Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1) A competitive process to enter schools of education(1 out of every 10 make it in)
2) Teachers have to earn their masters
3) Teachers at the elementary level get a degree in education with an emphasis on pedagogical practices, content knowledge, and research supported methods for teaching specific subjects. Secondary teachers study their field and then move into teaching methods. Both levels of educators are trained in conducting research.
4) Teachers practice in the field before getting a degree and have to undergo extensive coursework as well.
5) Teachers assess students, but the assessing is used for tracking students. National testing involves testing a random sample of students. Testing is not outcome based.
6) Teachers are free to create their own curriculum using the national standards as a guide. They have much more independence compared to teachers in other countries.
7) Teachers are paid about average what a mid career teacher makes elsewhere.
8) Teaching is considered prestigious and are treated as professionals due to the process it takes to become one.
I ask this question because Finland's students are some of the top performing students in the world right now and they've done the complete opposite of what some other countries are doing like the US. Basically they make it hard to enter the schools in the first place which raises the quality of entrants while setting the standards for schools of education to be more researched focus so teachers aren't poking in the dark when educating so students can learn. In the US, you have people trying to cash in on education and tie salaries to outcomes which makes teaching(not learning) competitive and makes teachers focus on the outcomes of standardized testing.
I'm currently attending a top researched based SoE that models itself similarly to Finland's SoE, but I have to wonder how long I will stay in the profession given the way education reform is going in the US.
1) A competitive process to enter schools of education(1 out of every 10 make it in)
2) Teachers have to earn their masters
3) Teachers at the elementary level get a degree in education with an emphasis on pedagogical practices, content knowledge, and research supported methods for teaching specific subjects. Secondary teachers study their field and then move into teaching methods. Both levels of educators are trained in conducting research.
4) Teachers practice in the field before getting a degree and have to undergo extensive coursework as well.
5) Teachers assess students, but the assessing is used for tracking students. National testing involves testing a random sample of students. Testing is not outcome based.
6) Teachers are free to create their own curriculum using the national standards as a guide. They have much more independence compared to teachers in other countries.
7) Teachers are paid about average what a mid career teacher makes elsewhere.
8) Teaching is considered prestigious and are treated as professionals due to the process it takes to become one.
I ask this question because Finland's students are some of the top performing students in the world right now and they've done the complete opposite of what some other countries are doing like the US. Basically they make it hard to enter the schools in the first place which raises the quality of entrants while setting the standards for schools of education to be more researched focus so teachers aren't poking in the dark when educating so students can learn. In the US, you have people trying to cash in on education and tie salaries to outcomes which makes teaching(not learning) competitive and makes teachers focus on the outcomes of standardized testing.
I'm currently attending a top researched based SoE that models itself similarly to Finland's SoE, but I have to wonder how long I will stay in the profession given the way education reform is going in the US.
I would love to work in such a system. Who wouldn't?
Lets try those things but lets be realistic about our expectations of how well they will work here. The differences in SES and other demographic factors will likely mitigate SOME (not all) of the gains from such a system.
"Fixing" public education is a process not just adopting another system.
I would love to work in such a system. Who wouldn't?
Lets try those things but lets be realistic about our expectations of how well they will work here. The differences in SES and other demographic factors will likely mitigate SOME (not all) of the gains from such a system.
"Fixing" public education is a process not just adopting another system.
Who wouldn't? A lot of bad teachers here wouldn't since they probably wouldn't last long in a system designed to weed out uninspired professionals. I do think the US would have a harder time initially, but after a while, highly qualified teachers would make a difference in achievement gains for low SES students. Studies in the US have shown that teachers with higher credentials in the math and science subjects can raise achievement for students, especially for those from low SES. In general, those who are highly qualified in those subjects can also leave the field and make more working in another field and deal with less stress as well. When it comes to other subjects, the gains are non-existent or aren't very significant and that can largely be attributed to a lot of education schools having low standards and being diploma mills since they tend to bring in a lot of money.
