Although education scholars have examined the globalization effect of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and its impact in several countries, few have explored its effect at the sub-national level. Taking the Canadian federation as its case study, I argue that the PISA, as a universalizing project for education, is being uncritically replicated through the implementation of student assessments at the national level. By drawing on the policy studies and policy sociology literature, I find evidence of policy discursive practices and techniques, which led to the creation and replication of a PISA-modeled assessment sub-nationally in the form of the Pan-Canadian Assessment Program. Three key themes emerge that facilitate the modeling of universalizing educational projects such as the PISA by sub-national entities: (1) a preoccupation with the international benchmarking of student performance, (2) a shift away from a curriculum-based assessment to a competency-based one, and (3) the adoption of organizational systems and processes of assessment aligned with supranational assessment practices. I suggest that domestic conditions in the Canadian federation were conducive to the rapid integration of the PISA sub-nationally despite the decentralized structure of the Canadian elementary and secondary education system.
BallSJ (2008) The Education Debate. Bristol: The Policy Press.
2.
BarzalayM (2001) The New Public Management: Improving Research and Policy Dialogue. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
3.
BeechJ (2009) Who is strolling through the global garden? International agencies and educational transfer. In: CowenRKazamiaA (eds) International Handbook of Comparative Education, vol. 22. London and New York: Springer, pp. 341–357.
4.
BerlinerDC (2009) Poverty and Potential: Out-of-School Factors and School Success. Boulder, CO: Education and the Public Interest Center, University of Colorado; Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University.
5.
BieberT (2014) Cooperation or conflict? Education politics in Switzerland after the PISA study and the Bologna process. In: MartensKKnodelPWindzioM (eds) Internationalization of Education Policy: A New Constellation of Statehood in Education?Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 179–201.
6.
BieberTMartensKNiemannD (2014) Soft governance through PISA benchmarking – German reforms in secondary education. In: LawnMNormandR (eds) Shaping of European Education: Interdisciplinary Approaches. London: Routledge, pp. 50–65.
7.
BogdanRCBiklenSK (1992) Qualitative Research for Education. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
8.
BreakspearS (2012) The policy impact of PISA: An exploration of normative effects of international benchmarking in school system performance. OECD Education Working Papers, no. 71, 22February. Paris: OECD Publishing.
9.
British Columbia Ministry of Education (n.d.) Foundation Skills Assessment (FSA). Available at: http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/assessment/fsa (accessed 31 October 2014).
10.
BrochuP (2007) Bridging IEA studies and policy making. Presented at the 48th IEA general assembly meeting, Hong Kong, 8–11 October.
11.
BrochuPDeussingMAChuyM. (2013) Measuring Up: Canadian Results of the OECD PISA Study. The Performance of Canada’s Youth in Mathematics, Reading and Science. 2012 First Results for Canadians Aged 15. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
12.
CarrollPKellowA (2011) The OECD: A study of organisational adaptation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (1999) SAIP 1998: Report on Reading and Writing Assessment. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
15.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2000) SAIP 1999: Report on Science Assessment. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
16.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2002) Report on Mathematics Assessment III School Achievement Indicators Program 2001. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
17.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2003) SAIP 2002: Report on Writing Assessment III. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
18.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2005) Report on Science III Assessment. School Achievement Indicators Program 2004. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
19.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2008) PCAP-13 2007: Report on the Assessment of 13-Year-Olds in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
20.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2009) PCAP-13 2007: Contextual Report on Student Achievement in Reading. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
21.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2011) PCAP-2010: Report on the Pan-Canadian Assessment of Mathematics, Science, and Reading. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2012b) PCAP-13 2010: Contextual Report on Student Achievement in Mathematics. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
24.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2012c) PCAP- 2007: Report on Reading Strategies and Reading Achievement. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
25.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (2013a) Provincial and Territorial Assessments. Toronto, ON, Canada: CMEC.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (n.d.-a) About. What is CMEC? Available at: http://www.cmec.ca/11/About/index.html (accessed 31 October 2014).
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC) (n.d.-c) Pan-Canadian Assessment Program (PCAP). Available at: http://www.cmec.ca/240/ (accessed 31 October 2014).
CrundwellR (2005) Alternative strategies for large scale student assessment in Canada: Is value-added assessment one possible answer. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy41: 1–21.
33.
