An international comparative analysis on the variation of the Educational Accountability Policy

• In Event: Dissertation Workshops 1-2 and Publication Workshop 1 (by invitation only)
  In Special Session: Publication Workshop: Globalization and Education [by invitation only]

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to comparatively analyze Educational Accountability Policies(EAPs) by countries, and empirically investigate the factors leading to the variation of the EAPs. For these objectives, two research questions were set as follows; first, this study descriptively examined the aspect of EAP implementation by countries, and endeavored to identify the trends regarding international variation and diffusion of EAP. Second, this study focused on the differences of EAP implementation across countries, and empirically analyzed the factors resulting in those differences.
For answering to the first research question, this research identified three major components of EAP based upon the conceptual framework of the ‘Principal-Agent Theory’, and measured EAP index scores(0-3 scale) by countries depending on those 3 components; 1)the existence of standardized nationwide assessment, 2)whether or not the test results are made public by schools, 3)whether or not the test results are used for sanctions, assistance, or rewards to schools. Utilizing these index scores, this research examined the aspect of EAP implementation by countries, and ascertained whether the international diffusion & reinforcement of EAPs are observed in practice among countries. For the second question, this research verified whether country-level differences in adopting and implementing EAPs exist in practice, and investigated the factors giving rise to those differences using ‘Panel Random Effect Logit Model’ and ‘Panel Random Effect Ordered Logit Model’ on the conceptual framework of ‘Policy Comparative Research’, especially ‘Industrialization Theory’, ‘State Bureaucratic Power Theory’, and ‘External Diffusion Theory’.
The country sample used for this study is comprised of 30 countries that participated in all of the five PISA waves. As a result, we constructed a country-level panel dataset including 150 samples of 30 countries for five years.
After analysis based upon above methodology and dataset, two findings were drawn from the results of this research. First, the number of countries, which is implementing EAP, has increased rapidly in the 2000s, and the intensity of EAP implementation has also strengthened since 2000. Based on these results, it can be inferred that the diffusion & reinforcement of EAPs are worldwide phenomena.
Second, even though the number of countries implementing EAP is increasing, and the intensity of the EAP implementation is strengthening, there are obvious differences in adopting and implementing EAPs by countries. And after the empirical analysis regarding the factors affecting those differences, this study revealed that ‘Industrialization Theory’ and ‘State Bureaucratic Power Theory’ were supported in explaining the differences of the adoption of EAP across countries, which means countries, with higher developed economy, or stronger government power, are inclined to adopt EAP with less difficulties. In the meantime this research found that ‘Industrialization Theory’, ‘State Bureaucratic Power Theory’, and ‘External Diffusion Theory’ were plausible in determining the differences of the intensity of EAP implementation across countries. This means countries, with higher developed economy, stronger government power, or higher global openness, tend to implement stronger EAPs.
These findings provide useful policy implications for EAP implementation aiming at enhancement of students’ performance. First, it is necessary to discuss more deeply about EAP exploiting comparative educational perspective. To be specific, it is recommended to recognize EAP as a global phenomenon and extend scope of discussion regarding EAP including the differences of background contexts of EAP implementing countries, aspects and effects of policy implementation. Second, given that the current EAP is not identical for all countries which implementing those policies and there is no single definite theory or variable that explains those differences, it is recommended not only to understand the theories that explain the variation of EAP across countries have partial validities, but also to appreciate the combination aspect of those factors leading to the variation of the EAPs in more strict sense.

Author

• Young-sik Kim, Hanyang University