Pasi Sahlberg - The Myth of Finnish Education
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 05. 2015
- Pasi Sahlberg is Finnish educator, author and scholar. He has worked as schoolteacher, teacher educator, researcher and policy advisor in Finland and has studied education systems and reforms around the world. His expertise includes school improvement, international education issues, classroom teaching and learning, and school leadership. His best-seller book “Finnish Lessons 2.0: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland” won the 2013 Grawemeyer Award. He is a former Director General of CIMO (Centre for International Mobility and Cooperation) at the Finland’s Ministry of Education and Culture in Helsinki and currently a visiting Professor of Practice at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education in Cambridge, MA, USA. More on his website: pasisahlberg.com
and Twitter: @pasi_sahlberg.
Thank you. This is a wonderful talk. This gives us great insight into how Finland insures that there's a balance of talents and learning/teaching skills among its teachers.
I'm afraid one of the respondents below thinks that a reference to a "myth" is a self-serving criticism (based on a "grudge") but that is not the case at all, as the first person replying points out. The myth is that only a special elite with the top test scores get picked up for the program. That's not the case, according to this speaker.
Here in Germany it's the opposite - in order to NOT get accepted as a teacher you need to (a) fail at useless-learning irrelevant stuff or (b) be mentally ill. So in the end many children decide to become teacher simply because they do not know what to do, and when you become a teacher in Germany it does not matter how bad you are - if you fail, it's the children who get bad grades. No one will ever bring the grades of students into relation with their teachers. Everyone pretends that the skill of the teacher is somehow irrelevant.
I teach few coding courses every now and then (I'm not a real teacher) and every time I see a kid who comes short on the exam I feel like I failed them. Sure there are kids who just don't pay attention, but it was my job to make sure they do. It's on me. To think what it's like to be a primary school teacher... You can eff someone's future if you can't teach them the things needed. They will be trying to catch up from now on.
I have the highest regard for teachers who keep their morale up and try their best. I couldn't do that day to day. My (grades 7-9) math teacher was awesome even when we werebeing little assholes and thanks to that I flew through any math class later on. My computer sciences teacher might hate me, but just because I knew some things better than him (he tried to punish me by making me teach basic as I kept throwing better ways to do it at him, and I nailed it) but because this little rivalry I really wanted to show that I really know what I'm talking about, and well... Now I'm doing this for a career. The bastard still gave me an 9/10, so he might not be the best teacher, but in this case it just made me more determined to show him off.
P.s. I probably shouldn't call 16-19 year olds kids, but I'm slowly getting old :)
I think it's the teacher's unions. They don't want to add stress to teacher's lives or pit teachers against each other. - It's a sad, dead end road...
Seems odd.
This gentleman characterizes it nicely. The residents in Finland are certainly very unique regarding the common good. I do not know how they do it... but they do it!
Social fabric.. all populations are not equal, the culture matters. You can only do so much with systems. We should learn from Finlands’ culture, not only the schooling there.
I think that they are looking for passion in the ambition to teach also and not only the academic prowess. Therefore a person who is asked, why do you want to be a teacher,you could have chosen anything? will be able to answer that question without a second thought, if they truly have that passion. I am glad that she finally got her wish .
The reasoning behind his niece not getting accepted the first time around makes perfect sense to me. I wouldn't hire anyone for any job if they didn't know why they were doing it.
While a teacher being super-smart is nice, I don't see where it would be as as important as being able to connect with and motivate the students. Especially with younger students, the teacher's mastery of advanced calculus is not going to matter much as they teach simple addition; their ability to plum the subtleties of the elements of literature will not likely be a significant benefit as they teach basic reading and writing.
What is important is that they can implement a well-designed pedagogical program while being a human being that the children trust and are comfortable with.
teaching having high prerequisites means
1. They merit the freedom and trust that the finnish education system gives them
2. Their jobs are prestigious
3. They can teach at all levels, from young to old
Also, it doesn't interfere with their ability to connect with, motivate, and successfully reach their students. In fact, it can be argued that a teacher who was demonstrably sucessful in their educational career can be expected to be more capable in helping a student in their educational career.
