Empowered Education Systems – Finland and South Korea

What can other countries learn from the top two education systems in the world?

Finland and South Korea are two very distinct countries – in terms of demography, culture and economics but they share the same limelight when it comes to their education systems because of their continuous dominance as the best school systems in the world.

They both consistently top the international Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) exams (run by OECD – Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), which evaluates students worldwide on their Reading, Math and Science abilities. Both countries feel that education is THE instrument to steer their country towards economic growth and development, and they have both overhauled their schools to an equal-opportunity system promising to educate every child regardless of their social, economic or cultural status.

This article aims to critically examine both these education systems from the point of view of their similarities and differences in order to document best practices that could work for other countries.

Similarities in funding, role of teachers and parent & community participation

Active government role in funding: As per the Center on International Education Benchmarking (CIEB), funding responsibilities in Finland are divided between the federal and municipal governments with the federal government assuming about 57% of the financial burden of schools and municipal authorities assuming the remaining 43%. There are very few private schools and those that exist are granted the same government funds as public schools and are required to use the same admissions standards and provide the same services as public schools [1].In South Korea school funding is very centralized, with local school systems deriving 80% of their revenue from the central Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) budget. The local systems are also funded to a much smaller degree through revenue transferred from local governing bodies, internal assets, locally issued bonds, school admission fees and tuition[2].

Focus on role of teachers: Teachers play a very important role in the success of the education system. In Finland teachers are selected from the top ten percent of university graduates and are given an opportunity to earn a master’s degree in education before they can teach and compete, as the competition for these spots is fierce. Out of 6,600 applicants, only 600 were admitted to the program in 2010 [3]. The teachers are given the autonomy to prepare their own curriculum, which includes art and music as well, and are empowered to make the right choice for their students. The scene in South Korea is also very competitive. Only 5% of hopefuls are accepted into the elementary school teacher-training program[4]. Teachers enjoy high social status, are paid very well and have great job security. This is one of the reasons why this profession is most revered in both the countries.

Parent and community participation: In Finland, parents are expected to take an active interest in their child’s performance, and teachers are held accountable to community standards and values. The level of participation of parents can range from dropping their children to school (Finnish schools do not normally have a school bus system) to volunteering at school events to sitting on the school board (each school’s board requires the participation of five parents)[5]. Like Finland, South Korea also welcomes and values the participation of the parents in their child’s education. There is a parent group, which the parents can access to liaise between parents and school. MEST has unveiled initiatives to expand parents’ role in their child’s education. These initiatives ranges from school monitoring programs, in which parents can get a clear sense of what is happening in their child’s school, to parents’ training programs and support centers.

The above three similarities between Finland and South Korea point towards a potential list of three pre-requisites that every school system must put in place in order to elevate its stature at a global level – (i) Centralized and well governed funding mechanism, (ii) Focus on quality teachers and (iii) Active community and parent participation.

But then the question arises, do these prerequisites mean that they will work in every environment, in every country for every system. To examine this, let’s look at the things that make Finland and South Korea different

Differences in funding, role of teachers and parent and community participation

Study time: The students in South Korea invest lot of their time studying both inside and outside the classroom. They are in the school from 9am to 5pm and then attend additional classes in the night. Additionally they are also given lot of homework. The only breaks Korean kids get is the 10 minutes they have to shuffle between classes[6]. In Finland, the students spend only an average of 5 hours in school. Additionally, children get a 75minute recess per day to play. They have very little or no homework, which gives the child enough time to be with family, friends and also spend time on other activities that the child is interested in[7]

Academic pressure: The students, parents and teachers are all equally under pressure to get good grades. For the South Koreans they perceive education as an important instrument to secure their future. Everything from their social status to their marriage prospects to their job depends on education. Parents spend all their savings in educating their children and this puts immense pressure on the children to get good grades. In Finland it’s a relatively easier view as the students and teachers care more about learning than grades[8]. The teachers prepare their children for life and not just to get good grades.

Testing: The students in South Korea are subjected to massive, high pressured standardized test to secure a place at each level of education be it primary secondary or college[9]. Unlike South Korea, Finland has only one standardized test in their academic career at the age of 16. They are more oriented towards learning and understanding than towards marking and evaluating. The students are evaluated through the course and a positive feedback is given to the students to promote learning.

Use of Technology: South Korea is a world leader in integrating technology in the classrooms. They topped PISA’s digital literacy test in 2009. Every school in South Korea has access to high-speed Internet. They also have digital textbooks to make learning materials more accessible, especially to lower income students. The MEST has also created a Cyber Home Learning System, an online program designed to help students with their after-school learning[10]. In Finland, students spend majority of their time in the “real” world. They often take their studies out of the classroom and into the outdoors. Technology adoption is growing but is not considered a pre-requisite for good quality education [11].

The above examples indicate marked differences in values and implementation between the two countries – and yet they have similarly successful education systems. It can hence be inferred that if the foundation for education is established properly with appropriate funding, empowerment of teachers and involvement of parents, success can be achieved in diverse societies.

What else can other countries learn from these two powerful education systems?

Having researched various sources for this article and conversed with a few friends from these countries, this is how I summarize my key takeaways about what other school systems can adopt:

•Respect teachers for their service to the community and the youths of the country at large by rewarding them with incentives to choose teaching as a profession.

•Give teachers the training and the autonomy to do the best for the child.

•Reconsider standardized testing and adopt continual assessment through positive feedback.

•Promote equal and standard education for all children irrespective of their social and economic background.

•Encourage children to take part in extra curricula activities in school and relieve them of the intense pressure subjected on them through standardized tests, additional tutoring and home works.

•Integrate technology in the classroom to promote e –learning but keep a good blend of real world learning.

•Government to paly an active role in funding the schools through subsidized programs to provide quality education for all.

The above are some peripheral takeaways, but my key argument is the need for three key pillars in establishing a sound education system – (i) appropriate funding, (ii) empowered teachers and (iii) involved parents.

References

[1] Center on International Education Benchmarking. “Finland system and school organization.” Available from http://www.ncee.org/programs-affiliates/center-on-international-education-benchmarking/top-performing-countries/finland-overview/finland-system-and-school-organization/ (accessed November 5, 2009).

[2] Center on International Education Benchmarking. “South Korea system and school organization.” Available from http://www.ncee.org/programs-affiliates/center-on-international-education-benchmarking/top-performing-countries/south-korea-overview/south-korea-system-and-school-organization/ (accesses November 5, 2009)

[3] Dalporto, Deva. “Finland’s A+ schools.” Available from http://www.weareteachers.com/hot-topics/special-reports/teaching-around-the-world/finlands-a-plus-schools (accesses November 5, 2009)

[4] Dalporto, Deva. “South Korea’s school success.” Available from http://www.weareteachers.com/hot-topics/special-reports/teaching-around-the-world/south-koreas-school-success (accesses November 5, 2009)

[5] Ibid, “Finland system and school organization.”

[6] Dalporto, “South Korea’s school success.”

[7] Dalporto, “Finland’s A+ schools.”

[8] Dalporto, “Finland’s A+ schools.”

[9] Dalporto, “South Korea’s school success.”

[10] Dalporto, “South Korea’s school success.”

[11] Dalporto, “Finland’s A+ schools.”

Posted by Sindhya