Comparative education a.y. 2025-2026 – Corso di laurea magistrale in Scienze pedagogiche

CFU: 6
Course code: 804002513
SSD: M-PED/02
Master’s Degree: Scienze pedagogiche
Language: Italian

Course delivery modalities: E-learning
Period:
Attendance: Optional
Assessment method: Oral examination

Pre-requisites:
Degree L-19 or basic knowledge in the field of education

Program:
Introduction to the concepts and fields of comparative education (4 hours) Analysis of the history of the discipline: main stages and protagonists (8 hours) Analysis of current developments and issues of interest (8 hours) Analysis of different approaches and presentation of research (5 hours) Analysis and deepening of the comparative-historical perspective (5 hours)

Text books:

Bibliography:
Study aid summary sheets will be provided to students for individual self-study. The material will be uploaded to the e-learning platform.

Educational goals and expected learning outcomes:

Methods and criteria for verifying the learning:
Oral examination about the course contents The grade is expressed out on a scale of thirty. The grade will depend on: the adequacy of the presentation in relation to the expected knowledge and skills; the ability to synthesize information; clarity of expression, and mastery of the subject’s terminology and concepts. The final grade will be based 70% on the student’s depth of knowledge and 30% on the student’s ability for expression (written and oral) and independent critical thinking. The exam will be evaluated according to the following criteria: – Failed: significant deficiencies and inaccuracies in the knowledge and the understanding of the subject matter; poor analytical and synthesizing skills, recurrent generalizations, limited critical and judgmental skills; the arguments are exposed inconsistently and with inappropriate language. – 18-20: Knowledge and understanding of topics barely adequate, with occasional generalizations and imperfections possible; sufficient capacity for analysis synthesis and autonomy of judgment, the arguments are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/non technical language. – 21-23: Fair knowledge and understanding of the subject; proper analysis and synthesis skills with coherent, logical argumentation, but with language that is often inappropriate/non technical. – 24-26: Moderate knowledge and understanding of the subjects; good analytical and synthesis skills with arguments expressed rigorously but with language that is not always appropriate/technical. – 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the subjects; remarkable analytical and synthesis skills. Good autonomy of judgment. Topics expounded rigorously and with appropriate/technical language. 30-30L: Excellent level of in-depth knowledge and understanding of the subjects. Excellent skills in analysis, synthesis, and independent judgment. Arguments are expressed in an original way and with appropriate technical language.

Methods and criteria for verifying the learning:

Oral examination about the course contents
The grade is expressed out on a scale of thirty.
The grade will depend on: the adequacy of the presentation in relation to the expected knowledge and skills; the ability to synthesize information; clarity of expression, and mastery of the subject’s terminology and concepts.
The final grade will be based 70% on the student’s depth of knowledge and 30% on the student’s ability for expression (written and oral) and independent critical thinking.
The exam will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
– Failed: significant deficiencies and inaccuracies in the knowledge and the understanding of the subject matter; poor analytical and synthesizing skills, recurrent generalizations, limited critical and judgmental skills; the arguments are exposed inconsistently and with inappropriate language.
– 18-20: Knowledge and understanding of topics barely adequate, with occasional generalizations and imperfections possible; sufficient capacity for analysis synthesis and autonomy of judgment, the arguments are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/non technical language.
– 21-23: Fair knowledge and understanding of the subject; proper analysis and synthesis skills with coherent, logical argumentation, but with language that is often inappropriate/non technical.
– 24-26: Moderate knowledge and understanding of the subjects; good analytical and synthesis skills with arguments expressed rigorously but with language that is not always appropriate/technical.
– 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the subjects; remarkable analytical and synthesis skills. Good autonomy of judgment. Topics expounded rigorously and with appropriate/technical language.
30-30L: Excellent level of in-depth knowledge and understanding of the subjects. Excellent skills in analysis, synthesis, and independent judgment. Arguments are expressed in an original way and with appropriate technical language.

Attendance modalities:
Group discussion of topics and texts, e-learning. Attending and participating to topic discussions.