国际学生评估项目（PISA）衍生品：全球教育治理的功利化挑战

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2023.02.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

PISA衍生品与金融衍生品具有诸多相似之处，已成为国际教育评价发展的重要趋势，正潜移默化地重塑着全球教育治理的图景。其影响体现在用市场经济逻辑替代教育育人规律、PISA参评需求背离国别教育实境需要、教育发展自主性与多样性受阻碍等方面。通过逻辑置换、需求扭曲、价值侵蚀三种演进路径，PISA衍生品正在加深全球教育治理的结构性短视化、去地域化与依附化倾向。面对这样的系统性功利化挑战，新时代全球教育治理体系的共建共治迫切需要重新审视人文性、包容性与平等性的价值功能，通过国际教育评价模式的革新进而引领释放全球教育治理现代化的潜能。

关键词: PISA, 衍生品, 全球教育治理, 国际教育评价

Abstract:

PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) derivatives share many commonalities with financial derivatives, and have emerged as a key development in international student assessments that is rapidly reshaping the policy landscape in global education governance. Their influence includes market-economy ideology replacing that of educational value, sharp increases in global demand for testing, and deterioration of local education autonomy and diversity. Through ideology transfusion, distortion of supply and demand, and decay of educational value, PISA derivatives are deepening policy short-sightedness, decontextualization, and structural dependency in global education governance. In light of these challenges, global education governance frameworks in the new era must emphasize humanistic values, strengthen inclusiveness, enhance equality, and activate new governance potentials through strategic reform in the international educational assessment architecture.

Key words: PISA, derivatives, global education governance, international educational assessment

刘骥, 张晋. 国际学生评估项目（PISA）衍生品：全球教育治理的功利化挑战[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(2): 53-62.

Ji Liu, Jin Zhang. PISA Derivatives: A Utilitarian Challenge to Global Education Governance[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2023, 41(2): 53-62.

