On the paradox of lower On the paradox of lower performing Swedish performing Swedish speaking schools in speaking schools in

Finland – Finland – An educational leadership An educational leadership

perspectiveperspectiveMichael Uljens and Johan Korhonen

Åbo Akademi, Vasa, Finland

NERA, March 2012Copenhagen

1. The neo-liberal educational paradigm – school in the

accountability era.

2. PISA09 Finland2. PISA09 Finland• Reading comprehension – from 546 to

536p• No differences between North, East,

West or South of Finland (13p, ns.)

Differences do exist :• Between finnish and swedish schools,

27p.• Explained by higher number of bi-lingual

students in swedish speaking schools and learning strategies (?)

• Between swedish sp. regions in Finland, 28p.

• Between schools (Fi-Swe = 145p, Fi = 272p)!

• Between individuals (500p, 200-700)• Boys and girls – biggest in PISA.

3. Regional differences 3. Regional differences withinwithin Svenskfinland (raw data, 28p)Svenskfinland (raw data, 28p)

Variation Variation withinwithin each region each region large:large:

Metropol Övr.Nyland Åboland Österbotten Åland Språköarna

Regional differences Regional differences eliminated by controlling eliminated by controlling SCES, SCES, exc. for Ålandexc. for Åland! !

502

504

508

513

515

526

470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550

Språköarna

Övriga Nyland

Åboland

Österbotten

Metropol

Åland

Hembakgrunden beaktad: Regionerna jämna. Endast Åland-Övr.Nyland signifikant olika.

Problem: Åland achieved Problem: Åland achieved better than expected - better than expected -

why?why?

”A school (or student) may achieve better (or worse) than what could be expected with respect to the sociocultural composition of students of the school.”

”To the extent a school (or student) performs better than expected, the school/student is an overachieving school.”

Research problem: Research problem: How do OA-UA schools look How do OA-UA schools look

like?like? Method:

• To operationalize over/under achievement a value was created for every student equal to the discrepancy between their actual score in reading and their expected score based on individual SCES.

• = unstandardized residuals in a regression analysis with SCES predicting reading scores

• Data: PISA09 Finland

Residual =the distance to the regression line

Over-underachieving regions in Swedish Over-underachieving regions in Swedish speaking parts of Finland (reading compr., speaking parts of Finland (reading compr.,

SCES controlled)SCES controlled)

4

-6,5 -5,2

0,8

14,4

-20,3-25-20-15-10

-505

101520

Metropol Övr. Nyland Åboland Österbotten Åland Språköarna

.

.

Åland Islands – what Åland Islands – what happened?happened?• Active leadership initiative from the regional level !

• Open dialogue, trust, no ranking• Regular meetings on developmental issues among

principals• Time plan was analyzed and reallocated• All districts follows same curriculum• 26 (!) follow up studies 2003-2012 and they are used• Coordination of continuing education• Hiring and education of principals renewed• Special agreements with principals concerning tasks

and responsibility- Principals visit classrooms and discuss with

teachers• Positive mix with teachers from Finland and Sweden• Cooperation with social-, youth-, healthcare/service

and homes

Exempel på finlandsvenska ”metropoler”Exempel på finlandsvenska ”metropoler”

Huvudst.reg. (528 p) och Vasa (544 p)Huvudst.reg. (528 p) och Vasa (544 p)

”Inom varje finlandssvensk region finns högre/lägrepresterande kommuner.”

Kovariat hem F(1, 1045)=5,77, p<.05

Metropol Vasa

Over/underachieving Over/underachieving schoolsschools

(effect of home/SECS controlled, Variation still104p, (effect of home/SECS controlled, Variation still104p, swe)swe)

Over/underachieving schools may be found in:

- all swedish speaking regions in Finland - in urban and rural areas - on mainly one- and bilingual areas.

But how do they look like?1.Contextual factors2.Size and rescources3.Pedagogical activities4.Leadership and policy

1. Contextual factors School community (size of community: village, small town, town, city)

   .44**

Opportunity to choose between school (2, 1, 0 schools in the area)

-.14 ns.

First language not test language -.19 ns.

2. School size and teaching resources

Proportion of qualified teachers (as experienced by principals)

 

.30*

 Teacher shortage (number of qualified teachers of total number)

 -.28*

Total school enrollment (school size as number of students)

.36**

Teacher-student ratio (number of students in relation to teachers)

.38**

Extra-curricular activities offered by school .20 ns.  

 3. Pedagogical activities & supportive climate Teacher stimulation of reading activities - as exp. by students/school level

-.17 ns

Teacher structuring and scaffolding - as exp. by students/school level - teachers explaining, follow up/monitoring, dialogue, responsiveness Teacher caring, attention, support (stud. exp/school level)  Schools support for future orientation in life - as exp. by students/school level

.06 ns.  

.15 ns. .33*

Disciplinary climate during lessons (as exp. by students/school level)

-.14 ns

Teacher behavior - as exp. by principals - Teacher expectations & sensitivity conc. students, teacher resistance to change Student behavior (as exp. by principals) - Student disturbing teaching, teasing/mobbing, drugs, etc

 .21 ns.  

-.03 ns.

 

4. Leadership and policy School leadership - as experienced by principals: goal orientation, teacher support, student/class monitoring

  

.11 ns.

School responsibility curriculum and assessment  School responsibility for resource allocation - e.g. hiring teachers, budget, salaries

.16 ns.  

.07 ns.

Teacher participation in decision making concerning curriculum, assessment, resources  

-.02 ns.

Over/under achieving Over/under achieving - students and schools- students and schools

School level

Stud. exp. of schools

support for future

orientation

Teacher caring,

attention,support

(stud. exp)

Disciplinary climate

Teacher stimulation of reading activities(stud. exp)

Teacherstructuring and scaffolding (stud. exp)

Over/under achievement

.33* .15 ns. -.14 ns. -.17 ns. .06 ns.

Student level

Stud. exp. of schools

support for future

orientation

Teacher caring,

attention,support

(stud. exp.)

Disciplinary climate

Teacher stimulation of reading activities

Teacherstructuring and scaffolding (stud. exp)

Over/under achievement

.19*** .19*** .07*** .01 ns. .18***

Educational leadership - a detail Principals in swedish speaking schools

experience themselves significantly more active than principals in finnish speaking schools.

More:• School development based on evaluation• Educational support to teachers• Classroom visits – follows students work• Goal oriented• Focused on teachers competence and

development• Attention to school climate• Distribution of responsibility

ConclusionsConclusions1. Different explanations on various levels of 1. Different explanations on various levels of analysis:analysis:

a. Finnish-Swedish speaking schools (27p) a. Finnish-Swedish speaking schools (27p) Home and school language differentHome and school language differentLearning strategiesLearning strategiesNot educational level of homesNot educational level of homes

b. Regions within swedish parts of Finland b. Regions within swedish parts of Finland (28p)(28p)

Educational level of homesEducational level of homes

c. School level (145 p)c. School level (145 p)Structure and resources (choice, school Structure and resources (choice, school

size)size)Leadership matters – superintendent, Leadership matters – superintendent,

principalprincipalTeachershipTeachership

II. Explaining variation II. Explaining variation withinwithin a country should not a country should not

be forgot in the PISA era.be forgot in the PISA era.

III. Focusing on large regions within countries III. Focusing on large regions within countries

hides actual variation between schools within hides actual variation between schools within these these regions.regions.

IV. Strategy of focusing over/underachieving IV. Strategy of focusing over/underachieving schools appears educationally fruitful and schools appears educationally fruitful and useful useful for school developmental work.for school developmental work.

V. Comparative leadership research!V. Comparative leadership research!

KonklusionerKonklusioner1. Konstruktivt arbete med ”evaluering för utveckling”

• Ett demokratiskt skolideal – en skola för alla – har varit vårt framgångskoncept – och som nu erövrar världen. Vi skall inte ge upp det.

• Bevara den respekt för lärarens professionalitet som präglat den finländska traditionen.

• Offentlig rangordning blir lätt kontraproduktivt – skampedagogik bör undvikas.

2. Lärar- och ledarprofessionaliteten bör utvecklas• En ny syn på lärar- och ledarprofessionalitet som inkluderar

skolutvecklingsarbete behöver utvecklas.• Förena pedagogisk forskning, skolutveckling och lärar- och

ledarskapsfortbildning.• Rektorsutbildningen och –fortbildningen genomgås.• Lärarutbildningen ökar praktik och forskning – minskar på annan

ledd undervisning.• Former för stöd / samverkan med skoldirektörer utvecklas.

3. Helhetssyn kring samverkan och utvecklingsarbetet • Klokt att aktörer med reellt ansvar för verksamheten

(universiteten, kommunerna och statliga myndigheter) leder utvecklingsarbetet (lärarutbildning och –fortbildning, forskning, utbildningsadministration, läroplansarbete, utvärdering).

• Regionala pedagogiska skolutvecklingscentra som samverkar med och stöds av Utbildningsanordnare (kommun), Utbildningsstyrelsen och Universiteten för att arbeta med Utbildning och Undervisning (U5)?

• Kommunreformen bör medtänka hur skolutvecklingsarbetet skall organiseras.

TY: )

Over/under achieving Over/under achieving - students and schools- students and schools

Student level

Approaches to learning Joy read Diversity reading

Memori-sation

Elaboration Control

Over/under achievement

.08*** .12*** .23*** .41*** .34***

School level

Approaches to learning Joy read Diversity reading

Memorisation

Elaboration Control

Over/under achievement

.03 ns. .07 ns. .22 ns. .48*** .35*

variable over/under achievement

Proportion of qualified teachers .30*

School leadership .11 ns.

Teacher shortage -.28*

Educational resources .01 ns.

Extra-curricular activities offered by school .20 ns.

Teacher behaviour .21 ns.

Student behaviour -.03 ns.

School responsibility: resource allocation .07 ns.

School responsibility: curriculum and assessment

.16 ns.

Total school enrollment .36**.

Teacher-student ratio .38**

Ratio of computers and school size -.24 ns.

Proportion of computers connected to the internet

-.09 ns.

School community .44**

Available schooling (competition) -.14 ns.

First language not test language -.19 ns.

Detta syns i skolvärlden på olika sätt:

Redovisningsskyldighet (Accountability) Sättet att använda mätresultat är nytt - rangordning Valfrihet – föräldrars val av närskola Decentralisering av läroplansarbetet Profilering och specialisering Ny indirekt, transnationell styrningNy indirekt, transnationell styrning Evaluering styr planering – den som styr evaluering styr. Ny professionalitet? ”Teaching for testing…”Ny professionalitet? ”Teaching for testing…” Ledarskap Utbildningsexport Differentiering av skolsystemet inifrån, ”AB Lärande OY” Privata aktörer träder in på området