This paper calls for a recentring of researcher positionality and reflexivity in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) by foregrounding a historically situated understanding of (de)coloniality in comparative education. Drawing on examples from a recent CDA study of Taiwanese EFL textbooks by scholars based in the People's Republic of China, we argue that positionality (the social, political, and epistemic location from which scholars produce knowledge) and reflexivity (the practice of interrogating this location) are central to the validity of CDA in Taiwan's educational contexts. The absence of such engagement risks reinforcing the very geopolitical hierarchies that critical inquiry seeks to dismantle. Our re-reading of selected textbook passages shows how our positionality shapes interpretation less as ideological determination than as a form of pedagogical negotiation. Recognising Taiwan as a distinct site of epistemic production, we call for a reflexive comparative stance that foregrounds plurality and situated understanding over universalist critique.
This article examines how Holocaust remembrance, migration, and postcolonial critique have reshaped history education in Germany. Situating the German case within a wider European context, it reconstructs three pedagogical orientations - liberal-integrative, pluralist, and reflexive - and analyses tensions between ritualised commemoration and critical reflection in plural classrooms. It argues that reflexive pedagogy, though institutionally demanding, offers the most promising framework for democratic learning. (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)-- (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).
Despite recent initiatives to boost foundational learning in low- and middle-income countries, doubts persist about their uptake. Dominant narratives and research assume that resistance to such reforms stems from frontline actors being either unaware of low learning or apathetic towards the problem. Drawing on interviews with 63 teachers, principals, and bureaucrats in India, this study complicates both assumptions. Most actors were aware of and motivated to address the problem of low foundational learning yet remained doubtful that current reforms would improve outcomes. Their scepticism stemmed from frame dissonance - policies attributed low learning to instructional shortcomings, whereas actors located the problem in broader, interconnected conditions. This mismatch of problem framing subsequently weakens policy resonance and curtails uptake. The study reframes policy implementation not as a matter of frontline compliance but of congruence with frontline sensemaking, underscoring the need for more participatory reform design in education.
This paper examines whether rising political critiques of higher education reflect a broader public backlash against universities in advanced democracies. Drawing on an original five-country survey - including observational and experimental components - it investigates three questions: who is more critical of universities, where are such divisions sharper, and why do citizens hold these views? The results show that while overall support for universities remains widespread there are emerging divides structured by cultural orientations. Socially conservative voters, particularly in the United States and United Kingdom, are more sceptical of universities' social and cultural roles, but they do not reject them wholesale. Experimental evidence reveals no generalised hostility: across contexts, most respondents respond more to positive over negative arguments about universities, although social conservatives adopt more selective, less 'bundled' positions than liberals. The findings suggest that ideological divides are real but asymmetrical, pointing to the critical role of different political contexts in shaping backlash.
This inquiry explores how hensachi (standardised test scores) and juku (private tutoring providers) shape how Japanese students perceive themselves, their peers, and their futures. Drawing on Foucauldian governmentality and Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, this study examines how these ostensibly 'neutral' technologies encourage self-monitoring, competition, and personal responsibility within a tightly ranked educational system. Interviews with university students reveal the emotional weight of rankings, the pressure to perform, and the contradictions learners navigate in a system that does not reward effort equally. While some participants viewed these practices as motivating, others described them as unfair, financially restrictive, or disconnected from actual ability. As such, it is argued that Japan's long-standing educational culture of quantification operates as a 'small-n' regime of truth that organises the visibility and value of academic success, while also reflecting broader trends in marketised education.a
Drawing on social science perspectives, research has examined how twenty-first-century competencies are incorporated into educational policies, curricula, and classroom practices across contexts, yet comparatively little attention has been given to these processes from an 'internal' perspective that is distinctively educational and curricular. Informed by Bildung-centred Didaktik, this article addresses this gap by critically examining the conceptual framework that underpins twenty-first-century competency-based education. Using Singapore as an analytic case and situating it within the global movement towards competency-based education, the article elucidates three central ideas promoted by the OECD and other international organisations: competencies as educational goals, competency-based curriculum development, and pedagogy for twenty-first-century learning. These ideas are critically examined by tracing their origins and analysing their inherent issues. The article argues that Bildung-centred Didaktik offers a viable and distinctively educational alternative for rethinking educational purposes, knowledge and content, and classroom teaching in comparative and international contexts.
Following 9/11, education in Pakistan, particularly English language teaching (ELT), emerged as a primary focus of donor intervention associated with security and development objectives. Although donor influence on state-led reforms is well documented, limited research addresses the ways in which non-governmental organisations (NGOs) mediate these agendas within institutional practice. This study investigates how two Pakistani NGOs, the Society of Pakistan English Language Teachers (SPELT) and the Linguistic Association of Pakistan (LAP), navigate donor-funded ELT initiatives. Utilising 26 semi-structured interviews and informed by Blommaert's sociolinguistics of globalisation, the analysis applies the concepts of scales, spaces, and indexicality to examine how donor authority is interpreted, constrained, and reconfigured across organisational, national, and local levels. The findings indicate that NGOs act as scalar brokers who selectively adapt donor agendas, localise global pedagogical knowledge, and, in certain instances, challenge prevailing development discourses by advocating for multilingualism and linguistic justice. By positioning NGOs as meso-level actors, this study demonstrates that post-9/11 ELT reform constitutes a mediated and multi-scalar process rather than a straightforward extension of donor intent, thereby contributing to debates on securitised development, donor dominance, and language policy governance in postcolonial contexts.
International organisations are considered central actors in global education governance, producing policy-relevant knowledge that can shape national reforms. While extensive studies have examined their influence on education policy, less attention has been paid to who actually produces this knowledge. This article examines the producers of global education policy knowledge by analysing the authorship of education-related publications of UNESCO, the OECD, and the World Bank. Drawing on the theoretical concepts of policy networks and epistemic communities, the study dissects patterns of disciplinary backgrounds, institutional affiliations, and geographic locations of authors. Based on an analysis of 1,447 publications and 3,175 authors, the findings reveal limited overlap across organisations, distinct disciplinary profiles, a strong reliance on internal contributors, and a predominance of authors affiliated with institutions in the Global North. These patterns reflect organisational mandates and knowledge infrastructures, and point to epistemic segmentation that shapes how policy knowledge on global education problems and solutions is legitimised.
The conceptual article examines the purpose and impact of international agendas (EFA, MDGs, SDGs) against the backdrop of three temporal units of analysis: sequence, future, and historical context. In sequence, each of the three international agreements built on the previous one by extending the years of compulsory schooling and broadening the range of social groups, with each new call for 'universal access'. The future orientation of multi-year international agreements has a lock-in effect for governments and donors and shields educational development from politicisation, stakeholder replacement, and administrative turnover. However, both the future orientation and the historical context of international cooperation have changed dramatically over the last forty years. The greatest time ordeal for international organisations, however, is the short-termism of governments. This is especially pronounced among autocratic governments that seek re-election in the short term and therefore have little regard for multi-year international agreements and long-term action plans.
