EDUCATION RESEARCH, KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION & IN POST-SOVIET TAJIKISTAN: BETWEEN DECOLONIZATION, RECOLONIZATION, AND INDIGENIZATION - PEER Network
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
EDUCATION RESEARCH, KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION &
IN POST-SOVIET TAJIKISTAN:
BETWEEN DECOLONIZATION, RECOLONIZATION, AND INDIGENIZATION
SARFAROZ NIYOZOV ( University of Toronto)
@ PEER NETWORK PROJECT
JUNE 24, 2021
A story of 5 sub-stories
Education Research
& Knowledge
Production
Implication for
(ERKP)
ERKP & Education
Reforms & Key Arguments
Decolonization,
& Decolonization in Recolonization,
Central Asia Indigenization
education Research
Discourse
Questions to
Decolonization
Recolonization ERKP in Tajikistan –
Indigenization Central Asia
Discourses Status and RealitiesEducation Research & Knowledge Production (ERKP) & Key Arguments
Research, Knowledge
Production and (De)
Colonization
Policy Borrowing & Need to move strategically:
Start from where
Lending &Failure of we are Indigenization & Work, With, Despite and
Education Reforms Decolonization Against Best Practices &
to what end ? Eurocentrism & Other
Global best Practices Alternative EpistemologiesOn the Method: Data Sources & Analysis ◦ 2012- 2014: Sociology of Education Courses in Tajikistan ◦ 2015-2018: Leading a private education institution in Pakistan (AKU-IED) ◦ Solution to problems of Pakistan should come from Pakistan. ◦ Producing local medicine vs. testing the existing ones ◦ 2018-2020: Education Research and Evidence-based Policy-Making in Tajikistan ◦ Interviews, focused groups and classroom notes ◦ 2020 February: A Qualitative Analysis of A survey on education policy making and research in Tajikistan ◦ On going Review of Publications and Reports on Education in Central and South Asia ◦ Lessons from the Implementation of Teacher Education Reforms in Pakistan (2018) ◦ Globalization on the margins: Educational transformations in post-soviet central Asia (2020) ◦ Decolonization studies, post colonial, post-socialist studies ◦ A graduate course “Education Research and Knowledge Production in the CIDE contexts”- A Hair Splitting work on identifying alternatives to existing research approaches;
Decolonization, Recolonization, Indigenization Pathways, (Mignolo, 2011:35)
Key Concepts, Theories and Frameworks
◦ Colonialism as the darker side of ◦ Zero-point epistemology
modernity ◦ Academic dependency and Imperialism
◦ Post-colonial condition as hegemonic ◦ Colonization of Minds, Dependency
colonialism ◦ Western/Eurocentric Universities
◦ Knowledge and knowledge production ◦ Graduate studies
as defining force ◦ Publications, Conferences
Ø Eurocentrism: The current research & knowledge ◦ English
production is grounded in western , secular, ◦ Borrowing, “best Practices”- South as testing ground
Eurocentric ontology, epistemology and methodology ◦ Epistemicide:
and techniques and methods
◦ Can non-European think? Mignolo
Ø Coloniality of knowledge – consisting in the fact that ◦ Can Asians think ( Mahbobani)
all models of cognition and thinking, seeing and ◦ Can post-Soviets think? (Tlostanova)
interpreting the world and the people, the subject-
object relations, the organization of disciplinary ◦ Can subalterns think ? ( Spivak)
divisions,- entirely depend on the norms and rules …so far the post-Soviet space has not been able to
created and imposed by Western modernity since the demonstrate to the world and to itself that its inhabitants
16th century, and offered to humankind as universal, can indeed think. This does not mean that the situation has
to stay like that forever, but there is almost no time left to
delocalized and disembodied.” (Tlostnanova and reverse it (Tlostnanova and Mignolo p. 39).
