The Field of Knowledge and the Policy Field in Education: PISA and the Production of Knowledge for Policy

Abstract

This article is about the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and its actors. It analyses the development and role of PISA as a 'cultural product' from the perspective of Bourdieu's field theory. The authors attempt to answer the following questions: Of which field is PISA the product? In which field and by whom is PISA used and 'consumed'? The authors argue that the development of PISA is part of a broader transformation of equilibria within the field of (education) knowledge -i.e. a move away from its autonomous pole towards its heteronomous pole. Such a move transforms the very form and shape of the field of knowledge: it has expanded and attracts a growing number of internal and external actors around its heteronomous pole. This (cor)responds to a transformation of the equilibrium within the general field of power, where the intellectual bourgeoisie (artists, professors, academics, writers) is increasingly subordinated to -indeed, sometimes working for -economic and political interests. The authors further argue that the incorporation of PISA at the level of education policy fields also transforms their form and shape in two main ways. Within policy fields, the diffusion and reception of PISA reinforces a heteronomous understanding of education which is defined mostly in terms of its contribution to external interests. The diffusion of PISA also extends and, in a sense, dissolves the very boundaries of (national) education policy fields. Specifically, the authors underline that such an internationalisation of the education policy fields progresses mainly at their heteronomous poles and through a heteronomous definition of education.This article deals with the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and analyses the role and development of PISA by using a specific theoretical framework -that of Pierre Bourdieu's field theory (especially as developed in Bourdieu, 1989Bourdieu, , 1992. Analysing PISA with the aid of field theory helps us characterise and understand the different types of actors contributing to its development, and the specific situations and tensions they are faced with. It helps us make sense of their trajectories and understand their positions vis-à-vis other actors.The uses of the concepts of cultural capital and habitus developed by Pierre Bourdieu have been much discussed in education research (see, for example, Atkinson, 2011), but, strangely, the literature has long remained silent on his theory of fields, although it lies at the heart of his work (Hilgers & Mangez, forthcoming). There have been a few attempts to use Bourdieu's concept of the field to study changes in the education sector. Grenfell and James (2004) offer an interesting perspective on how to use Bourdieu's concept of the field to study education research. They argue that it is possible to understand different research methodologies by studying the structure of their interrelations and the history of this structure. They further argue that the field of (education) research can be more or less...

Aspectos teórico-metodológicos para a análise da constituição do campo acadêmico da política educacional no Brasil

“…O grau de autonomia dos campos dá-se na medida em que essas leis próprias são mais ou menos influenciadas pelo "macrocosmo" (BOURDIEU, 2004a). Para compreender a relativa autonomia dos campos, ou seja, o nível de interferência de demandas externas e as dinâmicas de interrelações entre os campos, um conceito chave é o de "campo do poder" (MANGEZ; HILGERS, 2012). O "campo do poder" é um campo de tipo diferente de qualquer outro campo específico, "é uma espécie de "metacampo" que regula as lutas pelo poder em todos os campos" (VANDENBERGHE, 1999 apud MANGEZ;HILGERS, 2012, p. 191, tradução nossa).…”

“…O "campo do poder" é um campo de tipo diferente de qualquer outro campo específico, "é uma espécie de "metacampo" que regula as lutas pelo poder em todos os campos" (VANDENBERGHE, 1999 apud MANGEZ;HILGERS, 2012, p. 191, tradução nossa). Está situado no polo dominante da estrutura social (BOURDIEU, 1983 apud MANGEZ;HILGERS, 2012) no espaço ocupado pela classe dominante com os seus diferentes tipos de elite.…”

Evaluation systems in a crowded policy space: Implications for local school governance

“…The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a major international student test developed by the OECD to provide policy actors at various levels with trustworthy performance data that can be used for evaluating and benchmarking education systems (Grek 2012;Hanberger 2014;Mangez and Hilgers 2012). PISA is regarded as the key pillar in producing knowledge used to shape educational policy in many countries (Carvalho 2012).…”

What PISA Intends to and Can Possibly Achieve: A Critical Programme Theory Analysis

“…(Carvalho, 2012, p. 180) Mangez and Hilgers' (2012) field theory analysis of PISA offers insight into how the 'field of power' and the 'economic pole' have created demand for the particular policy knowledge that PISA provides. There is a constant struggle over the definition of what constitutes legitimate means of understanding and evaluating a field's central activity, and PISA has succeeded in becoming 'a legitimate instrument of measurement for defining the performances of education across different (national) policy fields' (Mangez & Hilgers, 2012, p. 199).…”

“…Although there is some empirical evidence that PISA has affected national education discourse and policy (Breakspear, 2012;Carvalho, 2012;Mangez and Hilgers, 2012;Ozga, 2012), there is a lack of research into when and why benchmarking and the 'shame and blame' mechanism work.…”