Assessment for Monitoring of Education Systems: International Comparisons

Over the last two decades, with the increase in both numbers of participating jurisdictions and media attention, international large-scale assessments (ILSAs) have come to play a more salient role in global education policies than they once did. This has led to calls for greater transparency with re...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2019-05, Vol.683 (1), p.75-92
Hauptverfasser: BRAUN, HENRY I., SINGER, JUDITH D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 92
container_issue 1
container_start_page 75
container_title The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
container_volume 683
creator BRAUN, HENRY I.
SINGER, JUDITH D.
description Over the last two decades, with the increase in both numbers of participating jurisdictions and media attention, international large-scale assessments (ILSAs) have come to play a more salient role in global education policies than they once did. This has led to calls for greater transparency with regard to instrument development and closer scrutiny of the use of instruments in education policy. We begin with a brief review of the history of ILSAs and describe the requirements and constraints that shape ILSA design, implementation, and analysis. We then evaluate the rationales of employing ILSA results for different purposes, ranging from those we argue are most appropriate (comparative description) to least appropriate (causal inference). We cite examples of ILSA usage from different countries, with particular attention to the widespread misinterpretations and misuses of country rankings based on average scores on an assessment (e.g., literacy or numeracy). Looking forward, we offer suggestions on how to enhance the constructive roles that ILSAs play in informing education policy.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/0002716219843804
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2229892288</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26732340</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1177_0002716219843804</sage_id><sourcerecordid>26732340</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-5ed7bd585ac6be7221f01272347eca5e9ad10e8ff24c99c6d41cc98adf2714d23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kL1PwzAQxS0EEqGwsyBFYk6xz05sj1VVPqQiBmCOXH9UqUhcfOnQ_55EQSAxcMsN93vv9B4h14zOGZPyjlIKklXAtBJcUXFCMlaWUHAu9CnJxnMx3s_JBeKOjsN0RuYLRI_Y-q7PQ0z5c-yaPqam2-Yx5Ct3sKZvYpe_HrH3LV6Ss2A-0F997xl5v1-9LR-L9cvD03KxLiyvRF-U3smNK1VpbLXxEoAFykACF9JbU3ptHKNehQDCam0rJ5i1WhkXhgzCAZ-R28l3n-LnwWNf7-IhdcPLGgC00gBKDRSdKJsiYvKh3qemNelYM1qPrdR_WxkkxSRBs_W_pv_wNxO_w6GWH3-oJB_SUP4F-UNp2Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2229892288</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessment for Monitoring of Education Systems: International Comparisons</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>BRAUN, HENRY I. ; SINGER, JUDITH D.</creator><creatorcontrib>BRAUN, HENRY I. ; SINGER, JUDITH D.</creatorcontrib><description>Over the last two decades, with the increase in both numbers of participating jurisdictions and media attention, international large-scale assessments (ILSAs) have come to play a more salient role in global education policies than they once did. This has led to calls for greater transparency with regard to instrument development and closer scrutiny of the use of instruments in education policy. We begin with a brief review of the history of ILSAs and describe the requirements and constraints that shape ILSA design, implementation, and analysis. We then evaluate the rationales of employing ILSA results for different purposes, ranging from those we argue are most appropriate (comparative description) to least appropriate (causal inference). We cite examples of ILSA usage from different countries, with particular attention to the widespread misinterpretations and misuses of country rankings based on average scores on an assessment (e.g., literacy or numeracy). Looking forward, we offer suggestions on how to enhance the constructive roles that ILSAs play in informing education policy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-7162</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3349</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0002716219843804</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc</publisher><subject>Assessments for System Monitoring ; Attention ; Cross cultural studies ; Education ; Education policy ; Educational systems ; Evaluation ; Inference ; International comparisons ; Mass media ; Numeracy ; Scrutiny ; Transparency</subject><ispartof>The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2019-05, Vol.683 (1), p.75-92</ispartof><rights>2019 by The American Academy of Political and Social Science</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-5ed7bd585ac6be7221f01272347eca5e9ad10e8ff24c99c6d41cc98adf2714d23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-5ed7bd585ac6be7221f01272347eca5e9ad10e8ff24c99c6d41cc98adf2714d23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0002716219843804$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716219843804$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27866,27924,27925,33774,43621,43622</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>BRAUN, HENRY I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SINGER, JUDITH D.