Mignolo p. 39).Key Concepts, & Proposed Ways to Go
◦ Epistemic disobedience, ◦ Afrocentrism (Dei, Abachi, Lumumba, Odore)
◦ Epistemic Break ◦ Islamization (Naguib Al-Attas, Zia Sardar, Ashraf Hussain;
Chandra Muzaffar, etc.,)
◦ Delinking, Decoupling
◦ New Left and Progressive Ideologies
◦ Indigenization
◦ Revival of ethno-religious thoughts ( Hindu nationalism,
◦ Culturally responsive pedagogy and research Confucianism)
◦ Land – nature sensitive epistemologies
◦ There is a need for a conscious willingness on the
part of the post-Soviet social scientists to
◦ (i) decolonize knowledge and methods;
◦ (ii) critically engage [get rid of and disavow]--the
epistemic grounds of … modernity, its disciplines and
methods, which in the dominant system are presented
as the only legitimate and existing forever…
◦ (iii) Eurocentrist Research is narrow in capturing human
experience because of focus on empiricism, logical
positivism and scientific focus
◦ (iv) Eurocentric research implicated in colonization,
racism, Eugenics, and environmental degradationResearch in Post-Soviet Tajikistan (Central Asia): Typology
◦ Pre Islamic & Islamic Approaches to Research ◦ Soviet style ( candidate, doctoral studies, books,
monographs)
◦ Superiority of Islamic Knowledge,
◦ Superiority of Dialectical and Historical materialism,
◦ Superiority of prophet and Imams over scholars Marxism-Leninism
◦ Ideas of ilm, ta’lim, tarbiya, adab; ijtihad, qiyas, ◦ Tight Relationship with the state/party
Isnad ◦ Psychology, Pedagogy & Didactics
◦ Knowledge as sacred; We discover, do not ◦ Vygotsky
create and construct ◦ Use of Russian language, scholarship and supervision of
Russian scholars
◦ Reform within Islamic Framework ◦ Teachers’ ‘best experience’ writings
◦ Jadidism in the 19-20 centuries
◦ Textual studies and Travelogues (Safarnamahs); Ø Like the west, the Soviets too created local academies and
institutions and scholars in the periphery. Many of the
◦ Medical Research ( Ibn Sino); locals, similar to those trained by the west in their colonies,
◦ Anthropology by Beruni) do not see themselves as colonized minds, and conduits for
reproducing Russian or Western hegemony. Russian/Soviets
too dismissed local ways of producing knowledge and
replaced them with the modern western.
Ø Soviet social sciences… being a poor copy paste of the
western social science, tweaked into a progressive Marxist-
Leninist liberation ideology, but actually camouflaging neo-
colonialisms and neo-imperialismsTypes of Research in Central Asia
Western- Driven: NGOs, Bilateral & Multilateral Organizations
◦ Managerial –technical neoliberal epistemology ( prepare students
◦ Studies into culture, Ethno- pedagogy ( Indigenization) to serve global market, excel in PISA Tests)
◦ History and tradition, Patriotism, Nationalism ◦ Technical reports
◦ Use of English literature with limited knowledge of English ◦ Local scholars as data collectors, report producers & publisherss
◦ Experimental, quasi-experimental and sociometric approaches ◦ Responding to both external and internal interests and needs
(intervention
◦ E. g,. Gender; Islamic extremism; radicalism, security, crisis -
◦ National pride and closely connected to state research; competency based education, migration
◦ Connection with Russian Scholarship ◦ Monitoring & Evaluation Studies
◦ Journals (Vestnik) ◦ Survey, quantitative, highly focused studies
◦ Draw attention of the policy makers
◦ Some NGOs have plan to develop research and knowledge
production agenda (e.g., Human Dynamics of EU, OSU, UCA,
AUCA)
◦ PISA and Testing Centers as research for Policy MakingCritiques and Counter-Critiques
While the post-Soviets abandoned Marxist-Leninist Central Asian researchers … refused to question
epistemology and ideology as guiding frameworks the generally accepted Western scientific
for data analysis, they are now using a hotch potch, terminology and approaches, defending them,
eclectic approach, jumbling together contradictory once again, as presumably objective and
ideas of Western progressives and neo-liberals, … uncontaminated by locality and/or ideology and
neo-imperialists and Eurasianist scholarships in their silently agreeing that knowledge is always
research, which results in inability to situate their produced in the West. (Tlostanova, pp. 50-51)
research in the broader scholarship, as well as
inability to contribute new knowledge (Tlostanova, p.
