Promoting the comparative method in studying role and use of ICT in Education

• In Event: Research Approaches to Globalization & Education

Proposal

The Improving "Education for a More Equitable World" CIES 2023 conference theme is declarative; it does not ask whether there should be an equitable world or if education contributes to it. However, in ICT-related fields, the question of equity is not resolved. Diwan and Livingston (1979) explored the role of ICTs in an equitable world order, and Walsham (2012), at a conference in Jamaica, in his reflections, penitently asked the audience, "Are we making a better world with ICTs?" Arguments can be made in any direction regarding the benefits or the disadvantages of ICTs worldwide. Evidence abounds for the role of technology in stoking nationalism flames (Muwanguzi, 2009), promoting nativism ideologies through social media, and celebrating globalism by promoting the idea that we are all interconnected and experiencing the same things at the same time. In this paper, we argue that the scarcity of comparative work at the intersection of ICT and education is not only robbing us of ways to learn from one another globally but also allows inequitable views to fester.

The Comparative Method is generally viewed as the analytical examination of educational problems or phenomena through comparison techniques (Bereday, 1964; Rosselló, 1963). Reasons for employing the comparative international education method are varied, but many focus on similarities or differences (Thomas, 1998), examining how phenomena manifest themselves in different national contexts (Carnoy, 2006). As comparative researchers and educators, we teach that as the world becomes increasingly globalized, we must look at educational issues through different national perspectives and learn how others deal with educational changes and challenges (Arnove, 1999; Bignold & Gayton, 2009). Comparing internationally and examining how phenomena present themselves in different national contexts is of critical concern given the nature of education today, where nations face many of the same or similar educational challenges. There is perhaps no time in recent memory where comparative research is needed as it is presently, where the COVID pandemic impacts every country.

Using the Comparative Method to Study ICT in education
Using the comparative method to study ICT topics is not common; few comparative studies explore a technological phenomenon. When they do, it is only discussed indirectly. This omission and gap in the literature contradict the understanding that comparative research, as an academic activity, demands diverse theoretical explanations and understanding.

When comparative studies are undertaken, researchers do not always justify why cross-cultural research is conducted. Often comparative studies conducted internationally are justified as comparative merely by being conducted in two separate countries. For example, Teo et al.(2008) explored personal computers by pre-service teachers in Malaysia and Singapore. Although the study contributes significantly to the literature on pre-service teachers' intention to use computers in Singapore and Malaysia, it provided little explanation as to why the two countries should be compared.

Similarly, Arpaci (2014) conducted a comparative study that examined the effects of culture on the adoption behavior of mobile devices and how culture affected the adoption decisions of Turkish and Canadian students. The results from the study suggested that "national culture has a significant effect on the adoption mobile learning by undergraduate students, and there are major differences in their adoption behaviour” (p. 2). In other words, comparative studies between countries can help identify how adoption behaviors and conditions differ or are the same cross-culturally to avoid a one-size-fits-all approach. Sung and Mayer (2012) conducted a study on students' beliefs about mobile devices versus desktop computers in South Korea and the United States. The study examined if learners in South Korea, a society well known for its long-standing involvement with mobile technology, differed from learners in the United States, where mobile devices are new by comparison. The study found that students in the United States took the instructional medium into account; learning material presented on a mobile device differed from the learning offered on a personal computer. However, the South Korean students made no distinction between mediums (Sung & Mayer, 2012). These studies illustrate the need for applying a comparative lens to LDT, particularly in the present time where the importance of technology in education is critical.

The COVID19 pandemic forced educational institutions around the world to operate remotely. The categorization of developing and developed was rendered useless due to the use of ICT in teaching and learning. In other words, before the pandemic, the sustained narrative was that rich countries were better poised to benefit from what they offered because they had access to technologies. Conversely, nations categorized as poor and developing still need to learn more and can be relegated to the ICT for development categories. Instead, what materialised were stop-gap measures to keep the school year going in countries regardless of economic status. By all accounts, the pandemic has not disappeared. While some institutions worldwide are reopening, there are still many trying to figure out how to learn and teach through virtual means and benefit from the promises of ICT in education.

Using a document analysis approach, the authors argue for redressing the sins of comparison that have maintained the differentiated power structures, where comparative research flows unidirectionally from the global north influencing the global south. Using the perspective of the Learning, Design, and Technology field (also referred to in some circles as Educational Technology or ICT in Education) and the impact of the COVID pandemic, we argue for a reexamination of comparative research where ICT serves as a disruptor to the globalization, nativism and nationalism narrative. As Zimmerman (2020) and Anderson (2020) argued, the field of education globally is in the age of experimentation with educational technology and online learning, where data is being generated simultaneously around the world regardless of national status. Hence, more research is needed to examine the power dynamics encapsulated in the use of technology. The question then remains whether those of us in comparative research are poised to apply a fresh perspective, where we all learn from one another, or whether we shall replicate the established differentiated power structures whereby the global north is the one teaching the global south.

Author

• Stephen Wanger, Oklahoma State University