Knowledge and numbers in education
Knowledge and numbers in education
复制标题
教育中的知识和数字
DOI：
10.1080/14681366.2014.926138
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Goldstein H
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Goldstein H
这期特刊的核心主题是教育中知识与数字之间的关系，特别强调在教育中收集和使用数字数据所产生的各种知识形式，以及它们帮助创建的以不同方式理解、分析和应对数据的知识社区。数字数据编码或多或少的信息，这取决于它们是如何形成的，考虑到使用的上下文，根据其解释规则。统计学作为一个知识领域，为处理它所收集的数字数据并进行分析规定了非常精确的条件。一旦数据被收集起来并稳定下来作为（经验）调查的对象，统计学家就会期望反思数学的客观结构（允许从明确陈述的假设进行逻辑推理）与数据中编码的这些假设的性质之间的相互作用。从这个角度来评估一个人可能有权从这样的推论中得出多少结论。数据的稳健性、方法的适用性和所作主张的力度都将在该领域的辩论中得到严格的检验。但这些数据并不属于统计界。相反，它们进入了公共、政策和教育领域，这些领域将它们用于其他目的，并以不同的方式对其进行测试。这期特刊旨在探讨这一动态的作用，审查在一系列不同的背景下统计数据的形成、解释和使用情况，在这些背景下形成了对扫盲和教育质量的判断。这些论文是从不同学科传统的角度发展起来的，这些学科传统通过其领域的特殊兴趣、方法和分析关注的透镜来考虑统计数据，这些学科传统由其较长的制度和话语历史所塑造（Manzon 2009）。这种更广泛的认识论景观本身如何转变是Cowen（2014）深入探讨的问题，他以比较传统在不同时间点处理从一个教育系统到另一个教育系统的“结果”和“可转移性”问题的方式为出发点。社会科学中的历史研究追踪了统计数据的出现与国家形成之间的相互关系（Hacking 1990; Porter 1995; Desrosieres 2002; Vincent 2014）;他们已经确定了社会世界的统计账户是如何形成的，以及不同统计技术的发展和在不同社会环境中的应用是如何形成的（Wooldridge 1994; Stigler 2002）。但统计学上的理解并不是一成不变的。它们是随着时间的推移而改变其形式和目的的社会现象，因为它们在不同的使用环境中被利用（Lawn 2013; Moss 2014）。它们编码的关于社会世界的命题不是一成不变的，而是随着更广泛的话语形式而变化。统计数据曾经在向国家通报其公民方面发挥了重要作用，但现在也向公民代表了国家的活动，公民被邀请进行判断（Byrne 2002，46-49; Novoa and Yariv-Mashal 2003; Landahl and Lundahl 2013）。在某种程度上，这种情况是通过所谓的“治理”来实现的。
This special issue takes as its core theme the relationship between knowledge and numbers in education, with a particular emphasis on the diverse forms of knowledge that emerge from the collection and use of numerical data within education, and the knowledge communities they help create who understand, analyse and respond to the data in different ways. Numerical data encode more or less information depending upon how they are formed, with which context of use in mind, according to whose interpretative rules. Statistics as a knowledge field sets out very precise conditions for the treatment of the numerical data it collects and then analyses. Once the data are assembled and stabilised as objects of (empirical) investigation, statisticians would expect to reflect on the interplay between the objective structure of mathematics that allows logical inferences to proceed from clearly stated assumptions and the nature of those assumptions encoded in the data. How much one might be entitled to conclude from such inferences is assessed in this light. The robustness of the data, the aptness of the method and the strength of the claims made will all be rigorously tested in debate within the field. But such data do not remain within the statistical community. On the contrary they travel out into public, policy and educational domains that appropriate them for other purposes and test them in different ways. This special issue sets out to explore this dynamic at work by reviewing the formation, interpretation and use of statistical data in a range of different settings where judgements about the quality of literacy and education are formed. The papers have been developed from the standpoint of different disciplinary traditions which consider statistical data through the lens of their field’s particular interests, methods and analytic concerns, shaped by their longer institutional and discursive histories (Manzon 2009). How this broader epistemological landscape itself shifts is a matter that Cowen (2014) explores in some depth, taking as his point of departure the ways in which comparative traditions have variously dealt with the issue of ‘outcomes’ and ‘transferability’from one education system to another at different points in time. Historical studies in the social sciences have tracked the interrelationship between the emergence of statistical data and the formation of the state (Hacking 1990; Porter 1995; Desrosieres 2002; Vincent 2014); they have identified how statistical accounts of the social world shape and are shaped by the development of different statistical techniques and their uptake in different social settings (Wooldridge 1994; Stigler 2002). But statistical understandings do not stand still. They are social phenomena that change their form and purpose over time as they are harnessed in different contexts of use (Lawn 2013; Moss 2014). The propositions they encode about the social world are not immutable but vary in line with broader discursive formations. Where once they played an important role in informing the state about its citizens, statistical data now also represent the state’s activities to the citizen, in terms that the citizen is invited to judge (Byrne 2002, 46–49; Novoa and Yariv-Mashal 2003; Landahl and Lundahl 2013). In part this happens through what has been described as ‘governing by
登录
查看更多内容
将识字率数据置于背景中：审视过去，寻找现在
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Moss G
通讯作者：
Moss G
在世界银行生均资助改革项目中使用定量数据：转型国家的数据、设计和困境
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
R. Levačić
通讯作者：
R. Levačić
透明度短路：哥斯达黎加水政治中的笑声和数字
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
S. Ballestero
通讯作者：
S. Ballestero
学校排名表：它们到底能告诉我们什么？
影响因子：
--
作者：
H. Goldstein;G. Leckie
通讯作者：
G. Leckie
全民教育、质量要求和教育学问题。
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
R. Alexander
通讯作者：
R. Alexander