O Level: Learning - the Finnish way

 

By Sandra Davie The Straits Times Monday, Sep 30, 2013

 

 

Like Singapore, Finland, which has a population of 5.4 million, is an education superstar. - See more at: http://www.edvantage.com.sg/content/learning-finnish-way#sthash.3XR6FXvm.dpuf

 

Only Finland's best become teachers

Free to play and free to learn at Finnish pre-schools.

 

 

Its students consistently do as well as top-performing Singapore pupils in international maths and science tests. 

 

But a recent study trip by The Sunday Times sponsored by Lien Foundation found that Finnish students take a completely different route to academic excellence.  Before going to Primary 1 at age seven, all that Finnish children in pre-schools seem to do is play.

 

And once in school, they do not undergo formal assessments or examinations until they are 18, when they sit for a matriculation examination to enter university. There is also little homework for primary and lower secondary students, and no nationwide standardised testing. 

 

And tuition? That is a concept foreign to most Finnish parents.  Teachers say the equivalent of Singapore's gifted education scheme or Normal or Express streams would be illegal in Finland because its education policy calls for all children to be given the same opportunities.

 

Streaming at 16

 

The only "streaming" allowed occurs at age 16, when students, after being graded by teachers, get to choose whether to take the vocational or academic route. 

 

And yet, the Finns have consistently performed in the top tier since the first Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa) survey was conducted in 2000.  This study compares 15-year- olds in different countries in reading, mathematics and science. 

 

So how does Finland do it without the intense pressure and competition that are so much a part of Singapore's system?  Finnish educators list a combination of factors, from the strong reading culture - Finnish people borrow more books from libraries than anyone else in the world - to highly educated and well-trained teachers. 

 

Many also attribute the success of the Finnish education system to the strong foundation in learning laid in pre-school, where the focus is on cultivating intellectual curiosity and a love of learning in the young.

 

The emphasis is on learning through collaboration, not competition."  All children are given equal opportunities. We put equity ahead of producing top students," says Dr Pasi Sahlberg, who wrote the much-talked-about book, Finnish Lessons, which details how the country improved its mediocre academic results and produced top-performing students.

 

Every school is a good school

 

The 53-year-old director-general of CIMO (National Centre for International Mobility and Cooperation) at the Finnish Ministry of Education explains how Finns aim to have good schools for all students, echoing the Singapore Education Ministry's (MOE) recent slogan that "every school is a good school".

 

Dr Sahlberg says Finnish parents really do believe that all Finnish schools are equal. That would explain the puzzled looks given by Finnish parents when The Sunday Times asked how they select a school for their children. The answer: They pick the one closest to home.

 

Dr Sahlberg points out that the Pisa results show that the gap between high and low achievers in Finland is the smallest in the world.The main aim of its policymakers since the 1980s has been to ensure that every child should be given the same opportunity to learn, regardless of family background or income.

 

In Finland, education is free from pre-school to university level. Government spending on education makes up 6.8 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP).All Finnish schools offer free meals, free health care, free psychological counselling and free individualised student guidance.The country's education system did not start out this way.

 

Back in the 1960s, less than 10 per cent of students continued their education until the age of 18. There was nationwide standardised testing for children at age 11. Children who scored in the top 25 per cent went to private schools that charged high fees.

 

But starting in the mid-1970s, education reforms were introduced. Private schools were scrapped and all schools became publicly funded. Pre-school teachers attended a three-year degree course, while those heading to teach in primary and secondary schools studied for five years up to master's level.

 

Teachers are allowed to design their own lessons.

 

Streaming of students to put them on either the vocational or academic tracks was pushed to a later stage, at age 16.Class sizes were kept to an average of 25 students. Teachers were allowed to design their own lessons.

 

Instead of examinations, teachers assessed students using tests they designed themselves. Grades in report cards were based not just on test scores, but also on projects and class participation. 

 

Periodically, the Education Ministry would track a few sample groups of children across a range of schools to make sure the system was working.  There was opposition to the reforms at first, with some groups calling for a return to examinations and streaming. 

