and Watson, 2003) and to use formal models of analysis (Gautherin, 1993). In his book Esquisse et vues préliminaires d’un ouvrage sur l’éducation comparée or Sketch and Preliminary Views on Comparative Education (published in 1817), unlike his predecessors, Jullien provided a systematic approach to collecting information on education in Europe by using simple questionnaires (Green, 2003). 

According to Gautherin (1993), by using the comparative method successfully employed in anatomy, Jullien was trying to advance the science of education. Although his work was largely neglected throughout his lifetime, the first course on the science of education was officially introduced at the Sorbonne in Paris in 1883 (Masemann, 2006). Bereday called this first phase in comparative education the period of ‘borrowing’because the purpose of comparing was about taking the best practices from one country and transplanting them to another (Bereday, 1964). For Bereday (1964), the second phase, called the period of ‘prediction’, occurred during the first half of the twentieth century and was led by the British educationalist Sir Michael Sadler. 

Like Jullien de Paris, Sadler was also interested in improving the English education system so looked to other systems, namely those in France, the USA and Germany, in order to draw comparisons. In his quest for reform, he was mindful of the wider social consequences that educational change may present (Mallinson, 1981). Scholars at this time paid attention to the relationship between education and society and the social causes underlying pedagogical practice. There was now a shift from cataloguing descriptive data to examining the social and cultural factors influencing education. In his classic text Studies in Comparative Education (1933, p. xi), Kandel writes: ‘The problems and purposes of education have in general become somewhat similar in most countries; the solutions are influenced by differences of tradition and culture peculiar to each.’ As a result, educators became much more careful when transferring ideas and practice from one country to another. Bereday (1964) called this phase in comparative education ‘the period of prediction’ as there was a shift from not just borrowing but also predicting the likely success of that borrowing based on other countries’ experiences. At the time of writing his book, comparative education had only just embarked on the third phase, which Bereday called the period of ‘analysis’. This was an appeal for a more systematic approach to research to help ensure the success of borrowing educational policy and practice from elsewhere. Early scholars such as Kandel (1933) even called for the development of better methods in the field. There was no universal agreement as to what kind of methods and systematisation comparativists should follow. This disagreement was evident in much of the scholarly writing in the field after the Second World War. 

However, critics such as Epstein (2008, p. 374) argue that the widespread view that comparative education ‘evolved mainly in Darwinianstyle stages of development’ is misunderstood. Others believe that separating out the history of the field into phases is over-simplistic and that they ‘are not necessarily linear or consistent across time, cultures or individuals’ (Crossley and Watson, 2003, p. 21). Brickman (2010) and Epstein (2017) ask us to challenge the role of Marc-Antoine Jullien as the ‘father’ of comparative education, and assert that there were, perhaps, others before and after him who used analytical approaches in their comparative studies. Despite criticism, it is widely acknowledged that both Bereday’s and Noah and Eckstein’s books have contributed greatly to the field (Bray et al., 2007). 

What is the early history of comparative education in other parts of the world? Comparative education was developing in the countries of Europe, North America and Asia between the latter parts of the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries (Masemann, 2006). However, the historical development of comparative education in mainland China, for example, can arguably date back further than the ‘travellers’ tales’ of Western Europe. Due to its long history of civilisation, cases of ‘borrowing’ and ‘lending’ can be traced back to the Han Dynasty (206 BC–220 AD) and the Tang Dynasty (618–906 AD) where the influence of Indian Buddhism on Chinese education was evident (Bray and Qin, 2001). 

In the Middle East between the twelfth and fourteenth centuries, scholars travelled extensively in the Arab region and their accounts represent the first comparative education documents in the region (Benhamida, 1990, in Halls, 1990). As in the West, during the latter part of the nineteenth century, the establishment of public schooling required a more systemic way of studying foreign education. It was not until the 1940s and 1950s that comparative education, led by the prominent Syrian Sati al-Husari (1882–1968), began to develop into the field as we understand it today (Benhamida, 1990, in Halls, 1990). 

In Latin America during the nineteenth century, there are examples of ‘travellers’ tales’ from those such as José María Luis Mora from Mexico, Andrés Bello from Venezuela, Domingo Faustino Sarmiento from Argentina and José Pedro Varela from Uruguay, who looked at education practices that they could borrow from Europe and the USA (Acosta and Centeno, 2011). For example, Sarmiento, an intellectual and social activist in Argentina, travelled to France, Prussia, Switzerland, Italy, Spain and England to learn new ideas in his quest to bring education to the masses and improve the social conditions of women and children in particular (Bravo, 1994).

In the twentieth century, the Second World War had a tremendous influence on the field of comparative and international education (international education will be discussed in Chapter 7). Many international organisations which undertake comparative research in education, such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and the World Bank, were created to help rebuild a world shattered by war (Crossley and Watson, 2003).

https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-assets/101778_book_item_101778.pdf

3. Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA)

1.  The Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA) measures 15 years old student's reading, mathematics and science literacy, it was first perform in 2000 and repeat every three years. Coordinated by the OECD or organization for economic cooperation and development. It aims to evaluate education system worldwide. 

