OECD Programme for International Student Assessment: unraveling a knowledge network

Abstract

Direction du P atrim oine d e I'edition 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 CanadaBien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. i* i Canada Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. iii Abstract The dissertation examines the construction of an international student assessment, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), by the Organization for International Co-operation and Development (OECD). The PISA is analyzed within the context of the global architecture of education where various agents such as the OECD and other international organizations, states and communities of experts are reconstructing, reproducing and legitimizing the discourse and material practices of societal and economic progress and of official educational knowledge. The dissertation argues that the PISA is a fragile entity that is susceptible to contestation not only as it is located in a highly politicized setting, the OECD, but also because it is founded on the socially-constructed science of educational measurement. The dissertation draws on the Foucauldian concept of a power bloc formation in order to analyze the PISA's technical capacity, relations of communication and relationships of power. The analysis contributes to our understanding of how programs such as the PISA come to be constructed, how they work, how they attempt to order and shape our worlds, and how they are connected to global networks of power. It reveals that the international educational statistics that inform public policy decision-making are the result of a series of negotiated compromises made by communities of practice occupying various institutional structures within the global architecture of education. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. iv Acknowledgements This work would not have been possible without the kind and generous support of several individuals and institutions. I would like to thank my dissertation committee, Bruce Curtis, Rianne Mahon, and Lisa Mills, for their guidance, support, optimism and valuable advice during my intellectual journey.

Coloniality and a global testing regime in higher education: unpacking the OECD’s AHELO initiative

“…PISA garnered credibility through the same logic of global quality assurance that OECD employs to legitimate AHELO (Morgan 2009). On the AHELO website (OECD 2012b), the OECD offers itself as the 'savior,' showcasing its competency as a reputable and quintessential global consultant.…”

“…Do we really have to cut this degree programme because it doesn't contribute to securing us a higher place in the ranks? (OECD 2009, 5) The OECD blames the pervasive confusion of higher education stakeholders on a lack of reliable sources of information; 4 a similar rhetoric of 'unreliable information' was utilized to justify the OECD's construction of PISA (Morgan 2009). Whereas the dominant narrative depicts and 'fixes' students as concerned about validity of credentials on the labor market, credential transferability, and learning objectives, administrators are, so the story goes, concerned with university standards, university decision-making through rankings, and improving quality.…”

“…The OECD's vested interest in the success of AHELO as a social scientific experiment is apparent: … given uncertainties … to the scientific and operational feasibility of such an assessment [,] the OECD needs to demonstrate that it is feasible to measure learning outcomes in valid and reliable ways across cultures, countries, languages and Journal of Education Policy 683 institutions before significant resources can be invested in the development of an AHELO as part of the regular OECD programme of work and budget. (OECD 2010c, 14) The OECD carves, sustains, and justifies its role in higher educational policy through AHELO's success, even in its fragility as a contested knowledge for policy tool (Morgan 2009). This knowledge for policy tool is also tied to neoliberal agendas that prioritize higher education's function to prepare 'future workers' to enhance national, corporate, and transnational productivity.…”

“…In particular, the OECD's Programme for International Student Achievement (PISA) has received significant attention (see Carvalho and Costa 2009;Corbett 2008;Grek 2009;Morgan 2009;Pereyra, Kotthoff, and Cowen 2011). This article extends this latter debate by offering a higher education standpoint; higher education institutions (HEIs) are vital players in the global knowledge economy and are the objects of various transnational policy tools and metrics (Luke 2011).…”

“…documenting and forecasting trends, providing educational indicators, and supporting forums where stakeholders come together) (Shahjahan 2012). OECD here refers not to a self-contained entity, but rather to a vast network of policy circles and actors, including OECD staff, member countries, policy-makers, consultants, and researchers (Henry et al 2001;Morgan 2009). Despite OECD's dissemination of a plethora of publications and reports on higher education globally, scant research exists on its influence on global higher education discourse (exceptions include Henry et al 2001;King 2009;Martens, Rusconi, and Leuze 2007;Saarinen 2008;Shahjahan and Torres 2011).…”