The renowned Finnish educator, Pasi Sahlberg, explains how major American innovations improved education in Finland but are all too often forgotten here, where they originated.
He begins with a new report from the OECD that measures educational innovation between 2003 and 2011. The U.S. does not get high rankings from the OECD, yet oddly enough, other nations send delegations here to learn about what we do that has made us such a successful nation.
Sahlberg writes:
“An interesting observation that anyone interested in what current high-performing school systems have in common is that they all, some more than the others, have derived critical lessons from abroad. Singapore, one of the most successful reformers and highest performers in global education, has been sending students to study education in U.S. universities and encouraged university professors to collaborate in teaching and research with their American colleagues. Japan, Hong Kong and South Korea have done the same. More recently China has also benefited from education innovation from the United States and other Western education systems. Even those running school systems above the 49th parallel in North America admit that U.S. research and innovation have been instrumental in making education in Canada world-class.
“Finland is no exception. If you want to discover the origins of the most successful practices in pedagogy, student assessment, school leadership, and school improvement in Finland, you only need to visit some schools there and have a conversation with teachers and principals. Most of them have studied psychology, teaching methods, curriculum theories, assessment models, and classroom management researched and designed in the United States in their initial teacher education programs. Primary school teacher education syllabi in Finnish universities include scores of books and research articles written by U.S. scholars. Professional development and school improvement courses and programs often include visitors from the U.S. universities to teach and work with Finnish teachers and leaders. So common is the reliance on U.S. ideas in Finland that some have come to call the Finnish school system a large-scale laboratory of American education innovation.
“The relatively low overall rating of “innovation in education” in the United States raises an interesting question: Where are all those great ideas in the United States that other countries have been able to utilize to improve the performance of their school systems during the last century? It is interesting that, according to the OECD, the United States exhibits only modest innovation in its education system but, at the same time, it is the world leader in producing research, practical models and innovation to other countries.”
Read on to learn which five U.S. innovations he considers most important.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I wonder if Pasi Sahlberg would approve of allowing students to choose schools in order to create the possibility of innovation at the building level. This would allow parents who wish their students to be taught math conceptually (see the discussion here: https://dianeravitch.net/2014/07/27/robert-berkman-the-new-york-times-stinks-at-math/)
to band together without having to convince the entire district and all the math teachers in the district to teach mathematics that way.
You could read his book – I believe he has a lot to say about “school choice”. And probably about the teaching of math too.
Apparently it is impossible for you to choose schools in your area, TE. But keep in mind that most states DO have systems of school choice amongst true public schools already in place. The ironic thing, at least in my area, is that school choice has NOTHING to do with academics in most cases. Instead, the choices are made because of sports, friends, or (undeserved) reputations. A school with a strong academic program is seen by most people as “the ghetto school” because it has a large population of Hispanics, and therefore is avoided, even though it is a FAR better school academically. A neighboring school is chosen far more, even though its academics are vastly inferior, because it’s where the wealthy go. I’m not making up this example, and it happens a lot. Just because people can choose doesn’t mean that they will choose wisely.
Threatened,
I am an advocate of choice and relatively agnostic about whether that choice is between magnet schools is charter schools.
It is disappointing to hear that schools in your district have not differentiated themselves from each other. That is the great opportunity that matching student to school offers.
My state, Utah, HAS NO magnet schools, TE. Students CAN choose any school in their district and file a variance. As long as the school has room and the kid isn’t a behavior problem, they can go there.
Threatened,
It seems to me a wasted opportunity to allow students to choose between schools and not allow schools to specialize more. One school might offer language immersion, another more emphases on the arts.
Well, they don’t care about what actually is good for education, do they? This is all about privatizing our school system and breaking our public schools. It doesn’t matter what Finland says. Finland and the Scandinavian countries are concerned with what is best for the majority of its citizens. America is only concerned with what is best for the rich 1%. You can’t really compare the America of today with Finland, Denmark, or even Germany. It’s funny, we trained Germany to be a Democracy like we “were.” We “denazified” them, and now they “do” Democracy 100 times better. Germany is an interesting culture.