参考文献 0

	鲍俊逸, 程晋宽. (2021). “指标癖: 监视资本主义的制度陷阱——兼论破“五唯”问题”. 江苏高教, (08), 16- 23.
	陈法宝. (2021). PISA 测评对世界课程改革的影响与启示. 现代教育管理, (03), 108- 113.
	丁瑞常. (2019). 经济合作与发展组织参与全球教育治理的权力与机制. 教育研究, 40 (07), 63- 72.
	顾明远, 唐虔, 秦亚青, 张静, 张小劲, 阚阅, 谢喆平. (2021). 全球教育治理. 清华大学教育研究, (04), 1- 17. doi: 10.14138/j.1001-4519.2022.01.010808
	刘骥, 郑磊. (2019). 人力资本与全球增长新动能: 对我国教育发展的启示. 教育经济评论, (05), 17- 32.
	沈伟. (2019). 人文主义与工具理性的张力: 国际组织在全球教育治理中的价值导向和政策实践. 华东师范大学学报 (教育科学版), 37 (01), 95- 102.
	Addey, C. (2015). Participating in international literacy assessments in Lao PDR and Mongolia: A global ritual of belonging. In Literacy as numbers: Researching the politics and practices of international literacy assessment (pp. 147−164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
	Addey, C. (2017). Golden relics & historical standards: How the OECD is expanding global education governance through PISA for Development. Critical Studies in Education, 58 (3), 311- 325. doi: 10.1080/17508487.2017.1352006
	Addey, C., & Sellar, S. (2018). Why do countries participate in PISA? Understanding the role of international large-scale assessments in global education policy. In Global education policy and international development: New agendas, issues and policies (pp. 97−117). London, Bloomsbury.
	Addey, C., & Sellar, S. (2019). Is it worth it? Rationales for (non) participation in international large-scale learning assessments. Education Research and Foresight Working Papers. UNESCO, Paris.
	Addey, C., Sellar, S., Steiner-Khamsi, G., Lingard, B., & Verger, A. (2017). The rise of international large-scale assessments and rationales for participation. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 47 (3), 434- 452. doi: 10.1080/03057925.2017.1301399
	Alasuutari, P., & Qadir, A. (2014). Epistemic governance: An approach to the politics of policy-making. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 1 (1), 67- 84. doi: 10.1080/23254823.2014.887986
	Auld, E., Rappleye, J., & Morris, P. (2019). PISA for Development: How the OECD and World Bank shaped education governance post-2015. Comparative Education, 55 (2), 197- 219. doi: 10.1080/03050068.2018.1538635
	Bloem, S. (2013). PISA in low and middle income countries. OECD.
	Breakspear, S. (2012). The Policy Impact of PISA: An Exploration of the Normative Effects of International Benchmarking in School System Performance. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 71. OECD Publishing.
	Delaune, A. (2019). Neoliberalism, neoconservativism, and globalisation: The OECD and new images of what is ‘best’in early childhood education. Policy Futures in Education, 17 (1), 59- 70. doi: 10.1177/1478210318822182
	Dolin, J., & Krogh, L. B. (2010). The relevance and consequences of PISA science in a Danish context. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8 (3), 565- 592. doi: 10.1007/s10763-010-9207-6
	Grek, S. (2009). Governing by numbers: The PISA ‘effect’in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24 (1), 23- 37. doi: 10.1080/02680930802412669
	Hunter, B. M., & Shaffer, J. D. (2022). Human capital, risk and the World Bank’s reintermediation in global development. Third World Quarterly, 43 (1), 35- 54. doi: 10.1080/01436597.2021.1953980
	Kamens, D. H. (2015). A maturing global testing regime meets the world economy: Test scores and economic growth, 1960–2012. Comparative Education Review, 59 (3), 420- 446. doi: 10.1086/681989
	Kaplan, D. , & Kuger, S. (2016). The methodology of PISA: Past, present, and future. In Assessing contexts of learning (pp. 53−73). Springer, Cham.
	Kilian, L., & Murphy, D. P. (2014). The role of inventories and speculative trading in the global market for crude oil. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 29 (3), 454- 478. doi: 10.1002/jae.2322
	Kraay, Aart. (2019). The World Bank Human Capital Index: A Guide. The World Bank Research Observer, 34 (1), 1- 33. doi: 10.1093/wbro/lkz001
	Lewis, S. (2020). The Evolving State of the OECD and PISA. In PISA, Policy and the OECD (pp. 13−28). Springer, Singapore.
	Lewis, S., Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2016). PISA for schools: Topological rationality and new spaces of the OECD’s global educational governance. Comparative Education Review, 60 (1), 27- 57. doi: 10.1086/684458
	Liu, J. (2019). Government, media, and citizens: Understanding engagement with PISA in China (2009–2015). Oxford Review of Education, 45 (3), 315- 332. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2018.1518832
	Liu, J., & Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2020). Human Capital Index and the hidden penalty for non-participation in ILSAs. International Journal of Educational Development, 73, 102149. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2019.102149
	Liu, J. , & Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2022). Reasons for Participation in International Large-Scale Assessments. In International Handbook of Comparative Large-Scale Studies in Education: Perspectives, Methods and Findings (pp. 1−19). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
	Meyer, H. D. (2014). The OECD as pivot of the emerging global educational accountability regime: How accountable are the accountants?. Teachers College Record, 116 (9), 1- 20.
	Morgan, C., & Volante, L. (2016). A review of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's international education surveys: Governance, human capital discourses, and policy debates. Policy Futures in Education, 14 (6), 775- 792. doi: 10.1177/1478210316652024
	Niemann, D., Martens, K., & Teltemann, J. (2017). PISA and its consequences: Shaping education policies through international comparisons. European Journal of Education, 52 (2), 175- 183. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12220
	Nortvedt, G. A. (2018). Policy impact of PISA on mathematics education: The case of Norway. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33 (3), 427- 444. doi: 10.1007/s10212-018-0378-9
	Nóvoa, A., & Yariv-Mashal, T. (2003). Comparative Research in Education: A Mode of Governance or a Historical Journey?. Comparative Education, 39 (4), 423- 438. doi: 10.1080/0305006032000162002
	Rottenburg, R. , Merry, S. E. , Park, S. J. , & Mugler, J. (2015). The world of indicators: The making of governmental knowledge through quantification. Cambridge University Press.
	Rutkowski, D., & Rutkowski, L. (2021). Running the wrong race? The case of PISA for development. Comparative Education Review, 65 (1), 147- 165. doi: 10.1086/712409
	Sassen, S. (2008). Mortgage capital and its particularities: A new frontier for global finance. Journal of International Affairs, 62 (1), 187- 212.
	Sassen, S.. (2017). Predatory formations dressed in wall street suits and algorithmic math. Science, Technology and Society, 22 (1), 6- 20.
	Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2014). The OECD and the expansion of PISA: New global modes of governance in education. British Educational Research Journal, 40 (6), 917- 936. doi: 10.1002/berj.3120
	Sjøberg, S.. (2015). PISA and global educational governance–A critique of the project, its uses and implications. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11 (1), 111- 127.
	Soumitra, D. , Lanvin, B. , & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (2022). Global innovation index 2022: What is the future of innovation-driven growth?. WIPO: Geneva.
	Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2014). Cross-national policy borrowing: Understanding reception and translation. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 34 (2), 153- 167. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2013.875649
	Steiner-Khamsi, G., & Dugonjić-Rodwin, L. (2018). Transnational accreditation for public schools: IB, PISA and other public–private partnerships. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50 (5), 595- 607. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2018.1502813
	Tucker, M. S. (2014). Chinese Lessons: Shanghai’s Rise to the Top of the PISA League Tables. National Center on Education and the Economy.
	Verger, A., Fontdevila, C., & Parcerisa, L. (2019). Reforming governance through policy instruments: How and to what extent standards, tests and accountability in education spread worldwide. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40 (2), 248- 270. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2019.1569882
	Waldow, F., & Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2019). Understanding PISA’s attractiveness: Critical analyses in comparative policy studies. Bloomsbury Publishing.
	Ward, M. (2018). PISA for Development: Results in Focus . OECD Publishing.
	World Bank. (2018). Measuring Human Capital. World Bank, Washington, D. C.
	World Bank. (2019a). Regional human capital plan for Africa. World Bank, Washington, D. C.
	World Bank. (2019b). Pakistan@100: Shaping the Future. World Bank, Washington, D. C.
	World Bank. (2019c). Future drivers of growth in Rwanda. World Bank, Washington, D. C.
	Xie, S., & Huang, J. (2014). The impact of index futures on spot market volatility in China. Emerging Markets Finance & Trade, (50), 167- 177.
	Zapp, M. (2021). The authority of science and the legitimacy of international organizations: OECD, UNESCO and World Bank in global education governance. Compare:A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 51 (7), 1022- 1041. doi: 10.1080/03057925.2019.1702503
	Zhao, Y. (2020). Two decades of havoc: A synthesis of criticism against PISA. Journal of Educational Change, 21 (2), 245- 266. doi: 10.1007/s10833-019-09367-x