PISA tests critical thinking in math, science and reading to 15 year old students. The test questions do not measure memorization of facts but rather demands the students draw on knowledge and real world problem solving skills. 

2. The basis why the Philippines made a decision to join PISA

Philippines’ Participation in PISA is an answer to the mandate of the Republic Act No. 9155 (RA No. 9155), otherwise known as the Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001, that the Department of Education (DepEd) to formulate national educational policies to improve the delivery of its services and achieve basic education outcomes. In line with this, DepEd implemented Republic Act No. 10533 (RA No. 10533) entitled “Enhanced Basic Education Act”, also known as the K to 12 Program, which aims to equip Filipino learners with skills and competencies that address the demands of the 21st Century. 

In support of the K to 12 program, part of Secretary Leonor Magtolis Briones’ 10-Point Agenda is the continuous improvement of the basic education system. Amidst the significant developments of improving  ACCESS, DepEd is also geared towards achieving QUALITY basic education. This declaration of commitment is in consonance with the objectives under Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4: Quality Education.

Assessment plays an important role in determining the quality of basic education. In the context of the K to 12 Program, assessment results shall be used to look into the learners’ performance so that relevant and responsive policies/programs/reforms can be introduced to further improve teaching and learning quality. One of the initiatives of assessing performance is the Department’s participation in international large-scale assessments (ILSAs), which aims to achieve the following purposes as outlined in DepEd Order No. 29, s. 2017 

(Policy Guidelines on System Assessment in the K to 12 Basic Education Program): 1. Establish baselines for the basic education system and the implementation of the K to 12 curriculum in schools in terms of teaching and learning; 2. Monitor the implementation of the K to 12 cturriculum in schools in terms of teaching and learning; 3. Measure effectiveness of instructional reforms that are part of the K to 12 basic education program; 4. Generate reliable data for purposes of benchmarking; 5. Provide bases for the improvement of programs for learner development, curriculum implementation and school effectiveness; and 6. Provide evidence that will aid policy formulation, planning and programming at the division, regional and national levels. 

In particular, PISA assesses students nearing the end of their compulsory education and the Philippines’ participation in PISA will provide DepEd an additional tool to measure the effectiveness of the enhanced curriculum and its delivery systems. DepEd can utilize the PISA 2018 results to understand how Filipino students apply what they have learned in everyday contexts. With the global advancement and rapid technological changes brought about by the digital era and Industry 4.0, PISA shall provide timely and relevant insights on student performance and inform policy decisions and preparations of the Department. 

3. The possible reasons why the Philippines rank below in the PISA:  We ranked in the low 70s in the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a student assessment of 15-year-old learners across 79 countries done by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).  The Philippines ranked 79th in reading, with an average of 340 against the OECD average of 487. Reading was the focus of this year’s PISA, the results of which were released on Tuesday, December 3.

PISA defined reading literacy as “understanding, using, evaluating, reflecting on and engaging with texts in order to achieve one’s goals, to develop one’s knowledge and potential, and to participate in society.” Filipino students also ranked low in mathematics and science, with 353 points and 357 points respectively against a 489 OECD average for both categories. 

According to the full report, the Philippines sees a strong relationship between students' socio-economic status and his or her performance in school. The study found that disadvantaged students were clustered in certain schools in the Philippines, as well as in countries like Belarus, Hungary, Peru, and Slovakia. The report recommended interventions in education be "targeted at socio-economically disadvantaged students and/or schools" for these said countries. 

The possible reasons why the Philippines rank below in the PISA: The Philippines ranked 79th in reading literacy it defines as understanding, using, evaluating, reflecting on and engaging with texts in order to achieve one’s goals, to develop one’s knowledge and potential, and to participate in society.” Based on the research I read, In total, about 80% of Filipino students were classified as having Proficiency Level below Level 2. The Majority of students cannot identify the main idea in a piece of moderate length, and may have difficulty in making comparisons based on single features of text and in making connections between text and outside knowledge. They are also not expected to represent literal meaning of single or multiple texts in the absence of explicit content or organizational clues. Only 0.05% of Filipino students attained Proficiency Level 5. These students are expected to comprehend lengthy texts, and to infer which information in the text is relevant even though the information of interest may be easily overlooked.

Filipino students also ranked low in mathematics and science, with 353 points and 357 points respectively against a 489 OECD average for both categories. 

Reasons: Based on the research, For the Philippines, only 1 out 5 students (19.7%) Proficiency Levels 2 to 4. These students can employ basic algorithms, formulae, procedures or conventions to solve problems involving whole numbers. Only 0.01% of students performed within Proficiency Levels 5 to 6. They can develop and work with models for complex situations, identifying constraints and specifying assumptions. They can also apply this insight and understanding, along with a mastery of symbolic and formal mathematical operations and relationships, to develop new approaches and strategies for attacking novel situations.

