Knowledge mobilization practices and problems from the global to the local level

Group Submission Type: Formal Panel Session

Proposal

Objectives
In bringing together papers that unpack and problematize knowledge production and mobilization (KMb) from the global to the local level, the objectives of this session are, first, to connect and advance disparate but related lines of research on KMb; second, to raise awareness of the ways that KMb and debate-framing in education is affected by the intersection of private actors networks and epistemic communities that operate on a global scale; and third, to call attention to both the ways in which evidence spreads across a system over time and the influence of key players in that system as it moves from higher to lower levels of the system.

Overview
The session will be organized such that the focus gradually shifts from the global to the local level. The first paper reveals insights on the production of knowledge related to charter schools in Bogotá, Colombia, and the ways this knowledge has been mobilized and embodied in the global education policy field. The second paper then turns to focus on how the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has engaged in strategic KMb practices to shape the debate around school funding. The fourth paper shifts to Europe and examines the competing rationales associated with employing “PISA for Schools” data in the European Schools System. The final paper focuses on the schooling system of Texas and illustrates how teachers and teaching are being thoroughly (re)made by data technicians, statisticians and algorithm developers.

Significance
Seminal KMb work has been done outside the field of education (e.g., by Campbell, 1998; Haas, 1992; Kingdon, 1997; Sabatier, 1988). Building on this foundation, education scholars have in the past decade begun to investigate such issues as: (a) the politics of knowledge production (Lubienski, Scott, & DeBray, 2014; Walters, Lareau, & Ranis, 2009); (b) the “new,” “intermediary,” and “global” actors that connect evidence with policymakers (Ball, 2010; DeBray, Scott, Lubienski, & Jabbar, 2014; Edwards, 2018); (c) the role of epistemic communities and the echo chamber effect (Goldie, Linnick, Jabbar, & Lubienski, 2014; Verger, Fontdevila, Rogan, & Gurney, 2018); and (d) the ways that data and evidence from a variety of sources is mobilized by district- and school-level actors (Anagnostopoulos, Rutledge, & Bali, 2013; Finnigan, Daly, & Che, 2013; Lewis, 2017). Although important advances have been made, research tends to look at one or another of the issues mentioned as opposed to bringing these various streams into conversation, as the present panel does.

Structure
The session will entail four fifteen-minute presentations followed by discussant comments and, finally, question-and-answer with the audience

Sub Unit

• SIG: Globalization and Education

Chair

• D. Brent Edwards Jr., University of Hawaii

Individual Presentations

• Mobilization through (mis)representation: Juxtaposing the promotion, problems, and personification of impact evaluations - D. Brent Edwards Jr., University of Hawaii; Stephanie M Hall, University of Maryland; Jeana E. Morrison, Boston University

• Examining the OECD’s role as a global policy influencer of school funding debates - Glenn Savage, University of Melbourne; Elisa Di Gregorio, University of Melbourne

• ‘Becoming European’ or ‘phasing out’ culture: New modes of topological governance and knowledge mobilization - Steven Lewis, Research for Educational Impact (REDI) Centre, Deakin University

• Script-ing Teachers in the language of the T-TESS Evaluation System - Jessica Holloway, Deakin University; Steven Lewis, Research for Educational Impact (REDI) Centre, Deakin University

Discussant

• Bob Lingard, University of Queensland