Search

This paper is a response to David Limond's exposition, “[An] historical culture … rapidly, universally, and thoroughly restored”? British influence on Irish education since 1922', which appeared in Comparative Education, Vol. 46, No. 4, November 2010, pp. 449–462. Limond's overall thesis is that ‘a post-colonial overhang affects Irish policy-makers and bureaucrats in their educational policies and practices’. This paper contests three main aspects of Limond's exposition. First, in his analysis of the period 1831–1922, he fails to place sufficient emphasis on the extent to which the educational system was favoured by the Catholic Church, which operated in a manner which served not only its own interests, but also those of the middle classes of Irish Catholic farmers, merchants and business people. Secondly, he does not sufficiently indicate the extent to which the structure of Irish education from the early years of independence until the mid-1960s, and associated curriculum changes, were very different from the situation in Britain at the time. Thirdly, while he is correct in stating that, since the 1960s, Ireland has imported certain ideas on educational policy and practice from Britain, he neglects to demonstrate that there were also other sources, and that they were probably more dominant than the British ones. Hopefully, as a rejoinder, the paper will be read in a positive light by indicating how the historical study of Irish education within a comparative context is a neglected area of scholarship, and thus stimulate researchers to address the situation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Debate on teaching in low-income countries has tended to assume an over-simplified conceptualization of pedagogy as either teacher-centred or learner-centred. If theory is to address itself to the complex challenge of improving the quality of teaching within under-resourced education systems then it will have to move beyond this polarized view of pedagogy. This paper applies Basil Bernstein's performance and competence modes to the findings of fieldwork in Tanzania. It thereby arrives at a more nuanced understanding of primary school teachers' classroom practice, which allows for teachers working with a mixed palette of techniques and ideas. Bernstein's pedagogic modes were constructed from his studies of education in Britain. Their application to the Tanzanian setting, however, highlights the limitations of analytical frameworks developed in western contexts. It is argued that appreciation and critique of pedagogy in low-income countries could be deepened through linking with comparative literature that compares across English and non-English-speaking countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]