Lesson 2: The Historical Development of Comparative Education

Lesson objective:

At the end of this lesson,

- students will explain the historical development of comparative education

Lesson plan:

1. The historical background

1. The historical background :

In the beginning, Comparative Education was not really Comparative but descriptive as
the people were mostly concerned with the description of educational systems of each country
without necessarily comparing one educational systems with another. However, the 19th
Century witnessed an increased interest in the study of Comparative Education as education
started to be studied in a Comparative form.

As a matter of fact, what can be regarded as serious studies in the field of Comparative
Education could be traced to the early 19th century after the Napoleonic wars since there was
no war among the Europeans, there was peace among them and they needed something that
could enhance their interaction with each other. Therefore, a consideration was given to the
study of comparative education as a strong channel through which the youths of various
European countries could be more unified. To this end, John Griscom travelled to Europe and
on his return, he published his findings on educational institutions in the countries visited such
as Great Britain, France, Switzerland, Italy as well as Holland between 1818 and 1819.

In the same vein, Victor Cousin, a representative of the French Minister of education
visited Prussia in 1831 and also on return home, published his findings on the Prussian
educational institutions and practices, His findings were later translated to English and
enhanced the educational development in France, England as well as in America.

1
 Another pioneer in the field of Comparative Education was Horace Mann of America
who after a six-month visit to Europe also published his findings in 1843 on educational
institutions and practices in England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Germany as well as Holland.
His report was purely on the comparison of the school organization and methods of
instruction.

Matthew Arnold of England visited both France and Germany in 1859 and 1865. On his
return home, he made some remarks particularly on the educational institutions and practices
in both France and Germany. Like others, he advised that some useful aspects of the
educational system of France and Germany should be integrated into the systems of education
in England.

What can be viewed as second generation in the study of Comparative Education could
be traced to Sir Michael Sadler who in one of his publications: how far can we learn anything
of practical value from the study of Foreign Systems of Education which was published in
1900, went further than other pioneers before him who were more utilitarian and straight
forward in the description of the foreign educational systems studied by them.

2. Historical development of comparative education :

During the first phase of the development of Comparative Education, the educational
comparativists involved in this stage include: Marc-Anthony Jullien de Paris, 1817, Mathew
Arnold of England, Victor cousin of France, Leo Tolstoy and K.D. Aushinsky of Russia,
Domingo Sermiento of Argentina, Horace Mann and Henry Barbard of America. At the
borrowing stage, the education data collected would be compared so as to make use of it for
the best educational practice of the country studied for the purpose of transplanting it to other
countries.

2.2. The second phase (predictive phase)

The second phase in the study of comparative education took place in the first half of the
20th century. The stage could be regarded as a stage of Prediction because at this stage, the
study of comparative education has gone beyond the borrowing stage. At this stage, the
educational comparativists studying the educational institutions and practices of another
country will be in the position to predict what is likely to be the success or failure of adopting

2
the educational practices of the country studied by his own country. It should be remembered
by both the students and the teachers of comparative education that the students and the
teachers of comparative education that the basis on which a country's educational practice is
based may not necessary be the same thing with that of education comparatives studying the
education system of other countries.

The educational comparativists involved in this stage included: Friedrich Schneider and
Franz Hilker of Germany, Isaac Kandel as well as Robert Ulich of America., Nicholas Hans
as well as Joseph Lanwerys of England including Pedro Rosselo of Switzerland. They tried to
find out the reasons behind the educational practices of the country visited by them and they
became more careful in transplanting the educational practices of another country to their
own.

2.3. The third phase (scientific phase)

The third stage can be regarded as the scientific period or analytical period. This stage
took place in the second half of the 20 th century. The period witnessed rigorous analysis as
well as objectivity in the study of educational practices of other countries. At this stage,
before transplanting the educational practices of another country to one's country, such
educational practices have to be subjected to a critical analysis unlike the first stage when the
educational practices of the country visited can be borrowed or the second stage when the
implication of transplanting the educational practices of another country can be easily
predicted.

The comparativists involved in this stage included: Schneider, Kandel as well as Uich.

3. Noah and Eckstein division of the historical development of comparative education

Noah and Eckstein postulate five stages in the development of comparative education
which, they argue, are not ‘discrete in time’:

1. travellers’ tales
2. travellers with a specific educational focus; learning through example; improving
circumstances at home
3. understanding of other nations; detailed accumulation of information; educational
exchange

3
4. study of ‘national character’ and its deterministic role in shaping national systems of
education
5. quantitative research; explanation of educational phenomena.