A review of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's international education surveys: Governance, human capital discourses, and policy debates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the influential role that the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) plays in educational governance, we believe it is timely to provide an in-depth review of its education surveys and their associated human capital discourses. By reviewing and summarizing the OECD's suite of education surveys, this paper identifies the ways in which the OECD frames these surveys and embeds them in human capital discourses. We observe that the OECD's large-scale education surveys contribute to its growing cognitive and normative governance role in the global governance of education. The significance of our analysis lies in highlighting these surveys' truth claims as objective measures of human capital while at the same time pointing to their contested and controversial role in broader educational debates. We focus on three contested terrains: student testing, educational system improvement, and the politics of educational reform. In conclusion, we suggest that there is a need for an alternative paradigm – one that values the significant role that public schools play in building socially cohesive and equitable societies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it