Since 2000 the European Union (EU) education policy-making tools, which drive change and push different EU education agendas forward, have entirely changed. Authors (Ioannidou 2007; Lange and Alexiadou 2007; Wiseman 2010) agree that new modes of governance in the field of education are based on diverse knowledge-based governing tools, including regular monitoring, comparison, and reporting of education systems, evaluation by peers (peer review process) and large-scale international comparative assessment studies (ICAS). These tools work as governing devices by drawing national systems closer into European and global frameworks and practices through negotiation, co-option, cross-comparison, and competition (Ozga 2008; Delvaux and Mangez 2010; Grek 2010). Since education is an area that does not require harmonization of national laws and regulations with EU legislation, these tools are the main mechanism for translating common agreed EU goals in national contexts through the process of policy learning. In the paper we focus on how ICAS in addition to other knowledge-based governing tools influence national education policies and practices and are seen as the driver of reform in national education systems.

Although the role that ICAS plays in national education policies has been frequently addressed, authors agree that empirical evidence in the field is missing. The research question addressed in this paper – “What is the real role of ICAS in national education policies and therefore in the European education space?”– has not yet been satisfactorily answered. The basic objective of the paper is to fill this research gap by providing an innovative research framework for investigating the role of ICAS in national education policies and practices with the case study of PISA 2009 in Slovenia. The case study is especially interesting since PISA 2009 results showed for the first time since Slovenia has been participating in ICAS that Slovenian students perform below the EU and OECD average. These results have triggered extensive scientific discussions and policy debates, not to mention extensive public and media attraction. The paper systematically explains the strong response to PISA 2009 results in comparison to the lack of attention that accompanied the announcement of above average PISA 2006 results in addition to other ICAS in which Slovenia took part (TIMSS, PIRLS, ICCS etc.).

In order to understand the reception of ICAS in a national setting, we take into account both the institutional context in which the ICAS is to be implemented and the micro politics of the ICAS (i.e. actor responses and activities as well as relationships between actors) (Jacobsson and Johanson 2007). Our own analytical model is therefore used, focusing on the questions: Who are the most influential actors in translating and disseminating ICAS results on a national level? Which are the instruments and mechanisms these actors use to attract other relevant actors to ICAS results in the Slovenian education space? Which factors at the international and national level trigger changes in national education policy and practice on the basis of ICAS results?

- Alexiadou Nafsika, Bettina Lange and Danica Fink-Hafner. 2010. Education policy convergence through the Open Method of Co-ordination (OMC): Theoretical reflections and implementation in ‘old’ and ‘new’ national contexts. European Educational Research Journal 9 (3): 346-359. - Altrichter, Herbert. 2010. Theory and Evidence on Governance: conceptual and empirical strategies of research on governance in education. European Educational Research Journal 9 (2): 147-158. - Grek, Sotiria. 2009. Governing by numbers: the PISA effects in Europe. Journal of Education Policy 24 (1): 23-37. - Ioannidou, Alexandra. 2007. A Comparative Analysis of New Governance Instruments in the Transnational Educational Space: a shift to knowledge-based instruments? European Educational Research Journal 6 (4): 336-347. - Lajh, Damjan and Urška Štremfel. 2011. The reception of the open method of coordination in Slovenia. Ljubljana: Faculty of Social Sciences. - Lange, Bettina and Nafsika Alexiadou. 2007. New Forms of European Union Governance in the Education Sector? A Preliminary Analysis of the Open Method of Coordination. European Educational Research Journal 6 (4): 321-335. - Lawn, Martin and Sotiria Grek. 2012. Europeanizing Education, governing a new policy space. Oxford: Symposium Books. - Ozga, Jenny, Peter Dahler-Larsen, Christina Segerholm and Hannu Simola (eds). 2011. Fabricating Quality in Education. Data and governance in Europe. London: Routledge. - Ozga, Jenny. 2008. Governing Knowledge: research steering and research quality. European Educational Research Journal 7 (3): 261-272. - Radaelli, M. Claudio. 2008. Europeanization, Policy Learning, and New Modes of Governance. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 10 (3): 239-254. - Sanderson, Ian. 2002. Evaluation, Policy Learning and Evidence-Based Policy Making. Public Administration 80 (1): 1-22. - Steiner-Khamsi, Gita and Florian Waldow. 2012. Policy Borrowing and Lending in Education. London: Routledge. - Wiseman, W. Alexander. 2010. The Uses of Evidence for Educational Policymaking: Global Contexts and International Trends. Review of Research in Education 34 (1): 1-24.