 

But the results of the first Pisa studies in 2000 and the second in 2003 changed people's minds. Finnish children were among the top performers in mathematics, science and literacy.  Soon, educators from around the world were flocking to Finland, hoping to learn the secret to its success.

 

"Once, people used to come to Finland to learn about Nokia. Now, they come here to learn about our school system," says Dr Sahlberg, who receives numerous invitations from around the world to give talks and attend education conferences. 

 

Dr Sahlberg, who has been appointed visiting professor by Harvard University, says: "When the first Pisa study came out, most Finns didn't believe it. But we came out tops again in the second survey. The best thing that Pisa did was that it silenced those who wanted to go back to having private schools and national examinations."

 

But he is quick to correct any misconceptions among visiting educators that the system, from pre-school to university, is laid-back. He notes that although examinations and streaming do not exist in the lower levels, students have to sit examinations at age 18.  At 16, more than 90 per cent of students choose to further their education through either "general" or "vocational" upper secondary schools.

 

Consider doing away with PSLE

 

Vocational students usually head to polytechnics or enter the job market. Those in the academic general stream have to sit a national examination to get a place in university.  Universities also set their own entrance tests to select students for specific courses.

 

However, there are those who believe the Finnish system is not suitable for all countries, including Singapore. 

 

While Finland's population is similar in size to Singapore's, it is largely homogeneous, with people speaking the same language, Finnish.  Also, Finland has a generous social welfare system where education and health care are free. But Finnish taxes are among the highest in the world at 44 per cent of GDP, reported Reuters.

 

The income tax rate ranges from 6.5 per cent to 31.75 per cent. On top of that, Finns pay municipal tax ranging from 16.25 per cent to 22 per cent.  Dr Sahlberg says Singapore is admired for the way it teaches mathematics and science, and for its recruitment and training of teachers.

 

But one thing that Singapore should consider doing away with is the Primary School Leaving Examination, he says, echoing the views expressed by Stanford University professor Linda Darling-Hammond in a recent interview with The Sunday Times.  "Singapore is one of the few countries in the world to have a high-stakes examination for 12-year-olds," says Dr Sahlberg. "So I wonder why Singaporeans are arguing over scores or bands.

 

Shouldn't the debate be about whether the exams are appropriate for children at such a young age?" 

 

He is aware of the anxiety felt by Singapore educators over the widening gap in school performance between children from disadvantaged homes and those from privileged backgrounds. 

 

Stressing that many elements of the Finnish school system are interwoven with the country's social welfare policies, he says: "As the OECD (Pisa) report stated, the highest-performing education systems are those that are able to combine quality with equity." 

 

And if there is something that Finland can show others, it is what equity and equal opportunity in education look like. And it is possible to achieve excellence along with equity."

 

 

Source: http://www.edvantage.com.sg/content/learning-finnish-way

What important lessons in life are learned away from school?

Education plays a pivotal role in the life of any person. Some think that learning is done primarily in school. It is true that educational institutions have been so entwined with the process of learning where students learn languages and a variety of other subjects to learn how to communicate and analyze. However, important lessons outside school are also important to develop skills in us to prepare us for the future.

One of the most important lessons that school cannot teach is morality. School cannot and will not be the yardstick of right and wrong. To be a person of integrity, one could probably attend a religious institution and learn the principles of upright living. To be morally upright would definitely help one to be a better person and grant him the inner peace that he needs for daily living. Living by the religious principles such as the Proverbs in the bible would also be able to guard him from committing follies that can be avoided.

Another important lesson that one can learn outside school is the skills of financial planning. Although school teaches the calculation of figures, it does not teach us how these figures would affect us financially in our lives. By learning to budget wisely, one would not end up in unnecessary debts. It is not uncommon to find young adults under a huge credit-card debt. To avoid such dire situations, one needs to learn the discipline to save, invest and spend wisely so that there will be wealth accumulation and funds set aside for a rainy day.

Beside financial planning, we must learn lessons of hardship and perseverance. Without such values, one would be easily set back by failures. Hence, taking vacational jobs to earn some pocket money is an excellent opportunity to learn how to withstand hardship. For example, I was employed as a waiter in a five-star hotel. Having to stand daily for hours has taught me to take hardship in good stride. Such lesson would not have been made possible in school where children learn academic success above anything else.

