Seeing like PISA: A cautionary tale about the performativity of international assessments

European Educational Research Journal

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 598-616

  Gorur, Radhika ^a  

^a DEAKIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Education policy; international assessments; performativity; PISA; STS

Indexed keywords

EID: 84988530050     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14749041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1474904116658299     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Baird J-A, Isaacs T, Johnson S, Stobart G, Yu G, Sprague T, Daugherty R, (2011) Policy Effects of PISA. Oxford: Oxford University Centre for Educational Assessment.
2. Ball SJ, (2009) Privatising education, privatising education policy, privatising educational research: network governance and the ‘competition state’. Journal of Education Policy 24(1): 83–99.
3. Barber M, Mourshed M, (2007) How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top. McKinsey and Company.
4. Berliner D, (2011) Rational responses to high stakes testing: The case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows. Cambridge Journal of Education 41(3): 287–302.
5. Breakspear S, (2012) The policy impact of PISA: An exploration of the normative effects of international benchmarking in school system performance. OECD Education Working Paper (Volume 71). Paris: OECD.
6. Bridge International Academies (2016) Bridge International Academies. Available at: http://www.bridgeinternationalacademies.com/company/about/ (accessed 02 June 2016).
7. Crocco MS, Costigan AT, (2007) The narrowing of curriculum and pedagogy in the age of accountability: Urban educators speak out. Urban Education 42(6): 512–535.
8. Gorur R, (2011) ANT on the PISA Trail: Following the statistical pursuit of certainty. Educational Philosophy and Theory 43(S1): 76–93.
9. Gorur R, (2014) Producing calculable worlds: Education at a glance. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 36(4): 578–595.
10. Gorur R, Wu M, (2015) Leaning too far? PISA, policy and Australia’s ‘top five’ ambitions. Discourse-Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 36(5): 647–664.
11. Gove M, (2012) Education for economic success: speech by Michael Gove to the Education World Forum, 11 January 2012. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/michael-gove-to-the-education-world-forum (accessed 17 June 2016).
12. Halpin D, Troyna B, (1995) The politics of education policy borrowing. Comparative Education 31(3): 303–310.
13. Hargreaves A, (2011) Foreword: ‘Unfinished Business’, Finnish Lessons: What Can We Learn From Educational Change in Finland? New York and London: Teachers College Press.
14. Hopkins D, Pennock D, Ritzen J, Ahtaridou E, Zimmer K, (2008) External Evaluation of the Policy Impact of PISA. Volume EDU/PISA/GB(2008)35/REV1. Paris: OECD.
15. Jensen B, (2012) Catching Up: Learning From the Best School Systems in East Asia. Melbourne: Grattan Institute.
16. Knorr-Cetina K, (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Latour B, (1987) Science in Action – How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18. Latour B, (1996) ARAMIS or The Love of Technology (Porter C, transl.). Cambridage, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
19. Latour B, (1999) Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
20. Law J, (2002) Aircraft Stories: Decentering the Object in Technoscience. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
21. Law J, (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research (1st edition). London and New York: Routledge.
22. Law J, (2009) Actor network theory and material semiotics. In: Turner BS, (ed.) The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 141–158.
23. Lingard R, Sellar S, (2014) Globalization, edu-business and network governance: the policy sociology of Stephen J Ball and rethinking education policy analysis. London Review of Education 11(3): 265–280.
24. Martens K, Niemann D, (2010) Governance by comparison: How rating and ranking impact national policy making in education. TranState Working Paper. Bremen: University of Bremen Collaborative Research Centre.
25. Massumi B, (2002) Introduction: Concrete is as concrete doesn’t. In: Massumi B, (ed.) Parables for the Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 1–22.
26. Meyer H-D, Zahedi K, Signatories (2014) An Open Letter: To Andreas Schleicher, OECD, Paris. Available from: http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/05/05/2014/open-letter-andreas-schleicher-oecd-paris (accessed 17 June 2016).
27. Mol A. (1999) Ontological politics: A word and some questions. The Sociological Review 47(S1): 74–89.
28. Morris P, (2016) Education Policy, Cross-national Tests of Pupil Achievement and the Pursuit of World-class Schooling: A Critical Analysis. London: UCL Institute of Education Press.
29. Nichols SL, Berliner DC, (2007) Collateral Damage: How High-Stakes Testing Corrupts America’s Schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
30. OECD (2010) The High Cost of Low Educational Performance: The Long-run Economic Impact of Improving PISA Outcomes. Paris: OECD.
31. OECD (2011) Lessons from PISA for the United States: Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education. Paris: OECD.
32. OECD (2014) PISA 2012 Results in Focus: What 15-Year-Olds Know and What They Can DO With What They Know. Paris: OECD.
33. OECD (2012) Lessons from PISA for Japan: Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education. Paris: OECD.
34. Pickering A, (1993) The mangle of practice: Agency and emergence in the sociology of science. American Journal of Sociology 99(3): 559–589.
35. Porter TM, (1995) Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36. Rose N, (1991) Governing by numbers: Figuring out democracy. Accounting Organizations and Society 16(7): 673–692.
37. Sahlberg P, (2011) Finnish Lessons: What Can the World Learn from Educational Change in Finland. New York and London: Teachers College Press.
38. Sahlberg P. (2015) Finnish Lessons 2: What Can the World Learn From Educational Change in Finland? New York and London: Teachers College Press.
39. Schleicher A, (Producer) (2013) What we learn from the PISA 2012 results? Education & Skills Today. Available at: http://oecdeducationtoday.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/what-we-learn-from-pisa-2012-results.html (accessed 17 June 2016).
40. Scott JC, (1998) Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
41. Serres M, Latour B, (1990) Conversations on Science, Culture and Time (Lapidus R, Transl.). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
42. The Melbourne Newsroom (2016) School principals directly impact student test scores. Available at: http://newsroom.melbourne.edu/news/school-principals-directly-impact-student-test-scores (accessed 02 June 2016).
43. Thomson S, De Bortoli L, Buckley S, (2013) PISA 2012: How Australia Measures Up. Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd.
44. UNESCO Institute for Statistics and the Centre for Universal Education at Brookings (2013) Toward Universal Learning: Recommendations from the Learning Metrics Task Force Volume Reference UIS/2013/ED/TD/07. Washington, DC: UIS/Brookings.
45. Waldow F, (Producer) (2015) Projecting images of the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ school: Using top scorers in large-scale assessments as reference societies (Keynote video, New York City Seminar: International Assessment and International Convergence of Educational Reforms, Columbia UniversityNew York, 6–7 March). Available at: http://international-assessments.org/seminar-2/ (accessed 17 June 2016).
46. Woolgar S, (1991) Beyond the citation debate: Towards a sociology of measurement technologies and their use in science policy. Science and Public Policy 18(5): 319–332.
47. Zajda JI, (2001) Curriculum, Culture and Teaching. Albert Park, Australia: James Nicholas Publishers Pty Ltd.