Abstract
The issue of methods is commonly overlooked—or under-addressed—in studies on global education policy. Lack of discussion in this area is a serious issue because the investigation of global education policies is not a straightforward matter. Conceptually, global education policies are slippery subjects, which makes discussion about how to research them all the more important. Casual readers, fellow researchers, and policymakers will wonder about the basis on which claims are made and the gravity that they should give to those claims. Thus, in the present chapter, significant space is dedicated to addressing the issue of how we can investigate the phenomenon of interest in this book, namely, the trajectory of global education policy. Although the present approach is not without its limitations, it is hoped that this discussion will generate or will contribute to methodological dialogue more generally.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Examples of objects which make up structures include landlords/tenants, capitalists/wage laborers, men/women and so on (Danermark et al. 2002).
- 2.
Sayer (1992) makes an additional point with regard to the vertical dimension: “In the vertical dimension, some readers may want to add a fourth level above events to cover meanings, experiences, beliefs and so forth, but as these can form structures, function as causes, or be considered events, I would suggest that they be taken as already included” (p. 116).
- 3.
In the parlance of critical realism, the research acts of reconstruction, theoretical interpretation, and explanation—as regards social phenomena—are embodied in the terms abduction and retroduction (Danermark et al. 2002).
References
Berg, B. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). New York: Pearson.
Cox, R. (2002). The political economy of a plural world: Critical reflections on power, morals and civilization. New York: Routledge.
Danermark, B., Ekstrom, M., Jakobsen, L., & Karlsson, J. (2002). Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences. New York: Routledge.
Davis, R. (2010). Case study database. In A. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclopedia of case study research (pp. 79–81). London: Sage.
Edwards, D. B., Jr. (2012). Researching international processes of education policy formation: Conceptual and methodological consideration. Research in Comparative and International Education, 7(2), 127–145.
Edwards, D. B., Jr. (2013). International processes of education policy formation: An analytic framework and the case of Plan 2021 in El Salvador. Comparative Education Review, 57(1), 22–53.
Edwards, D. B., Jr., & DeMatthews, D. (2014). Historical trends in educational decentralization in the United States and developing countries: A periodization and comparison in the post-WWII context. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(40), 1–36.
Engel, L. (2007). Rescaling the state: The politics of educational decentralization in Catalonia (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1981). Effective evaluation. London: Jossey-Bass.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. First published date: July-21-2016.
Jensen, J., & Rogers, R. (2001). Cumulating the intellectual gold of case study research. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 235–246.
Jupp, V. (1996). Documents and critical research. In R. Sapford & V. Jupp (Eds.), Data collection and analysis (pp. 298–316). London: Sage.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denizin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 163–188). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(3). Available at: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs100387
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Moutsios, S. (2010). Power, politics and transnational policy-making in education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 8(1), 121–141.
Robertson, S. (2011, May 1–5). Reconceptualising “state space” in the globalisation and governance of education policy. Paper presented at the conference of the comparative and international education society, Montreal.
Sayer, A. (1992). Method in social science: A realist approach. London: Routledge.
Siedman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Edwards, D.B. (2018). Investigating the Trajectory of Global Education Policy. In: The Trajectory of Global Education Policy. International and Development Education. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50875-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50875-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-50874-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-50875-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)