Are global education leaders really better? A comparison between United States and Finland education styles
Everyone’s a critic. Sure it is easy to figure out what went wrong but how to fix the system is tougher. One thing is for sure, nobody has the right answer and there are no perfect education systems out there. But do some come close? Finland’s education overhaul over the last four decades that catapulted them to the top of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) listing has drawn a lot of attention. One of the biggest differences between Finland and United States is that Finnish teachers are held to high standards, and only the elite students are accepted into teaching programs at universities. Subject-based teachers are required not only to know their content but also receive a Master’s degree. The teaching profession is respected, pays well and because of the advanced training they are given quite a lot of autonomy in the classroom with no federal oversight. Responsibility is in the hands of the local government but teachers have more autonomy compared to what is monitored and evaluated in the United States. (Tucker, M.) This has lifted a lot of stress and anxiety off the shoulders of Finnish teachers. Because they are deemed content experts and respected in the community, Finnish teachers can teach largely as they please. In the United States? Well…teachers are often berated, (by parents!) yelled at (by students!), are forced to defend their choices in the classroom (to administrators!) and to teach to the required testing resulting in the mentality that the teacher’s higher education was for naught and that their professional opinion means little. Finnish students are held responsible and accountable for their own performance after grade 9, (Pg. 3, Stotsky). This leading to pressure to compete for coveted spots at a university. It appears that only 18% of Finnish students attend a post-secondary school, (Pg. 1, Stotsky). This pales in comparison to the United States whose post-secondary population hovers around 66% each year, (National Center for Education Statistics). Judging by Finland’s division of high schools (academic vs. vocational), rigorous university education programs for teachers and teacher pay scales, Finland appears to place emphasis on subject content knowledge and does not emphasize work/life skills such as teamwork, analyzation, critical thinking, collaboration, respect, etc. Some speculate that the result of such a fine education system should be a stronger economy, (Clark, D). Perhaps Finland’s economy is weaker because those who graduate are unmotivated or unsure how to work with others in a way that produces results and elicits positive change. It brings up an interesting point about education: is the goal to have students become successful and contribute to society or to just provide a good education so students make good choices, be self-sustaining and happy? Finland is now reevaluating its approach and abolishing content specific classes to focus on teaching by topic (emphasizing skills needed for specific job or professional skills) and collaborating in smaller groups to assist in communication and creative thinking skills. (Garner, R.) While this is a huge change, it is aligned with the same concepts of problem-based learning, (PBL) where students must use knowledge across multiple subjects to solve real world problems. PBL is lauded as a way to engage students in group exercises that involve critical thinking, evaluative and communications skills across a wide range of content matter. In the United States, PBL is not yet a mainstream concept, but it is gaining traction. Despite the international rankings, when comparing these two countries it is safe to say that each does something well and could improve in other areas. It is important to remember that no system is perfect, and even those countries at the top of the ranking have to reevaluate and continue to evolve. Clark, D. (January 18, 2015). Why Finland is finished as role model in education. Donald Clark Plan B. Retrieved from: http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.ca/2015/01/why-finland-is-finished-as-role-model.html. Garner, R. (March 20, 2015). Finland schools: Subjects scrapped and replaced with topics as country reforms its education system. Independent. Retrieved from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/finland-schools-subjects-are-out-and-topics-are-in-as-country-reforms-its-education-system-10123911.html.. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=51. Stotsky, S. (February 2012). The serpent in Finland’s garden of equity. Pioneer Institute, Center for School Reform. Retrieved from: http://www.uark.edu/ua/der/People/Stotsky/The_Serpent_in_Finland's_Garden_of_Equity.pdf. Tucker, M. (May 7, 2015). Tucker’s lens: What lessons should we draw from Finland? Center on International Education Benchmarking. Retrieved from: http://www.ncee.org/2015/051/tuckers-lens-what-lessons-should-we-draw-from-finland/.
0 Comments
Mother always knows best. No wait…the phrase is father knows best. Wait…let me try that again, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania knows best? Uncle Sam knows best? Ugh…Can we just have a ‘Who is the smartest in the land’ contest?
