The Future of the Education System

The Future of the Education System

The current education system is yet again in a state of flux: policy based on political ideology rather than educational good practice; an ideology that looks backwards rather than forwards; propaganda rather than pedagogy.

For the last five decades this country’s education system has been the political football of politicians who want to make a name for themselves rather than develop and grow an education system that is fit for purpose, that will educate and that will prepare young people for an ever more competitive world.

It is Governments role to be constantly ensuring an education system that is capable of providing world class learning.  By doing so, education and those involved are assisted and empowered with a confidence about their own abilities.  This freedom thorugh empowerment allows those involved to become competitive enough to take on the international market and develop a pride in their achievements.

This noble, yet economically critical, aim for education must therefore surely ensure provision of world class learning and teaching for all learners and not just the academically gifted who will leave school and move on the Russell group of universities.

So how does this ‘ideal’ situation manifest in the real world?

To answer this question it is important to recognise fundamentally that the current move towards encouraging huge numbers of school leavers at eighteen years of age to go onto university is a mistake!  The reasons that this move is a mistake are many and a several of the key ones are noted here.

First, and perhaps counter intuitively; the increase in the number of learners going onto university is actually devaluing higher education, creating an increasingly commercial higher education trade.  This commercialisation in itself creates a devaluation of the sector.

The evidence to support this viewpoint is simple.  The proliferation of substandard universities that began their educational life, not even as polytechnic but sometimes as technical colleges (or not even that), has developed a market where some degrees from those ‘lesser’ universities have no value in the business or academic world.  The only value of these qualifications is that the graduate believes they have a degree and that its possession will help them in getting a job.  Unfortunately, the truth is that it prepares them for nothing and allows for the lowest common denominator to study far beyond ability and talent.

Secondly, by looking back further to the decision to abolish the Polytechnics and allow them to become universities it is apparent that few have been successful (with notable exceptions such as South Bank and the University of East Anglia).

Polytechnics provided higher education in quite a different way to traditional universities and gave to Britain a highly trained and effective workforce.  It was almost the differentiation between vocational and academic qualifications, taught by those who were best placed to understand and teach those vocational specialist areas.  The decision to abolish Polytechnics was to down-grade the less traditional subjects such as business studies, engineering and social work, among others.  It gave the impression that only university higher education had value and in fact was purely an ideological decision with no educational or pedagogy understanding.

Thirdly and on a sad note, ever since the political arena within education has been led by ideology and poor economics the system has been handicapped in developing a world class solution and as a consequence the learner has always ended up a poor second place to politics. 

Why is poor economics important in this argument? Specifically because politicians seem to have lost the vision that money spent on developing a world class education system will provide dividends in the future.  Education will always pay for itself in the long term.  The better prepared, educated and trained a workforce the more income the government will receive through income tax and taxes on spending, as well as the reduction in public benefits spending because more people would be employed and less people would require state support to live a satisfactory life.

What do we have in place now and what does this government tell us about their plans for education in this country?

The current Secretary of State has indicated he wants to return to a system similar to the old O level and CSE process – and of course, this from a Government minister who is too young to remember that system and the inherent strengths and weaknesses it manifested. The Secretary of State wants to emulate the Finnish system, but one wonders which Finnish system he has looked at because much of what he wishes to introduce is the antipathy of the excellent current Finnish system.

It is always easy to look back rather than look forward and develop a system based upon the good practices and stronger results of other countries.  No matter what the rose tinted glasses of the past tells us, the reality of the O level system was that it did not work.  It discriminated against those who were less academic, benefiting only about 5-7% of young people who went onto university and did very little to give confidence to the rest of the learning cohort, again denigrating the vocational learners. The O level system was linked to a process that had a series of strands of education quality, delivery and success.  These strands were based on the public school at the top, followed by the Grammar School and then the state secondary modern.  How did that prepare leavers to make an active and positive contribution?  The answer is that it did not; in fact if the O level system, or one that was predicated upon it, were to replace the current system it would necessitate the re-introduction of grammar schools and the abolition of higher education fees and the significant re-think in the structure of higher education. Higher education is free in Finland.

The incontrovertible fact is that going back never achieves anything of real value.

What British education is crying out for is a significant and radical re-design of the system and the vision from somewhere to start from a blank sheet of paper.  However, what government will have the courage to initiate this process and take it through to a conclusion?  Great Britain is at the mercies of almost constant changes from government, primarily with focus on a style of education and 'delivery of curriculum' that, as the educationalist Sir Ken Robinson has said, “was fine in the nineteenth century”.  This manifests with exceptionally high turnover in teaching staff, where teachers do not learn to teach at college; they learn in the classroom.  Interestingly, the same is considered true of engineers, doctors and lawyers. The craft in all these roles comes from years of apprenticeship and it takes dedication and numerous hours to perfect your role.  Many teachers leave the profession early and many of those following their probationary year.  What would happen to the health service if 30% of doctors quit within 5 years of qualifying?