But anyways, other Nordic countries have the same general makeup SES numbers and do worse than Finland. Norway's educational system is similar to ours. Sweden's is basically where we are headed where for profit schools and vouchers are pretty common. Sweden does a little bit better than us when it comes to math. Norway is a little ahead of Sweden. When it comes to reading and sciences, the US does better except for in reading where Norway does a little better. I know I'm drawing a premature conclusion, but I imagine if we continue further towards outcomes and privatization, we'll continue to sink further. The US has the excuse of economic inequalities which do play a role with achievement disparities. The other Nordic countries don't(21% vs 3% about) since their safety net is much more generous. The US has the tools to be one of the highest performing countries in the world when it comes to learning, but we lack the political willpower due to a war on education and poor people.
Who wouldn't? A lot of bad teachers here wouldn't since they probably wouldn't last long in a system designed to weed out uninspired professionals.
I'm not sure why you think that system is "designed to weed out" anything. For does the Finland system do that exactly?
Also, there are people who are less than inspired in every field. What evidence do you have that they are over represented in teaching?
Quote:
I do think the US would have a harder time initially, but after a while, highly qualified teachers would make a difference in achievement gains for low SES students. Studies in the US have shown that teachers with higher credentials in the math and science subjects can raise achievement for students, especially for those from low SES.
I am fairly familiar with the research in this area. I am assuming you are talking about Darling-Hammond, as she is THE expert in this area. Care to give a direct citation for the statement bolded?
Quote:
In general, those who are highly qualified in those subjects can also leave the field and make more working in another field and deal with less stress as well. When it comes to other subjects, the gains are non-existent or aren't very significant and that can largely be attributed to a lot of education schools having low standards and being diploma mills since they tend to bring in a lot of money.
Let me guess, you are someone with a science degree hoping to become a science teacher?
Quote:
But anyways, other Nordic countries have the same general makeup SES numbers and do worse than Finland. Norway's educational system is similar to ours. Sweden's is basically where we are headed where for profit schools and vouchers are pretty common. Sweden does a little bit better than us when it comes to math. Norway is a little ahead of Sweden. When it comes to reading and sciences, the US does better except for in reading where Norway does a little better. I know I'm drawing a premature conclusion, but I imagine if we continue further towards outcomes and privatization, we'll continue to sink further. The US has the excuse of economic inequalities which do play a role with achievement disparities. The other Nordic countries don't(21% vs 3% about) since their safety net is much more generous. The US has the tools to be one of the highest performing countries in the world when it comes to learning, but we lack the political willpower due to a war on education and poor people.
You are deeply discounting the effect of SES. What is the single best predictor of student outcome? Do you know? Because it is not the teacher or any certifications they hold. Any serious attempt to improve the education problems in this nation need to do something to address that first.
I want to clear something up before I start: I'm in no way a right wing ideologue which is the impression I think you're getting of me nor do I value any one field over another like a lot of people do over in the education main forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
I'm not sure why you think that system is "designed to weed out" anything. For does the Finland system do that exactly?
Schools of Educations in Finland are competitive. That's the weeding out process and that and the prestige associated with teaching is what allows Finland to select from a pool of more qualified candidates. The exercept below is taken from a website. Most from my information comes from an overview article of teacher prep in Finland that I read a while. None of the issues I'm talking about in this topic are covered in my course by the way. I've just taken an interest since I am dissatisfied with how leaders are handling education reform:
Finnish teacher education programs are extremely selective, admitting only one out of every ten students who apply. The result is that Finland recruits from the top quartile of the cohort. Applicants are assessed based on their upper secondary school record, their extra-curricular activities, and their score on the Matriculation Exam (taken at the end of upper secondary school). Once an applicant makes it beyond this first screening round, they are then observed in a teaching-like activity and interviewed; only candidates with a clear aptitude for teaching in addition to strong academic performance are admitted.
No alternative teaching routes. All teachers must hold a masters degree where the course load is rigorous and relevant enough to help prepare students become effective teachers.
