A Comparison of the Educational Systems of Finland and France, With Particular Focus on the Secondary Education Level
Chapter One
Preamble of the Study
Education may be regarded as a method of leading people out of ignorance. It is a means of socializing human beings. It involves the bringing up of a child in the community and constantly training him to adjust himself to the changing world around him. It is a lifelong process. Education is varied in its content and method as there are different societies in the world. The aim of education varies from time to time and from place to place. What one age cherishes as wisdom may be regarded by another as folly. The aim of education in a country should therefore be a reflection of the national aspiration of the people. According to information found on education and training of the European Union shows that “education and training are essential elements for the transformation of the European Union in a and societies based on knowledge of the world’s most competitive economies”.
Chapter Two
Review of the Related Literature
FINLAND EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
Finland is known for its equal education system and the high quality of teaching and learning. Equity and equality are promoted by providing equal access to education for everyone, by encouraging and supporting every student’s learning and well-being as well as by ensuring, using high-quality support systems, that everyone has opportunities to be successful in learning. Differences between schools and municipalities are small. Education is free of charge in Finland, even at the university level. The education system is flexible and always provides a way forward for students who want to study and move from one level to another. There are no dead ends in the system. Having good and motivated teachers is probably the most important factor influencing the quality of education. In Finland, teachers are highly educated and valued professionals. The teaching profession is very popular among young and talented people because there is much room for autonomy and creativity in teachers’ everyday work. Teachers are not stressed by inspections or high-stakes testing. Instead of controlling systems, the culture of trust, support, and collaboration is central (Halinen et al. 2016b). Teachers are trusted as the best experts in their work. Teachers in basic and upper secondary education need to have a Master’s degree either in Education science or in their main teaching subject. Class teacher education (teaching all subjects from grades 1-6) is so popular that the teacher education faculties of universities can take in only approximately 10% of applicants (Halinen et al. 2013). The high quality of teachers was also an important factor in the reform of the curriculum. It was possible to count on and build on teachers’ experience and their strong knowledge base as well as on their willingness to participate in the reform process. In the last few years, new challenges for the municipalities have been emerging about learning results and equality. Municipalities are autonomous education providers, and practically all schools in Finland are municipal. As a consequence of national budget cuts in education, some municipalities have not been able to cover the cuts with their own money, and gaps in the provision of education have been widening. This can be noticed, for instance, in the differing numbers of lesson hours that the municipalities provide for students: some only offer the national minimum, and others offer several hours more. At the same time, we have seen a decline in the level of learning results and an increase in differences between students (FINEEC 2017; Salmela-Aro et al. 2008). Another issue that was much discussed before the curriculum reform was the engagement and well-being of our students. For instance, OECD’s PISA research (OECD, 2013) indicated that students’ sense of belonging at school and their attitudes towards school were not very good in Finland compared to many other countries and that this had been on a downward trend from 2000 to 2012. This, connected with the experiences shared by both students and teachers, profoundly influenced the direction of the curriculum reform. In the reform of the curriculum, the main goals were to tackle the issues that had emerged during the consultation processes and to develop education concerning the goals of equity, equality, and high quality and students’ engagement and well-being at school (Halinen et al. 2013). It was important to describe the main values and principles for providing education and the objectives of teaching and learning more precisely than before as well as to support the positive development of all municipalities and schools. Equally important was the participation of municipal education authorities, school principals and teachers, and parents and students in the reform process, where common goals and guidelines were created both at the national and local levels. As Vahtivuori and others say, the emphasis of the Finnish curriculum is on the holistic mission of guiding the educational thinking of schools and municipalities. The core curriculum can be understood as an extensive ecosystem where different areas are linked together, as a teaching-studying-learning environment with several dimensions (Vahtivuori et al. 2014, 24).
Chapter Three
Conclusion
Strong basic education systems tend to succeed by providing good quality support for students, teachers and schools in the context of an integrated rather than differentiated school structure. Within schools and pre-schools with integrated classes, this requires teachers to differentiate and support individual needs. To perform these tasks successfully, they need high-level, high-quality preservice training, ongoing and mandatory in-service training, special training for school management tasks and counselling and support from teams of experts based on evaluation by external agencies.
References
- Airaksinen, T., Halinen, I. & Linturi, H. (2017). Futuribles of Learning 2030 – Delphi supports the reform of the core curricula in Finland. Eur J Futures Res (2017) 5:2. doi:10.1007/s40309-016- 0096-y.
- FINEEC (Finnish Education Evaluation Centre). (2017). Valtiontalouden säästöjen vaikutukset sivistyksellisiin oikeuksiin. (The Effects of the State Budget Cuts on the Educational Rights in Finland) https://karvi.fi/publication/valtiontalouden-saastojen-vaikutukset-sivistyksellisiinoikeuksiin/
- Halinen, I. (2016a). The Conceptualization of competencies related to sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles. In-Progress Reflection No. 8 on Current and Critical Issues in Curriculum, Learning and Assessment. IBE-UNESCO, International Bureau of Education.
- Halinen, I., Harmanen, M. & Mattila, P. (2015). Making sense of the complexity of the world today; why Finland is introducing multiliteracy in teaching and learning. In Bozsik V. (ed.) Improving Literacy Skills across Learning. CIDREE Yearbook 2015, 136 -153. Hungarian Institute for Educational Research and Development (HIERD).
- Halinen, I. & Holappa, A-S. (2013). Curricular balance based on dialogue, cooperation and trust – The case of Finland. In Kuiper, W. & Berkvens, J. (Eds.) Balancing Curriculum Regulation and Freedom across Europe. CIDREE yearbook 2013, 39 – 62.
- SLO, Enschede, the Netherlands. Halinen, I., Niemi, H. & Toom, A. (2016b). La confiance, pierre angulaire du système éducatif en Finlande. In Revue International d’Éducation, SÈVRES, no 72, Sept. 2016, 147 – 157. CIEP, Sorbonne Universités.
- Krokfors, L., Kangas, P., Kopisto, K, Rikabi-Sukkari, L., Salo, L. & Vesterinen, O. (2015). Learning. Creativity. Together. Educational Change Report 2016. University of Helsinki. Department of Teacher Education.
- National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2014. The Finnish National Agency of Education. National Core Curriculum for Pre-Primary Education 2014. The Finnish National Agency of Education. National Core Curriculum for Upper-secondary Education 2015. The Finnish National Agency of Education. National Core Curriculum for Early Childhood Education and Care. 2016. The Finnish National Agency of Education. OECD (2013).
- PISA 2012 Results: Ready to Learn: Students’ Engagement, Drive and Self-Beliefs (Volume III), PISA, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264201170-en OKM:
- Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriö. (2018). Tasa-arvoisen peruskoulun tulevaisuus (Ministry of Education and Culture: The Future of Equal Basic Education,) http://urn.fi/ URN:ISBN:978-952-263-554-9