To consider best practice it is always a useful exercise to examine countries with the highest educational achievement and ask whether their example would instruct Britain in the way in which we approach educating our young people. This article will return to the afore-mentioned Finnish education system and explore its clearly apparent differences and ask whether this is a process that should be considered by Great Britain. To pre-empt the discussion it will become clear that policy makers, educators and the media would do very well to take a lesson from Finland!

The successful performance of Finnish students is attributable to an array of interrelated factors which include a comprehensive pedagogy.  However, the reasons behind Finland's educational success are complex and include the evolved system being framed within their cultural backdrop, complementing each very well, but an explanation cannot be gleaned from their model in isolation.

Pasi Sahlberg, Finnish Director of Education said:  “I think one of the keys of our good performance is that we have systematically focused on equity and equality in our education system, and not so much on excellence and achievement like many other countries have done. And now we know, also through the OECD data and research, that the equity is the one that is also bringing excellence - just like this, not only Finland, but also Canada and Korea, for example, are the same. So I think the systematic way of addressing those who are in special need and need more help is the key”

In Finland teaching is a prestigious career.  Children aspire to be doctors, lawyers, scientists and in the same breath, teachers.  Teachers are respected and appreciated, they are highly qualified (requiring a Masters degree for full time subject based employment) and job selection is a tough process with only best candidates gaining the posts.

The Finnish curriculum is far less 'academic' than may be expected of such a high achieving nation.  Finnish students do the least number of class hours per week in the developed world, yet get the best results in the long term.  Students in Finland sit no mandatory exams until the age of 17-19.  Teacher based assessments are used by schools to monitor progress and these are not graded, but instead are descriptive to inform feedback and assessment for learning.

Great emphasis is put on pupil and teacher trust and well-being.  Outdoor, practical learning opportunities and healthy related physical activity sessions are a regular feature in the curriculum, all of which contribute towards maintaining a healthy body and mind and strongly supporting the idea that the two processes of health and learning ability are complimentary.

Finnish schools have full autonomy, with head teachers and teachers experiencing considerable independence when developing and delivering their own individual curricula which are suited to local needs and setting.  Combinations of alternative pedagogic approaches, as opposed to mere instructional methods, are utilised by teachers and it is clear that this freedom to innovate facilitates greater creativity, pro-activity and innovation.

Finland's educational philosophy has been to trust the professionals, parents and communities to guide their own policy - and it would appear that it works!  The opposite is the case in the United Kingdom where politicians with little or no background as teachers or within the education service create partisan and ideological decisions without the understanding of the learning process, or indeed a real care about the longer term effect on the individual or the economic consequences for the country.

As a result of the trust that is placed in high quality teachers, who are appreciated and trusted to do their job effectively as they see fit, political agendas are deflected and there emerges a strong and effective education system which serves the country well.

In Finland, all learners receive free education from when they start their formal education at 7 years of age until they complete their university studies.  During their educational life all learners receive free school meals, resources and transport and support services.

Educationalist Hank Pellissier says: “Finland's preschools offer no academics but plenty of focus on social skills, emotional awareness, and learning to play. Remarkably, Finnish children don't approach reading until age seven (Waldorf nation?). They learn other concepts first, primarily self-reliance”

An important aspect of the Finnish system is that prior to the age of 7 all children attend kindergarten which enables them to learn how to socialise, play and simply enjoy being a child.  Unacceptable behaviours are indentified and the child is assisted to unlearn that behaviour and to learn acceptable behaviours and, of course, diagnosable behaviours are identified earlier and intervention more effective as a result.

 ”Although Finnish children don’t start formal schooling until the age of 7, by the end of their first year, they all know how to read and write”, says Bryan Luizzi, Principal of Brookfield High School in Connecticut.

The learning of languages is high on the agenda and very effective.  Learners begin learning a third language by 11 and some a 4th at 13.

Classes contain a mixture of ability learners, with classes containing 2 or more teachers who focus on those needing additional support.  By having professionals working together, the needs of the learners are better met within a happy, supportive and familiar environment.  It is often the case that teachers stay with a single class for a significant part of their school journey.

Many educational institutions are combined primary and secondary schools, thus avoiding the disruption of moving from school to school which also allows for a consistent ethos.  Students do not wear uniforms and are encouraged to relax in their surroundings.

As with any system there are strengths, areas for development and ideological conflict.  The Finnish system prides itself on a positive and evolving process learning from learner need and ensuring that the interests of every learner are central to all decisions.

The Finnish system is based on the premise that it is not necessary to overload the learner.  The approach is to allow them the freedom to learn and to enjoy the experience and at the same time not over stressing the young person.  This approach would be at odds with the system in Great Britain where standards and effectiveness are measured in standardised data and evidence trails.  It is interesting to note that none of the educationally high achieving nations has a central inspection system.  Rather the local authority has the responsibility for ensuring quality of teaching and learning.  Contrast that with Great Britain where we have Ofsted whose processes are at the least negative and at best stressful.