Labor for the most part in Finland is adequately organized to protect workers rights and wages(which is a good thing). When it comes to removing ineffective teachers, I have no idea how it works, but it doesn't seem to be an issue of contention since teachers there are treated as other professionals due to their training and the quality of people of entering the pool of teaching.
Quote:
Also, there are people who are less than inspired in every field. What evidence do you have that they are over represented in teaching?
I didn't imply that they were over represented in teaching and that definitely wasn't an attack on teachers.
Quote:
I am fairly familiar with the research in this area. I am assuming you are talking about Darling-Hammond, as she is THE expert in this area. Care to give a direct citation for the statement bolded?
The actual data that's bolded comes from the National Center for Education Statistics which I can't locate. I will provide a study done by the Urban Institute, a non-partisan think-thank:
On average,
programs that produce childhood certified teachers who are more effective in math also produce
teachers who are more effective in ELA
Let me guess, you are someone with a science degree hoping to become a science teacher?
Nope. And I don't see what that has to do with anything or why you're taking offense to anything I'm saying. It's not like I'm saying teachers in general are bad and teachers who are should be provided with adequate professional development to help them improve. With that said, I do think the US should raise the bar when it comes to who can enter into the profession while raising the salary in understaffed schools and subjects to attract better teachers.
Quote:
You are deeply discounting the effect of SES. What is the single best predictor of student outcome? Do you know? Because it is not the teacher or any certifications they hold. Any serious attempt to improve the education problems in this nation need to do something to address that first.
I didn't discount it at all. In fact I even mentioned it when talking about the US and how it compares to the Nordic states and mentioned that achievement rates would probably sink further if we continue down our market oriented education reform path due to higher SES inequality. Furthermore I even stated that current policy is hell bent on demonizing poor people when the focus should be on addressing poverty. However we're talking about education reform, not welfare reform. I think it is silly to discount reforming teacher prep and professional development when those matter a lot. If they didn't then Teach For America participants would be blowing professionally trained teachers out of the water, but they don't because they're inadequately prepared in teaching and instructional methods and think being book smart is all you need to be effective at helping students learn.
I was skeptical of Finland's success at first, but now I really am a little envious. Their child poverty rate is far lower than ours which, of course, is huge factor. They do some very interesting things that we do not do. From what I have read, it seems that they focus more on teaching children cooperation the first few years and not so strictly on academics. It seems like somewhere I read they don't start reading until age 7, but it all seems to work out in the end because of the foundation that is laid in the beginning. School year is longer, but school days are shorter. Teachers have a lot more planning time than we get.
I really don't know to what degree they are more successful than US teachers, though. If we took a group of Finnish teachers and had them run a school here dealing with what we deal with, I doubt that we would see much difference.
In Finland:
They are much more homogenous than we are.
Teachers have more freedom.
Teachers are considered experts.
There are academic interventionist specialists that come in to assist students who are not succeeding.
They are probably less mobile than we are.
They are not required to implement Common Core.
The child poverty rate in the US is around 20%; in Finland around 4%.
No standardized testing.
Cooperation over competitiveness is fostered - teachers are reluctant to even assign grades.
Strong unions.
Kids are tracked starting around 15 years old into either college or vocational ed.
I have not read any research studies; the above is just what I picked up from reading here and there. On another thread about Finland, I actually had a dialogue with a Finn via DM and it was very interesting.
I want to clear something up before I start: I'm in no way a right wing ideologue which is the impression I think you're getting of me nor do I value any one field over another like a lot of people do over in the education main forum.
Schools of Educations in Finland are competitive. That's the weeding out process and that and the prestige associated with teaching is what allows Finland to select from a pool of more qualified candidates. The exercept below is taken from a website. Most from my information comes from an overview article of teacher prep in Finland that I read a while. None of the issues I'm talking about in this topic are covered in my course by the way. I've just taken an interest since I am dissatisfied with how leaders are handling education reform:
Finnish teacher education programs are extremely selective, admitting only one out of every ten students who apply. The result is that Finland recruits from the top quartile of the cohort. Applicants are assessed based on their upper secondary school record, their extra-curricular activities, and their score on the Matriculation Exam (taken at the end of upper secondary school). Once an applicant makes it beyond this first screening round, they are then observed in a teaching-like activity and interviewed; only candidates with a clear aptitude for teaching in addition to strong academic performance are admitted.
