Why make the case for change in a system with an outstanding track record of education outcomes? Because there are potential pitfalls and challenges ahead:
- A skills shortage
- Difficulty integrating 21st century skills into curriculum
- Too strong a content orientation
- Inadequate and ineffective use of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) in Education
- A growth of differing and conflicting learning outcomes
- Low satisfaction levels in schools
And there are more on the list. Now, before you begin typing your response that I have unfairly vilified our outstanding education system in British Columbia, I am not describing British Columbia, but rather Finland. And these are not my thoughts, but those of Timo Lankinen, Director General at the Finnish National Board of Education, as recently expressed in his presentation, Making a case for change in a successful system (Finnish basic education). The list is from a more complete slide in his presentation:
Finland has been setting the world benchmark, so many of us are chasing. However, while they are widely seen as the strongest in the world, they have embarked on a change agenda.
These are the questions being asked (from Lankinen’s presentation):
- Are we picking up on the warning signals about the growing differences between schools and learning outcomes, and provision of education?
- Do we highlight higher-order skills, citizen skills needed for future lives in a systematic way?
- Do we enable teachers and students to flourish? Do we notice and care about non-conforming students?
- And what about . . .
- More individual freedom to choose between subjects
- Multidisciplinary subject groups
- Increase of minimum instruction time
- A more diversified language program
- Increase of the Arts and PE
- Highlight 21st century skills – citizen skills
- Educational use of ICT
cultureofyes.ca 
Hi Chris,
Thanks for sharing this awesome blogpost. I did think you were talking about BC at the beginning of the post – a great hook!
The desire to change in an excellent system does seem paradoxical, yet you have made an excellent case for doing just that. We need to fight complacency and target our efforts through a positive but honest inventory of what we are doing well and what needs improving.
I also enjoyed this post because it is a more honest characterization of Finland’s education system than what one often hears. It is a great system but not beyond improvement. Getting past the good/bad paradigm is so refreshing.
Lots of food for thought! Thanks for taking the time to post these thoughts and to recap some of Timo Lankinen’s key ideas. Much appreciated!
Ingrid
Thanks Ingrid. I like a notion I heard at this conference that countries like ours and Finland need a “split screen” approach – we need to continue to improve our current system (get better at doing what we do, largely in the same ways we do it), while also creating spaces for innovation (doing new things, in different ways).
(update on Lankinen’s position)
http://www.valtioneuvosto.fi/ajankohtaista/tiedotteet/tiedote/en.jsp?oid=341642
Hold on a second here, please. First, Lankinen does not necessarily speak for all the Finns (asuin Suomessa–I lived in Finland). Also, to say that Lankinen supports change and following the government / corporate push for 21st C learning could be comparable to saying that George Abbott, BC’s Minister of Ed, supports 21st C benchmarks. They will not have neutral opinions / directives. Abbott’s weekly visits to private schools, along with his many photo ops at private schools splashed over the Ministry’s website, may demonstrate his loyalty.
Also, see how this works. Gov’t can simply point to a higher achieving PISA nation, evoke the fear of being left behind in the global economy, then radically argue to change one’s own ed system– with the help of Pearson’s shareholders.
Pearson, by the way, must be quite interested in these PISA benchmarks, considering that it will be developing the framework questions, etc.
http://www.pearson.com/media-1/announcements/?i=1485
If the BC gov’t, which has a strong ed system, is willing to open its doors fully to Pearson / Microsoft et al, we cannot simply assume that the Finnish gov’t would not attempt the same.
Corporations only care about my child, and yours, as a a commodity. My community, my neighbours, care about them as people, as citizens.
I am not against change, but let’s make sure that the public directs it, not faceless shareholders.
Thank you, Chris, for allowing open discussion on this site– Excellent model.
(I love Finland, so I am concerned for my friends there too now. )
Yes, thanks for sharing the reference on the new job Lankinen is taking on in January. It was quite the topic of discussion at the meetings last weekend, as his influence is seen as being very important to the agenda in Finland. I appreciate you have raised your concerns around corporate involvement, but in any of the conversations I heard from Lankinen or others on their team, the moves they are making as part of their plan for 2020: http://www.oph.fi/download/135542_learning_and_competence_2020.pdf The conversations sounded much like ones I hear in our district. They want to improve their current system, but they also are setting up innovation zones as they look towards the system that they want to be in 2020.
What I appreciated in hearing Lankinen and others speak about education in Finland, is their commitment to not being satisfied with the status quo (even if we are all envious of it). I have also heard lots about the key tenets of the system, including a highly educated and respected teaching force, a lack of large scale assessments, and a highly positive view of education in society – all which clearly are part of their story. I had not heard much previously about where they see education moving next. In listening to them, in a room that included countries as diverse as India, South Korea, Australia, England and Brazil – while each have some very unique and challenging local conditions, they all speak about a desire for increased personalization of learning, and the need for innovation.
Fascinating differences, though, Chris. Look closely at the two documents. In the Finnish plan, one notices an almost complete lack of computers/ laptops/ etc in the pictures. There is just one keyboard featured.
