Search

This paper analyses Twitter microblogs over a 3-day period, during the release of the results of PISA 2015 on 6 December 2016 by the OECD. We document a methodological approach to investigating the social mediatisation of policy and its inclusive potential for enabling the participation of multiple voices. We draw on two data sets from the 3-day period: first, a large data corpus (n = 17,260) of all microblogs about PISA, and second, a smaller cluster of selected participant groups, notably academic, OECD, and teacher union actors (n = 65). Our analytic tools provide a methodological heuristic for scoping social media networks. Our research is guided by questions about 'Who participates?' in PISA debates and 'What is being said?' and considers the volume, engagement, and content of the microblogs. Of the three participant groups, the academic actors authored the largest volume of microblogs across the corpus and cluster. The content of microblogs from the OECD cluster mainly provided information about and promotion of PISA, while the academic cluster emphasised commentary and critique, with all actors using an analytic tone. The OECD had the largest number of followers and the highest rate of social recommendations and engagement with their microblogs.

This paper empirically documents media portrayals of Australia's performance on the Program for the International Student Assessment (PISA), 2000-2014. We analyse newspaper articles from two national and eight metropolitan newspapers. This analysis demonstrates increased media coverage of PISA over the period in question. Our research data were analysed using "framing theory", documenting how the media frames stories about Australia's performance on PISA. Three frames were identified: counts and comparisons; criticisms; and contexts. Most of the media coverage (41%) was concerned with the first frame, counts and comparisons, which analysed PISA data to provide "evidence" that was then used to comparatively position Australia against other countries, reference societies, which do better, with particular emphasis on Finland and also Shanghai after the 2009 PISA. The other two frames dealt with criticisms and contextual issues. This paper only focuses on the first frame. The analysis demonstrates the ways in which media coverage of Australia's PISA performance has had policy impact.

Media reportage often act as interpretations of accountability policies thereby making the news media a part of the policy enactment process. Within such a process, their role is that of policy reinforcement rather than policy construction or contestation. This paper draws on the experiences of school leaders in regional Queensland, Australia, and their perceptions of the media frames that are used to report on accountability using school performance. The notion of accountability is theorised in terms of media understandings of "holding power to account", and forms the theoretical framework for this study. The methodological considerations both contextualise aspects of the schools involved in the study, and outline how "framing theory" was used to analyse the data. The paper draws on a number of participant experiences and newspaper accounts of schools to identify the frames that are used by the press when reporting on school performance. Three frames referring to school performance are discussed in this paper: those that rank performance such as league tables; frames that decontextualise performance isolating it from school circumstances and levels of funding; and frames that residualise government schools.