Raising the bar: How does Finland respond to the dual challenge of secondary education?

  • Pasi Sahlberg

Resumen

Secondary education has been at the core of social policies and education system development in Finland during the last three decades. After creating a comprehensive nine-year comprehensive school that is same for all pupils in 1970s, education policy targets have regularly insisted that all basic school leavers have to have access to upper secondary education of their choice. Today, the Finnish education system is considered as an international benchmark of good quality combined with system-wide equity and access. In this article I analyze the twin challenge—that is quality of and access to secondary education—through three dimensions: transition rate from basic to upper secondary education, completion rates of secondary education, and student learning. I then argue that Finland has been able to create a secondary education system that performs well at reasonable cost by using education reform strategies that have relied on (1) long-term vision of good secondary education for all, (2) improving quality of primary education for all children, (3) designing a system of early intervention and educational counseling and guidance in primary and in secondary schools, (4) helping all students to be successful in transition from primary to secondary education and creating second chance paths to increase the rate of success, and (5) promoting lateral capacity building in which schools and municipalities learn from each other. The Finnish experience suggests that improving the quality of secondary education requires sustainable policies and leadership, cultivating professionalism and trust throughout the education system, and intelligent approaches to curriculum and accountability.

Citas

Aho, E., Pitkänen, K. & Sahlberg, P. (2006). Policy development and reform principles of basic and secondary education in Finland since 1968. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Berry, J. & Sahlberg, P. (2006). Accountability affects the use of small group learning in school mathematics. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 11(1), 5−31.

Castells, M. & Himanen, P. (2002). The information society and the welfare state. The Finnish model. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Committee Report (2005). Report of the committee on transition from basic to secondary education and training. Reports of Ministry of Education, 2005:33. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.

Crooks, T. (2003). Some criteria for intelligent accountability applied to accountability in New Zealand. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.

Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability. System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

Hargreaves, A. & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hargreaves, A. & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 3-41.

Helsingin Sanomat (2004). Ykkössuosikki: Opettajan ammatti. [Top favorite: Teaching profession] February 11.

Hirvi, V. (1996). Koulutuksen rytminvaihdos. 1990-luvun koulutuspolitiikka Suomessa [The rhythm change in education. Finnish education policy in the 1990s]. Helsinki: Otava.

Itkonen, T. & Jahnukainen, M. (2006). An analysis of accountability policies in Finland and the United States. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

Kupari, P. & Välijärvi, J. (Eds.) (2005). Osaaminen kestävällä pohjalla. PISA 2003 Suomessa [Competencies in on the solid ground. PISA 2003 in Finland]. Jyväskylä: Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä.

Lampinen, O. (1998). Suomen koulutusjärjestelmän kehitys [Development of the Finnish education system]. Tampere: Tammer-paino.

Lewis, R. (2005). Finland, cultural lone wolf. Yarmouth: Intercultural Press.

Ministry of Education (2004). Development Plan for Education and Research 2003 – 2008. Helsinki: Ministry of Education.

National Board of Education (2005). Perusopetuksen matematiikan kansalliset oppimistulokset 9. vuosiluokalla 2004. National assessment in mathematics in the 9th grade of basic education in 2004]. Helsinki: National Board of Education.

Numminen, U. & Kasurinen, H. (2003). Evaluation of educational guidance and counselling in Finland. Helsinki: National Board of Education.

OECD (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.

OECD (2004). Learning for tomorrow's world. First results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD.

OECD (2005a). Education at a glance. OECD indicators 2005. Paris: OECD.

OECD (2005b). Equity in education. Thematic review of Finland. Retrieved from the Internet: www.oecd.org on 16 July, 2006.

O’Neill, O. (2002). A question of trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rinne, R., Kivirauma, J. & Simola, H. (2002). Shoots of revisionist education policy or just slow readjustment? Journal of Education Policy, 17(6), 643-659.

Routti, J. & Ylä-Anttila, P. (2006). Finland as a knowledge economy. Elements of success and lessons learned. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Sahlberg, P. (2006). Education reform for raising economic competitiveness. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), pages not available.

Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising student learning: The Finnish approach. Journal of Education Policy, pages not available.

Schleicher, A. (2006). The economics of knowledge: Why education is key for Europe’s success. Brussels: The Lisbon Council.

Secondary Heads Association (2003). Towards intelligent accountability for schools: A policy statement on school accountability, Policy Paper 5. Leicester: SHA.

Simola, H. (2005). The Finnish miracle of PISA: Historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education. Comparative Education, 41(4), 455-470.

Tschannen-Moran, M. (2004). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Välijärvi, J. (2004). Implications of the modular curriculum in the secondary school in Finland. In J. van den Akker, W. Kuiper & U. Hameyer (Eds.) Curriculum landscapes and trends. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 101-116.

Välijärvi, J., Linnakylä, P., Kupari, P., Reinikainen, P. & Arffman, I. (2002). Finnish success in PISA. Some reasons behind it. Jyväskylä: Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä.

Virolainen, M. (1996). Post-15 strategies and the experimental reform of Finnish upper secondary schools. In J. Lasonen (Ed.) Reforming upper secondary education. Jyväskylä: Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä.

Westbury, I., Hansen, S-E., Kansanen, P. & Björkvist, O. (2005). Teacher education for research-based practice in expanded roles: Finland’s experience. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49(5), 475-485.

World Bank (2005). Expanding opportunities and building competencies for young people. A new agenda for secondary education. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Publicado
2006-04-01