Eliminating Dysfunctional Boundaries and Mapping Educational Practice: Toward Integration, Infusion, and Inclusiveness in Comparative Education

Abstract

This chapter discusses the boundaries that traditionally kept comparative education marginalized in United States schools of education and how those boundaries have been breached as other areas of education research have been enhanced by comparative study. The perspective is different from some other chapters in this volume, which focus on macro level theory and discourse and are less concerned with what comparative education actually means at the grassroots level of faculties of education and pre-university schools. The theory of Pierre Bourdieu is used to explain why such a ghetto previously existed even though dysfunctional. In earlier years the basic mapping of educational practice, which could have served as the basis for integration of comparative study with other areas of educational inquiry, was neglected in the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES). Instead, this mapping was left to international assessment studies to initiate outside the purview of the CIES organization and largely without its support. Two examples show how what could be called the most important developments in comparative education took place outside CIES in efforts to expand comparative study to other domains of educational research. One is the story of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) and progress made in mapping educational practices and outcomes across countries. The other example focuses on efforts at Michigan State University (MSU) to reduce dysfunctional boundaries in developing an international dimension throughout the College of Education. Finally, the development of the Special Interest Groups (SIGs) in CIES is analyzed as evidence that the organization has at last endorsed and put into practice more integration, infusion, and inclusiveness.