Source: Comparative Education, Vol. 36, No. 3, Special Number (23): Comparative Education for the Twenty-First Century, (Aug., 2000), pp. 343-355
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3099622
Accessed: 19/08/2008 22:26
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact email@example.com.
Comparative Education Volume 36 No. 3 2000 pp. 343-355
Extending the logic of industrialism thesis, it is argued here that the world now has a global infrastructure,information technology empowered by those who control capital. Globalisation has resulted in the development of learning societies as a superstructural phenomenon. Four dimensions of the learning society are analysed in this article and the implications of these are explored for the study of comparative education. The thesis of the article is that the field of comparatives is broaderthan education itself, and that reasonsfor comparative studies have changed little since early adult education comparativists met in 1966 and agreed on a number of major themes. ABSTRACT
In an earlier article in this journal (Jarvis, 1999a), I argued that the universities had to respond to the international division of labour generated through the forces of globalisation in innovative ways. In a sense, that argument reflected the one contained in the logic of industrialisation thesis, first propounded by Kerr et al. in the 1960s (Kerr et al, 1973). While that thesis was not totally correct, I want to expand upon that article here and argue that the logic of industrialism thesis contained a basis from which to understand globalisation and, consequently, the learning society. However, the learning society is a contested concept, so that it is also necessary to understand it if we are to examine ways by which comparative education might relate to it.
The general thesis of this article is that comparative education needs to continue to adapt and to find its place in studies of the newly emerging learning society, one which is far broader than the educational institutions themselves. Indeed, there are many other providers of learning opportunities than education. But, significantly, the learning society itself might be regarded as an object for comparative study, as the following argument demonstrates. Consequently, the article has three parts; the first examines the process of globalisation, the second analyses different interpretations, or dimensions, of the learning society and, finally, comparative education is examined within the context of the learning society. The Processes
The logic of industrialisation thesis was first published at the...