Is the Knowledge Capital Research Programme as a Basis for International Large-scale Assessments in a Progressive or Degenerative State?

: (Alternative Format Thesis)

Abstract

International Large-Scale Assessments (ILSAs), like the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), have significantly influenced global education policy, with Knowledge Capital Theory (KCT) serving as their theoretical foundation (Hanushek and Woessmann, 2015). This thesis critically examines whether the knowledge capital research programme underpinning ILSAs is in a progressive or degenerative state, as conceptualised by Imre Lakatos' methodology of scientific research programmes (Lakatos, 1978).

The study employs a Critical Realist (CR) perspective (Bhaskar, 2008) and an updated Abductive Theory of Science Method (ATOM) (Haig, 2018; Williams, forthcoming) to evaluate KCT. It begins with a rational reconstruction of KCT's hard core using Lakatos' framework, then proposes a shift from logical empiricism to CR, illuminating KCT's ontological and epistemological foundations. The research applies CR to ILSAs, resulting in a modified ATOM framework. Finally, it uses a comparative analysis of novel datasets - the Rosetta Stone Project (Sandoval-Hernandez, 2022) and Harmonised Learning Outcomes (HLO) (Angrist et al., 2021) - to test KCT's claims across a broader range of countries.

The Lakatosian analysis reveals a complex picture of KCT's progress. Empirical analysis using the novel datasets shows R² values of 0.43 and 0.21 for the Rosetta Stone and HLO data, respectively, suggesting empirical progressiveness across a wider range of countries than previously studied. However, the analysis also indicates a potentially logarithmic relationship between cognitive skills and economic growth, particularly in countries with lower GDP per capita, challenging KCT's linear assumptions.

This study raises fundamental questions about applying Lakatosian concepts in social sciences. It suggests reinterpreting Lakatos' framework as a heuristic tool rather than a strict evaluative criterion in open social systems. The research calls for a dual approach in educational economics: pursuing empirical progressiveness while developing more sophisticated theoretical models that can accommodate the complexities of open systems.

The study's methodological approach offers a more comprehensive framework for evaluating and refining educational theories, with implications for both research practices and policy formulation in international education. It advocates for a methodological evolution in ILSAs to better recognise latent variables and the multifaceted nature of educational outcomes, contributing significantly to the body of knowledge in international large-scale assessments and policy.

Date of Award	26 Mar 2025
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	University of Bath
Supervisor	Andres Sandoval Hernandez (Supervisor) & Hugh Lauder (Supervisor)