Revisiting Insider-Outsider Research in Comparative and International Education.

Sonst. Personen	Crossley, Michael (Hrsg.); Arthur, Lore (Hrsg.); Mcness, Elizabeth (Hrsg.)
Titel	Revisiting Insider-Outsider Research in Comparative and International Education.
Quelle	Oxford: Symposium Books Ltd (2015), 264 S.Verfügbarkeit
Reihe	Bristol Papers in Education
Zusatzinformation	Verlagshomepage
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; Monographie
ISBN	978-1-873927-67-0
Schlagwörter	Vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaft; Bildungsforschung; Feldforschung; Forschungsmethode; Methodologie; Qualitative Forschung; Vergleichende Forschung; Gruppenzugehörigkeit; Kulturelle Identität; Wissensgenerierung; Interkulturelle Begegnung; Multikulturalität; Multiperspektivität; Fremdheit; Mobilität; Internationaler Vergleich; Globalität; Interkulturelle Forschung; Perspektive; Wissensproduktion; Forscher; Individuum; Anderer; Afrika; China; Europa; Großbritannien; Indischer Ozean; Lateinamerika; Pakistan; Südasien
Abstract	"This volume recognises how many researchers across the social sciences, and in comparative and international education in particular, see themselves as insiders or outsiders or, more pertinently, shifting combinations of both, in the research process. The book revisits and problematises these concepts in an era where the global mobility of researchers and ideas has increased dramatically, and when advances in comparative, qualitative research methodologies seek to be more inclusive, collaborative, participatory, reflexive and nuanced. Collectively, the chapters argue that, in the context of such change, it has become more difficult to categorise and label groups and individuals as being 'inside' or 'outside' systems, professional communities, or research environments. In doing so, it is recognised that individual and group identities can be multiple, flexible and changing such that the boundary between the inside and the outside is permeable, less stable and less easy to draw." [Abstract: Editors of Education Worldwide].
Erfasst von	DIPF \| Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation, Frankfurt am Main
Update	2016/2