48)
◦ …
Critiques of global capitalism and liberal ideologies
of democracy, long considered a hallmark of
postcolonial writing, have little resonance in these
new cases where the colonial past was itself ‘socialist
( Amsler 31)Typology: Academics/Scholars in the Western Academia
◦ Western Born Scholars
◦ Former Soviet Scholars in the Western Academia
◦ Post-Soviet Graduates of Western Universities Ø The post-Soviet scholars, whether working in the former
◦ Studies on methodological and ethical issues of Soviet Union or even west, do not have visibility, cannot
research challenge the western post-Soviet narratives of the
Soviet Union countries: “The post- Soviet space and its
◦ Not accessible to local educators and policy makers social sciences and scientists for the rest of the world
◦ Limited acceptance & recognition by local scholars, and the refusal of the global North to accept the post-
INGOs, NGOs etc., Soviet scholar in the capacity of a rational subject.” (p.
◦ Insider-outsider dilemmas 38).
◦ Suspicions by the local policy makers and INGOs
◦ Appraisals? Citations)
Ø Any scholars elaborating their own critical post-
◦ Western style Universities in Central Asia Soviet theory formulated from the border position
between the Western and Soviet/Russian
modernity/coloniality without subscribing to any of
them, are immediately marginalized. (Tlostanova,
p. 50)Understanding Research: Insights from the field
vEducation/Pedagogy Research status ? ◦ Field research vs Survey vs review of Literature
◦ Data analysis vs Chapters predefined
vCandidate, Phd Studies are main research ◦ Research Ethics (e.g., MoE survey of 150 people)
activities
◦ Reflexivity, positionality– subjectivity
◦ Western research vs Soviet- Russian, post-Soviet
vLimited or untapped knowledge of or attention Research
to:
◦ Intergenerational conflicts ( young scholar vs
◦ Value of Research for Policy Making old supervisors)
◦ Research Questions
◦ Locating one’s study in a particular framework vs
Eclecticism
◦ Qualitative Research vs Quality of Research (
translation issue)
◦ Research Methods vs Teaching Methods
◦ Breadth vs Depth ( e.g. influence of 5 global
civilizationsInsights from the Field
◦ ER& KP Capacity is limited ◦ Controlled
◦ Limited link between Research and ◦ Local frameworks, methods
Policy Making in Education
◦ Niyozov (2020). Report for INGO: I argue that the survey data
and the brief report by the Institution have insufficient value in
understanding and developing the two items of the partnership:
◦ Other Conditions:
evidence based policy -making and research capacity
development. However, I also argue that the survey data is
◦ Funding
helpful understanding educational situation, issues and problems ◦ Limited research grants
faced by the system, including especially the Higher Education
Institutions in the country. ◦ Salaries are poor
◦ Theoretical studies ◦ Thinking about life and survival not
work
◦ Little knowledge of the recent
◦ Environment not conducive to critical
western research ideas and studies (academic freedom)
methods; ◦ Research is undervalued and has
◦ Monopolized by Academies and limited relevant
Scholars ◦ Corruption, plagiarismNotes from the Field
◦ Scholars do not want to think– no ◦ Research that are being done, ◦ It is the traditional pre-Soviet and
money, no time and no need to aren’t bringing many benefits to Soviet methods ( our indigenous)
think; No one needs their thinking; the learning and knowledge that do not allow or have not
allowed us to think ; We do not
they need to implement well what seeking;
want to borrow new methods that
is there, laws, ideas, textbooks; make them think, analyze and solve
◦ Currently we are not able to
◦ Most of our scientific works are produce ideas about our society problems.
written in the frame of the and education. We need to look ◦ We contextualize, critique,
communist ideology and do not at we have elsewhere and asses domesticate and adapt- as a result
respond to the current needs all that and decide on borrowing. these methods become localized
◦ Agree that our students cannot
◦ Why should we produce every thing
think. I know this from my practice.
Traditionally we are post-soviet – new? What is wrong with CT, CCP,
which implies we grew up on the ◦ We should not borrow from Arab OBC, CL…disability…
basis of Soviet system. Our thinking countries or Pakistan; We can
both Soviet and pre-Soviet are not borrow only problems from them. ◦ Knowledge is not any one’s
oriented toward western. So moving They do not have solutions. property, it is global and always
toward western would require travels like air and birds
complete transformation of our
thinking and values ◦ Research is the job of the
academies and universities, not
teachersOn the survey: Basic Issues with Understanding of Research
1. Due to its conceptual, methodlogical, and ethical shortcomings,- should be taken as of limited
value to its key focus and goals: --EBPM and Research Capacity.
