Advertisement

Teachers as Active Contributors in Quality of Education: A Special Reference to the Finnish Context

Chapter
Part of the Education Innovation Series book series (EDIN)

Abstract

The chapter reflects on what major changes teachers are facing in their profession related to concepts of learning and knowledge and how these changes influence teachers’ professional work. Thereafter, the author will introduce a conceptual model of the major conditions if teachers are seen as professional agents developing their work based on evidence and research when facing changes in their work. Finally, the chapter analyses the Finnish educational system and teacher education identifying what conditions are supporting teachers’ professional agency. Equity has been the most important value throughout the Finnish educational system and the main aim is that everyone can always continue one’s learning to the next phase and all students are supported in their progress. Finnish teachers are very aware of the ethical nature of their work. They are not regulated by national testing or by inspectorate. They have a lot of freedom but are also required to make professional decisions. In Finland, the teaching profession has become socially, morally, and academically very demanding, but at the same time it has made the profession highly attractive. The Finnish teachers play a key role in the quality of students’ learning and they are expected to take an active role in educational transformations.

Keywords

Teacher Education Knowledge Creation National Core Curriculum Finnish Teacher Mixed Ability Group 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aloni, N. (2002). Enhancing humanity: The philosophical foundations of humanistic education. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  2. Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries (OECD Education Working Papers, 41). Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asia Society. (2012). Teaching and leadership for the twenty-first century: The 2012 international summit on the teaching profession. Retrieved from http://asiasociety.org/files/2012teachingsummit.pdf
  5. Berliner, D. C. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biesta, G. (2007). Why ‘what works’ won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biesta, G. (2009, March). Good education: What it is and why we need it. Lecture conducted from The Stirling Institute of Education, University of Stirling. Retrieved from http://biesta.docjax.net/g/search/biesta/GOODEDUCATION--WHATITISANDWHYWENEEDITInauguralLectureProfGertBiesta.pdf
  8. Boaz, A., Ashby, D., & Young, K. (2002). Systematic reviews: What have they got to offer evidence based policy and practice? (Working Paper 2). London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, University of London.Google Scholar
  9. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7(2), 161–186. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00015-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brandsford, J., Darling-Hammond, L., & LePage, P. (2005). Introduction. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Brandsford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 1–40). San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell, E. (2008). Preparing ethical professionals as a challenge for teacher education. In K. Tirri (Ed.), Educating moral sensibilities in urban schools (pp. 3–18). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  12. Carr, W., & Hartnett, A. (1996). Education and the struggle for democracy: The politics of educational ideas. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI). (2007). Understanding the brain: The birth of a learning science. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  14. Cole, M. (1991). Conclusion. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 398–417). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Commission of the European Communities. (2007). Towards more knowledge-bases policy and practice in education and training. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/educ2010/sec1098_en.pdf
  16. Cousins, J. B., & Ryan, E. (2009). Dilemmas for educational evaluation in a globalized society. In K. E. Ryan & J. B. Cousins (Eds.), The SAGE international handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 539–554). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Darling-Hammond, L. (2010a). New policies for 21st century demands. Interviewed by James Bellanca. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), Rethinking how students learn (pp. 33–50). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tress Press.Google Scholar
  18. Darling-Hammond, L. (2010b). Teaching and educational transformation. In M. Fullan, A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational change (pp. 505–522). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Day, C., & Johansson, O. (2008). Leadership with a difference in schools serving disadvantaged communities: Arenas for success. In K. Tirri (Ed.), Educating moral sensibilities in urban schools (pp. 19–34). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  20. Elliott, J. (2001). Making evidence-based practice educational. British Educational Journal, 27(5), 555–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Evans, K., Gerlach, C., & Kelner, S. (2007). The brain and learning in adolescence. In CERI (Ed.), Understanding the brain: The birth of a learning science (pp. 186–210). Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  22. Gindis, B. (1995). The social/cultural implication of disability: Vygotsky’s paradigm for special education. Educational Psychologist, 30(2), 77–81. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3002_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hammersley, M. (2004). Some questions about evidence-based practice in education. In G. Thomas & R. Prong (Eds.), Evidence based practice in education (pp. 133–149). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  24. Hammersley, M. (2005). Is the evidence-based practice movement doing more good than harm? Reflections on Ian Chalmers’ case for research-based policy making and practice. Evidence & Policy, 1(1), 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  26. Harjunen, E. (2009). How do teachers view their own pedagogical authority? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 109–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hautamäki, J., Kupiainen, S., Arinen, P., Hautamäki, A., Niemivirta, M., Rantanen, P., et al. (2006). Learning-to-learn assessment in Finland – Versatile tools to monitor and improve effectiveness and equity of the educational system. In R. Jakku-Sihvonen & H. Niemi (Eds.), Research-based teacher education in Finland: Reflections by Finnish teacher educators (pp. 189–202). Turku, Finland: Finnish Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  28. Hemsley-Brown, J., & Sharp, C. (2003). The use of research to improve professional practice: A systematic review of the literature. Oxford Review of Education, 29(4), 449–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Husu, J., & Tirri, K. (2001). Teachers’ ethical choices in socio-moral settings. Journal of Moral Education, 30(4), 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Husu, J., & Tirri, K. (2007). Developing whole school pedagogical values – A case of going through the ethos of “good schooling”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(4), 390–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Issitt, M., & Spence, J. (2005). Practitioner knowledge and evidence-based research, policy and practice. Youth & Policy, 88, 63–82.Google Scholar
  32. Jackson, P. (2006). Networked learning communities: Setting school-to-school collaboration within a system context. East Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Centre for Strategic Education.Google Scholar
  33. Jyrhämä, R., & Maaranen, K. (2012). Research orientation in a teacher’s work. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 97–112). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Kim, K. H. S., Relkin, N. R., Lee, K. M., & Hirch, J. (1997). Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second language. Nature, 388, 171–174. doi: 10.1038/40623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Koizumi, H. (2003). Science of learning and education: An approach with brain-function imaging. No to Hattatsu, 2, 126–129.Google Scholar
  36. Kozulin, A., & Presseisen, B. Z. (1995). Mediated learning experience and psychological tools: Vygotsky’s and Feuerstein’s perspectives in a study of student learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(2), 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kumpulainen, K., & Lankinen, T. (2012). Striving for educational equity and excellence: Evaluation and assessment in Finnish basic education. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 69–82). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Laukkanen, R. (2006, September). Finnish strategy for high-level education for all. Paper presented at the conference of the Educational Systems and the Challenge of Improving Results. University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  39. Laukkanen, R. (2008). Finnish strategy for high-level education for all. In N. C. Sognel & P. Jaccard (Eds.), Governance and performance of education systems (pp. 305–324). Dordrecht, The Netherland: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Life as Learning Research Programme. (2002–2006). Suomen Akatemia. Retrieved from http://www.aka.fi
  41. Learning Solutions. (2011–2015). Tekes. Retrieved from http://www.tekes.fi/programmes/Oppimisratkaisut
  42. Mathison, S. (2009). Serving the public interest through educational evaluation: Salvaging democracy by rejecting neoliberalism. In K. E. Ryan & J. B. Cousins (Eds.), The SAGE international handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 525–548). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McCormick, R. (2003, October). Reliable evidence for policy making in complex settings. Paper presented at the conference of the EMINENT IV, Geneva.Google Scholar
  44. Medel-Añonuevo, C., Ohsako, T., & Werner Mauch, M. (2001). Revisiting lifelong learning for the 21st century. Hamburg, Germany: UNESCO Institute for Education.Google Scholar
  45. National Board of Education, Finland (NBE). (2004). National core curriculum for basic education 2004. Retrieved from http://www.oph.fi/english/sources_of_information/core_curricula_and_qualification_requirements/basic_education
  46. National Board of Education, Finland (NBE). (2011). The Finnish National Board of Education. The official website of National Board of Education. Retrieved from http://www.oph.fi/english/education/basic_education