I think students are more naturally motivated there, the system hasn't worn them out yet.
Can we learn from Finland ?
Finland performs much better than England and the USA in the PISA test. In this international test the students have to apply their knowledge in novel situations. It seems that their average pupils achieve comparatively higher scores than those in other countries. Does this reflect Goverment directives, the headteacher, the teachers, teaching methods, continual assessment, revision methods or parental involvement?
At the Government level ...
The Government in Finland introduced a law so that all children have a 15 minute break after 45 minutes of teaching.
The Government decided on mixed ability classes.
The Government sets out a curriculum that is short with only a few pages of text per subject. The curriculum is not overwhelming, leaving time in the year for teachers to plan local activities and innovate.
The Government approves science and mathematics textbooks that have been tried and tested in schools. Textbooks have teacher guides and these provide lesson plans for teachers for every term. They also contain extension material, printouts and projects. Textbooks are supplemented with free internet material.
The Government directs examination boards to set questions that assess the understanding of concepts and their application in novel situations rather than just factual recall. The application of knowledge (problem solving) is a higher order of skill in Blooms Taxonomy of Learning. There is a minimum reliance on multiple choice questions as these are viewed as only useful for testing factual recall.
The Government believes that SATs testing is unnecessary as continual assessment provides sufficient data about pupil attainment.
The Government is now reviewing the curriculum to periodically introduce topics that require strategies which are needed in modern industry, such as working together and creativity.
At the Headteacher level...
The school day is organised with one hour periods and each period includes a lesson of 45 minutes and a 15 minute break. There are also morning and afternoon 15 minute coffee breaks and a lunch hour.
The Head meets with teachers in an interview every term to discuss class progress, any problems with individual pupils, innovations, new topics etc.
There are no heads of department and one teacher is given responsibility for ordering equipment, materials etc.
The Head is responsible for standards and these are checked yearly by the government who give an examination to a few pupils in a year group. School inspectors can visit if results are unsatisfactory.
Poorly performing pupils or gifted pupils are interviewed with their parents, the class teacher, a school psychologist and a social worker present.
The Head provides an academic route or a vocational route for pupils aged 13+.
The Head insists that good discipline is introduced quickly in the school and is effective at an early age. Head teachers believe that learning cannot occur if minor disruption occurs in lessons.
At the teacher level...
Teachers enjoy their jobs and few leave teaching.
Teachers know the abilities of their mixed ability class and have the same pupils all day and every day. Poor behaviour can be remedied quickly in such a situation and discipline is good.
Teachers on exchange visits comment that lessons are not drastically different to those in their countries and comment that Finnish teachers are not ‘super teachers’.
A common lesson format is a period of teacher talk followed by the pupil reading the textbook and answering some factual recall and problem solving questions. A short test is then used to monitor learning in the lesson. In summary, passive learning is followed by active learning and a short test gives immediate feedback. Teacher talk probably accounts for 15 minutes in the lesson.
Teachers are trained to monitor learning effectively with short tests in every lesson and termly tests. The results for the latter are used for grades (these are entered into a national database). This is continual assessment.
Teachers keep the same class for many years and know pupil strengths and weaknesses (upper secondary pupils aged 13+ are taught by subject specialists).
Teachers teach all subjects and introduce cross curricular projects which are also given a grade.
Teachers keep a portfolio of children’s work and comment on this frequently. New targets are set after a discussion with the pupil.
Teachers set a short homework every week and pupils mark their own homework in class as the teacher goes through the marking scheme. Pupils have to comment on their results and results are entered into the national database. If no homework is done this is also recorded.
Teachers use textbooks and the teacher guide lesson plans daily. They feel there is no need to ‘reinvent the wheel’.
Teachers are expected to design a new topic for lessons at the end of the year and show their creativity to the Headteacher.
At the pupil level...
Pupils enter the classroom and take off their shoes.
Pupils listen, read their textbook and answer questions, write summaries and are tested in every lesson.
Pupils keep a portfolio of work and are self critical about their own work using a proforma.
Pupils say they appreciate the regular 15 minute breaks every hour.
Pupils work well and quietly in class for 45 minutes.
Pupils conduct peer to peer tests as a revision process before end of term tests. A bright pupil is paired with a less able pupil. Each pupil has to explain a concept to the other pupil and they persist until mastery is achieved.
Older pupils do online guided projects using school computers and use a special program that has prompts. Some homework involves using the internet for research.
Parents...
Parents receive a form at the end of term which provides the grade for the end of term tests. They have to sign this and return it to the school.
Parents attend parents’ evenings.
Parents are satisfied that homework is brief (sometimes less than 30 minutes per week) and realise that children need time to have hobbies and interests.
Some parents do not like the idea of peer to peer revision as it seems that the bright pupil is being used as a teacher. They want their bright pupils to do extra studies. Schools believe that this method benefits both abilities.
Parents can see test results on a national database.
Parents can be contacted by teachers using mobile phone messages if progress is slow or behaviour is poor.
Parents buy school workbooks and textbooks. These are used daily in class and parents can see that their children are getting a broad, balanced and relevant curriculum.
Parents do not make sandwiches for their children. Pupils receive a free meal at school and they are not allowed off site to buy junk food.
Comment...
It would seem that there are many similarities and differences between Finnish education and that of other countries. There is certainly no one silver bullet for success. Finnish success has been achieved by implementing a complex well organised system. The major factors are:-
1. At the classroom level the most obvious difference is the typical lesson plan which is composed of a short teacher talk phase (15 mins), an active learning phase using textbook questions to enhance learning and a short test phase to provide feedback to the learner and the teacher.
2. The use of continuous assessment is another important difference in that Finnish pupils are regularly made accountable for their own learning through lesson tests, termly tests, portfolios and self assessment proformas.
3. Finnish examination questions are also different to questions in the UK in that copious text is initially provided and this must be analysed by pupils. Questions then require the pupil to apply concepts. Teachers incorporate this type of question into their lessons and problem solving becomes a regular learning activity for pupils.
The three factors above could easily be implemented in any country that is considering curriculum change. I believe that they are fundamental to the success of Finland in PISA.
Further reading...
‘Cleverlands’ by Lucy Crehan on Kindle.
Lucy Crehan was a science teacher who taught in several countries to understand their success. She wrote a book called ‘Cleverlands’ and there is a long chapter on the Finnish educational system.
Wow! Thank you, Kenneth! This succinct description of the Finnish educational system. Furthermore, thank you for the reading recommendation.
Do u use spesial trainer, näyttö tai käyttö opettajaa?
good sir
She wanted to be a teacher and could not articulate why? Seems like a fairly good reason to disqualify her. Surely she knew that question was going to come up in her qualification process. You say she sailed through her lesson practical tests. So she knew the how but not the why.
so the system is working perfectly then lol
What is the myth?
That the Finnish education system only works cause only the smartest people become teachers. Like he explained even when his niece who was highly educated and probably had much higher grade than other applicants she still didn't get into the school cause she could specify why she wanted to become a teacher. At a certain threshold of grades it doesn't matter, you're not treated special to someone who barely had the grades to get in compared to someone top of their class.
Bart, I also don't understand it. In my opinion, they asked his niece the most important question of all: "Why do you want to become a teacher?"
From what I understood: The myth is that Finland only recruits the highest/strongest academic performers to be a teacher. The reality is that they prefer artists/sports players/ youth leaders. Why? because these types of individuals usually attend college while working (working adults?). They are more likely to have experiential tools to be self-learners and self-motivators. He also said that their pedagogical school system is 5 years long.
This man has a personal grudge and his reasoning doesn't matter. Sounds like the entrance procedure was good. If his niece didn't understand why she was there, waiting a year likely brought her some clarity. Good decision. Besides, being a brianiac is not sufficient for being a teacher - it's is about inspiring children. Pasi, get over it! They did her and her future students a favor. I hope she's entering the profession with a clearer sense of why she's there. No myth here.
