My observations of the Finnish Educational System as a Fulbright-In-Residence: A 30,000 ft viewpoint
I had the unique opportunity to travel to Finland two times in the past 5-years. Since time seems to now-a-day be measured in “before pandemic” and “after pandemic”, the visits took place before the pandemic and then during/after the pandemic. Each time I was welcomed warmly—literally and figuratively as those who know the Finnish culture know that the Finns are some of the greatest consumers of coffee (Finns Consume Most Coffee in World Due to Dark Days, Need Caffeine (insider.com) in the world, and are the inventors of the sauna (History of Saunas (cedarbarrelsaunas.com), of which Finns enjoy at least once a day. In addition to the plentiful coffee and a sauna in my flat, the welcome that I received has been with open arms from high quality researchers, educators, and instructors—as my visits were both working visits centered around my research in science education/educational sciences.
During my visits, three core elements stood out to me and they remain top of mind as I reflect on how I can provide the best educational opportunities to my students, as well as how I can best contribute to the field of science education research. Specifically, I will share my three overarching observations when considering comparing and contrasting the US vs Finnish educational system. Specifically, these are:
- Homogeneity of learners
- Trust in teachers to handle all components of instruction and assessment
- Continuous quality improvement
1.) Homogeneity of Learners
The homogeneity of learners comes from the fact that the Finnish system trains nearly exclusively Finns (with only 7.9% of residents being born abroad (Tilastokeskus/ StatFin; Key figures on population by Area, Information and Year. PxWeb (stat.fi), accessed May 6 2022). And, through primary school at least (i.e. the US-based equivalent of 6th grade), all instruction is the same. For instance, students are taught their mother tongue of Finnish, Swedish (as it wasn’t until the 19th century that Finland split off from Sweden), as well as English. As an aside, this fact makes Finland a wonderful spot for American tourism because the Finns speak English, and there is plentiful signage in English, as well as illustrative icons on major signs to help demonstrate key rules, guidance, or other relevant information. Students all begin formal schooling by age 8, encouraging alignment of expectations. And, there is expansive parental leave for child rearing, which helps to ensure that children receive the care to help them excel later in life, including during the school day.
The homogeneity also comes from more subtle things such as common expectations. In America, there are choices for most children that borderline endless—choices are fewer in Finland. For example, at dinner one night, we overheard a group at another table inquiring about wine options and requested a menu with the list of red wines available. The waiter simply replied, “good news, it will be quite easy for you to choose as we have just one red…”. So, while there isn’t as much range of items to choose from (as compared with the US’s exhaustive choices ranging from cheap and fast to elegant and expensive, with ‘good’ somewhere in the middle, the Finns have ‘good’ and often one more choice). As a colleague of mine native to Finland put it, it’s not “better or worse, it’s good.” This phrase conceptualizes the fact that ‘competition’ isn’t widely publicized or selected for—rather, everyone focuses on good quality—ranging from food to education and beyond.
Some will argue that it’s due to this homogeneity that education is high quality and for that reasons Finns routinely top the PISA (Finland remains among top nations in PISA education survey – thisisFINLAND) scale. However, I’ll argue that it’s largely the second reason that Finns outscore most other countries on the PISA scale. Additionally, the trust, respect, and independence given to teachers plays a large role.
2.) Trust in Teachers
To become a teacher in Finland, students are chosen from the top approximately 7% of their class and go on to an extensive training path culminating with a masters degree. Teachers are prepared through established best practices or ‘high-impact practices’ such as inquiry-based learning, flipped learning, and place-based learning. These instruction practices also prepare teachers through modeled behavior of how to facilitate learning in their own future classrooms.
Prospective teachers receive pedagogical and content-based training side by side (much like many programs in the US). But perhaps most striking is that teachers are given expansive independence on the ‘how, why, and what’ of instruction, as well as assessment. Many of the assessments in Finland were performance-based—covering a range of options like laboratory practicals, demonstrations, preparation of a virtual reality-based video, or poster presentation. Nearly all of these performance-based assessment approaches were completed in teams. The focus on collaboration was pervasive—never did I observe any student trying to ‘go it alone’ to outcompete others in the class, nor compete for recognition, which is in stark contrast to the states. Furthermore, a typical prelude to any conference or in-person presentation for my students in the US is the panic, anxiety, and/or worry before giving a presentation or speaking in front of others. In Finland, this was an uncommon site; rather, it was as if the demonstrative portion of showcasing ability, performance, talent, and/or research results were already so common that it was seen as a low risk, low stakes exercise for students. While the demonstration of these performance-based evaluations was unaccompanied by noticeable worry, the quality remained high. Further students used a range of visual aids in their presentations, further engaging the audience.
In Finland, teachers are granted total authority on planning activities within their classrooms. They follow an international curriculum, but the mode or model of presentation and pace is up to the teacher. Further, the assessment strategies are also at the discretion of the teacher and, as shared earlier in this article, that is often based on an assessment like performance-based evaluation. (Students do not receive letter grades until the end of primary school in Finland—the US-equivalent of 6th grade).
3. Continuous quality improvement
Perhaps the third most profound difference is the focus on continuous quality improvement. This is done via continuing education and professional development for teachers, meta-cognitive reflection by teachers through journaling and documentation to support parent-teacher conferencing, and assist with translating the most effective pedagogical methods in the classroom.
________________________________________________________________
Now, I do need to emphasize that while these are three major differences based on my interpretation comparing and contrasting the US-based system with that of Finland, it’s surely not exhaustive nor exclusive. For instance, particularly with the expansive variety of schooling options in the US, it’s likely that someone reading this article in the US will say “we do that!” I am certain! But, as a generality, the US-based educational system is more exhaustively tied to regulations, standards, and standardized exams, which put it in contrast to the Finnish system. And, these observations are not meant to provide a rating of one vs the other, but rather to share some overarching observations from studying educational sciences in both contexts and, perhaps more uniquely, across a range of age groups (i.e. primary school through doctoral studies).
The biggest takeaway from me personally is to remember that continuous quality improvement is essential, but that good and excellent are what we should strive for, more than “better than.”