2. Should and can be used for broader analysis on:
(i) the education situation and
(ii) capacity of the faculty in understanding basic research questions, which appeared so minimal.
3. The survey, if possible, should be repeated with fixing its ethical-methodological and conceptual
and procedural aspects:
1. being fully anonymous;
2. accompanied by a pliot, and explanation notes and more friendly administration,
3. include a larger number of samples, beyond the universities and
4. include the research structures of the MOE, education structures within the parliament and the Presidents’
office and international and local organizatations on both- policy making and research.
4. Followed by qualitative interviews with selected number of the vocal participants to produce
richer, more contextual knowledge of the EBPM and RC.
5. The participants of this survey need to be involved in trainings on EBPM and ERKP to enhance their
knowledge of Education ResearchInsight from the Field Problems are Basic
◦ Decreasing access & drop out, ◦ Exam and assessment systems
◦ Poor quality and irrelevant education ◦ No Higher Order thinking, problem Solving , and other
21st century competencies
◦ Teacher status and image
◦ Teacher Education, Professional Development in ◦ English , Russian, Local Languages,
content, pedagogy etc ◦ Citizenship issues, Critical thinking
◦ Teacher Shortage, Remuneration, Salary, retaining
◦ Competencies
◦ No-correlation between education and jobs
◦ Gender and other diversities and inequities ( Elite,
◦ Public spending, its efficient and appropriate use Private Schools, vs Rural schools )
◦ Corruption ◦ School interruptions
◦ Lack of autonomy for Schools and School Leaders ◦ School, Buildings
◦ Benchmarks for school levels and standards for ◦ Parental involvement
teachers , directors
◦ Freedoms, exclusivist nationalism, and religiosity
◦ ICT at schools and for teachers (radicalism)
◦ Science & STEM labs, facilities ◦ Social and environmental malaises, e.g., COVID 19
◦ Textbooks, lack, irrelevance, hard to understand ◦ Development of Scientific thinkingTough Questions on the Journey Towards Decolonization
◦ What is colonization (s) exactly?
◦ Why decolonization is only about Western, Eurocentric, Secular and Scientific?
◦ (Islamic, Chinese, Russian, internal?)
◦ Is Western, Eurocentric, Scientific all bad?
◦ Where do Soviet time approaches stand in the Decolonization and Indigenization Discourse?)
◦ What about Islamic knowledge, ideas
◦ Are these alternatives all good?
◦ Is contextualization (of borrowed ideas) still colonization?
◦ The role of locals (elites and scholars) in the processes of colonization and decolonization
◦ Role of religions in the colonization?
◦ What exactly is is Indigenous?
◦ Is Indigenization going to past?
◦ What should be the approach to the past
◦ Is an idealized or romanticized approach to the past helpful to Decolonization and IndigenizationTough Questions on the Journey Towards Decolonization
◦ Decolonization as Pluriversality ◦ Critical + constructive approach accompanied
◦ The critical task is to create “an open horizon of by reflexivity criteria
pluriversality” where many different worlds and ◦ Dialogs between past and present, local and
worldviews can coexist on a non-imperial and global
non-hierarchical basis (Mignolo 2011: 275). ◦ What are the criteria for choosing ? Who decides
on them?
◦ What to do with the multiple perspectives?
Myth & Science; Right & Wrong; South & North, Past,
Present & Future?
Decolonization and Indigenization as Syncretic of
Best ideas from Pasts, Presents and Futures
◦ This entails both “unlearning” the terms of
modern/colonial knowledge production and ways of
being and learning & acknowledge, and engage
with multiple interconnected (and always relational)
worlds.Implications: Towards the indigenization & decolonization
ØEducation Research & Knowledge Production ØWork critically and constructively with, despite
Capacity should be a Strategic Priority and against Eurocentrism's, Islamo-Centrism and
Ethno-Centrisms – see hem as social constructs
ØResearch culture should be developed
and produce something new;
ØDemystify & Democratize, Diversify Research
ØCollaboration and Dialog with others and self
Ø Decolonization of knowledge production requires
scholars to also engage in decolonizing their
subjectivity, so that “the understanding of the self may
be transformed, and subjectivity rebuilt” (Chen 2010:
212).
