Measuring Curriculum–Assessment Regulation Coherence

Learning Outcomes–Criteria Coupling, Thematic Emphasis, and Global Discourse Alignment in Kazakhstan and Finland

Författare

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.6574

Nyckelord:

national curricula, learning outcomes, global competence, STEM, 21st century skills

Abstract

National curricula regulate educational expectations and assessment through their statement genres and the linkage between expectations and criteria. This article compares Kazakhstan and Finland through cross-lingual computational document analysis of formal curriculum and assessment-regulation texts; it does not examine classroom assessment or implementation. Atomic normative statements were embedded and compared using directional mean-best similarity, threshold coverage, one-to-one matching, and size-matched bootstrapping. Both systems show strong internal textual coherence through different architectures: Kazakhstan exhibits close outcomes-to-criteria coupling, whereas Finland links a broader objective layer to criteria. Cross-system convergence is higher for expectations/objectives than for criteria, indicating that evaluative phrasing is more system-specific than curricular intentions. Finland shows higher semantic alignment with literacy, civic and social learning, sustainability, and inclusion frames, whereas Kazakhstan shows higher semantic alignment with digital-competence language in the assessment-related layer. The findings show that global curriculum discourses travel more readily at the level of stated aims than assessment rules, where evaluative frameworks remain less portable.

Nedladdningar

Nedladdningsdata är inte tillgängliga än.

Författarbiografi

Aiman Ali, National Scientific and Practical Institute for Child Well-Being

Senior expert

Referenser

Adam, S. (2004). Using learning outcomes: A consideration of the nature, role, application and implications for European education of employing learning outcomes at the local, national and international levels. United Kingdom Bologna Seminar.

All European Academies - ALLEA. (2023). The European code of conduct for research integrity (Revised ed.). https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/

Baden, C., Pipal, C., Schoonvelde, M., & van der Velden, M. A. C. G. (2022). Three gaps in computational text analysis methods for social sciences: A research agenda. Communication Methods and Measures, 16(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.2015574

Ball, S. J. (1993). What is policy? Texts, trajectories and toolboxes. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 13(2), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0159630930130203

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871

Borhan, H. (2025). Civic education as a pathway to inclusive societies: Exploring the role of education in fostering civic and social engagement (OECD Education Working Papers No. 326). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/3f128be8-en

Clark, N., & Hsu, J. L. (2023). Insight from biology program learning outcomes: Implications for teaching, learning, and assessment. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-09-0177

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE.

Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

European Commission. (2015). ECTS users’ guide 2015. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2766/87192

Grimmer, J., Roberts, M. E., & Stewart, B. M. (2022). Text as data: A new framework for machine learning and the social sciences. Princeton University Press.

Hailikari, T., Virtanen, V., Vesalainen, M., & Postareff, L. (2022). Student perspectives on how different elements of constructive alignment support active learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23(3), 217-231. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787421989160

Hamdoun, W. M. A. (2023). Constructive alignment approach: Enhancing learning and teaching. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies, 4(2), 162-170. https://doi.org/10.37745/bjmas.2022.0173

Karseth, B., Bernotaite, S., & Sundby, A. H. (2024). The OECD’s narrative on the future curriculum: Issuing values. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 10(2), 79-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2024.2361937

Law on personal data and their protection. (2013). Law on personal data and their protection - Law No. 94-V. Republic of Kazakhstan/Adilet Legal Information System. https://adilet.zan.kz/eng/docs/Z1300000094

Мектепке дейінгі тәрбие мен оқытудың, бастауыш, негізгі орта, жалпы орта, техникалық және кәсіптік, орта білімнен кейінгі білім берудің мемлекеттік жалпыға міндетті стандарттарын бекіту туралы [On approval of the state compulsory standards for preschool education and training, primary, lower secondary and general secondary, technical and vocational, and post-secondary education], Қазақстан Республикасы Оқу-ағарту министрінің № 348 бұйрығы [Order of the Minister of Enlightenment of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 348] (2022). https://adilet.zan.kz/kaz/docs/V2200029031

Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology, 103(1), 144-181. https://doi.org/10.1086/231174

Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a qualitative document analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64-77. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044

Ni, J., Hernández Ábrego, G., Constant, N., Ma, J., Hall, K. B., Cer, D., & Yang, Y. (2022). Sentence-T5: Scalable sentence encoders from pre-trained text-to-text models. In Findings of ACL 2022 (pp. 1864-1874). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.findings-acl.146

OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. https://doi.org/10.1787/54ac7020-en

OECD. (2020a). Curriculum (re)design: A series of thematic reports from the OECD Education 2030 project [Overview brochure]. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/projects/edu/education-2040/2-1-curriculum-design/brochure-thematic-reports-on-curriculum-redesign.pdf

OECD. (2020b). Curriculum analysis of the OECD future of education and skills 2030: Technical report (OECD Education Policy Perspectives No. 106). https://doi.org/10.1787/fec47a82-en

OECD. (2025). Education policy outlook 2025: Nurturing engaged and resilient lifelong learners in a world of digital transformation. https://doi.org/10.1787/c3f402ba-en

Opetushallitus/Utbildningsstyrelsen [Finnish National Board of Education]. (2016). Perusopetuksen – Opetussuunnitelman Perusteet 2014 [National core curriculum for primary and lower secondary education 2014. https://www.oph.fi/sites/default/files/documents/perusopetuksen_opetussuunnitelman_perusteet_2014.pdf

Орта, техникалық және кәсіптік, орта білімнен кейінгі білім алушылардың білімін бағалау өлшемшарттарын бекіту туралы [On approval of the criteria for assessing the knowledge of students in secondary, technical and vocational, and post-secondary education], Қазақстан Республикасы Білім және ғылым министрінің № 52 бұйрығы [Order of the Minister of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 52] (2016). https://adilet.zan.kz/kaz/docs/V1600013137

Pettersson, D., Prøitz, T. S., & Forsberg, E. (2017). From role models to nations in need of advice: Norway and Sweden under the OECD’s magnifying glass. Journal of Education Policy, 32(6), 721-744. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1301557

Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031007003

Priestley, M., Alvunger, D., Philippou, S., & Soini, T. (Eds.). (2021). Curriculum making in Europe: Policy and practice within and across diverse contexts. Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781838677350

Siegesmund, R., & Smilan, C. (2023). Educational aims, goals, and objectives: Balancing instructional objectives and expressive outcomes. In R. Siegesmund & C. Smilan (Eds.), Authentic secondary art assessment (pp. 11-28). Routledge.

Steiner-Khamsi, G. (Ed.). (2004). The global politics of educational borrowing and lending. Teachers College Press.

UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802

UNESCO International Bureau of Education. (2017). Prototype of a national curriculum framework: Training tools for curriculum development. UNESCO. https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/bitstream/123456789/108649/1/Prototype_of_a_National_Curriculum_Framework.pdf

van den Akker, J. (2003). Curriculum perspectives: An introduction. In J. van den Akker, W. Kuiper, & U. Hameyer (Eds.), Curriculum landscapes and trends (pp. 1-10). Springer.

Ventista, O. M., & Brown, C. (2023). Teachers’ professional learning and its impact on students’ learning outcomes: Findings from a systematic review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100565

Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens: With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376

##submission.downloads##

Publicerad

2026-09-17

Referera så här

Assylbekova, A., & Ali, A. (2026). Measuring Curriculum–Assessment Regulation Coherence: Learning Outcomes–Criteria Coupling, Thematic Emphasis, and Global Discourse Alignment in Kazakhstan and Finland. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 10(4). https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.6574