We don’t have much in common with Democracies in Europe anymore, do we? We don’t even have the same kind of government anymore. We have become some new kind of beast- unique to these shining shores. Europeans don’t really understand the severity of what we are yet., but they are starting to figure it out. It’s just as hard for Europeans to understand what we are really about, as it was for us (teachers) to finally see America for what it “is.” It’s very upsetting for Europeans as well. I was just in Germany.
The Scandinavian and Northern European countries may review and even implement ideas from the US, but there is one HUGE difference: if those innovations in any way harm children, they do not use them. Their teachers and parents would never tolerate it or participate in it.
The systemic harm done now to US children, in the name of EdReform, is totally unexceptable, especially to the young children, yet we participate in it & allow it. Soon, Arne will get ahold of all four year olds…watch them squeal! Sick!Sick!
Those same countries also will not tolerate the privacy invasion that the US inflicts on its population. Their citizens and governments watch us now, like a hawk. US has lost much in the last two administrations, and nothing is changing. Europe lived and learned from the total devastation to its people, and that total power and total corruption will do. They hope to never repeat it.
So why aren’t the Unions saying the text /punishment of the last 12 years is harmful to students. teachers, schools and education in general. Where is the call to stop participating in these failed reforms. Has education improved anywhere especially for the disadvantaged students NCLB and RTTT were suppose to help?
AL,
To answer your first question: because the leadership of those unions have been bought off, plain and simple.
Hi Mike:
…as it was for us (teachers) to finally see America for what it “is.” This sounds very sad.
Through this website, It seems to me that DOE in America has applied the terrorist technique on Educators by threatening a removal of their teaching licence, by cutting off their teaching livelihood…and much more
Sometimes, I wonder and ponder what happens to young, strong, democratic America in the 21st century? I left my communist country. I am still horrified whenever I read, and watch history document of Germany “Nazi” period of time. Most recently, I am vividly reminded by Japanese Kamikaze pilots attacked Pearl Harbor from document on PBS.
How can I move around to live in the most humanitarian country? I do not know which country it is? Yes, I prefer to stay in North America and to fight back for democracy and humanity with the hope for the better Public education system to many upcoming generations. Back2basic
I visited Germany twice and I also found the culture very interesting. Everything is so organized and clean. I had trouble engaging Germans in conversation. I spoke mainly with resident foreigners.
The data on Singapore’s high achievers is highly suspect: why does the US spawn world class mathematicians, but none have come from Singapore? See my analysis here at http://bltm.com/blog/2014/07/28/do-americans-really-stink-at-math-lets-check-the-numbers/
Excellent question and analysis!
Robert Berkman: glad to see another devotee of Ionesco on this blog—
“It is not the answer that enlightens, but the question.”
But not to worry. The leaders and enablers of the “new civil rights movent of our time” are only applying the wrecking ball of “Measure and Punish” education reform [thank you, Audrey Amrein-Beardsley!] to OTHER PEOPLE’S CHILDREN. When it comes to THEIR OWN CHILDREN, let’s take a gander at, let’s see, Harpeth Hall, where the offspring of Michelle Rhee can participate in the hazing ritual known as “Winterim”—
[start quote]
Winterim offers students the very best in experiential learning, creating for them a chance to see their academic studies take a tangible, dynamic form. They are immersed in environments where they use language skills during a home stay in France or Argentina, math skills to design a model home, analytical and science skills in a Cryptography course, or writing and communication skills at a local or national news station.
During Winterim, juniors and seniors have traveled to Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, England, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Qatar, South Africa, and Spain. These academic trips and cultural exchanges have fostered a deeper understanding of the world and the world’s needs.
In New Zealand, students studied marine biology, ecology and native cultures while participating in service learning. In Japan, students studied the art and culture of that country, in South Africa, students were immersed in service learning and issues of global poverty. In England, Greece, and Italy, students experienced the rich history and culture of civilizations that have so impacted and shaped our own American heritage. In Argentina, France and Spain, students were immersed in the language of the three countries during home stays and while interacting with their exchange hosts at local schools in Bonpland, Paris and Malaga.
[end quote]
Link: http://www.harpethhall.org/podium/default.aspx?t=151822
I am sure I can count on you to organize a rescue committee to save these youngster from the rigors and travails of such ill-conceived ‘education’ schemes.
And why do some folks call these students “advantaged”? What sort of advantage is conferred by genuine learning experiences?
