As I read through the fascinating ruminations of Drs. Albisetti, Finkelstein, Thelin, and Urban, it seemed to me that two basic points emerge, one conceptual and one methodological. Conceptually, Albisetti, Finkelstein, and Urban are asking historians of education to move away from national frames of reference to either a global, transcontinental purview (Albisetti and Finkelstein) or a small, local one (Urban). The two alternatives become complementary as we read on, however, for many examples given of such globalism are actually case studies on a small scale—the lives of single individuals in Finkelstein's case, and of single institutions in Albisetti's. Similarly, Urban's localism becomes the starting point for comparative history between one location (Alabama) and another (Georgia), which in turn expands into regional comparisons (the American South and other parts of the country) and institutional ones (Catholic and public systems). The portmanteau “globalocal,” or the commonplace “think globally, act locally” seem to capture this conceptual recommendation nicely.

James Albisetti is certainly right when stressing that “attempting to establish an agenda for one's own research is often challenging; trying to do so for a broad swath of one's field is even more so.” One might add that discussing the research agenda of other historians is equally difficult in light of the peculiarities of the lines of investigations which reflect specific research interests, sometimes consolidated over years or even decades. Specialization legitimates a historian's competence and guarantees the completeness or relevance of the sources used, the methodological rigor, the reliability and consistency of the reconstruction carried out, and, finally, the effectiveness of critical evaluations and judgments formulated.

These essays by our thoughtful colleagues open a wide range of ideas to consider. I offer some comments on several categories that emerged from reading their essays, each of which leads us to a more complex and interconnected grand narrative for our field: access to evidence, transnational studies, local studies, biography, and autobiography.