Comparative pedagogy and quality of education: its status and evaluation

Volume 5, Number 2, 2020, P. 219–231


Article (file: pdf, size: 293 KB, downloads: 412)


From the mid-20th century to the present, comparative pedagogy has been participating in students’ education in different countries, including Russia where the number of migrants is constantly growing. For this purpose, a particular model of education, upbringing and training is chosen. Based on comparative research, the new pedagogy provides a voluminous interaction between education and culture, the quality of educational services and forecast of its development. A significant resource in achieving these goals is to improve a teacher’s training who is prepared for various practical problems, has skills of distance education and knows the requirements for quality education and its various philosophical underpinnings. The article analyses the eight options of democratic education – elitist, liberal, neoliberal, deliberative, multiculturalist, participatory, critical and agonistic. Different options for democratic education meet different (a) ontological and epistemological prerequisites, (b) normative approaches to democracy, and (c) concepts of the relationship between education and politics. However, all innovations in pedagogy should be combined with the achievements of past scientists, from Socrates onwards, including Pestalozzi, Ushinsky, Montessori and others. COVID-19 has updated distant education in the world, the use of e-courses and all kinds of educational technologies. All innovations recorded in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS programs are ultimately aimed at improving the quality of education. The article gives examples of ambiguous understanding of training and its forms in different regions of the world: USA, Europe, Asia.


comparative pedagogy, education and culture, democratic education options, distant education, quality of education


Anatoly S. Kolesnikov, Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Professor of History of Philosophy Department, St. Petersburg State University, Institute of philosophy, St. Petersburg, Russia


The study has been implemented with the support of the fund RSF № 17-18-01440 «Anthropological dimension of the history of philosophy».

For citation:

Kolesnikov A.S. (2020) Comparative pedagogy and quality of education: its status and evaluation. Sotsial’naya kompetentnost’ = Social Competence. Vol. 5. No. 2. P. 219–231. (In Russ.)


  1. Bai T. (2011). Against democratic education. Journal of Curriculum Studies. Vol. 43. Iss. 5. P. 615–622.
  2. Belcastro A.T. (2015). Rebalancing quality education in a democratic society. Creative Education. Vol. 6. P. 428–439.
  3. Bindewald B.J., Tannebaum R.P., Womac P. (2016). The common core and democratic education: Examining potential costs and benefits to public and private autonomy. Democracy & Education. Vol. 24. Iss. 2. P. 4.
  4. Bradshaw R. (2014). Democratic teaching: An incomplete job description. Democracy & Education, Vol. 22. Iss. 2. C. 3.
  5. Hawley T. S., Hostetler A. L., Mooney E. (2016). Reconstruction of the fables the myth of education for democracy, social reconstruction and education for democratic citizenship. Critical Education, Vol. 7. Iss. 4. P. 2–12.
  6. Kahne J., Hodgin E., Eidman-Aadahl E. (2016). Redesigning civic education for the digital age: Participatory politics and the pursuit of democratic engagement. Theory & Research in Social Education, Vol. 44. Iss. 1. P. 1–35.
  7. Kumi-Yeboah A., Smith P. (2016). Critical multicultural citizenship education among Black immigrant youth: Factors and challenges. International Journal of Multicultural Education. Vol. 18. Iss.1. P. 158–182.
  8. Laclau E., Mouffe C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (2nd ed.). London, England: Verso.
  9. Lefrançois D., Ethier M. (2010). Translating the ideal of deliberative democracy into democratic education: Pure Utopia? Educational Philosophy and Theory. Vol. 42. P. 271–292.
  10. Lo J.C. (2017). Empowering young people through conflict and conciliation: Attending to the political and agonism in democratic education. Democracy & Education, Vol. 25. Iss.1. P. 2.
  11. Edda S., Davies I., Pashby K., Shultz L. (2018) Global citizenship education: a critical introduction to key concepts and debates. London: Bloomsbury Academic. 248 p.
  12. Su-I Hou and Shannon Wilder (2015) Changing Pedagogy: Faculty Adoption of Service-Learning: Motivations, Barriers, and Strategies Among Service-Learning Faculty at a Public Research Institution. SAGE Open January – March. P. 1–7.
  13. Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers (2005). OECD. Paris.
  14. Tryggvason Á. (2017). The political as presence: On agonism in citizenship education. Philosophical Inquiry in Education. Vol. 24. P. 252–265.
  15. The Learning Generation. Investing in education for a changing world. A Report by The International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity 2016.
  16. Westwood Robert and Low David R. (2003) The Multicultural Muse: Culture, Creativity and Innovation. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management. Vol. 3. Iss. 2. P. 235–259.