OECD’s knowledge-based regulation tools attempt to promote orthodox professional practice and increased standardisation of professional formation and development. The strength and power of these tools lies in its apparently objective nature, in the attractiveness of the space of negotiation and debate that it creates, where experts, policy makers and other knowledge-brokers meet and position themselves, and in its capacity to define the terms of that engagement. There is going on a huge invasion of politics of standardisation. Standardisation allows building uniformity in time and space by creating common standards and establishing political control at a distance on work and communities of practice. Standardisation helps the State and public authorities to compare and rank individuals and groups and to create a common language shared by professionals, policymakers and evaluators. Standards rely on a form of classification and measurement that defines limitations and exclusions in shaping the policy. The term “glocal” unites the concepts of global and local and underlines the situation where the position of the nation-state as the driver of the education politics is questioned. The new architecture of governance relies on the ever faster production, mobility and circulation of data. In national and local education policies there are, however, the social facts, the already existing circumstances, which include and frame the possibilities for present and future actions. They are called the “opportunity structures” and make also local spaces important. Our time is not only global, but also strongly glocal.