Another reason that the Finnish system works so well is that they have thought about how children and young people learn best and created an environment in which to facilitate this.  In Great Britain, our primary problem is not with diversity.  However, because we ignore the neuroscience and learning research there is a continuation with practice that has failed to deliver good learning outcomes for over a hundred years.  The Leitch report (2005) does not provide any evidence that our mythical 'golden age' of education provided a sound education for all.  However, it does remind us that 1/3rd of all adults left school with no basic learning qualification and over 5 million people with no qualifications at all.

It is true that the Finnish model is not the only model in which to educate - countries such as Singapore also are extremely successful in PISA and other such international assessments. Singapore uses far more traditional approaches, although in the Far East the process of lesson study as a form of professional development is ingrained.

If we were to consider the introduction of the Finnish system into Great Britain, it would require a seismic shift in thinking, a cross party agreement not to use education as a political football and a supportive media to the long term ideal of radically improving our education system.  An improvement to a system that is not wedded to the past or stuck in the present but willing to move together into the future.  The system would need to examine the following areas:

·         Formal reading instruction begins at 7, when children begin their formal schooling

·         Parents, community and the culture itself supporting reading

·         Schools ensure interest in reading with learners being encouraged to be interested in and engaged in reading using diverse range of reading material

·         Protect the network of libraries with Great Britain ensuring that they are protected by law

·         Ensure that maths is enjoyable and has relevance to the learner, particularly at the early stages

·         Maths and science curriculum emphasise the use and application of knowledge and problem solving

·         A national program aimed at developing knowledge and skills in maths and science at all levels of schooling and throughout the school life

·         All learners have equal educational opportunities and remove obstacles to learning, especially among the least successful students

·         Ensure that our national education system provide all students, whatever their place of residence, with equal opportunities for high-quality education

·         Respect teachers and educational professionals for what they achieve and attract highly qualified teachers in all schools. (Government has currently removed the requirement for teachers in post sixteen institutions to be qualified)

·         The education process is not only a system; it is a matter of pedagogical philosophy and practice

·         The school exists for each learner; therefore, adjusting to the needs of each learner

·         Teaching and pedagogy are structured to work with diverse learner groups

·         No learner can be excluded and sent to another school, unless they have diagnosable special needs which requires specialist intervention

·         The interests and choices of learners are taken into account when schools plan and select the curriculum, content, textbooks, learning strategies and methods of assessment. This is truly listening to the learner voice

·         All this calls for a flexible, school-based and teacher-planned curriculum along with learner-centred instruction, counselling, and remedial teaching

·         Special needs education should be inclusive and closely integrated into mainstream teaching

·         Special needs educational establishments should be well funded and encouraged to attract the most experienced and highly qualified teachers.  They should aim to integrate into society all but the most severe special needs learner

·         Every learner should have the right to student counselling with schools providing students guidance in study skills, options and planning post-secondary studies

·         Class sizes should be limited to no more than 20 and smaller for those learners with special needs - these numbers should be limited in law, thus enabling schools to cater for the variety of needs of different students

·         Teaching should be one of the most important professions of society with substantial resources being invested in teacher education.

·         Teacher training should not be done ‘on the cheap” but significant investment based on the return on investment that the country will achieve through a better qualified and effective work force

·         Teachers and educationalists should be trusted to do their best as true professionals of education. They should be entrusted with considerable pedagogical independence in the classroom and schools should have an equal freedom to manage the learning and teaching

·         The system should set high standards for learners’ literacy skills and interests

·         Teachers should be relied on when it comes to learner assessment, drawing on learners’ class work, projects, internal exam, and portfolios.

·         Teacher-based assessment would be important because learners are not assessed by national tests or examinations during the school years or upon completing school

·         Head-teachers and staff should be given considerable decision-making authority as concerns school policy and management

·         The school should have exclusive responsibility for the choice of textbooks and have more say in determining course content, establishing learner assessment policies, deciding which courses the school should offer and allocating budgets within the school

·         The education system should ensure that significant political conflicts and sudden changes in educational policy are rare

·         The national curriculum has become flexible, decentralized, and less detailed

·         There should be an established national grading guidelines for performance that allow for student effort and activity to be taken into account

·         Schools should have a high degree of autonomy with regard to pedagogical practices

·         Governing bodies of schools and local educational authorities have less decision-making power than at present

What would be achieved by these radical changes and commitment to the future of education ceasing to be a political battleground?

The nation’s education system would be developed on a long-term vision of a school system, with teachers focus concentrating on learning and teaching rather than preparing learners for tests or exams, creating a process that would always find well performing schools and high quality learning and teaching. 

Learners would stay at the same school until they reach 16 and then attend either academic secondary colleges or vocational colleges; all of which will offer courses, teaching and progression of equal status and attract equal government funding.

This system offers many workable and pragmatic education policy directions for creating a world class education system.

It is it is time for policy makers, educators and the media to examine the education policy directions of countries like Finland, instead of continually duplicating the less-than-successful policy ideas that are regularly imported from the low-ranking American education system. 

It means that if the Secretary of State for Education can be radical in their approach they will assist the Government to create a world class system based on the success of the highest achieving countries, ensuring that education is less of a political battle field and much more of a consensus.