Constitutive effects as a social accomplishment: A qualitative study of the political in testing

References

• Berger B., and Luckmann T. (2009) Den Samfundsskabte Virkelighed. Kobenhavn: Lindhart og Ringhof.
   Google Scholar
• Bouckaert G., and Balk W. (1991) Public productivity measurement: Diseases and cures. Public Productivity & Management Review 15 (2), 229–235.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan R. (2006) Perspectives on the Evolution and Future of Educational Measurement. Edu-cational Measurement. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Callon M. (1998) An essay on framing and overflowing: Economic externalities revisited by sociol-ogy. In Callon M. (ed.) The Laws of the Markets. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Courtney M., Needell B., and Wulczyn F. (2004) Unintended consequences of the push for ac-countability: The case of national child welfare performance standards. Children and Youth Services Review 26,1141–1154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahler-Larsen P. (2012) The Evaluation Society. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. De Bruijn H. (2001) Managing Performance in the Public Sector. New York: Routledge
   Google Scholar
• Doran H. (2001) Dissertation: Evaluating the Consequential Aspect of Validity on the Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards. Arizona: University of Arizona.
   Google Scholar
• Espeland W., and Sauder M. (2007) Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology 113 (1), 1–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feller I. (2002) Performance measurement redux. American Journal of Evaluation 23 (4): 435–452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallie W. (1955) Essentially Contested Concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen A. (2000) How tests create what they are intended to measure. In (ed.) Assessment: social practice and social product. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
   Google Scholar
• Hood C. (2007) Intellectual obsolescence and intellectual makeovers: Reflections on the tools of government after two decades. Governance 20 (1), 127–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koselleck R. (2004) Modernity and the planes of historicity. In Koselleck R. (ed.) Futures Past. On the Semantics of Historical Time. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lascoumes P. and Le Gales P. (2007) Introduction: Understanding public policy through its in-struments — from the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumenta-tion. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 20 (1), 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McBriarty M. (1988) Performance appraisal: Some unintended consequences. Public Personnel Management 17 (4), 421–434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeil L. (2000) Contradictions of School Reform. Educational Costs of Standardized Testing. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Osterloh M. (2010) Governance by numbers: Does it really work in research? Zeitschrift fiir Sozi-altheorie 2, 267–283.
   Google Scholar
• Osterloh M., and Frey B.S. (2010) Academic Rankings between the “Republic of Science” and “New Public Management”. Working Paper. Zurich: CREMA — Center for Research in Man-agement, Economics and the Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Perrin B. (1998) Effective use and misuse of performance measurement. American Journal of Evaluation 19,367–379.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter T.M. (1994) Making things quantitative. Science in Context 7 (3), 389–407.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson P. (2003) Government accountability and performance measurement. Critical Perspec-tives on Accounting, 171–186.
   Google Scholar
• Rosanvallon P. (2009) DemokratM som Problem. flägersten: Tankekraft Ffirlag
   Google Scholar
• Skwrbwk P. and Christensen M. (2010) Consultancy outputs and the purification of accounting technologies. Accounting, Organizations and Society 35 (5), 524–545.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith P. (1995) On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector. International Journal of Public Administration 18(2&3), 277-310.
   Google Scholar
• Stake R.E., and Schwandt T.A. (2006) On discerning quality in evaluation. In (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Evaluation. London: Sage Publications: 404-418.
   Google Scholar
• Suen H. (2003) Some very long-term and some chronic effects: The invisible dimension of the consequential basis of validity. Unpublished paper.
   Google Scholar
• Talbot C. (2005) Performance management. In (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Public Manage-ment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Thiel S., and Leeuw F. (2002) The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Perfor-mance and Management Review 25 (3), 267–281.
   Google Scholar
• Vulliamy G., and Webb R. (2001) The social construction of school exclusion rates: Implications for evaluation methodology. Educational Studies 27 (3), 357–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weingart P. (2005) Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? Scientornetrics 62 (1), 117-131.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson D., Crox B. and Atkinson A. (2006) “What gets measured gets done": Headteachers' re-sponses to the English secondary school performance management system. Policy Studies 27 (2), 153–171.
   Google Scholar