I see. So you want to make it harder to be a teacher. Ok, and how do we do that exactly?
Quote:
No alternative teaching routes. All teachers must hold a masters degree where the course load is rigorous and relevant enough to help prepare students become effective teachers.
You have lost me right there. I have a graduate degree in my field, and have done graduate level course work in education at a high level university with one of the highest ranked masters program in education. My education classes were a joke. I learned as much from 15 credits of that as reading that book by Wong and a semester of student teaching. Meanwhile the things I learned in my actual field I use everyday.
Quote:
Labor for the most part in Finland is adequately organized to protect workers rights and wages(which is a good thing). When it comes to removing ineffective teachers, I have no idea how it works, but it doesn't seem to be an issue of contention since teachers there are treated as other professionals due to their training and the quality of people of entering the pool of teaching.
You are ignoring the fact that teachers in the US are subject to political machinations at the local, county, state and federal level. Something that does not happen in Finland. How are you going to protect teachers from those political machinations?
[quote]I didn't imply that they were over represented in teaching and that definitely wasn't an attack on teachers.
The actual data that's bolded comes from the National Center for Education Statistics which I can't locate. I will provide a study done by the Urban Institute, a non-partisan think-thank:
On average,
programs that produce childhood certified teachers who are more effective in math also produce
teachers who are more effective in ELA
Where did you get your info about Urban Institute? It is STRONGLY affiliated with the Calder Center which includes conservative think tank members intent upon privatizing education.
Both involved in the Texas Schools project BTW.
"
And what you actually claimed was this:
"Studies in the US have shown that teachers with higher credentials in the math and science subjects can raise achievement for students, especially for those from low SES."
I cannot find anything to support THAT claim in the pdf you provided. Can you direct me to the correct page or give a cite that actually supports that claim, the very claim this whole discussion hinges upon, I might add?
Quote:
Nope. And I don't see what that has to do with anything or why you're taking offense to anything I'm saying. It's not like I'm saying teachers in general are bad and teachers who are should be provided with adequate professional development to help them improve. With that said, I do think the US should raise the bar when it comes to who can enter into the profession while raising the salary in understaffed schools and subjects to attract better teachers.
Im not offended, just annoyed by yet more naive infatuation with the Finnish system. What you are purporting to do is to adopt their system instead of FIXING our own. The problem is it is not well thought out. If you can explain how we will protect teachers from the political nature of their employers, how we will deal with our own SES factors that will be exacerbated by adopting a system based on a completely different demographic, etc thats fine but without those key factors its meaningless at best and harmful at worst.
Quote:
I didn't discount it at all. In fact I even mentioned it when talking about the US and how it compares to the Nordic states and mentioned that achievement rates would probably sink further if we continue down our market oriented education reform path due to higher SES inequality. Furthermore I even stated that current policy is hell bent on demonizing poor people when the focus should be on addressing poverty. However we're talking about education reform, not welfare reform. I think it is silly to discount reforming teacher prep and professional development when those matter a lot. If they didn't then Teach For America participants would be blowing professionally trained teachers out of the water, but they don't because they're inadequately prepared in teaching and instructional methods and think being book smart is all you need to be effective at helping students learn.
Matter a lot? You have yet to show anything to support this claim or even quantify it.
I have only been teaching for 8 years. I have never gone to a single professional development program that was useful in my classroom. Seriously, I wish I had gone alternate route and saved my money. A class on management, learning styles and differentiation is all a secondary teacher needs. The notion that we can teach the "art" portion of being an effective teacher is silly and if anything all of the mandated professional development just underscores this.
Seriously, why spend precious dollars on PD when it hasn't been shown to be effective, when that money can be better spent doing something as simple as feeding breakfast to kids so they are not hungry (something which has been shown to be beneficial)?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