He wasn't complaining that his niece didn't get in, he just used her as an example. The myth here he was trying to explain was to people who read something like "only 10% of applicants become teachers" and assume only the smartest become teachers, but in reality it's that the best suited get into the school. What you said is exactly what he was trying to say.
That is a misunderstanding on your part. I have heard him talk about this elsewhere. He believes it's a strong point of the Finnish system that it didn't accept his niece but required her to clarify her motivation. Elsewhere he mentioned that she was initially rejected because she said her motivation was that many in her family are in education and they didn't find that satisfactory. His main point here is that it's a myth that Finnland stresses academic excellence over everything else in selecting teachers.
Just can't buy it. Not on your subject but you're at least questioning. The lack of questioning I find to be a question worth thinking about.
I picture children playing and becoming their own "educator". So the teaching is no longer in the teachers hands, they just support their "feelings". This is all very egalitarian and sweet but existential "education" is nothing new. And this seems to be just doubling down on that approach that allows children to "will reality" as if objective reality doesn't exist. Then these children can become "educated" with what they desire and simply dismiss what doesn't fit the narrative they want to will into reality. So all of education at that point is just whatever teachers wish or dream it to be. Is this education or a form of propaganda? Hate to be so cynical but much doesn't add up.
When an entire system, like in america, is manipulated by one ruling entity they decide what "average" is. They set all the standards and make all the rules so any country can lower standards then go, "hey, look how smart we are". Not wanting to bash Finland, same approach is being pushed in america. I just want honesty and our children not to be treated like test subjects. America has lied and cheated their way to more honor roll students. Same way they fudge all their numbers to make government look good. We know their unemployment numbers are total fantasy but in every other case they should be trusted? They implemented Common Core socialized "education" and over night we became smarter in america? No over night they lowered standards and started catering to the lowest denominator. This isn't education, this is an egalitarian "we all are equal" philosophy. It is a cult idea with no objective reasoning behind it. This is a subjective, feeling based approach. So just an illusion and complete opposite of what america is claiming. I have looked at state and county numbers and the jump was an impossible overnight leap. Common Core is new, but soon america will bring these fabricated numbers out as proof government "education" is working and good. And I believe this is the case also in Finland.
Don't want to upset anyone. Just want the truth, even if it isn't pleasant. I see children who thought they had everything figured out before college become teachers. And as long as they keep producing teachers then everyone will say "look we are educated". And to me this is like the fan in the stands who wants attention for something they didn't earn.
They are the top performers. There is nothing to buy and everything to learn from
To support individual feelings is the OPPOSITE of being "egalitarian". Its the best way to support individuality to help every child to learn about psychology - especially the own. To find out more about yourself is NOT socialism. But of course it also is NOT capitalism to drill children to compete, compete, compete und gain more, more, more. You seem to be caught in the very weird idea that there only can exist either capitalism or socialism. This is one of the most stupid idea of modern american society (and america established several really stupid ideas).
Standards is nothing that MUST be given. It also can be worked out. But of course people (and especially children) will only care and work something out if they are motivated.
The problem with human reality is that you will never find one "truth". Humans are different. If you create a society that at least TRY to accept this and let everybody find out how he/she difers from others and establish some self-confidence that consists it... that helps to make people getting satisfied in their lifes.
The problem with capitalism is that it is NOT the most individual society. Its something capitalists claim for a long time. But it just saying a lie over and over again doesnt make it real. Capitalism helps SOME kind of indivuality. But it also forces several people to give up parts of their individuality. If you WANT that its fine.
Teaching children to check out their potential and indivuality by also teaching them to become a part of a social enironment DOES have several problems. Finland is no paradise. But they found an interesting way that is worth to check out. The only way to check it out in depth is to face the complexity and diversity of human nature - and learn about it. Its about emotional literacy (check it out) and psychological competence.