ØThe Indigenous needs to be created and
produced as a result of synthesisImplications: Towards the indigenization & decolonization
Ø Role of University/Academia
ØThe crucial aim of the university to shape not a submissive and loyal narrow specialists in some
applied science … but first of all
◦ а critically thinking, self-reflexive and independent individual, never accepting any ready- made truths at
face value;
◦ truly and unselfishly interested in the world around in all its diversity, and striving to make this world more
harmonious, and fair for everyone and not only for -particular privileged groups. (Tlostanova p. 54).
◦ Thank you and Q&AAppendix 1: On the survey
1. Due to its conceptual, methodlogical, and ethical shortcomings,- should be taken as of limited
value to its key focus and goals: --EBPM and Research Capacity.
2. Should and can be used for broader analysis on:
(i) the education situation and
(ii) capacity of the faculty in understanding basic research questions, which appeared so minimal.
3. The survey, if possible, should be repeated with fixing its ethical-methodological and conceptual
and procedural aspects:
1. being fully anonymous;
2. accompanied by a pliot, and explanation notes and more friendly administration,
3. include a larger number of samples, beyond the universities and
4. include the research structures of the MOE, education structures within the parliament and the Presidents’
office and international and local organizatations on both- policy making and research.
4. Followed by qualitative interviews with selected number of the vocal participants to produce
richer, more contextual knowledge of the EBPM and RC.
5. The participants of this survey need to be involved in the workshops and trainings on EBPM and
ERKP to enhance their knowledge of Education ResearchAppendix 2: REFERENCES ◦ Vanessa W. Simonds, Suzanne Christopher, (2013). Adapting Western Research Methods to Indigenous Ways of Knowing. Am J Public Health. 103(12): 2185–2192. ◦ Wilson, S. (2001). What is indigenous research methodology? Canadian Journal of Native Education, 25 (2). ◦ Tillman, L. (2002). Culturally Sensitive Research Approaches: An African-American Perspective. Educational Researcher 31 (9), 3-12. ◦ Niyozov, S. (2017). Fieldwork as socially constructed and negotiated practice. In Silova, I., Sobe,N.W., Korzh, A., Kovalchuk, S. (Eds.). Reimagining Utopias. Theory and Method for Educational Research in Post-Socialist Contexts (pp. 119-139). The Netherland: Sense Publish ◦ Crossley, M., & Vulliamy, G. (1997). Qualitative educational research in developing countries: Issues and experience. New York: Garland. ◦ Silova, I., Sobe,N.W., Korzh, A., Kovalchuk, S. (Eds.). Reimagining Utopias. Theory and Method for Educational Research in Post-Socialist Contexts (pp. 119-139). The Netherland: Sense Publishers ◦ Bray, Mark, Bob Adamson, and Mark Mason, eds. 2007. Comparative Education Research: Approaches and Methods. 1st ed. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, University of Hong Kong. ◦ Ur-Goli M. Rezai-Rashti (2013) Conducting field research on gender relations in a gender repressive state: a case study of gender research in Iran, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26:4, 489-502, DOI: 10.1080/09518398.2013.765615. ◦ Ahmed, F. (2014). Exploring halaqah as research method: A tentative approach to developing Islamic research principles withn critical ‘indigenous’ framework. Int. Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(5), 561-583. ◦ Smith, L. T. (2005). Decolonizing methodologies. Research and indigenous peoples. London & New York: Zed Books. ◦ Srivastava, P. (2010). Private foundations, philanthropy, and partnership in education and development: mapping the terrain. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(5), 460-471 ◦ Nordveit, B. (2015). Knowledge production in a constructed field. Reflections on comparative and international education. Asia Pacific Education Review 16, 1- ◦ Dei. G. S. (Nana Sefa Atweneboah I, 2014). The African Scholar in the Western Academy. Journal of Black Studies, 45(3) 167–179.
