The Finland Phenomenon

BY David Sirota

Where Finland rejects testing, nurtures teachers and encourages its best and brightest to become educators, we fetishize testing and portray teachers as evil parasites.

When I heard the news last week that the Department of Education is aiming to subject 4-year-olds to high-stakes testing, all I could do is shake my head in disbelief and despondently mutter a slightly altered riff off The Big Lebowski’s Walter Sobchak.

Four-year-olds, dude.

You don’t have to be as dyspeptic as Walter to know this is madness. According to Stanford University’s Linda Darling-Hammond, who headed President Obama’s education transition team, though we already “test students in the United States more than any other nation,” our students “perform well below those of other industrialized countries in math and science.” Yet the Obama administration, backed by corporate foundations, is nonetheless intensifying testing at all levels, as if doing the same thing and expecting different results is innovative “reform” rather than what it’s always been: insanity.

In light of this craziness, it’s no wonder we’re being out-educated by countries going in the opposite policy direction.

Though bobo evangelists like David Brooks insist–without data, of course–that reduced testing “leads to lethargy and perpetual mediocrity,” Hammond notes that “nations like Finland and Korea – top scorers on the Programme for International Student Assessment” have largely “eliminated the crowded testing schedules used decades ago when these nations were much lower-achieving.”

Finland’s story, recounted in the new documentary “The Finland Phenomenon,” is particularly striking. According to Harvard’s Tony Wagner, the country’s modernization campaign in the 1970s included a “transforming of the preparation and selection of future teachers.”

“What has happened since is that teaching has become the most highly esteemed profession (in Finland),” says Wagner, who narrates the film. “There is no domestic testing … because they have created such a high level of professionalism, they can trust their teachers.”

The inherent parallels between Finland and the United States make the former’s lessons indisputably relevant to us. As Wagner says, Finland is a fellow industrialized country “rated among the highest in the world in innovation, entrepreneurship and creativity.” And though Finland is more racially homogenous than America, Wagner points out that “15 percent of the population speaks a second language” – meaning the country’s schools face some of the same cross-cultural challenges as our schools.

That said, for all the similarities, Finland finds its comparative success in how it chooses to differ from us.

Where Finland rejects testing, nurtures teachers, and encourages its best and brightest to become educators, we fetishize testing, portray teachers as evil parasites and financially encourage top students to become Wall Streeters.

Just as important, Finland’s tax and social welfare system have made it an economically equal society, and its education quality doesn’t vary across class lines. By contrast, America’s low taxes and meager social safety net have made it the industrialized world’s most stratified nation – and our Separate And Unequal education system is better funded and better performing in rich neighborhoods, and grossly underfunded and therefore underperforming in poor areas.

This is the ugly secret that America’s education “reformers” seek to hide.

As Joanne Barkan reports in Dissent magazine, data overwhelmingly show that “out-of-school factors” like poverty “count for twice as much as all in-school factors” in student achievement. But because economic inequality enriches wealthy titans like Wal-Mart’s Walton family, and because those same titans fund education policy foundations and buy politicians, the national education debate avoids focusing on economics. Instead, it manufactures a narrative demonizing teachers and promoting testing as a panacea.

It’s certainly a compelling fairy tale. Unfortunately for “reformers,” Finland, Korea and other successes prove the story’s dishonesty – and too bad for America’s kids that those successes are being willfully ignored.

David Sirota, an In These Times senior editor and syndicated columnist, is a bestselling author whose book Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now—Our Culture, Our Politics, Our Everything was released in 2011. Sirota, whose previous books include The Uprising and Hostile Takeover, hosts the morning show on AM760 in Denver. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com or follow him on Twitter @davidsirota.

More information about David Sirota

  • Reader Comments

    I have always been fond of the art of giving speeches. Some said I was weird, but I had a distinct view upon it. You know, it`s like having a unity measure, universally accepted of communicating in front of so many people. You need to find your calm, control your thoughts and concentrate on displaying your ideas so that people understand you thoroughly.  And everything else becomes systematical afterwards. On studying for my masters in nursing programs, it helped me a lot to understand my language teachers` methods. It`s not just a learning hint, it even becomes part of who you are and I can tell you it`s always an advantage to have a holistic view upon the world.

    Posted by Elliad on Dec 30, 2011 at 8:36 AM

    I believe this theory goes for children proving high abilities when getting their IQ adequately tested and get bored with ordinary games or activities proper to their age. Even so, some may say submitting your four-year old to a special learning and prep program would mean soliciting him too much. Somehow, they need to make a difference in the educational system, in order to allow the real values and geniuses promote their talents. At one of my communications degree online courses, I got to learn about the importance of establishing distinct communication codes and contexts with the high ability young people.

    Posted by daria spencer on Jan 30, 2012 at 2:09 PM

    I believe this theory goes for children proving high abilities when getting their IQ adequately tested and get bored with ordinary games or activities proper to their age. Even so, some may say submitting your four-year old to a special learning and prep program would mean soliciting him too much. Somehow, they need to make a difference in the educational system, in order to allow the real values and geniuses promote their talents. At one of my communications degree online courses, I got to learn about the importance of establishing distinct communication codes and contexts with the high ability young people

    Posted by daria spencer on Jan 30, 2012 at 2:11 PM

    It is amazing the way the students can carry out with such event and campaign planning when there`s a common wealth outcome at stake they all fight for. I don`t remember going to such movement campaigns by the time I was in college some years ago, but I still hold on to this solidarity climate with my online colleagues at my masters in public administration. We are so different, we come from so many countries, yet there`s a climate of mutual trust and solidarity so beautiful that I can`t describe it.

    Posted by finn hewey on Jan 31, 2012 at 5:31 PM
  • Posting Security

    To participate in our forums, please register for a free account