Globalizing Educational Accountabilities
Abstract
Globalizing Educational Accountabilities analyzes the influence that international and national testing and accountability regimes have on educational policy reform efforts in schooling systems around the world. Tracing the evolution of those regimes, with an emphasis on the OECD’s PISA, it reveals the multiple effects of policy as numbers in countries with different types of government and different education systems. From the effect of Shanghai’s PISA success on nations trying to compete economically to the perverse effects of linking funding to performance targets in Australia, the analysis links testing and accountability to new modes of network governance, new spatialities, and the significance of data infrastructures. This highly illustrative text offers scholars and policy makers a critical policy sociology framework for doing education policy analysis today.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Curriculum reform in England has been dominated by a narrowing of the curriculum around priority subjects (English, mathematics and the sciences) and a test-based, numbers-driven accountability.
“Alongside the trials and tribulations within the music education community, curriculum reform more generally within England has been dominated by a narrowing of the curriculum around subjects that the government consider to be priority areas (English, mathematics and the sciences), and a test-based, numbers-driven accountability (Anagnostopoulos et al., 2013;Lingard et al., 2013Lingard et al., , 2”
From The policy and practice of music education in England, 2010–2020 (2021) · cites this paper as Lingard et al., 2015
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The policy and practice of music education in England, 2010–2020
Savage, J. (2021) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1002/berj.3672 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lingard, B., Martino, W., Rezai-Rashti, G., & Sellar, S.
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2015-07-30
- OpenAlex
- W1963023660
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 22.75
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Global Educational Policies and Reforms
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Higher Education Governance and Development
- Keywords
- educational accountability, international testing, PISA, OECD, education policy reform, policy sociology, network governance, data infrastructure, Shanghai, Australia, market competition, global education governance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
