Page 28 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 1-2: The Language of Neoliberal Education, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 28
šolsko polje, letnik xxix, številka 1–2
whole, things change, and we enter an undefined – and perhaps undefin-
able – matter.
We find a further instance of such a gesture in the webpage devoted
to explain aims and structure of the PISA-based Test for Schools, we find
the following:
It is expected that the PISA-based Test for Schools will provide [...] the
opportunity [...] to improve learning and build better skills for better
lives.” (OECD, 2018b).
Such a statement is not an isolated case. In several places OECD af-
firms its capacity to identify which the way for a “better life” is. In a sense,
such a call for “a better life” is an OECD’s brand.
We find such a gesture in a OECD’s 2012 publication with the mean-
ingful title Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Lives. We find it, again, in a
2014 publication, where OECD, again, speaks about “convert[ing] bet-
ter jobs into better lives” (OECD, 2014, p. 3). By combining scientific au-
thority and advertisement fascination OECD produces a kind of mix of
superficial optimism and scientific evidence that is highly ambiguous and
difficult to debunk.
However, it is my contention that such a problematic approach
does not derive from lack of conceptual knowledge or awareness. Rather,
it is the consequence of a precise choice and communicative approach.
OECD, in its claims and findings mixes two diverse logics and languag-
es: a) a scientific logic and language, with OECD being a center for data
collection and elaboration in diverse fields; and b) an advertising logic
and language, through which OECD may spread its ideas in all levels of
population. Such a question is not a merely linguistic or theoretical one.
Analyzing OECD’s language, in fact, we may note that, on the one hand,
OECD strongly reclaims a scientific role while, on the other hand, in its
communications through webpages, videos and brochures, OECD’s lan-
guage and overall gesture mirrors advertisement’s language—see, for in-
stance claims such as “convert better jobs into better lives” (OECD, 2014)
or “PISA results reveal what is possible in education” (OECD, 2016: p. 2)
which hardly could find space in a scientific publication.
Such a twofold gesture is highly problematic, in that, when listening
to an advertisement, one is aware that languages and images are intend-
ed and prepared in order to capture listeners’ attention, thus persuading
people to buy the product advertised rather than the concurrent one; fea-
tures and benefits of products are, then, intentionally overestimated. The
question is that people are well aware about the amount of pretense con-
tained in advertisement and, in turn, such a pretense, due to the nature
26
whole, things change, and we enter an undefined – and perhaps undefin-
able – matter.
We find a further instance of such a gesture in the webpage devoted
to explain aims and structure of the PISA-based Test for Schools, we find
the following:
It is expected that the PISA-based Test for Schools will provide [...] the
opportunity [...] to improve learning and build better skills for better
lives.” (OECD, 2018b).
Such a statement is not an isolated case. In several places OECD af-
firms its capacity to identify which the way for a “better life” is. In a sense,
such a call for “a better life” is an OECD’s brand.
We find such a gesture in a OECD’s 2012 publication with the mean-
ingful title Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Lives. We find it, again, in a
2014 publication, where OECD, again, speaks about “convert[ing] bet-
ter jobs into better lives” (OECD, 2014, p. 3). By combining scientific au-
thority and advertisement fascination OECD produces a kind of mix of
superficial optimism and scientific evidence that is highly ambiguous and
difficult to debunk.
However, it is my contention that such a problematic approach
does not derive from lack of conceptual knowledge or awareness. Rather,
it is the consequence of a precise choice and communicative approach.
OECD, in its claims and findings mixes two diverse logics and languag-
es: a) a scientific logic and language, with OECD being a center for data
collection and elaboration in diverse fields; and b) an advertising logic
and language, through which OECD may spread its ideas in all levels of
population. Such a question is not a merely linguistic or theoretical one.
Analyzing OECD’s language, in fact, we may note that, on the one hand,
OECD strongly reclaims a scientific role while, on the other hand, in its
communications through webpages, videos and brochures, OECD’s lan-
guage and overall gesture mirrors advertisement’s language—see, for in-
stance claims such as “convert better jobs into better lives” (OECD, 2014)
or “PISA results reveal what is possible in education” (OECD, 2016: p. 2)
which hardly could find space in a scientific publication.
Such a twofold gesture is highly problematic, in that, when listening
to an advertisement, one is aware that languages and images are intend-
ed and prepared in order to capture listeners’ attention, thus persuading
people to buy the product advertised rather than the concurrent one; fea-
tures and benefits of products are, then, intentionally overestimated. The
question is that people are well aware about the amount of pretense con-
tained in advertisement and, in turn, such a pretense, due to the nature
26
