what's the diff!

During my eleven day Baltic sojourn, I had the opportunity to visit schools in Finland and Latvia. I was particularly interested in Finland schools due to their high ranking in the international PISA tests that are set up to compare educational effectiveness in
the developed nations.

The US routinely ranks down around 19th or below in reading and math. Finland is routinely tied for first. As one of the first place scoring nations, there are educational tours going to Finland all the time. These tours pay large sums of money for groups of American school administrators to tour Finnish schools.

Due to my having contacts at the University of Helsinki, I was able to get a personal tour of one of their public schools, along with some insight into why they are a proven success story. On the surface, not much will appear different from many American schools. I'm not sure how many educational observers, regardless of how much they paid for a tour would grasp the difference. In addition to visiting a public school, I also visited a highly respected private school.

I had theories going in. Years ago (2008), I had asked Patrik Scheinen, Dean of the University of Helsinki School of Social Sciences, whether they had done research that might suggest a relationship between student's involvement in crafts education, and the level of student engagement that would lead to higher test scores. There was no particular research that would suggest that their success could be so narrowly found. That does not disprove the hypothesis. Nevertheless, Finland does have compulsory education in crafts. Finland has a two track higher education system with the trades being held forth as a reasonable alternative to college.

I then began wondering if there was some relationship between Froebel's educational method and the Finland Schools' success. The Finnish Folk Schools were founded by Uno Cygnaeus upon the Froebellian philosophy of learning through play.

Here is some of what I observed. Class sizes were not overly small. Fifteen to twenty five seemed to be normal in the school I visited. Students all removed their shoes and put on indoor slippers when in school. This was a requirement. Woodworking classes appeared smaller in number of students than the typical class size. In large schools, classes are of a single age student, but in smaller country schools, a classroom may have two or three ages combined. Finland has a two track higher education system with the trades being held forth as a reasonable alternative to college. Both technical school and college are held forth as reasonable options.

Finland has a reputation for not sitting on its laurels when it comes to learning. They try new things on a national level. For instance, despite Sweden having experimented with theme based curriculum and having warned against it, Finland is in its third year of a plan in which all schools adopt cross curricular themes to guide integrated studies. The idea is to bring a multidisciplinary approach requiring collaboration between teachers. Latvia has also joined in that approach. One cannot say, however that this curriculum integration has anything at all to do with their ranking in the PISA study, as they've been on top for many years before the new reform was put in place.

I had hoped that my visit might shed some light on Froebel. Were his theories and methods still important in Finland schools? I came away with no evidence that Froebel was still the guiding light in Finnish education. And yet, here are the few things we know.

Children in Finland spend more time in recess than any other children in the European Union, and far more than children from the US. That alone suggests a greater emphasis on play and a better understanding of child development. From the earliest days of Finnish education, children were fed a hot lunch each day. This policy was instituted by Uno Cygnaeus, when children's labors were needed on the farms, and for a child to go to school meant some sacrifice for their families. Finnish parents have learned to trust schools and to value them (and the teachers) as important contributors to community life. 

Compare that to American education where education and the rights of teachers have been a political football thrown back and forth by opposing parties.

Cygnaeus had developed a system of teacher training that survives to this day, and some of Finland's success story was described by a teacher who said, "They train us well and then trust us to do what we've been trained to do." As did Froebel, upon whose model Finnish education was based, Cygnaeus recognized the important role that women teachers are well suited to play. Teachers are valued in Finnish society. How different that is from so many of our American schools.

If there are failures in our system of education, let me assure you, our teachers are not to blame. Through careful reflection, I remain convinced that there are improvements that can be made. One of these, of course has to do with the hands. Where the hands are engaged, the artificiality of learning is erased, the lessons become more relevant, practical and useful to family and community, and the engagement of the heart follows.

The photo is of the entry to Jaunmārupes Pamatskola in Riga, Latvia.

The cover story in Time Magazine this week tells of a teacher who has to give blood each month to get by. It illustrates how much we value teachers, and shows also how little we value our kids.

Make, fix and create... Let the hands restore meaning in American education.