  47. Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  48. Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning – A cultural change needed in teacher education and in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 763–780. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00042-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Niemi, H. (2007). Life as learning – The Finnish case of a national research programme. In OECD/CERI, Research and evidence in educational policy-making: New challenges (pp. 117–123). Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  50. Niemi, H. (2009). Why from teaching to learning? European Educational Research Journal, 8(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Niemi, H. (2011). Educating student teachers to become high quality professionals – A Finnish case. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal. C·E·P·S Journal, 1, 43–67.Google Scholar
  52. Niemi, H. (2012). Teacher education for high quality professionals: An analysis from the Finnish perspective. In O.-S. Tan (Ed.), Teacher education frontiers: International perspectives on policy and practice for building new teacher competences (pp. 43–70). Singapore: CENGAGE Learning.Google Scholar
  53. Niemi, H., & Jakku-Sihvonen, R. (2006). Research-based teacher education. In R. Jakku-Sihvonen & H. Niemi (Eds.), Research-based teacher education in Finland – reflections by Finnish teacher educators (pp. 31–50). Turku, Finland: Finnish Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  54. Niemi, H., & Kemmis, S. (2012). Communicative evaluation for improvement in education. In J. Harford, B. Hudson, & H. Niemi (Eds.), Quality assurance and teacher education: International challenges and expectations. Oxford, UK: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  55. Niemi, H., Kynäslahti, H., & Vahtivuori, S. (2012). Towards ICT in everyday life in Finnish Schools: Seeking conditions for good practices. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(1), 57–71.Google Scholar
  56. Niemi, H., & Lavonen, J. (2012). Evaluation for improvements in Finnish teacher education. In J. Harford, B. Hudson, & H. Niemi (Eds.), Quality assurance and teacher education: International challenges and expectations. Oxford, UK: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  57. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). The knowledge-creating theory revisited: Knowledge creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1, 2–10. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. OAJ. (n.d.). Teachers’ Trade Union of Education in Finland. Retrieved from http://www.oaj.fi/portal/page?_pageid=515,452376&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
  60. Parliamentary Committee on Education. (1998). Report (3/ 1998 – HE 86/1997). Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
  61. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of motivation in self-regulated learning. In P. R. Pintrich & P. Ruohotie (Eds.), Conative constructions and self-regulated learning (pp. 51–60). Hämeenlinna, Finland: RCVE.Google Scholar
  62. Reinikainen, P. (2012). Amazing PISA results in Finnish comprehensive schools. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 3–18). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense publishers.Google Scholar
  63. Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New York: Teacher College Press.Google Scholar
  64. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building. In Encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., pp. 1370–1373). New York: Macmillan Reference.Google Scholar
  65. Schleicher, A. (Ed.). (2012). Preparing teachers and developing school leaders for the 21st century: Lessons from around the world. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264174559-en.Google Scholar
  66. Schuller, T. (2006). International policy research: Evidence from CERI/OECD. In J. Ozga, T. Seddon, & T. Popkewitz (Eds.), Education research and policy (pp. 78–90). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Slavin, R. E. (1997). Co-operative learning among students. In D. Stern & G. L. Huber (Eds.), Active learning for students and teachers: Reports from eight countries (pp. 159–173). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  68. Slavin, R. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Smith, N. L. (2009). Fundamental evaluation issues in a global society. In K. E. Ryan & J. B. Cousins (Eds.), The SAGE international handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 37–51). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Smyth, J. (1995). Introduction. In J. Smyth (Ed.), Critical discourses on teacher development (pp. 1–19). London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  71. Toom, A., & Husu, J. (2012). Finnish teachers as ‘makers of the many’: Balancing between broad pedagogical freedom and responsibility. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 39–54). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense publishers.Google Scholar
  72. Vartiainen, J., & Aksela, M. (2012). LUMA Science Education Centre: Joy of science for all – Bringing science, math and technology together. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 263–272). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense publishers.Google Scholar
  73. Vitikka, E., Krokfors, L., & Hurmerinta, E. (2012). The Finnish national core curriculum: Structure and development. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 82–96). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense publishers.Google Scholar
  74. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. R. (1993). Studies on the history of behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Behavioural SciencesUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations