抄録
Set against the increasing global influence of OECD’s PISA, this paper proposes a critical approach to studying OECD’s PISA that challenges its fundamental logic of legitimation. It advocates for a normative stance in educational policy studies wherein explicit attempts are made to answer what kind of research education policy scholars ought to pursue to limit PISA’s undesirable impact on education around the world. At the core of PISA’s logic of legitimation, it is argued, lies the dualistic view between science （rationality） and politics （irrationality）, with PISA “spokesperson” Andrea Schleicher consistently associating PISA with the former and national policymaking with the latter. This paper proposes interrupting this dualistic logic as one of the most effective strategies to undermine PISA’s legitimacy. To achieve this end, education researchers must surface the messes, contradictions, and irrationalities in the construction of data, indicators, and frameworks that become muted in PISA’s rational, scientific discourse of procedural fairness and transparency. The paper then goes on to review two recent studies, involving Japanese researchers or researchers affiliated with Japan, that pursue the strategy proposed here. These studies help us understand how a close look at what goes on behind the production of PISA data can help us undermine the scientific status of PISA. The paper concludes by inviting Japanese education policy scholars to take a similar normative stance when studying OECD and PISA and contribute to the global effort to curb their influences. Keywords: PISA, OECD, politicization, dualism, cultural bias, reading literacy, wellbeing, translation