I have no idea what any of this means. Not buying what? That the Finns choose people with a wide variety of talents and skills and not just the "top 10%" of candidates? Are you saying they only choose that top group? Based on what evidence? The information we have here comes from an expert in the field. What would be the point of saying what is not correct? It's easy to refute if false.
What are you talking about otherwise? This seems more like an excuse to complain about something going on in the US, which you vaguely attach to the Common Core. What numbers are you talking about? If there's a university near you, it might be instructive to go talk to the people in education, especially those studying to be teachers.
When I was getting my doctorate in English at Idaho State University, there was this crank in the community who wrote a really tough letter in the newspaper moaning how the English department was no longer teaching really good stuff, you know, like that Shakespeare guy, you know, his plays, and stuff. The professors didn't know what to say in response because they couldn't believe such a well-to-do man could be such a twit. That was okay. I wrote the counter-letter to the editor, pointing out that ISU annually performed Shakespeare; we sponsored Shakespeare in the Park; we taught a summer program in which graduate students went to southern Utah for the Shakespeare Festival there and met with directors and actors and so on; we had a respected scholar who regularly published on Shakespeare; and so on. I co-taught a course with a highly respected professor with one of our key works Shakespeare's The Tempest. I later taught excerpts from key works of Shakespeare and Marlowe in a college in Poland.
In short, just as there are these crazy-a** stories about the professors neglecting the "great works of literature" for something some old coot deems "not-great," there seem to be a plethora of ill-thought-out diatribes (to borrow a term from another respondent above) against American education. This is not to say it doesn't have its shortcomings. Indeed, it has. And those shortcomings are why we're not number 1 and haven't been for some time, except at the university level. The first major shortcoming is a good idea in principle, "separate but equal," except it never was equal. In countries like Finland, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, for instance, there are no "rich" districts. All the funds are put together and the schools generally have an even distribution of money for salaries and facilities, with some exceptions (so-called elite or magnet schools). In Taiwan where I lived, top students went to either the Boys' High School or the Girls' High School, with the idea being that the absence of distraction would spur everyone on to study harder. They did. They do. That's why they're near the top all the time. America's "neighborhood" system basically keeps poor people in crappy schools and showers the kids of the upper-middle-class with everything wonderful. I saw it growing up. I went to one of the better schools. I visited others and compared.
you must be paying teachers too much to attract that many , your system seems to be slanted to teaching more than engineering or medicine or law. redesign the system . teaching is not rocket science ,you are too selective.
Better teachers is a big reason why they have a better education system. Why would you dumb it down?
I don't believe this is correct. As far as I know good teachers are twice as effective as normal teachers while bad teachers are half as effective as normal teachers. So good teachers are 4 x or 400% as effective as poor teachers. How many great teachers did you have? - I would say for me it's less than one in twenty, if that, who were good and none who were great.
@az_koala thanks for the call. i don't recall or maybe never knew how they measured teaching skill for that study. i think it was done in the context of the PISA studies, where they tried to cerate fairly rigorous standards for evaluating teaching and learning. on a personal note, i teach myself and have had many teachers in my life. i'm sure you have so this is just a suggestion: i would say a good teacher can control the environment to create respect for learning his subject and he will do an adequate job of communicating the relevant content of his curriculum such that 90% of students have sufficient mastery to move on to the next step, without losing talented, quick students or letting those who struggle lose hope. a great teacher, to me, has a way deeper understanding of his student[s]; he's far more interested in the quality of picking up the student where he is and makes the student perceive the subject differently, inherently shifting to intrinsic learning. because he is very close to what the student is at, he will also be able to call the student on bullshitting very early in the process, where a good teacher is somewhat lost in his perception of himself and his curriculum and how he, the teacher, is doing. the difference is vast. [gender yourself, if you need to :)]
@az_koala that would be for me the good teachers. very good teachers can often dominate an environment that wouldn't appear to have it in it. think tony robbins, to name someone well known. there is a TED talk where the snobbish audience is decidedly anti-tony robbins in the worst possible way. it's worth watching how he brings them around. there are actually quite a few interactions of his around where he does that...