ABSTRACT
Meta-ethnography and systematic review of qualitative research are needed but also challenged by the link to the evidence movement’s models and PISA-traditions for measuring learning effects. For reflections on the perspective for meta-ethnography it means to reconstruct the methodological argument almost divided in a ‘Before and After PISA’, meaning before and after 2000. To understand challenges, benefits and limitations of being involved in the evidence circuit also implies that you recall the origin for meta-ethnography (back in the 1980s) to develop a more genuine practice-oriented meta-ethnographical framework. Referring to Denmark, this means navigating between political and institutional parties and between different forms of knowledge identified as sound knowledge, common sense and ‘non- knowledge’. On this backdrop the article will address methodological questions and dilemmas. Beginning with a short introduction it will follow three steps to clarify platform and dilemmas going through research trends and examples ‘before and after’ PISA-traditions.