Reasons: Based on the research, Nearly four out of five (77.97%) PISA eligible students in the Philippines achieved proficiency levels below Level 2. Specifically, 35% of Filipino students were classified as Proficiency Level 1a and another 35% as Proficiency Level 1b. This suggests that majority are able to select the best scientific explanation for given data in familiar personal, local and global contexts. They can identify simple patterns in data, recognize basic scientific terms and follow explicit instructions to carry out a scientific procedure. Those within Proficiency Levels 2 to 4 comprised 21.97% of the distribution. Around 5.6% and 1% of these students achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4, respectively. They can construct explanations with relevant cueing or support in less familiar or more complex situations.

Reason why Philippines rank below in the PISA2018 students doesn’t meet the standard in PISA

4. If I will become the Secretary of the Department of Education, the innovations I am going to do in the following are: 

a. Curriculum - This innovation focus in problem-centered design, the basic education curriculum should consider this reform, it should be K - 13 program, here there will be added 1 year in the end of the senior high or grade 12 in basic education. The added year or we can call it special 13th year program is an On the job set up learning with free tuition because it is outside the school facility and with free allowance from the partner company. And it may lead to the full absorbtion of the partner company to where the students are assigned if the client is satisfied to their OJT.

To clarify, those who will reach the special 13th year program will reciept allowance as compensation from the partner company where the students are assigned. 

This 1 year program is the last subject that is all about Senior High On the Job Learning (OTJL) will be facilitated, evaluated and guided by their senior teacher/trainor.

It is not added expenses for the parents because it is like a true job in a sense but it is still under the school curriculum. Under the Department of Education mandates the 13th year program to the partner company the Senior High OJT's will be accepted and will probably have their very first job/ work, the promise to the senior high that after the grade 12 they can apply for job, will now is not just a promise but a fulfilment to this promise, the schools with Senior High will usher and collaborate the students to their target company. Department of Education and with the help of the government order the mandate to the partner company should accept Senior High OJT with the minimum compensation or allowance for atleast 1 year, the BIR will issue a 25% discount of 1 quarter of the business tax if the company have accepted atleast 1 Senior High OJT. 

And it will make an advancement of the educational status of the technical Vocational courses of the Senior High School from the reflections and real-time reports to their OJT advisors of the students under the program. The reliability of the technical Vocational learnings of the students will be validated through this process. 

b. Teaching Pedagogy - My innovation in teaching Pedagogy will be more focus in collaborative strategy. One of the most powerful pedagogical examples is where students and teachers produce work and learning together. The teacher becomes more of a mentor or coach helping students achieve the learning goal. Students also work together and use each other's skills and expertise to accomplish a set of learning tasks.

In special 13th year program the trainor and the students will hand and hand ,collaborately work together in the real life scenario, the trainor for advising, assessing and visiting the site while the students in the field will apply his knowledge and skills he/she learned from Senior High grade 11th and 12th year, will submit a report, his field experiences and self evaluation and assessment. 

Another innovation in Pedagogy is the permanent usage of the blended learning -the face to face learning and the online class learning. This two should be the norm of the educational system of our basic education in public or private, even after this pandemic, the age of digital and technological education can be attained because of the experiences we gained from this worldwide scenarios. The session of synchronous and asynchronous learning should be the new way of Pedagogical approach. The face to face and virtual interactions between teachers, students, and the learning environment and the learning tasks will help the educational system to develop and achieve the futuristic classroom set-up.

c. Faculty - new faculty qualifications for hiring such as: Kinder - atleast bachelor graduate of education even witthout licence; Elementary teacher should be bachelor graduate with licence; Junior High - teacher should be bachelor graduate with licence  and seminars and training certificates; Senior high - should be bachelor graduate with licence and NC's Certificates or company certificates. And about honing and improving the faculty there will be seminars and training that will focus in Teamwork: the ability to effectively and efficiently collaborate with others in a group; Intelligent risk-taking: the ability to weigh potential benefits and disadvantages of exercising one's choice or action to assume calculated risks; Challenging the status quo: the ability to set ambitious goals that challenge established practices—especially when tradition impedes improvements; Intellectual curiosity: the desire to acquire new knowledge and seek explanations for things—even when the applications for that new learning are not immediately apparent; Flexibility: the willingness to change or compromise according to the situation. With this we can develop Innovative teachers were they are excellent at supporting students, and are also adept at creating engaging content and new experiences. A good teacher observes and measures progress without causing any stress to the learner or interruption to learning.

d. Facilities - the school will have technological equipment and educational gadgets, we will install to every public school facilities build-in projectors and multi-media in the wall, so that the presentation is not longer chalk based intruction but digital based teaching strategy. Also have a Free Internet connection trough Free Hotspot wifi from National telecommunication Commission. 

Also the school will conduct facilities and equipment inventory, were the old ones will be scraped and turn into money and buy new equipments needed to every schools, there should be more facilities, school buildings and school laboratories with equipments.