</creatorcontrib><title>Assessment for Monitoring of Education Systems: International Comparisons</title><title>The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science</title><description>Over the last two decades, with the increase in both numbers of participating jurisdictions and media attention, international large-scale assessments (ILSAs) have come to play a more salient role in global education policies than they once did. This has led to calls for greater transparency with regard to instrument development and closer scrutiny of the use of instruments in education policy. We begin with a brief review of the history of ILSAs and describe the requirements and constraints that shape ILSA design, implementation, and analysis. We then evaluate the rationales of employing ILSA results for different purposes, ranging from those we argue are most appropriate (comparative description) to least appropriate (causal inference). We cite examples of ILSA usage from different countries, with particular attention to the widespread misinterpretations and misuses of country rankings based on average scores on an assessment (e.g., literacy or numeracy). Looking forward, we offer suggestions on how to enhance the constructive roles that ILSAs play in informing education policy.</description><subject>Assessments for System Monitoring</subject><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Cross cultural studies</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Education policy</subject><subject>Educational systems</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Inference</subject><subject>International comparisons</subject><subject>Mass media</subject><subject>Numeracy</subject><subject>Scrutiny</subject><subject>Transparency</subject><issn>0002-7162</issn><issn>1552-3349</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kL1PwzAQxS0EEqGwsyBFYk6xz05sj1VVPqQiBmCOXH9UqUhcfOnQ_55EQSAxcMsN93vv9B4h14zOGZPyjlIKklXAtBJcUXFCMlaWUHAu9CnJxnMx3s_JBeKOjsN0RuYLRI_Y-q7PQ0z5c-yaPqam2-Yx5Ct3sKZvYpe_HrH3LV6Ss2A-0F997xl5v1-9LR-L9cvD03KxLiyvRF-U3smNK1VpbLXxEoAFykACF9JbU3ptHKNehQDCam0rJ5i1WhkXhgzCAZ-R28l3n-LnwWNf7-IhdcPLGgC00gBKDRSdKJsiYvKh3qemNelYM1qPrdR_WxkkxSRBs_W_pv_wNxO_w6GWH3-oJB_SUP4F-UNp2Q</recordid><startdate>20190501</startdate><enddate>20190501</enddate><creator>BRAUN, HENRY I.</creator><creator>SINGER, JUDITH D.</creator><general>Sage Publications, Inc</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190501</creationdate><title>Assessment for Monitoring of Education Systems</title><author>BRAUN, HENRY I. ; SINGER, JUDITH D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-5ed7bd585ac6be7221f01272347eca5e9ad10e8ff24c99c6d41cc98adf2714d23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Assessments for System Monitoring</topic><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Cross cultural studies</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Education policy</topic><topic>Educational systems</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Inference</topic><topic>International comparisons</topic><topic>Mass media</topic><topic>Numeracy</topic><topic>Scrutiny</topic><topic>Transparency</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>BRAUN, HENRY I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SINGER, JUDITH D.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>BRAUN, HENRY I.</au><au>SINGER, JUDITH D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessment for Monitoring of Education Systems: International Comparisons</atitle><jtitle>The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science</jtitle><date>2019-05-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>683</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>75</spage><epage>92</epage><pages>75-92</pages><issn>0002-7162</issn><eissn>1552-3349</eissn><abstract>Over the last two decades, with the increase in both numbers of participating jurisdictions and media attention, international large-scale assessments (ILSAs) have come to play a more salient role in global education policies than they once did. This has led to calls for greater transparency with regard to instrument development and closer scrutiny of the use of instruments in education policy. We begin with a brief review of the history of ILSAs and describe the requirements and constraints that shape ILSA design, implementation, and analysis. We then evaluate the rationales of employing ILSA results for different purposes, ranging from those we argue are most appropriate (comparative description) to least appropriate (causal inference). We cite examples of ILSA usage from different countries, with particular attention to the widespread misinterpretations and misuses of country rankings based on average scores on an assessment (e.g., literacy or numeracy). Looking forward, we offer suggestions on how to enhance the constructive roles that ILSAs play in informing education policy.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>Sage Publications, Inc</pub><doi>10.1177/0002716219843804</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0002-7162
ispartof The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2019-05, Vol.683 (1), p.75-92
issn 0002-7162
1552-3349
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2229892288
source Access via SAGE; PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Sociological Abstracts
subjects Assessments for System Monitoring
Attention
Cross cultural studies
Education
Education policy
Educational systems
Evaluation
Inference
International comparisons
Mass media
Numeracy
Scrutiny
Transparency
title Assessment for Monitoring of Education Systems: International Comparisons
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T22%3A56%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessment%20for%20Monitoring%20of%20Education%20Systems:%20International%20Comparisons&rft.jtitle=The%20Annals%20of%20the%20American%20Academy%20of%20Political%20and%20Social%20Science&rft.au=BRAUN,%20HENRY%20I.&rft.date=2019-05-01&rft.volume=683&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=75&rft.epage=92&rft.pages=75-92&rft.issn=0002-7162&rft.eissn=1552-3349&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0002716219843804&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26732340%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2229892288&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26732340&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0002716219843804&rfr_iscdi=true