References ◦ Popkewitz, T. (1984). Soviet pedagogical sciences: Visions and contradictions. In Popkewitz, T. (Ed.), Paradigm and ideology in educational research. The social functions of the intellectual (pp. 59-84). ◦ Rehman, S. (2002). Secular Knowledge vesrsus Islamic knowledge and uncritical inrellectuallty. Cultural Dynamics, 14 (1), 65-80. ◦ Safi, L. (2008). The quest for an Islamic methodology: The Islamization of knowledge project in its second decade. AJSS, 1991, 10(1), 23-48 ◦ Halai, A., D Williams (Eds.), Research methodologies in the South (pp. 18-32). Karachi: Oxford University Press. ◦ Alatas, S. F. (2006). Alternative discourses in Asian social science: Responses to Eurocentrism. New Delhi: Sage Publications. ◦ Amsler, S. (2007). The politics of knowledge in Central Asia. Science between Marx and market. Abingdon, England: Routledge. ◦ Ahmed, F. (2014). Exploring halaqah as research method: A tentative approach to developing Islamic research principles withn critical ‘indigenous’ framework. Int. Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(5), 561-583. ◦ Hoppers, Odora C. A., “The center and periphery in knowledge production in the twenty-first century.” Compare, 30(3), 2000, pp. 283-291. ◦ Coloma, R. (2009). Post-colonial challenges in education. New York: Peter Lang. Chapter by Anne Hickling-Hudson: Southern Theory and Its Dynamics for Postcolonial Education ◦ Hart, M. A. (2010). Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge, and Research: The Development of an Indigenous Research Paradigm. Journal of Indigenous Voices in Social Work, 1(1). ◦ Silova, I., Sobe, N.W., Korzh, A.., Kovalchuk, S. (Eds.). Reimagining Utopias. Theory and Method for Educational Research in Post-Socialist Contexts (pp. 143-161). The Netherland: Sense Publishers. ◦ Santos. B. (2014). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against Epistemicide. Boulder, CO: Paradigm. ◦ McNess, E., et al., (2016). “Ethnograohic Duzzle”-- in M. Crossley, L. Arthur, & Mc Ness (eds.). Revisiting the Insider-outsider research in Comparative and International Education (pp. 21-38). ◦ Tlostanova, Madina. 2015. “Can the Post-Soviet Think? On Coloniality of Knowledge, External Imperial and Double Colonial Difference.” Intersections: East European Journal of Society and Politics 1 (2): 38–58.
References ◦ Anderson, W. (2012). ‘Asia as method’ in science and technology studies. East Asian Science, Technology and Society, 6(4), 445–451. ◦ Auld, E., & Morris, P. (2014). Comparative education, the ‘New Paradigm’ and policy borrowing: Constructing knowledge for education reform. Comparative Education, 50(2), 129–155. ◦ Auld, E., & Morris, P. (2016). PISA, policy and persuasion: Translating complex conditions into education ‘best practice’. Comparative Education, 52(2), 202–229. ◦ Ball, S. (2007). Education PLC: Understanding private sector participation in public sector education. London: Routledge. ◦ Chen, K. H. (2010). Asia as method: Toward deimperialization. Durham: Duke University Press. ◦ Chisholm, L., & Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2008). South-south cooperation in education & development. New York: Teachers College Press. ◦ Connell, R. (2007). Southern theory: The global dynamics of knowledge in social sciences. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin. ◦ Edwards, D. B., & Klees, S. (2012). Participation in development and education governance. In A. Verger, M. Novelli, & U. Kosar-Altinyelken (Eds.), Global education policy and international development: New agendas, issues and programmes (pp. 55–76). New York: Continuum. ◦ Esteva, G., Babones, S., & Babcicky, P. (2013). The future of development: A radical manifesto. Chicago: Policy Press. ◦ Foray, D., & Lundvall, B. (1996). The knowledge-based economy: From the economics of knowledge to the learning economy. Employment and growth in the knowledge-based economy. Paris: OECD. ◦ Giroux, H. (1997). Rewriting the discourse of racial identity: Towards a pedagogy and politics of whiteness. Harvard Educational Review, 67(2), 285–321. ◦ Griffith, T., & Arnove, B. (2015). World culture in the capitalist world-system in transition. Globalisation, Societies, and Education, 13(1), 88–108. ◦ Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2007). Education quality and economic growth. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