DavisKFisherAKingsburyB. (2012) Governance by Indicators. Global Power through Classification and Rankings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
DeaconB (2007) Global Social Policy and Governance. London: Sage.
35.
DronkersJDe HeusM (2013) Immigrant Children’s Academic Performance: The influence of origin, destination and community. In: MeyerHDBenavotA (eds) PISA, Power, and Policy: The Emergence of Global Educational Governance. Oxford: Symposium Books, pp. 247–265.
ErtlH (2006) Educational standards and the changing discourse on education: The reception and consequences of the PISA study in Germany. Oxford Review of Education32(5): 619–634.
39.
Federal Ministry of Education and Research (2012) Cooperation between the Federal Government and the Länder. Available at: http://www.bmbf.de/en/1263.php (accessed 31 October 2014).
40.
GorurRWuM (2014) Leaning too far? PISA, policy and Australia’s ‘top five’ ambitions. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. Epub ahead of print 30June. DOI:10.1080/01596306.2014.930020.
GrekS (2009) Governing by numbers: The PISA ‘effect’ in Europe. Journal of Education Policy24(1): 23–37.
43.
GurBSCelikZOzogluM (2012) Policy options for Turkey: A critique of the interpretation and utilization of PISA results in Turkey. Journal of Education Policy27(1): 1–21.
44.
GurriaA (2011) Canada and the OECD: 50 years of converging interests. In: Public Policy Forum conference (Remarks), Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2 June.
45.
HartongS (2012) Overcoming resistance to change: PISA, school reform in Germany and the example of Lower Saxony. Journal of Education Policy27(6): 747–760.
46.
HenleyDYoungJ (2008) School boards and education finance in Manitoba: The politics of equity, access and local autonomy. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy72: 1–26.
47.
HenryMLingardBRizviF. (2001) The OECD, Globalization and Education Policy. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
48.
JuilletL (2007) Framing environmental policy: Aboriginal rights and the conservation of migratory birds. In: OrsiniMSmithM (eds) Critical Policy Studies: Contemporary Canadian Approaches. Vancouver, BC, Canada and Toronto, ON, Canada: UBC Press, pp. 257–275.
49.
KalloJ (2009) OECD education policy. A comparative and historical study focusing on the thematic reviews of tertiary education. PhD Thesis, Research in Educational Sciences, no. 45, Finnish Educational Research Association, Helsinki.
50.
KlingerDDeLucaCMillerT (2008) The evolving culture of large-scale assessments in Canada. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy76: 1–34.
51.
KnightonTBrochuPGluszynskiT (2010) Measuring Up: Canadian Results of the OECD PISA Study. The Performance of Canada’s Youth in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Statistics Canada.
52.
KurialR (2005) Excellence in education: A challenge for Prince Edward Island. Final report of the task force on student achievement. December. Prince Edward Island Task Force on Student Achievement. Available at: http://www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/task_force_edu.pdf (accessed 9 February 2015).
53.
LevinBYoungJ (1998) Understanding Canadian Schools: An Introduction to Educational Administration. Toronto, ON, Canada: Harcourt Brace Canada.
54.
LindquistE (1997) The bewildering pace of public sector reform in Canada. In: LaneJE (ed.) Public Sector Reform: Rationale, Trends and Problems. London: Sage, pp. 47–63.
55.
LingardB (2010) Policy borrowing, policy learning: Testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education51(2): 129–147.
56.
McBrideS (2000) Policy from what? Neoliberal and human-capital theoretical foundations of recent Canadian labour-market policy. In: BurkeMMooersCShieldJ (eds) Restructuring and Resistance: Canadian Public Policy in the Age of Global Capitalism. Black Point, HI: Fernwood Publishing, pp. 159–177.
57.
MahonRMcBrideS (eds) (2008) The OECD and Transnational Governance. Vancouver, BC, Canada: UBC Press.
58.
MahonRMcBrideS (2009) Standardizing and disseminating knowledge: The role of the OECD in global governance. European Political Science Review1(1): 83–101.
MartensKKnodelPWindzioM. (eds) (2014) Internationalization of Education Policy: A New Constellation of Statehood in Education?Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
61.
MartinoWRezai-RashtiG (2013) ‘Gap talk’ and the global rescaling of educational accountability in Canada. Journal of Education Policy28(5): 589–611.
