Page 16 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 1-2: The Language of Neoliberal Education, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 16
šolsko polje, letnik xxix, številka 1–2
Specifically, through close scrutiny of OECD’s language, I go deep into
the educational and ethical gesture underpinning OECD’s rhetorical ap-
paratus. A careful analysis of OECD’s documents—including publica-
tions, documents, brochure, videos and recommendations—spanning
from 2012 upto 2018, will show that the Organization, while concealing
its role as one shaping educational policies worldwide, shows a remarkable
prowess in communicating its ideas and mastering diverse communica-
tive registers, such as a scientific register, on the one hand, and a language
more in line with advertising style, on the other hand—thus making, as I
wish to argue, a problematic mix.
The paper is framed into two sections and a conclusion: in the first
section, I analyse a major feature of OECD’s rhetorical strategy, name-
ly, that of concealing its normative and performative role of steering ed-
ucational policies worldwide, thus presenting its products as—just—re-
sponses to pressing needs already present in schooling and society. To be
very clear, OECD creates the needs to which its products—PISA, TALIS,
PIAAC—are supposed to respond. In the second section, I unravel the
second feature of OECD’s rhetorical strategy, namely, that of mixing two
diverse logics and languages, such as a scientific logic and language, on the
one hand, and a logic and language more akin to advertisement leanings,
on the other. In the conclusions, I summarize and conclude my attempt.
One Test, One Vision, One School
In this section, I analyse a major feature of OECD’s rhetorical strategy,
namely, that of concealing its normative and performative role of steer-
ing educational policies worldwide, thus presenting its products as sim-
ple responses to needs already expressed by schools, teachers, policy mak-
ers and society at large. To be very clear, OECD, consistently with its own
goals, builds a peculiar vision of education and society, ascribing such a vi-
sion not to its own interests and aims; rather, such a vision is ascribed to
a widespread and unavoidable movement involving all countries around
the world, and pressing needs stemming from society independently of
OECD’s power of persuasion and penetration. In this way, one is pushed
to feel and perceive OECD’s purposes and interests as one’s own, while
OECD comes to be seen as—just—an agency which helps us to meet the
goals we already have in mind.
To introduce my analysis, I consider the OECD publication PISA
2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful? Resources, Policies and
Practices (OECD, 2013). In the Foreword we find the following:
14
Specifically, through close scrutiny of OECD’s language, I go deep into
the educational and ethical gesture underpinning OECD’s rhetorical ap-
paratus. A careful analysis of OECD’s documents—including publica-
tions, documents, brochure, videos and recommendations—spanning
from 2012 upto 2018, will show that the Organization, while concealing
its role as one shaping educational policies worldwide, shows a remarkable
prowess in communicating its ideas and mastering diverse communica-
tive registers, such as a scientific register, on the one hand, and a language
more in line with advertising style, on the other hand—thus making, as I
wish to argue, a problematic mix.
The paper is framed into two sections and a conclusion: in the first
section, I analyse a major feature of OECD’s rhetorical strategy, name-
ly, that of concealing its normative and performative role of steering ed-
ucational policies worldwide, thus presenting its products as—just—re-
sponses to pressing needs already present in schooling and society. To be
very clear, OECD creates the needs to which its products—PISA, TALIS,
PIAAC—are supposed to respond. In the second section, I unravel the
second feature of OECD’s rhetorical strategy, namely, that of mixing two
diverse logics and languages, such as a scientific logic and language, on the
one hand, and a logic and language more akin to advertisement leanings,
on the other. In the conclusions, I summarize and conclude my attempt.
One Test, One Vision, One School
In this section, I analyse a major feature of OECD’s rhetorical strategy,
namely, that of concealing its normative and performative role of steer-
ing educational policies worldwide, thus presenting its products as sim-
ple responses to needs already expressed by schools, teachers, policy mak-
ers and society at large. To be very clear, OECD, consistently with its own
goals, builds a peculiar vision of education and society, ascribing such a vi-
sion not to its own interests and aims; rather, such a vision is ascribed to
a widespread and unavoidable movement involving all countries around
the world, and pressing needs stemming from society independently of
OECD’s power of persuasion and penetration. In this way, one is pushed
to feel and perceive OECD’s purposes and interests as one’s own, while
OECD comes to be seen as—just—an agency which helps us to meet the
goals we already have in mind.
To introduce my analysis, I consider the OECD publication PISA
2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful? Resources, Policies and
Practices (OECD, 2013). In the Foreword we find the following:
14