References ◦ Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2016). Knowledge capital, growth, and the east Asian miracle. Science, 351(6172), 344–345. ◦ Hickling-Hudson, A. (2004). South-south collaboration: Cuban teachers in Jamaica and Namibia. Comparative Education, 40(2), 289–311. ◦ Holbraad, M., & Pedersen, M. A. (2017). The ontological turn: An anthropological exposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ◦ Komatsu, H., & Rappleye, J. (2017). A new global policy regime founded on invalid statistics? Hanushek, Woessman, PISA, and economic growth. Comparative Education, 53(2), 166–191. ◦ Larsen, M., & Beech, J. (2014). Spatial theorizing in comparative education. Comparative Education Review, 58(2), 191–214. ◦ Lin, A. M. (2012). Towards transformation of knowledge and subjectivity in curriculum inquiry: Insights from Chen Kuan-Hsing’s ‘Asia as method’. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(1), 153–178. ◦ McPhearson, I. (2016). An analysis of power in transnational advocacy networks in education. In K. Mundy, A. Green, B. Lingard, & T. Verger (Eds.), The handbook of global education policy (pp. 401–418). New York: Wiley-Blackwell. ◦ Mignolo, W. (2007). Delinking. Cultural Studies, 21(2), 449–514. ◦ Mignolo, W. (2010). The darker side of western modernity: Global futures, decolonial options. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. ◦ Mignolo, W. D. (2011). The darker side of Western modernity: Global futures, decolonial options. Durham: Duke University Press. ◦ Millei, Z., Silova, I., & Piattoeva, N. (2018). Towards decolonizing childhood and knowledge production. In I. Silova, N. Piattoeva, & Z. Millei (Eds.), Childhood and schooling in (post) socialist societies: Memories of everyday life (pp. 231–256). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ◦ Morris, P. (2016). Education policy, cross-national tests of pupil achievement, and the pursuit of world- class schooling: A critical analysis. London: IOE Press.
References ◦ Phillips, D. (2006). Investigating policy attraction in education. Oxford Review of Education, 32(5), 551–559. ◦ Buddhism? Mindfulness in American classrooms, ontology in comparative education [Under Review]. ◦ Rappleye, J. (2018). Borrowings, modernity, and de-axialization: Rethinking the educational research agenda for a global age. In A. Yonezawa, Y. Kitamura, B. Yamamoto, & T. Tokunaga (Eds.), Japanese education in a global age: Sociological reflections and future directions (pp. 53–74). Singapore: Springer-Nature. ◦ Rappleye, J. (2020). Comparative education as cultural critique. Comparative Education, 56(1), 39–56. ◦ Rappleye, J., & Komatsu, H. (2016). Living on borrowed time: Rethinking temporality, self, nihilism, and schooling. Comparative Education, 52(2), 177–201. ◦ Rappleye, J., & Un, L. (2018). What drives failed policy at the World Bank? An inside account of new aid modalities to higher education: Context, blame, and infallibility. Comparative Education, 54(2), 250–274. ◦ Robertson, S. L., Mundy, K. E., Verger, A., & Menashy, F. (2012). Public private partnerships in education: New actors and modes of governance in a globalizing world. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. ◦ de sá e Silva, M. (2009). South-south transfer cooperation: Past and present conceptualization and practice. In L. Chisolm & G. Steiner-Khamsi (Eds.), South-south cooperation in education and development (pp. 39–62). New York: Teachers College Press. ◦ Santos, B. (2014). Epistemologies of the south. Justice against epistemicide. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers. ◦ Scheiffele, E. (1991). Questioning one’s “own” from the perspective of the foreign. In G. Parkes (Ed.), Nietzsche and Asian thought (pp. 31–47). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ◦ Schultz, K. A. (2017). Decolonizing political ecology: Ontology, technology and ‘critical’ enchantment. Journal of Political Ecology, 24(1), 125–143. ◦ Shahjahan, R., Ramirez, G. B., & Andreotti, V. D. O. (2017). Attempting to imagine the unimaginable: A decolonial reading of the global university rankings. Comparative Education Review, 61(S1), S51–S73. ◦ Shibata, M. (2006). Assumptions and implications of cross-national attraction in education: The case of ‘learning from Japan’. Oxford Review of Education, 32(5), 649–663. ◦ Silova, I. (Ed.). (2010). Post-socialism is not dead: (Re)reading the global in comparative education. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.
