The aim of the Handbook is to present readily accessible, but scholarly sources of information about educational research in the Asia-Pacific region. The scale and scope of the Handbook is such that the articles included in it provide substantive contributions to knowledge and understanding of education in the Asia region. In so doing, the articles present the problems and issues facing education in the region and the findings of research conducted within the region that contribute to the resolution of these problems and issues. Moreover, since new problems and issues are constantly arising, the articles in the Handbook also indicate the likely directions of future developments. The different articles within the Handbook seek to conceptualize the problems in each specific content area under review, provide an integration of the research conducted within that area, the theoretical basis of the research the practical implications of the research and the contribution of the research towards the resolution of the problems identified. Thus, the articles do not involve the reporting of newly conducted research, but rather require a synthesis of the research undertaken in a particular area, with reference to the research methods employed and the theoretical frameworks on which the research is based. In general, the articles do not advocate a single point of view, but rather, present alternative points of view and comment on the debate and disagreements associated with the conduct and findings of the research. Furthermore, it should be noted, that the Handbook is not concerned with research methodology, and only considers the methods employed in inquiry in so far as the particular methods of research contribute to the effective investigation of problems and issues that have arisen in the conduct and provision of education at different levels within the region.

How the United States can provide equal educational opportunity to every child The United States Supreme Court closed the courthouse door to federal litigation to narrow educational funding and opportunity gaps in schools when it ruled in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez in 1973 that the Constitution does not guarantee a right to education. Rodriguez pushed reformers back to the state courts where they have had some success in securing reforms to school funding systems through education and equal protection clauses in state constitutions, but far less success in changing the basic structure of school funding in ways that would ensure access to equitable and adequate funding for schools. Given the limitations of state school funding litigation, education reformers continue to seek new avenues to remedy inequitable disparities in educational opportunity and achievement, including recently returning to federal court. This book is the first comprehensive examination of three issues regarding a federal right to education: why federal intervention is needed to close educational opportunity and achievement gaps; the constitutional and statutory legal avenues that could be employed to guarantee a federal right to education; and, the scope of what a federal right to education should guarantee. A Federal Right to Education provides a timely and thoughtful analysis of how the United States could fulfill its unmet promise to provide equal educational opportunity and the American Dream to every child, regardless of race, class, language proficiency, or neighborhood.

In many societies today, educational aims or goals are commonly characterized in terms of “equality,” “equal opportunity,” “equal access” or “equal rights,” the underlying assumption being that “equality” in some form is an intelligible and sensible educational ideal. Yet, there are different views and lively debates about what sort of equality should be pursued; in particular, the issue of equality of educational opportunity has served as justification for much of the postwar restructuring of educational systems around the world. The author explores different interpretations of the concept of equality of educational opportunity in Japan, especially as applied to post-World War II educational policies. By focusing on the positions taken by key actors such as the major political parties, central administrative bodies, teachers’ unions, and scholars, he describes how their concepts have developed over time and in what way they relate to the making of educational policy, especially in light of Japan’s falling birthrate and aging society.

Since Brown v. Board of Education and the desegregation battles of the 1960s and 1970s, the legal pursuit of educational opportunity in the United States has been framed largely around race. But for nearly thirty years now, a less-noticed but controversial legal campaign has been afoot to equalize or improve the resources of poorly funded schools. This book examines both the consequences of efforts to use state constitutional provisions to reduce the "resource segregation" of American schools and the politics of the opposition to these decisions. On Equal Terms compares the relative success of school finance lawsuits to the project of school desegregation and explores how race and class present sharply different obstacles to courts. Since a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that effectively deferred to the states in the matter of educational equity, about a third of state judiciaries have mandated reform of state-level educational funding systems. Douglas Reed analyzes both the rhetoric of reform and the varying effects of these controversial decisions while critiquing the courts' failure to more clearly define educational equity. Well-written with keen insight throughout, the book concludes with an intriguing policy proposal that acknowledges obstacles to such efforts. This proposal aims to enhance education by fostering racial and economic integration locally. Setting the stage for a more coherent debate on this controversial issue and expanding our understanding of constitutional design, On Equal Terms will have far-reaching implications for law, public policy, politics, and not least, the future of American education.