I think the global policy regime based on invalidating claims and the ultimate goal of economic growth plays a detrimental role in inequalities reduction, learning, and economic development. I reckon that policymakers who neglect unquantifiable non-school factors assume that only schooling factors can improve test scores, falsely attributing ‘educational failures’ (low test scores) to either primary school children or their teachers and schools. We tend to assume children who have low test scores are lazy or unintelligent, but we might forget that non-school factors, such as the cultural capital of one’s family, might affect academic achievement significantly. Therefore, children from high family socioeconomic status are more likely to access second/tertiary education, preventing upward socioeconomic mobilities.
The exclusive emphasis on schooling factors might also explain the accountability regime of teachers and schools. I think strict accountability would lead policymakers to blame low test scores on teachers and schools, but neither teachers nor schools can cause or force learning. I also feel that accountability might cause teachers/schools to focus on numeracy and literacy skills that are more concerned with tests, neglecting other soft skills.
I can relate to Komatsu and Rappleye that setting learning goals as economic gain might cause students to be shortsighted and less resilient, but increasing the innovative capacity of the economy is a challenging process that requires the labor force to be resilient and creative. Therefore, I think setting learning goals as economic development might prevent us from achieving SDG 1 and 10.