Institutionalization without professionalization? The influence of professional groups in the continuity of the national large-scale assessment in Argentina

• In Event: Recontextualizing post-bureaucratic reforms in different educational systems: private actors, public administration, and schools

Proposal

Since the 1990s, the adoption of national large-scale learning assessments (NLSAs) has been on the rise, changing the forms of modern governance in national education (Benavot & Koseleci, 2015). In Latin America, by the beginning of the century, most countries were implementing at least one NLSA (Swaffield & Thomas, 2016). Influenced by the principles of New Public Management in education, assessment governance became increasingly institutionalized through the creation of specialized testing agencies, and the recruitment of different professional groups -statisticians, psychometricians, sociologists, economists, curriculum specialists, etc.- to design and conduct NLSAs (Neirotti, 2012).

Despite their wide reception in the region, these data-intensive policy instruments follow context-specific trajectories that respond to distinct institutional settings, and are contingent on policy agendas, politics, or political struggles (Benveniste, 2000). Studies on the evolution of NLSAs have tended to focus on the political malleability of the instrument to respond to multiple policy purposes (Verger et al., 2019). Indeed, empirical research has shown that NLSAs have a life of their own, independent of intended policy goals, and a ‘chameleon-like’ nature that allows them to serve accountability or school choice policies (Diaz Rios, 2020). These attributes, along with the apparent neutrality of the measurement instrument, have been identified as key drivers behind the widespread adoption of NLSAs across locations and periods (Ball, 2015; Furuta, 2022).

However, the role of professional groups and bureaucratic and administrative actors in pushing to develop, maintain, and expand NLSAs has been overlooked (Béland & Schlager, 2019). While the role of development agents has been more explored, the role of professional groups within assessment institutions and the mechanisms they exercise to support NLSAs is less clear.

This paper unpacks how actors and practices operate in the retention of Argentina’s NLSA (1993-2023). The Argentine case presents a complex political scenario in which various education reforms adopted in the 1990s were discontinued, modified or mixed with other initiatives, giving rise to complex policy mixes (Feldfeber & Gluz, 2011). In a context of changing political cycles and reforms seemingly dependent on political administrations, Argentina’s NLSA stands out for having been maintained with relatively few changes and despite a period of discontinuity.

A qualitative process-tracing case study is conducted, focusing on the different forms of expertise on standardized tests, the engagement with policy officials over time, and mechanisms used to maintain the relevance of their NLSA-related roles and tasks. The methodological strategy combines semi-structured in-depth interviews with elites and experts and policy documents. The analysis draws on the literature on instruments constituencies and policy feedback (Béland & Schlager, 2019; Simons & Voß, 2018).

The study provides empirical data on the mechanisms underpinning the durability of Argentina’s NLSA. As such, it aims to contribute to the debate on less explored factors affecting the long-term stability of assessment policy devices. Actors and practices within assessment institutions appear to be significant in maintaining and reinforcing the 'lock-in' effects of such instruments.

Author

• Marina López Leavy, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona