Constructing Global Metrics of Learning: Are They Relevant, Fit for Purpose, and Sustainable?

Group Submission Type: Panel Session

Proposal

Following the UN member state adoption of a sustainable development goal on education (SDG4), as well as its accompanying targets and global indicators, efforts to construct a ‘global learning progression’ or ‘global learning metric’ in different subject areas have gained considerable momentum. The immediate objective is to construct a measure that reports national percentages of children or adolescents at different age or grade levels who have acquired a ‘minimum proficiency’ in reading and mathematics. UIS, the agency with a mandate to collect and compile international data on education and learning, has drawn on results from different learning assessment platforms, conducted between 1995 and 2015, to estimate global and regional figures of the number of children and adolescents unable to read or do math proficiently (UIS 2017). While national averages of learning were not reported, they are forthcoming.

The movement to construct global scales to situate national average proficiency levels in reading and mathematics is meant to enable policy makers, donors and other interested parties to compare learning outcomes between countries, over time and among different age groups. (Doing so for sub-populations within countries in much of the world is unlikely to be possible in the near future). However, there are broader aims -- and implications -- involved in the statistical construction of an international learning database. Some are less apparent than others. They include, for example, efforts to constitute in whole or in part a ‘lead indicator’ of SDG4; to re-orient education financing, both domestic and international, to measureable learning outcomes; to normalize a results-focused policy discourse; to promote the acquisition of foundational skills leading to a more productive and competitive workforce and higher growth rates; and to underscore international commitments to address the purported global learning crisis. How national authorities, civil society groups and key education actors will respond to learning data reported on global scales is unclear. What is clear is that the movement to construct global scales of (select) learning outcomes will prioritize certain education targets and populations over others, and limit the resources available to develop relevant, useful and sustainable information to improve learning outcomes, in their many manifestations, more closely aligned with the concerns of community leaders, teachers and educational authorities.

The papers in this panel session draw on different sources of evidence to ask probing questions around the uses, politics and implications of the establishment of global metrics of learning. The panelists will critically evaluate issues pertaining to the construction of global learning scales from technical, policy, political and conceptual perspectives. They will also consider their potential impact, sustainability and fitness for purpose of globally comparable learning data.

Sub Unit

• General Pool

Chair

• Anil Kanjee, Tshwane University of Technology

Individual Presentations

• Can learning be measured universally? - Luis Crouch, RTI International

• Who needs a global learning assessment and is it sustainable? - Aaron Benavot, State University of New York at Albany

• Idiocy for all and the rise of international large scale educational assessments - Gustavo E. Fischman, Arizona State University; Iveta Silova, Arizona State University; Amy Topper, Arizona State University

• When the purported link between cognitive skills and economic growth no longer legitimizes a global learning metric - Hikaru Komatsu, Kyoto University; Jeremy Rappleye, Kyoto University

Discussant

• Karen Mundy, Toronto University