References
◦ Silova, I. (2012). Contested meanings of educational borrowing. In G. Steiner-Khamsi & F. Waldow (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2012: Policy borrowing and lending in education (pp. 229–245). New York:
Routledge.
◦ Silova, I., & Rappleye, J. (2015). Beyond the world culture debate in comparative education: Critiques, alternatives, and a noisy conversation. Globalisation, Societies, and Education, 13(1), 1–7.
◦ Silova, I., Millei, Z., & Piattoeva, N. (2017). Interrupting the coloniality of knowledge production in comparative education: Postsocialist and postcolonial dialogues after the cold war. Comparative Education
Review, 61(S1), S74–S102.
◦ Silova, I., Piattoeva, N., & Millei, Z. (2018). Childhood and schooling in (post)soviet societies: Memories of everyday life. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
◦ Silova, I., Rappleye, J., & You, Y. (Eds.). (2020). Beyond the western horizon in educational research: Towards a deeper dialogue about our interdependent futures [special issue]. ECNU Review of Education,
3(2), 1–179.
◦ Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2004). The global politics of educational borrowing and lending. New York: Teachers College Press.
◦ Takayama, K. (2015). Provincialising the world culture theory debate: Critical insights from a margin. Globalisation, Societies, and Education, 13(1), 34–57.
◦ Takayama, K. (2016). Deploying the post-colonial predicaments of researching on/with ‘Asia’ in education: A standpoint from a rich peripheral country. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education,
37(1), 70–88.
◦ Takayama, K., Sriprakash, A., & Connell, R. (2017a). Rethinking knowledge production and circulation in comparative and international education: Southern theory, postcolonial perspectives, and alternative
epistemologies. Comparative Education Review, 59(1), 5–8.
◦ Takayama, K., Sriprakash, A., & Connell, R. (2017b). Toward a postcolonial comparative and international education. Comparative Education Review, 61(S1), S1–S24.
◦ Tarlau, R. (2012). Coproducing rural public schools in Brazil: Contestation, clientelism, and the landless workers’ movement. Politics and Society, 41(3), 395–424.
◦ Tlostanova, M. (2012). Postsocialist ≠ postcolonial? On post-soviet imaginary and global coloniality. Journal of Postcolonial Writing, 48(2), 130–142.
◦ Tlostanova, M., Thapar-Bjorkert, S., & Koobak, R. (2016). Border thinking and disidentification: Postcolonial and postsocialist feminist dialogues. Feminist Theory, 17(2), 211–228.
◦ Torres, C. A. (2002). Globalization, education, and citizenship: Solidarity versus markets? American Educational Research Journal, 39(2), 363–378.
◦ Unterhalter, E. (2017). A review of public private partnerships around girls’ education in developing countries: Flicking gender equality on and off. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 33(2),
181–199.
◦ World Bank. (2002). Constructing knowledge societies: New challenges for tertiary education.
◦ Washington: World Bank. Retrieved January 25, 2015, from http://siteresources.worldbank.
◦ org/INTAFRREGTOPTEIA/Resources/Constructing_Knowledge_Societies.pdf.
◦ World Bank. (2018). World development report: Learning to realize education’s promise. Washington, DC: World Bank.
◦ Wu, J., & Wenning, M. (2017). The postsecular turn in education: Lessons from the mindfulness movement and the revival of Confucian academies. Studies in the Philosophy of Education, 35, 551–571.
◦ Yelland, N., & Saltmarsh, S. (2013). Ethnography, multiplicity and the global childhoods project: Reflections on establishing an interdisciplinary, transnational, multi - sited research collaboration. Global Studies of
Childhood, 3(1), 2–11.
◦ Zhang, H., Chan, P. W. K., & Kenway, J. (Eds.). (2015). Asia as method in education studies: A defiant research imagination. Abingdon: Routledge.You can also read
