
Jennifer Chung
Supervisors: David Phillips
less
Related Authors
Judith L Green
University of California, Santa Barbara
George K. # Zarifis
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Paul R Carr
Université du Québec en Outaouais
Jo Tondeur
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Vassilia Hatzinikita
Hellenic Open University
Andrea Hellman
Missouri State University
Stephanie K Kim
Georgetown University
Armando Marques-Guedes
UNL - New University of Lisbon
Gerardo L Blanco
Boston College
paolo landri
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR)
InterestsView All (13)
Uploads
Papers by Jennifer Chung
International achievement studies such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) have an increasing influence on education policy worldwide. The use of such data can provide a basis for evidence-based policy making to initiate educational reform. Finland, a high performer in PISA, is often cited as an example of both efficient and equitable education. Finland’s teachers and teacher education have not only garnered much attention for their role in the country’s PISA successes, but have also influenced education policy change in England.
Main argument
This article argues that the Finnish model of teacher education has been borrowed uncritically by UK policy makers. Finnish and English philosophies of teacher preparation differ greatly, and the borrowing of the Finnish teacher education model does not fit within the teacher training viewpoint of England. The borrowed policies, thus, were decontextualized from the wider values and underpinnings of Finnish education. This piecemeal, “pick ‘n’ mix” (Morris 2012) approach to education policy reform ignores the fact that educational policies and “practices exist in ecological relationships with one another and in whole ecosystems of interrelated practices” (Kemmis and Heikkinen 2012, 157). Thus, these borrowed teacher preparation policies will not necessarily lead to the outcomes outlined by policy makers in the reforms.
Sources of evidence
Two teacher preparation reforms in England, the University Training Schools (outlined in the UK government’s 2010 Schools White Paper, The Importance of Teaching) and the Master’s in Teaching and Learning (MTL), are used to illustrate the problematic nature of uncritical policy borrowing. This article juxtaposes these policies with the Finnish model of teacher education, which is a research-based programme where all candidates are required to complete a Master’s degree. The contradictions exposed from this analysis further highlight the divergent practices of teacher preparation in England and Finland, or the disparate “ecosystems.” Evidence of educational policy borrowing in other settings is also considered.
Conclusions
Both the MTL and the White Paper reforms overlook the “ecosystem” surrounding Finnish teacher education. The school-based MTL contrasts with the research-based Finnish teachers’ MA. Similarly, the University Training Schools scheme, based on Finnish university-affiliated, teaching practice schools, contrasts heavily with the rest of the White Paper reforms, which contradict the philosophies and ethos behind Finnish teacher education by proposing the move of English teacher preparation away from the universities. The analysis highlights the uncritical eye through which politicians may view international survey results, looking for “quick fix” (Noah 1984, 550; Phillips and Ochs 2004, 780) options instead of utilising academic evidence for investigation on education and education reform.
"Next, Chung looks to the example of Finland, a country that has consistently performed well in PISA. She argues that Finnish success derives from a long-term planning approach that contrasts with the UK’s ideologically driven, ‘quick fix’ policy reactions. She urges comparative researchers to engage with policy makers over the interpretation of international comparisons. She offers the example of a UK Working Group doing just that, with which three of this Forum’s contributors are involved.
International achievement studies such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) have an increasing influence on education policy worldwide. The use of such data can provide a basis for evidence-based policy making to initiate educational reform. Finland, a high performer in PISA, is often cited as an example of both efficient and equitable education. Finland’s teachers and teacher education have not only garnered much attention for their role in the country’s PISA successes, but have also influenced education policy change in England.
Main argument
This article argues that the Finnish model of teacher education has been borrowed uncritically by UK policy makers. Finnish and English philosophies of teacher preparation differ greatly, and the borrowing of the Finnish teacher education model does not fit within the teacher training viewpoint of England. The borrowed policies, thus, were decontextualized from the wider values and underpinnings of Finnish education. This piecemeal, “pick ‘n’ mix” (Morris 2012) approach to education policy reform ignores the fact that educational policies and “practices exist in ecological relationships with one another and in whole ecosystems of interrelated practices” (Kemmis and Heikkinen 2012, 157). Thus, these borrowed teacher preparation policies will not necessarily lead to the outcomes outlined by policy makers in the reforms.
Sources of evidence
Two teacher preparation reforms in England, the University Training Schools (outlined in the UK government’s 2010 Schools White Paper, The Importance of Teaching) and the Master’s in Teaching and Learning (MTL), are used to illustrate the problematic nature of uncritical policy borrowing. This article juxtaposes these policies with the Finnish model of teacher education, which is a research-based programme where all candidates are required to complete a Master’s degree. The contradictions exposed from this analysis further highlight the divergent practices of teacher preparation in England and Finland, or the disparate “ecosystems.” Evidence of educational policy borrowing in other settings is also considered.
Conclusions
Both the MTL and the White Paper reforms overlook the “ecosystem” surrounding Finnish teacher education. The school-based MTL contrasts with the research-based Finnish teachers’ MA. Similarly, the University Training Schools scheme, based on Finnish university-affiliated, teaching practice schools, contrasts heavily with the rest of the White Paper reforms, which contradict the philosophies and ethos behind Finnish teacher education by proposing the move of English teacher preparation away from the universities. The analysis highlights the uncritical eye through which politicians may view international survey results, looking for “quick fix” (Noah 1984, 550; Phillips and Ochs 2004, 780) options instead of utilising academic evidence for investigation on education and education reform.
"Next, Chung looks to the example of Finland, a country that has consistently performed well in PISA. She argues that Finnish success derives from a long-term planning approach that contrasts with the UK’s ideologically driven, ‘quick fix’ policy reactions. She urges comparative researchers to engage with policy makers over the interpretation of international comparisons. She offers the example of a UK Working Group doing just that, with which three of this Forum’s contributors are involved.