Finally, the school usually does not teach us the skills of widening and deepening friendship. Learning the right communication skills and the social boundary that we should keep between friends will enable us to understand and appreciate our friends better. A widening social circle and an inner sphere of intimate friends are important to help one succeed in life. A friend can be there to give advice, provide business opportunities and even provide a listening skill. Unfortunately, the school does not provide such skills and this could only be learnt from home and interaction with the outside world.

In conclusion, it is a fallacy to think that everything can be learnt in school. One should always display a willingness to learn and relearn out of school context to be able to strive and thrive in this changing world.

O LEVEL Nov 2010 Paper 1

O Level Discussion Essay: Should we embrace technology in education?

iPad v a lump of clay  By Cecilia Kang

WASHINGTON - The sixth-graders are lighting up the room with their MacBook Airs, flipped open to Google, Wikipedia and YouTube, for a physics assignment. Their classroom is decked out with touch-screen whiteboards, tablets and powerful Wi-Fi connections able to handle a school full of children online at once.


'Cool!' Nina Jenkins says, opening links to websites that take her deeper into the study of acoustics. She's making a small drum by hand and will record herself playing it on iMovie. At the end of the project, she'll write her reflections in 140 characters or less - in a tweet.


In the same week, about a dozen kilometres away, another set of sixth-graders is on a similar lesson. Only they are in a spare, birch-hued classroom that looks like a throwback to the Norman Rockwell era. There are no computers here. The only tools being used are spoons and forks tied together with purple yarn.  The students listen to the clang of utensils changing pitch as the yarn is shortened and lengthened. Nina Auslander-Padgham's eyes widen with the discovery, and she rushes back to her wooden desk to write her reflections on the blank pages of a red hardcover journal.

At these two Washington area private schools, separated only by a 20-minute drive, the two Ninas may as well exist on different planets. They are growing up on opposite sides of a gaping educational divide formed not by the usual school fissures of economics and race. Theirs is a division wrought by technology.
The Flint Hill School in Oakton, Virginia, is ultra-wired. Apple hails it as a model for its embrace of devices. Its teachers believe technology immersion will make their pupils more excited about learning and better prepared for college and careers. So they've given each child a device - starting with an iPad for every preschooler and MacBook Airs starting in the fifth grade.   'Tech is like oxygen,' said Flint Hill's dean of faculty Shannan Schuster. 'It's all around us, so why wouldn't we try to get our children started early?'

The Washington Waldorf School in Bethesda, Maryland, is trying to stay unplugged. Its teachers think technology is a distraction and overhyped. They believe children are better taught through real-world experiences in the school's vegetable garden and woodwork shop. Educators at the school fear that the immediate gratification of texts and Wikipedia threatens face-to-face communication and original thinking, so they ban cellphones, laptops and tablets and require pupils to hand-write papers until high school.
'What is the rush?' said Ms Natalie Adams, Washington Waldorf's faculty chair. 'There is a time and a place for technology, but children need to first relate to the physical world around them.'

The independent pre-K-to-12 schools are able to make such stark choices because of the flexibility their private boards and budgets allow them. And though they may represent the extremes, their experiences offer touchstones for parents and educators unsure about the promises of learning through technology for this ultra-connected generation.

Amid a sweeping fancy for mobile devices, Americans are wrestling to understand how technology is shaping their lives. And nowhere is that more evident than in the debate over how much we should expose our children to technology.

For parents, there are no definitive answers. Academic research seems to provide contradictory findings. And the federal government has barely begun to grapple with the effects of technology on children, even as it spends billions of dollars to bring broadband Internet to schools and libraries, and offers big tax breaks for educational software and gadgets by Apple and Microsoft.

'We have to stop and think if we are embracing technology just because it is there and new or if it is the best tool for what we want to accomplish,' said Mr Michael Rich, director of the Centre on Child Media and Health at Harvard University. 'Sometimes the answer is that an iPad is great, but does it really do a better job than a hunk of clay or paper?'