Next thing you know someone will propose letting some of Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s “uneducables” and Michael J Petrilli’s “non-strivers” have a crack at these sorts of programs.
After all, should we even entertain the idea that American educators have anything to teach the world?
“I reject that mind-set.” [Michelle Rhee]
And she should know. She was a teacher too, once upon a time, and took her kids from the 13th percentile to the 90th, stuck like glue to the masking tape of $tudent $ucce$$.
😒
What a shame that these children are missing out on the advantages of Common
Core!
You are using the ‘Fields Medal’ to look at how the vast majority of Americans are learning math? It tells us nothing what so ever about what most Americans know about math.
Once I got to your data and analysis on the results of the Fields Medal, as a means for refuting the points being made in the NY Times article, I didn’t bother to read more. One thing has nothing to do with the other.
Should be required reading for everyone involved in education. That includes the pretenders. Especially the pretenders. I’m working on an assessment now.
Interesting comparison. Deming took his concepts to Japan, now the Finns are benefiting from practices in pedagogy, student assessment, school leadership, and school improvement learned in the US. http://asq.org/learn-about-quality/total-quality-management/overview/deming-points.html
What can US education learn or apply from Deming’s points?
The opinion of Paul are great, but not those of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The OECD is the source of almost all of the reports about our terrible system of education compared with other nations.
I have looked at the executive summary of this report, “ Measuring Innovation in Education,” and a four-page summary on the US “innovations-in-education.”
The OECD says that school systems do best with “rapid all-at-once change.”
I suppose this is an endorsement of “disruptive” and “transformational” change for education (if there is plenty of room for tax-subsidized for-profit education).
OECD has no doubt that innovation is a great strategy for improving education. Of course, the prime measures of “improvement” in the OECD report are scores on the international math, reading, and science tests administered under the auspices of OCED, along with some additional data it collects about higher education for it new Composite Index of Innovation.
These international tests, with data from 2000 to 2011, are the major proofs that OECD offers readers for the success of “an innovation” and also, it seems, some sort of proof that an “innovation imperative” exists within the education sector of the economy.
In the four-page summary report for the USA, you will find a bar chart (17.1) that seems to place the US way, way BEHIND in the innovation-in-education race—the sixth worst innovator in education among 29 entries.
Leading the innovation–in-education race are Denmark, Indonesia, Korea, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation, and Hungary (in that order).
A closer look at this chart reveals that the Index is picking winners among 22 nation-states, and all are in the same race with Hong Kong and Singapore, also three separate provinces in Canada, plus the United States, plus Indiana, Minnesota, and Massachusetts. Absurd comparisons, but nevermind.
Massachusetts is not likely to pleased it is in actually in last place.
Here are few more of the amazing insights about our “innovations” in the United States offered in a bulleted list, as if all are perfectly wonderful innovations that somehow arose spontaneously from the ingenuity of teachers and wisdom of out best thinkers in education
According to the OECD, “The top five US innovations in pedagogic and organisational practices (most between 2000 and 2009) ” are…… (drums and trumpets please):
(1) More use of student assessments for monitoring year-to-year achievement.
(2) More use of student assessments for comparing school performance to district or national performance.
(3) More use of achievement data over time by an administrative authority. An increase for the USA from 76.2% to 96.9%…”the largest increase in this metric of any educational system analysed for this report.” (Notice the extreme importance OECD has attached to cut off scores with the difference of only .1%.)
(4) More frequent observations by inspectors or other persons external to the school to evaluate teachers (2003-2011).
(5) More parental invitations to join school committees (well above the OECD average).
The Summary is silent about the policies, politics, and money driving these “innovations.“ It is also silent about the history of test scores
There is no mention of OECD’s own role in creating rhetoric and policies that forward an international competition based on test scores and the consequences of that. More informed and comprehensive thinking about education is present here and in many other nations were educators are sick and tired of being subjected to OECD and other idiotic ratings.
Find the US summary at http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Measuring-Innovation-in-Education-USA.pdf Other links to the full report and methodology are in this summary.
See also http://online.wsj.com/articles/report-finds-u-s-schools-rank-below-average-in-innovation-1405635683
Always Learning ~
Excellent Point!