62.
MawhinneyH (1998) Patterns of social control in assessment practices in Canadian frameworks for accountability in education. Educational Policy12(1–2): 98–109.
63.
MaXJongCYuanJ (2013) Exploring reasons for the East Asian success in PISA. In: MeyerHDBenavotA (eds) PISA, Power, and Policy: The Emergence of Global Educational Governance. Oxford: Symposium Books, pp. 225–245.
64.
MeyerHDBenavotA (eds) (2013) PISA, Power, and Policy: The Emergence of Global Educational Governance. Oxford: Symposium Books.
65.
MeyerHDSchillerK (2013) Gauging the role of non-educational effects in large-scale assessments: Socio-economics, culture and PISA outcomes. In: MeyerHDBenavotA (eds) PISA, Power, and Policy: The Emergence of Global Educational Governance. Oxford: Symposium Books, pp. 207–224.
66.
MillerP (2001) Governing by numbers: Why calculative practices matter. Social Research68(2): 379–396.
67.
MorganC (2009) The OECD Programme for International Student Assessment: Unraveling a Knowledge Network. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller.
68.
MorganCShahjahanR (2014) The legitimation of OECD’s global educational governance: Examining PISA and AHELO test production. Comparative Education50(2): 192–205.
OrensteinMA (2008) Privatizing Pensions: The Transnational Campaign for Social Security Reform. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
71.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2004) What Makes School Systems Perform? School Systems through the Prism of PISA. Paris: OECD.
72.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2009) PISA 2009 Assessment Framework: Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Paris: OECD.
73.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2012) Directory of Bodies of the OECD 2012. Paris: OECD.
74.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (n.d.) Who drives the OECD? Available at: http://www.oecd.org/about/whodoeswhat/ (accessed 31 October 2014).
75.
OzgaJ (2009) Governing education through data in England: From regulation to self-evaluation. Journal of Education Policy24(2): 149–162.
76.
PiersonP (2000) Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review94(2): 251–267.
77.
PorterWWebbM (2004) The role of the OECD in the orchestration of global knowledge networks. Paper prepared for the international studies association annual meeting, 17 March, Montreal, QC, Canada.
78.
RautalinMAlasuutariP (2009) The uses of the national PISA results by Finnish officials in central government. Journal of Education Policy24(5): 539–556.
79.
RizviFLingardB (2010) Globalizing Education Policy. London and New York: Routledge.
80.
RubensonK (2008) OECD Education policies and world hegemony. In: MahonRMcBrideS (eds) The OECD and Transnational Governance. Vancouver, BC, Canada: UBC Press, pp. 242–259.
81.
RustkowskiD (2014) The OECD and the local: PISA-based Test for Schools in the USA. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. Epub ahead of print 8August. DOI:10.1080/01596306.2014.943157.
82.
SacksP (1999) Standardized Minds: The High Price of America’s Testing Culture and What We Can Do to Change it. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.
83.
SchweisfurthM (2013) Editorial. The comparative gaze: From telescope to microscope. Comparative Education49(2): 121–123.
84.
SellarSLingardB (2013) The OECD and the expansion of PISA: New global modes of governance in education. British Educational Research Journal. Epub ahead of print 6August. DOI:10.1002/berj.3120.
85.
SimolaH (2005) The Finnish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education. Comparative Education41(4): 455–470.
86.
SkogstadGD (2008) Internationalization and Canadian Agriculture: Policy and Governing Paradigms. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
87.
SkogstadGD (ed.) (2011) Policy Paradigms, Transnationalism, and Domestic Politics. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
88.
SlevinskyK (1996) The school achievement indicators program 1988–1996. MA Thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Statistics Canada and CMEC (2014) Education Indicators in Canada: An International Perspective 2013. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Canadian Education Statistics Council.
VolanteL (2007) Educational quality and accountability in Ontario: Past, present, and future. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy58: 1–21.
95.
WallnerJ (2014) Learning to School: Federalism and Public Schooling in Canada. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
WoodwardR (2009) The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). London and New York: Routledge.
98.
ZhaoYMeyerHD (2013) High on PISA, low on entrepreneurship? What PISA does not measure. In: MeyerHDBenavotA (eds) PISA, Power, and Policy: The Emergence of Global Educational Governance. Oxford: Symposium Books, pp. 267–278.
