{"title":"How justified are the criticisms of bias against the OECD's global competence framework?","authors":"Izzettin Aydogan , Osman Tat","doi":"10.1016/j.ijedudev.2025.103258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In psychometric terms, bias is defined as the failure to ensure the psychological equivalence of the latent traits and related items intended to be measured by measurement procedures for different groups and therefore the measurements produce results in favor of or against at least one group. There has been both public and scientific criticism that it contains bias in terms of some features such as the OECD's global competence framework is designed according to the principles of the western liberal tradition, that students interpret words and expressions in some items differently, that their understanding of poverty and privilege is limited, and that students' lack of access to communication tools due to socio-economic conditions. In this research, we examined whether the OECD's global competence framework presented to students in the PISA 2018 assessment is statistically biased in terms of sociological features that encompass and even go beyond criticisms of the framework. In this context, we used six international classification indices and analyzed data on around 143 thousand students from 27 PISA participating countries. We believe that results will clarify criticisms of bias in the OECD's global competence framework.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48004,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Educational Development","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 103258"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Educational Development","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738059325000562","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In psychometric terms, bias is defined as the failure to ensure the psychological equivalence of the latent traits and related items intended to be measured by measurement procedures for different groups and therefore the measurements produce results in favor of or against at least one group. There has been both public and scientific criticism that it contains bias in terms of some features such as the OECD's global competence framework is designed according to the principles of the western liberal tradition, that students interpret words and expressions in some items differently, that their understanding of poverty and privilege is limited, and that students' lack of access to communication tools due to socio-economic conditions. In this research, we examined whether the OECD's global competence framework presented to students in the PISA 2018 assessment is statistically biased in terms of sociological features that encompass and even go beyond criticisms of the framework. In this context, we used six international classification indices and analyzed data on around 143 thousand students from 27 PISA participating countries. We believe that results will clarify criticisms of bias in the OECD's global competence framework.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of the International Journal of Educational Development is to foster critical debate about the role that education plays in development. IJED seeks both to develop new theoretical insights into the education-development relationship and new understandings of the extent and nature of educational change in diverse settings. It stresses the importance of understanding the interplay of local, national, regional and global contexts and dynamics in shaping education and development. Orthodox notions of development as being about growth, industrialisation or poverty reduction are increasingly questioned. There are competing accounts that stress the human dimensions of development.