Instead of calling for Arne Duncan’s resignation – he should disappear from education everywhere – Stop ToxicTesting initiative should have been out on the table by NEA & AFT. Many of us have advised teachers and admins to stop cooperating with ToxicTesting, but that isolates them, they get blacklisted, harassed and eventually fired.
Unions need to step up and focus on ToxicTesting and the harm to children.
Arne is not going anywhere, Obama wants him to dribble 🏀🏀🏀🏀🏀 and speak dribble during his entire presidency.
He is doing exactly that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stop ToxicTesting it Harms Children! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
One reason that Finland’s educational system innovates more rapidly might be that teachers are trained at relatively few colleges (11 universities have teacher education programs and there are five vocational teacher training colleges). Innovations are more likely to be adopted by this small number of schools than the United States with well over a thousand schools or departments of education.
I am not sure I trust Pasi Sahlberg entirely. I would like to hear another voice from Finland. He is the only one I ever hear. Clearly he loves progressive education. Surely there are elements of progressive education used in Finland –but how widely? And how do we know they cause Finland’s achievement? Maybe Finns achieve DESPITE the progressive practices they use. Perhaps there’s a hard core of traditional practice on which the progressive elements have been tacked.
Rule: Never question a Finn who’s telling you what you want to hear about education.
I admit I usually follow this rule.
It seems Sahlberg has never taught kids. Went straight from university student to education expert. I hope he’ll correct me if I’m misreading this. This is from the bio on his website:
“Dr. Sahlberg has a long track record in education and development. His teaching career started in Teacher Training School and Department of Teacher Education at the University of Helsinki in 1986. He then moved to the Ministry of Education (National Board of Education) in 1991 to serve as Senior Advisor in science education, Head of the School Improvement Unit, and later as Counselor to the Deputy Director General on education policy development and education reform. In 2000 he was invited to take the leadership of the Centre for School Development in the University of Helsinki.”
Law professors, and thus law schools, tend to regard the actual practice of law as a necessary evil at best, and a disqualification at worst. The conventional wisdom is that if you want to be a law professor, don’t practice for more than two or three years. It’s good advice.
Education experts may have a similar rule.
I think this is a terrible rule for education professors. They need an opportunity to watch their false doctrines crash on the rocks of reality.
Where is Bob Shepherd?
Good question Linda! He has been AWOL for days.
Maybe he’s on vacation. He must have his laptop glued to his lap.
Robert and NJ Teacher, Thanks for the replies about Bob Shepherd.
I’m looking forward to his return.
I’m not sure I understand the hostility toward educators who have not spent time as K-12 teachers. I value the input of educators who have spent time as classroom teachers, but I don’t see that as a necessary prerequisite to engaging in a knowledgeable discourse. I suppose it depends on whether an individual sets themselves up as the authority who dismisses the opinions of those with direct experience. In fact, true experts seem to draw on the experiences of those in the classroom to inform their own opinions and openly acknowledge it. Pasi Sahlberg has not set himself above; he is an advocate for the classroom teacher who obviously respects the knowledge and skills of classroom teachers.
Reblogged this on Pilant's Faculty Senate Page and commented:
If we can’t innovate using our own studies and research, what does that say about America and our future.
To teachingeconomist, FLERP, and ponderosa:
Here is the summary from Dr. Sahlberg’s article. Please prove this community (or cultivate me with your input about) what is wrong with his 5 principles extracted from our original USA research in education in 1970 and 1980.
To teaching economist, you do not need to choose school, but rather to adapt in cultivating, sharing and exchanging different cultures in order to appreciate humanity
To FLERP, every career, people need to have experience before they can teach/train others. Otherwise, society or profession becomes chaos
To ponderosa, please advise me how the doctrine of these 5 principles can crash on the rock of reality?
1. John Dewey’s Philosophy of Education
a) The roots of Finland’s pedagogical ideas date back to the 1860s when Uno Cygnaeus, who is sometimes referred as the father of basic education in Finland, said that in an ideal classroom, pupils speak more than the teacher.
b) … both boys and girls must learn all the practical skills that people need in everyday lives.
2. Cooperative Learning
a) Finland’s new 9-year comprehensive launched in early 1970s was built on an idea of regular small-group learning of students coming from different family backgrounds
b) The 1994 National Curriculum included a requirement that all schools design their own curricula in a way that would enhance teaching and learning according to constructivist educational ideas.
3. Multiple Intelligences
a) The overall goal of schooling in Finland was to support child’s holistic development and growth by focusing on different aspects of talent and intelligence
b) In the mid-1980s, both education policies and school practices adopted the principle that all children have different kinds of intelligence and that schools must find ways how to cultivate these different individual aspects in balanced ways.
4. Alternative Classroom Assessments
Without frequent standardized and census-based testing, the Finnish education system relies on local monitoring and teacher-made student assessments. A child-centered, interaction-rich whole-child approach in the national curriculum requires that different student assessment models are used in schools. Furthermore, primary school pupils don’t get any grades in their assessments before they are in fifth grade. It was natural that Finnish teachers found alternative student assessment methods attractive. And it is ironic that many of these methods were developed at U.S. universities and are yet far more popular in Finland than in the United States.
These include portfolio assessment, performance assessment, self-assessment and self-reflection, and assessment for learning methods.
Teacher education programs in Finland include elements of study of educational assessment and evaluation theories and also provide all students with practical knowledge and skill of how to use alternative student assessment methods in the classroom.
5. Peer Coaching
a) Peer coaching—that is, a confidential process through which teachers work together to reflect on current practices, expand, improve, and learn new skills, exchange ideas, conduct classroom research and solve problems together in school— became normal practice in school improvement programs and professional development in Finland since the mid-1990s.
b) Many visitors from the United States to Finland conclude their observations by saying that Finnish education looks like the U.S. education in the 1970s and 1980s.
m4potw,
My point is that the traditional zoned school system is inherently conservative.
Take for example changes in math education. It may be that 30% of the households in a district, tens if thousands or even hundreds of thousands of households in some districts, would be in favor of significant positive changes in how mathematics is taught. Those households, however, are spread across the catchment areas and are nowhere a majority of parents, so in no individual school are they a majority, and no school will change its practice in teaching mathematics and they would fail in electing school board members in favor if adopting these best practices.
This is the same reason that it is do much harder for a third party to start in the United States with its winner take all political system than a parliamentary system of proportional representation.
m4potw,
“The roots of Finland’s pedagogical ideas date back to the 1860s when Uno Cygnaeus, who is sometimes referred as the father of basic education in Finland, said that in an ideal classroom, pupils speak more than the teacher.”
Sahlberg implies here that Finnish kids speak more than their teachers. Is that true? I find it hard to believe. I know a Finnish graduate student at Berkeley who said his history education in Finland consisted of reading the textbook aloud in class (which he liked, by the way). In general, I think limiting adult talk is disastrous practice. I would be amazed if Finland attained high-achievement by following such a practice. Kids need to listen to knowledgeable adults, not their jejune peers. Dewey was wrong about many things; though he is often treated as a god beyond question.
Cooperative learning has been dogma in the US for a long time. More often than not, it’s less effective than good lecture in my experience. Talk to kids and they’ll often report the same thing: they hate cooperative learning, kids goof off, nothing gets learned…. To me this is the epitome of a cool-looking pet idea that gets launched in the Cloud Cuckoo Land of education schools. Used sparingly it’s fine.
I’m curious about what Sahlberg left out. I’ll bet Finnish teachers lecture. I’ll bet they see their job as transmitting knowledge, unlike a lot of American teachers who have been brainwashed with constructivism. In Amanda Ripley’s “The Smartest Kids in the World” a Finnish teen reports that “in Finland her exams were usually essay tests requiring her to write three to four pages in response. ‘You really have to study. You have to prove that you know it,’ Elina told me about Finnish high school. In the United States, her tests were typically multiple choice.” OMG –this Finnish teen had to learn and regurgitate facts! Lots of them! Malpractice in constructivists’ eyes. I have a hunch that smart Finnish teachers are not constructivists at heart, and this is what makes Finnish schools better than ours.
Another “Deming” case! We send experts who know that the 1920s “efficiency” model so beloved by our businessmen has limits in a technological world abroad and open minded national leaders in those countries embrace the ideas that our country rejects. But our country and our legislators prefer cheap, fast, and easy fantasies over expensive, time consuming and difficult realities.