Recent studies show children are being exposed to far more media than any previous generation, largely because of the explosion of smartphones and tablets in the home.

But is this healthy for their development? Some research shows that software programs such as smartphone applications help improve kids' vocabulary and mathematics. Children aged three to seven who used an app called Martha Speaks increased their vocabulary by as much as 31 per cent in two weeks, according to a 2010 study commissioned by PBS. Some educators say technology allows them to personalise teaching plans and offer free online tutoring, a way to break free from cookie-cutter lessons that don't resonate with every child.

However, child development experts say children are developing shorter attention spans and multi-tasking too much online - habits that will become more ingrained over time. Technology is changing the way kids learn, too; ideas aren't as original when cobbled together through Google searches and recycled from opinion blogs, teachers at Waldorf say.


And students are increasingly skipping over basic disciplines such as spelling and handwriting - practices that have diminished in importance in the workplace but are still key to wiring the young brain, some child-development experts say.

In February, the US Education Department, along with the Federal Communications Commission, called for all American classrooms to adopt digital textbooks by 2017. The goal was inspired by South Korea - which is now rethinking the merits of online books over paper textbooks.

'I'm calling for investments in educational technology that will help create digital tutors that are as effective as personal tutors, educational software as compelling as the best video game,' President Barack Obama said last year while touring a tech-focused school in Boston.

At the same time, the department has found that past investments in educational technology have not paid off. In a 2009 report, it found that students who used maths and reading software over a one-year period scored the same on tests as peers who did not use the programs.

The contrasting approaches on technology show a sharp dividing line between the two suburban Washington schools - and the families of the two Ninas.

Otherwise, the girls would find much in common. They are fans of Adele's moody ballads and the book The Hunger Games. They are svelte and athletic but haven't outgrown pinks and pastels. They are thoughtful and observant students; they won't be the first to speak up in class but aren't afraid to express their views either.
Both Ninas are on a track to succeed, if the academic performance of their schools is any measure.
Seniors at Washington Waldorf and Flint Hill score in the mid- to high 600s on each part of the SAT. They are going to elite colleges such as Stanford, Yale and the University of Virginia - which is not uncommon in the highly educated Washington region.

WASHINGTON POST

Source: http://khooky.blogspot.com/2012/05/ipad-v-lump-of-clay.html#more

O Level Discussion Essay: What Singapore can learn from Europe (By Tommy Koh)

IT IS a sad reflection on human nature that when a region is faced with a crisis, it is often treated with disdain instead of sympathy. I recall that during the Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998, some of our European and American friends were extremely unkind and predicted that Asia would suffer a lost decade.

We must not do the same to Europe which has been faced with a serious financial and economic crisis since 2008. I have, therefore, decided to swim against the tide of anti-Europe sentiments.

I wish to highlight the fact that not all the countries of Europe are in crisis. Last year, of the 27 European Union countries, only three had a negative growth rate. In the 2010-2011 Global Competitiveness Index of the World Economic Forum, six EU countries were ranked among the 10 most competitive countries.

I wish to make the case that Singapore has much to learn from the successful countries of Europe. I will focus on four European countries whose populations are below 10 million – namely, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.


LESSON NO. 1

Inclusive growth

THE citizens of the world aspire to live in fair societies. One important aspect of fairness is the equitable distribution of income and wealth. This is the moral force behind the economic doctrine of inclusive growth. As a result of globalisation, technological change and domestic policies, many countries have become extremely unequal.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is a reflection of the American people’s sentiments against a growth model which over-rewards the top 1 per cent and under-rewards the remaining 99 per cent. The inequality in Singapore, as measured by the Gini coefficient, is even greater than that in America. Too great a gap between rich and poor undermines solidarity and social cohesion. It poses a threat to our harmony and our sense of nationhood.

Let us compare Singapore, on the one hand, and Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden on the other. Their per capita incomes in 2010 were as follows:

Singapore: S$59,813
Denmark: S$69,249(€42,500)
Finland: S$54,584 (€33,500)
Norway: S$105,096 (€64,500)
Sweden: S$60,613 (€37,200)


The Gini coefficient is used universally as a summary measure of income inequality. It is based upon the difference between the incomes of the top 20 per cent and the bottom 20 per cent. Zero represents total income equality and one represents total inequality. What are the Gini coefficients of the five countries? In 2010, they were as follows:

Singapore: 0.46
Denmark: 0.27
Finland: 0.25
Norway: 0.24
Sweden: 0.24

In order to get a better sense of the wages earned in the five countries by the bottom 20-30 per cent of the working population, I have chosen the cleaner and the bus driver. The average monthly wages of the cleaner and bus driver in the five countries are as follows:

Singapore
Cleaner S$800     Bus driver S$1,800
Denmark
Cleaner S$5,502  Bus driver S$6,193
Finland
Cleaner S$2,085  Bus driver S$3,910
Norway
Cleaner S$5,470  Bus driver S$6,260
Sweden
Cleaner S$3,667   Bus driver S$4,480




A few observations are in order.
First, Singapore’s per capita income is roughly similar to those of Denmark, Finland and Sweden.

Second, the four Nordic countries are much more equitable than Singapore. This is reflected in their Gini coefficients as well as in the average monthly wages earned by the cleaner and the bus driver.

Third, some Nordic countries have a minimum wage and some, such as Denmark, do not. The minimum wage is, therefore, a means but not the only means to ensure that workers earn a living wage.

Fourth, the argument that the only way to raise the wages of our low-wage workers is through productivity increase is not persuasive. I would like to know, for example, how the two women who clean my office can be more productive than they already are in order to deserve higher wages? I would like to know how the Singapore bus driver can be more productive so that his income will approximate those of his Nordic counterparts?

The truth is that we pay these workers such low wages not primarily because their productivity is inherently low, but largely because they are competing against an unlimited supply of cheap foreign workers. Because cheap workers are so plentiful, they tend to be employed unproductively. In the Nordic countries, unskilled workers are relatively scarce and thus deployed more productively, with higher skills, mechanisation, and better organisation.


What is the solution? The solution is for the State to reduce the supply of cheap foreign workers or introduce a minimum wage or to target specific industries, such as the hospitality industry, for wage enhancement.

LESSON NO. 2

Higher fertility

ONE of our challenges is our low fertility rate. For a country’s population to remain stable, it needs a total fertility rate (TFR) of 2.14. Singapore’s current TFR is 1.2. Our population experts tell us that our population will begin to shrink by 2025. They have, therefore, argued that, to make up the deficit, we need to import foreigners to add to our population.

Importing foreigners is the second best solution. The best solution is to raise our TFR. On this point, our policymakers seem to have run out of ideas. The various incentive schemes, such as baby bonus, do not seem to be productive. It is time to look at our four European countries for inspiration. Their 2010 TFRs were as follows:

Denmark: 1.87
Finland: 1.87
Norway: 1.95
Sweden: 1.98


The four Nordic countries have TFRs which are close to the replacement level. This achievement seems extraordinary. They do not have the benefit of maids. There are over 200,000 foreign domestic workers in Singapore. They also do not have grandparents who help with child-rearing. At the same time, they have very high participation of women in their workforces. In terms of availability of time and help for child-rearing, common sense would suggest that the TFR in Singapore should be higher than those in the Nordic countries. How do we explain this paradox?

Our population experts cannot explain this paradox. I will venture a hypothesis. I believe that the high TFR in the Nordic countries could be due to four factors: the availability of convenient, affordable and good childcare; good work-life balance; an excellent and relatively stress-free education system; and the relative absence of male chauvinism.

Let me say a few words on each of the four factors.

First, one of the missing links in Singapore is the inadequate supply of conveniently located, good quality and affordable childcare for infants and young children.

Second, the work-life balance in Singapore, especially for many young professionals such as lawyers, architects and teachers, is poor. Singaporeans work one of the longest hours in the developed world. They have little energy for life other than work and thus little time for meaningful family life.

The Government and our employers should reflect on whether the existing climate of encouraging or requiring our young professionals to work late into the night is necessary or desirable.