Click to access 135542_learning_and_competence_2020.pdf
But, in the BC education plan, one sees painted fingers on the front page, then every single image inside focusses on computer learning. (quite a mess for those keyboards, all that paint)
Click to access bc_edu_plan.pdf
This is a major difference, Chris. The Finns appear to be getting it right, in my opinion, focussing on a rounded education.
Computers / tech companies are not the focus: students are the focus. (Note how students are actually hidden behind computers in the BC Ed plan)
Two plans, both seeming to be focussed on 21st C skills, but two different directions?
Yes, the Finns are not afraid to change their system. They are implementing a long term vision (2020) to ensure that everyone can have a say. The BC education plan has been launched with little to no input from classroom teachers and the general public. Also, it has a 2 year implementation (rushed in before next provincial election?)
Why the quick implementation? The 21st C will last 100 years. Why get everything done right now?
Again, thanks for the forum.
Chris,
Here is a little Seth Godin piece that ties in nicely to your post:
Seth’s Blog: Arguing with success http://bit.ly/t0A9mw
I love this quote from his piece. “It takes guts to argue with success, guts and insight. And it’s the best way to make things better.”
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks George. I suspect you must have the same conversations in Alberta – a very high achieving province, not only wanting to improve but also innovate.
Appreciate the video – Seth has a great way of making things make sense.
I imagine most education systems, regardless of international ranking, want to improve, and when educational change is being discussed, it is interesting to note that the same goals seem to pop up everywhere.. improved ICT skills, critical thinking skills, interpersonal skills, global awareness, personalized learning, etc. I feel, however, that the educational systems that will actually be able to turn these goals into a reality will be the ones that do the best job of including all stakeholders in the discussion, design and implementation of educational change. Is BC ready to do this? I fear that until the day arrives when all BC education stakeholders are ready to embrace transparency and openness, and truly work together with everyone at the table, dreams for a different system will remain just that…dreams.
Nicely said Rhonda – while I am anxious for the changes, having my own children in the system now, I also agree with you – these are not ideas that can be “implemented” in a year – it is a twenty-year plan to rethink what schooling could and should look like for our students. And yes, it will take everyone sitting around the same table to make this happen.
[…] look ahead and say what do we need to do now so that we continue to have success in the future? This story from Chris Kennedy is about Finland (no.1 in the world according to OECD PISA results) but it could also be about […]
I love the title of your Blog! I wish more people thought this way. I’m hoping to do a blog post on fostering a culture of yes in my classroom and the importance of modelling it for our students. I always enjoy your posts. Thank you for sharing!!
Thanks Hugh for the kind words. I find there is a growing community talking about big ideas and how we make them happen here in the digital space.
I have read a lot about Finland’s successful education system and how their high school students have the top internationally ranked Math and Science scores, but I think sometimes people forget that the Scandinavian countries have some of the highest personal income taxes in the world. If we want a similar system in Canada then we need to provide more funding for education.
As a BC elementary teacher I applaud Timo Lankinen saying that there needs to be a greater emphasis placed on the Arts and P.E. I’ve been saying to my colleagues for years that one day someone will stand up and say Art, Music and P.E. are important, I’m just not sure I will ever see it in my career as a teacher. In my thirteen years as a teacher nearly every school based professional development day has focused on Literacy or Math. In regards to the Finnish National Board of Education’s agenda, it also reminds me of what Sir Ken Robinson has said about the Arts being a very low priority in our present educational system. High school students are often dissuaded from taking Art programs or P.E. because the feeling is that these courses aren’t going to help them get into university or a good job.
When I first started teaching their were a few Music or P.E. specialists in schools, but most of them have retired and it seems today as an elementary teacher you are more of a generalist. It’s difficult to be an amazing teacher in every subject area. Perhaps, in the future, we will see the return of elementary teachers who specialize in a particular subject area.
Hi Jen. I am with you on the need for arts and physical education to be key aspects of a “new” system in BC. Sir Ken’s image of the rankings we place on different fields also still sticks with me. I have seen some really interesting partnerships with local arts groups to help support the arts at elementary. I am also in a district that has decided to have music specialist teachers at elementary which makes a noticeable difference.
Many for profit, not for profit and private organizations use the concept of zero-based budgeting to try and improve the use of the funds they have at their disposal. Some highly successful for profit organizations often use a similar concept to try and redefine how to support their clients. At its simplest, they might ask a question like “How can we build an organization that competes more effectively in meeting the needs of our customers?” “What might that business look like?” One of the key objectives of the exercise is to remove systemic barriers that limit solutions. In my exposure to the approach, it promotes lateral, innovative and divergent thinking. Looking at a challenge with a different lens can have a powerful effect (where are Digital Computers, AES, and Wang today)?
If a similar type of question were asked around public education, it might be posed as follows: “If we were to start a public k-20 learning world from scratch, what might that look like?”
Would a similar exercise be of value in the discussion about public education?
Martin Goldberg
@postdewey
[…] have previously written about Finland, and what I have learned about their system through GELP (here), in looking at their efforts for change in a highly successful […]
I’m book-marking. Furthermore I am emailing this site to some of my associates. Considering the fact that I enjoyed reading it, well my contacts will also.