In Rethinking Comparison, Simmons and Smith (2021) argue that comparative methods are at the cross-roads of two main trends: a trend towards controlled comparative methods whose main focus consists in the improvement of causal inference - something that often involves taking the route of natural experiments; and an opposing trend towards deconstructing comparison, heavily indebted to postcolonial theory, which sees comparative methods as ‘old fashioned’ and intellectually impoverishing. To these trends, we add a third one consisting of hyper-globalist understandings of globalisation that are challenging cross-country analyses, arguing  that the state has been hollowed-out as the main locus of policy-making. 

The comparative analysis of education policies is not alien to these challenges and advances. Indeed, such dilemmas have given rise to passionate debates and inspired a number of research innovations and increasingly ambitious research designs. Comparative education policy studies have  proven to be a dynamic research field that does not remain passive against the different external and internal challenges it faces. This symposium examines precisely how the field of comparative policy analysis has evolved in the last decade, and how education policy research can benefit from this evolution. The panel aims thus at stimulating reflection on the possibilities opened by the new comparative methods, tools and databases, and on the research questions posed by this changing environment and which merit further investigation. To do so, our panel revisits two recurring debates  that have long centred efforts at (re)thinking comparative research, namely, what to compare and how to compare. In relation to the former - what to compare -, we witness how comparative analysis is increasingly open to a broader range of research units. Beyond conventional cross-country studies, comparative research can be conducted within countries, across regions, across time and even compare different kinds of units (Schaffer 2015). 

In addition, the role of globalisation in policy formation has been conceptualised in a more sophisticated way. Increasingly, comparative analyses contemplate how different political scales are mutually constituted, how global policy models are being translated differently in different contexts and/or how the impact global forces fluctuates over the policy process. Such trends make the case for expanding the possibilities and perspectives for comparative inquiry. Overall, rather than taking them as a given, we are being encouraged to actively construct the objects of our comparative analyses (Barlett and Vavrus 2017). In a European context, where policy is no longer the exclusive parcel of nation states, and regions and cities play an increasingly prominent role as policy spaces, transcending the cross-country perspective is more necessary than ever.  

In relation to how to compare, the old divides between quantitative and qualitative approaches are being left behind. Mixed-methods designs have indeed found their place within European research, and there is a growing appetite for methodological pluralism.. Contrary to traditional conceptions, it is increasingly acknowledged that small-n studies can play a critical role in offering generalisable insights and that big-n studies can play an important role in theory building and identifying causal mechanisms. There is also growing recognition of the need for further disciplinary cross-fertilization and dialogue with other disciplines in the social sciences. The comparative analysis of education policy cannot remain insulated from the conceptual and theoretical innovations brought forward by political science, geography and policy sociology, among other. 

This double-symposium will include papers that make an explicit effort to innovate in comparative analysis methods and forms of inquiry. It includes a selection of empirically rich studies of education policy covering different contexts and domains, including teacher policy, international large-scale assessments, the role of expertise, public-private partnerships, and accountability reforms.

Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2016). Rethinking case study research: A comparative approach. Routledge. Schaffer, F. C. (2015). Elucidating social science concepts: An interpretivist guide. Routledge. Simmons, E. S., & Smith, N. R. (Eds.). (2021). Rethinking Comparison. Cambridge University Press.