[1]	刘宝存, 黄秦辉. PISA高绩效地区学生的全球素养：个体和学校因素的影响[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(2): 38-52.
[2]	黄声华, 尹弘飚, 靳玉乐. 家长教育卷入类型与中学生学科素养：基于PISA 2018中国香港及澳门数据的潜在类别分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(1): 50-59.
[3]	李小红, 王杉, 陈晨, 杨婕, 唐向黎. 家庭文化资本对学生阅读素养的影响：基于多层logistic模型的实证研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(8): 57-66.
[4]	[德]安德烈亚斯·施莱希尔（Andreas Schleicher）. 教育面向学生的未来，而不是我们的过去[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2020, 38(5): 1-21.
[5]	伍远岳, 郭元祥. 中学生科学学习的性别差异与课程应对——基于PISA 2015中国四省市的数据分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2019, 37(5): 115-127.
[6]	沈伟. 人文主义与工具理性的张力:国际组织在全球教育治理中的价值导向和政策实践[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2019, 37(1): 95-102+168+169.
[7]	陈纯槿, 顾小清. 义务教育年限延长与基础教育发展——基于PISA 2015数据的实证研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(5): 71-82+167+168.
[8]	戴维·埃乔莱纳, 张丹. 质量与公平:联合国教科文组织全球教育治理目标与路径——戴维·埃乔莱纳与张丹的对话[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(2): 139-147+159.