Therein lies the problem. When it comes to education, this country continues to volley back and forth between rights, responsibilities and funding at the expense of our children’s well-being. Republican-led states fight against Democratically led federal programs and vice versa. All for the sake of maintaining party dogma. Yeah…that works. Because one time, as a child I kept up a ruse (yelling and screaming) that I had “water” that just kept appearing in my mouth and refused, REFUSED to admit I was wrong… or even ask what saliva was. That made me so very right…right? The majority of education funding comes from state and local dollars. (School Money, NPR.org) Therefore, what role should the federal government have in assuring our students are prepared for the real world? In a weird political party reversal, No Child Left Behind, (NCLB) a product of a Republican administration, which placed emphasis on federal oversight has been replaced with the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the product of the Democratic Obama administration, which now places more emphasis on states to control teacher evaluations and college and post-high school preparedness standards. ESSA offers states a variety of factors than can be used to indicate success, not just test scores, and that is a big win. (Education Week, ESSA Explained) As Marion Brady of the Washington Post said, (and really every other person with a shred of intelligence), “What gets tested, gets taught.” Therefore, ESSA places less emphasis on testing and encourages the states to use different factors to guide success, hopefully changing the landscape of the classroom to allow for exploration, creativity, imagination and learning. After all the gripes over the amount of testing hours our children waste in the classroom, this should be a welcome change. If we keep testing our kids at this rate, we continue to perpetuate the problems that we are covering curriculum “an inch deep and a mile wide.” As a country, we have seen school Arts programs cut to save dollars in place of more rigorous curriculum and testing standards, yet listen with our contradictory ears wide open at the same time we tout the importance and pride of maintaining our American culture in the face of global diversity. (Despite the fact that we are a melting pot our self.) Without Arts programming, our schools would be devoid of any cultural education. We have seen our Physical Education program cut in place of more rigorous curriculum and testing standards, yet watch as our waist lines expand and health care costs rise as we rely on popping pills to solve problems rather than exercise and movement. (Time, September 12, 2016, The Exercise Cure, The Surprising Science of a Life-changing Workout). So I say, let us, once again ~sigh~ place our trust in our elected officials (Go Vote!) to do what is best for our students. Let us trust they will leave behind the petty arguments between Washington and Harrisburg and return our classrooms to a lower stressed environment where neither teachers nor students have test results looming over their heads. As an uninformed presidential candidate recently said, “What have you got to lose?” Are we trying to head right back where we started? Or tried to start for that matter. Because Harold Rugg in the early 20th Century described a broken curriculum that did not “deal with problems vital to contemporary society…or the growth of our national life,” (pg. 101, Ladson-Billings). As we become more attune to HPL model characteristics that tout connecting classroom curriculum to real-life scenarios and situations, we should wonder how we got to where we are now and effectively strayed from Harold Rugg’s desire over 100 years ago?
“Alternative Future 2” and “Ideal Future” in Four Scenarios for a Decade of Disruption (Prince) are similar in that outside educational agents are incorporated as experts to work directly with learners who have showed interest and passion in specific areas to “engage in authentic and relevant learning opportunities outside of school.” (pg. 7, Prince) Connecting curriculum in the classroom to the outside world, just like Rugg suggests, for “meaningful learning experiences for young people,” (pg. 6, Prince). Maxine Green suggests that raising “a generation of spectators is not to educate at all,” emphasizing the importance of learners becoming active members of their community. She thought this could be done with imaginative curriculum (pg. 102) through a quest for “civic learning.” Green pushed for cultural elements in curriculum citing the arts as an avenue for “new languages [to] be explored and new perspectives opened.” Yet our public funds are never enough to sustain and support the Arts. Either within public education or our community. Clearly the learning agents of Alternative Future 2 and Ideal Future fill this role Green laid out. The ability to engage the community to assist in the learning process is what Prince describes as “business-education partnerships” where professionals “recast their roles to reflect their organizations’ increasing contributions to learners’ playlists,” (pg.8, Prince). A playlist is described as a learners needs, interests and values and in the Ideal Future, Prince describes a setting where learners are matched with learned agents who can focus on these playlists. My concern would be a lack of diversity and well-roundedness in the learner and his/her ability to be able to listen to, experience and accept different opinions and beliefs. History has shown what can happen when we are not exposed to cultural differences or open to and respectful of new opinions and beliefs Finally, Rugg said he had faith a “national committee” (pg. 101, Ladson-Billings) could answer these challenges. I, unfortunately, do not believe our current national leaders can answer any of these questions. So where does that leave us? |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |