Studies on international large-scale assessments (ILSA) have become increasingly popular in the past decade, leading to much debate among academics and the general public (ILSA Gateway, n.d.). While ILSA is considered an important tool for studying education systems and for formulating evidence-based policies, some researchers argue that “the use of international assessment data can result in a range of unintended consequences, such as the shaping and governing of school systems ‘by numbers’” (Johansson, 2016, p. 139). 

The idea of ILSA can be traced back to the 1950s when a group of education researchers floated the idea of assessing the academic achievement of students across multiple countries at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Education in Hamburg, Germany (Husén, 1979). Today, ILSA is described as “studies in which both achievements of a certain age/grade in one or more subjects are compared across education systems and effects of contextual factors at the system, school, classroom, and student level on achievement are studied” (Bos, 2002, p.2). Some major ILSA include the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS), and the International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS) (Hernández-Torrano & Courtney, 2021).

Kijima (2010) identified four models of motivation driving countries to participate in the
ILSA studies: (1) the financial aid model; (2) the macro-dissatisfaction perspective; (3) the policy diffusion model; and (4) the rational choice model. In the case of the Philippines, the Department of Education seems to be motivated by the rational choice model. Malaluan (2021) stated that the “objective [in participating in PISA] was to look in the mirror and find out how our learners compared with the rest of the world, and to generate important data to deepen our understanding of the major factors that impact student performance” (p. 4). The Philippines’ participation in ILSA is explicitly spelled out in the country’s Department of Education’s Policy Guidelines on System Assessment Policy in the K to 12 Basic Education Program (DepEd, 2017a). The Philippines joined the PISA 2018, the first ILSA the country participated in since the current K to 12 Basic Education Program was implemented.

Given the growing importance of ILSA to educational policies, this paper examines ILSA in relation to pre-service teacher education in the Philippines. It reviews the performance of the Philippines in ILSA and assesses whether or not the country’s education system, including the provision of pre-service teacher education, is responding to the demands of ILSA. This paper also examines the consequential validity of ILSA and whether or not aligning the teacher education curricula with ILSA has the potential to aid in resolving pressing societal issues such as systemic inequities, social justice, and inclusion.