In recent years, national and international tests of students’ educational performances have gained importance in discourses on policy initiatives, curriculum change, educational research, and in media (Forsberg & Román, 2014). Furthermore, international organizations have developed a common discourse on schooling for influencing national education systems (Dobbins & Martens, 2012). In addition, renascent and new international entrepreneurial agencies (EA) have emerged in the field of edu-business (cf. Hogan, Sellar & Lingard, 2015), interpreting and producing educational data and making recommendations for educational improvements. They operate in greyzone (Lindblad, Pettersson & Popkewitz, 2015) spaces where actors interpret and mediate educational data but also fabricate (cf. Carvalho, 2012) educational “facts”. The most salient agencies are Pearson and McKinsey, but another contrasting but notable example operating outside the westernized world is Twaweza staging a range of educational activities in East Africa, at this time mostly with donor money, e.g. Uwezo, Africa’s largest annual assessment on children’s learning. Pearson is the world’s largest education company, with operations on nearly every continent. The company works with digital texts, online learning tools, virtual schools, student and teacher testing programs and services, student information systems, instructional management systems etc. Pearson is pursuing a variety of growth strategies including one that is said to revolutionize how education is delivered to students around the world. In December 2014 it was announced that Pearson won a competitive tender to develop the frameworks for OECD’s international large-scale assessment PISA 2018. Pearson’s chief executive John Fallon states in the press-release: “We are developing global benchmarks that, by assessing a wider range of skills, will help young people to prosper in the global economy”. In addition, Andreas Schleicher, the head of PISA, said: “PISA 2018 has the potential to be the start of a new phase of our international assessments”. Another EA is the McKinsey which publish reports on how educational systems can improve in relation to PISA results and labor market preparation of youth. In relation to this development, we raise questions on a shifting educational policy landscape in glonacal times (Marginson & Rhoades, 2001) when former dominating policy producers like governments and international organizations, e.g. the OECD and the EU, have reduced influence in favor of EA. In addition, we also raise questions on styles of reasoning (Hacking, 1992) embedded within EA for discussing what kind of educational knowledge and “facts” that will be produced in the future.

Carvalho, L. M. (2012). The Fabrication and Travel of a Knowledge-Policy Instrument. European Educational Research journal, 11(2), 172-188. Dobbins. M. & Martens, K. (2012). Towards an education approach à la finlandaise? French education policy after PISA. Journal of Education Policy 27 (1) p. 23-43. Forsberg, E. & Román, H. (2014) The Art of Borrowing in Swedish Assessment Policies. . A. Nordin & D. Sundberg (Eds.). Transnational policy-flows in European education: Conceptualizing and governing knowledge. Oxford Studies in Comparative Education. East Greenwich: Symposium Books. Hacking, 1992 Hogan, A., Sellar, S. and Lingard, B. (2015) Commercialising comparison: Pearson puts the TLC in soft capitalism. Journal of Education Policy. (published online 16 Nov. 2015). Lindblad, S., Pettersson, D., & Popkewitz, T. S. (2015). International comparisons of school results - A systematic review of research on Large Scale Assessment in education. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Research Council. Marginson, S. & Rhoades, G. 2001. Conceptualising Global Relations at the Glonacal Levels. Paper presented at the annual international forum of the Conference of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Richmond, VA, November 15-18.