Goodness!
So, Finland has taken cues from the USA about education?
Well, if only D.C. would take cues from Finland about taxation, universal healthcare, and income distribution.
Problem solved, plain and simple, comments or no comments from the robotic and childish TE or the vitriolic and calcified Harlan Underhill.
Harlan, where have you been?
Robert,
Sorry to disappoint you, but I think single payer universal health care is inevitable and a very good idea.
That would depend on what your version of it would be.
Robert,
How many versions of single payer health insurance are there? I am thinking something along the lines of Medicare for all. For much the same reasons that unemployment insurance can not be efficiently provided by private markets we will find health insurance will not be efficiently provided by private markets.
How exactly do Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Ireland, and Australia set up their nationalized healthcare system? Yes, all in the name of effeciency, but not all coverages are the same. What was covered in Canada 15 years ago is not covered today, thanks in part to the efforts of the Koch brothers. What is not covered from retirees here is covered, no brainer, in France.
Not all systems of efficieny and equity are equal.
Try putting some more depth into your thinking and writing.
And also, you must be on the computer 27/7, TE.
Why not take the sons out for some fly fishing and get some fresh air?
Robert,
Just finishing up my online class so I am on a lot.
“It is interesting that, according to the OECD, the United States exhibits only modest innovation in its education system but, at the same time, it is the world leader in producing research, practical models and innovation to other countries.”
When I first started reading the article, this is the first thought that came to mind. It would seem that since we seem to be the leader in innovation for education that some of that innovation should spill over here in the U.S. Unfortunately with all the testing that is done in many of the US schools, that leaves little time for innovation. Other countries do not over-test students for the purposes of ranking students, schools, and teachers. Real innovation will come from the real experts….teachers, not politicians, not philanthropists with a hidden agenda, and certainly not from the federal DOE.
Hi teachingeconomist and ponderosa:
Thank you for answering me. I need to set the ground to understand the profound meaning in educating or cultivating all young mind and old mind alike.
1) We live in the yin-yang cosmic. All aspects in body, mind and spirit have its dichotomy.
2) Material life is impermanent.
3) Civilization has existed and repeated limitless over certain period of time.
The basic point is that all sentient beings take their own time to learn and improve according to their conscience. Nobody is genius or stupid, but everyone loves to live harmoniously and peacefully. Some people have more civilized manner than others because they have been trained on this earth through many reincarnated lives. Yes, it is karma in which all sentient beings reincarnate into certain characters, environment where they belong. However, the beauty in human is that we have conscience and intuition to guide us to cultivate our body, mind and spirit in order to attain our inner peace.
For my argument sake, teachingeconomist is obsessive with math, and forget the goal in learning math for specific stage or level toward the general public’s career. If a person specially excels in math, (s)he can find time to learn extra on his/her own without demanding public school to please his/her need.
To ponderosa, there is a wisdom that advises us to be with children under 7 or to be with senior older than 70. In my own experience, children and old people love to talk. Children love to talk about imagination, happiness, fantasies. Old people love to talk about history, their experience in life, their success and failure. In education, in classroom, teacher is the leader. Leader should understand the followers. In order to understand students and guide them effectively, teacher needs to be patient and to listen students whose expressions/ideas correctly follow within the scope of the topic/subject. From that point, teacher can prepare assignment, leading questions so that students can find their ah ha moment. That is how I guide students in learning and in answering their own questions.
Back to my 3 grounds, I respect all of teachers in this forum because their ideas have its own merit. Most of all, I appreciate Dr. Ravitch’s website where I have excellent opportunity to pick up and learn from all contributors’ knowledge and experience. Maybe, I am old and have lived through many up and down in life, so that I accept the dichotomy easily.
I prefer to stay away from all ambitious evils. The best thing in life is that we live without fear. So, do whatever we could to provide students with confidence, honesty, and the love of learning and reading. This is the only way we, educators will win over all barbarous tycoons. Back2basic
M4,
I do agree that it’s important for the teacher to listen to his students: this helps him tailor his instruction to their needs. But what constructivists envision is kids talking to each other.
I like your fresh perspective –it has a Taoist/Buddhist flavor.
Thanks ponderosa. M4