Third, sociologists like Paulin Straughan have pointed out that Singapore’s highly competitive and stressful education system is also a deterrent to working parents having more children. The Nordic countries, on the other hand, are famous for their high quality, egalitarian education which fulfils the children’s aspiration for a happy childhood. It is a paradox that Finland, with no streaming, no elite schools and no private tuition industry, is ranked as having the world’s best education system.

Fourth, it is significant that the developed countries with low TFRs include Japan, Korea, Italy and Spain, which have a high degree of male chauvinism. Is it possible that Singapore too has a high degree of male chauvinism? The women of Singapore are often blamed for not marrying and having children. Perhaps, the main problem is not our women but our men. Perhaps, what we also need is a mindset change on the part of our men towards the status and role of our women and the shared responsibilities of the husband and wife, and father and mother in domestic chores and child-rearing.


LESSON NO. 3

Embracing nature and sustainable development

SINGAPORE is probably Asia’s cleanest, greenest and most liveable city. Our air is healthy, our water is potable and our land is wholesome. In addition, we enjoy good public health and food safety. Visitors are astonished by the fact that, in spite of our high density, 47 per cent of our land is covered in greenery. In view of this, the reader will ask what can we learn from the four Nordic countries? I suggest three things.


First, people there love nature and their natural heritage. They seem to have an emotional, even a spiritual, relationship with nature. They love their forests, lakes and fjords. In contrast, most Singaporeans tend to have a more pragmatic relationship with nature. They apply a cost-benefit analysis to the destruction of a natural heritage. Pragmatism is one of our virtues. We should, however, be aware of the defects of our virtues. Not everything in life can be monetised.

Second, we can learn useful lessons from the way in which the Nordic countries have been able to reconcile economic competitiveness with a deep commitment to sustainable development. After the 1992 Earth Summit, each of them has established a national commission to mainstream sustainable development.

In the case of Finland, the Prime Minister chairs the National Commission on Sustainable Development. The result is that there is a national consensus in each of those countries to internalise the ethic of sustainable development into all aspects of life.

Third, at the micro-level, there are lessons in areas where Singapore has room for improvement – for example, in energy efficiency, the use of solar energy, the recycling of waste, the use of non-polluting buses, changing unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, etc.

LESSON NO. 4

Heritage, culture and the arts


IN THE past two decades, inspired by the 1989 Ong Teng Cheong report and Mr George Yeo’s leadership at the then Ministry of Information and the Arts, Singapore has undergone a paradigm shift in the areas of heritage, culture and the arts. The arts have blossomed. More and more Singaporeans are interested in knowing their history and preserving their heritage. The trend is, therefore, favourable. What can we learn from the Nordic countries?

First, we can learn the importance of giving all our children a good education in the arts. We have made good progress in recent years. The opening of the Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music and the School of The Arts were important milestones.

We can strengthen arts education in our schools. We should consider starting courses in art history and museum studies at the undergraduate and graduate levels. This will help in the training of teachers, curators, dealers, collectors and museum administrators, all in short supply.

Second, we can emulate the achievements of the Nordic countries in respect of museums. They have an impressive range of museums with strong collections. They have been able to harness the benefit of public-private partnership. Their museum collections extend beyond their nations to the cultures of the world.

For example, the David Collection in Copenhagen is one of the world’s best collections of Islamic Art. The Kiasma Museum of Contemporary Art in Helsinki has a very ambitious programming agenda, covering Western as well as Asian and African art.

Third, because of their ancient Viking past and current strength in shipping and other maritime industries, Denmark, Norway and Sweden have outstanding museums of maritime history.


Given the importance of maritime trade to Singapore’s past and present, it is puzzling that we do not have a museum of maritime history. I hope one day the historic Clifford Pier, which now houses a restaurant, will be the home of a world-class museum of maritime history. When that time comes, we can look to the Nordic countries for inspiration.

By Tommy Koh, For The Straits Times, May 19, 2012
The writer is chairman, Centre for International Law and Rector, Tembusu College, National University of Singapore.
By Invitation is a new column featuring leading thinkers and writers from Singapore and the region.






From: What Singapore can learn from Europe By Tommy Koh « SG Hard Truth: