School Leadership for Systemic Improvement In Finland

2019

This paper discusses recent developments in school leadership practices in Finland. The focus is on what effects the major changes of education paradigms had in educational leadership. The theoretical discussion is based on several research findings. A meta analysis of 30 PhD studies was done by Alava, Halttunen & Risku (2012) in a research commissioned by the Finnish National Board of Education. Some of the key findings in this study were the need for stronger future orientation, the importance of broad pedagogical leadership, and understanding leadership as a resource with emphasis on shared leadership, change leadership and values leadership. The empirical examples in this paper are from two municipalities, Åland and Mäntsälä, where extensive development efforts were carried out in 2005-2018. The development in Åland was instigated by the rather poor results the students got in mathematics in the PISA 2003 assessment (Uljens, Sundqvist & Smeds-Nylund, 2016). In Mäntsälä the devel...

Bloomsbury Education and Childhood Studies, 2019

Comprehensive school system, Local education authorities, Decentralization, 'Culture of trust', Pupil welfare staff Comprehensive school system: An education system in which the schools are publicly funded and are commonly not able to select their intake on the basis of academic achievement or aptitude. It is the opposite of a selective school system, into which admission is based on selection criteria (Kalalahti, Silvennoinen, Varjo & Rinne 2015). Culture of trust: The unarticulated cultural principle in Finland, meaning that the central administration (Ministry of Education and Culture and the Finnish National Agency for Education) have confidence that local education authorities, together with principals, teachers, parents, and their communities know how to provide the best possible education for their children. Municipality: An administrative division having corporate status and powers of self-government as granted by the national laws to which it is subordinate. In 2018, Finland consists of 311 municipalities. They are the main providers of basic education (Varjo & Kalalahti 2018). Research on management, leadership and governance In Finland, local education administration at the primary level is the responsibility of the subordinate bodies of the state, municipalities. According Aho, Pitkänen and Sahlberg (2006), rather than unifying the education system through centralized decrees and standards, Finnish education policies have nurtured cohesive diversity and developed material and human resources. Hence, the practices on management, leadership and governance are distinctive.

Education Research International

The purpose of this study was to find out what current challenges successful principals in Estonia and Finland identify in developing their schools. The strategies used in dealing with these challenges were also analyzed within the framework of “growth-mindset pedagogy” as an educational approach to school leadership. The principals were interviewed, and the resulting data were analyzed by means of both inductive and deductive content analysis. The similarities among and differences between principals from Estonia and Finland were compared and discussed in the context of high-achievement-oriented but culturally different educational systems. According to the results, the challenges are similar in both countries, relating to the principals’ professional development, as well as developments in the curriculum and the learning community. The Estonian principals identified more challenges related to developments in the learning community than their Finnish peers, although in both countri...

American Journal of Educational Research, 2020

This paper discusses distributed leadership (DL) as educational leadership structure and its relation to school outcomes in compulsory schools. School outcomes are defined as students' learning to learn abilities. This study tests two hypotheses. H1: DL is perceived as a continuum consisting of two ends (as delegation and as situation-based interaction between leaders and subordinates). H2: conceptualization of DL as situation-based interaction positively affects the outcomes of the school. The data are leadership inquiry and students' longitudinal learning to learn follow-up data from grades 3 to 6 or grades 6 to 9. The results indicate that DL does not appear as a unidimensional continuum. Educational leadership is formed from multiple dimensions, and DL is one part of the whole; thus, H1 was incorrect. The conceptualization of DL as situation-based interaction is not statistically satisfactorily related to outcomes of the school; therefore, H2 was also incorrect. The paper concludes that results of this study point to the meaning of local education policy as a means of steering the distribution of students between schools in order to maintain the small between-school differences in student outcomes.

Research in Educational Administration & Leadership

Many phrases used in education policy discussions are very vague. They are fluid signifiers that everybody can interpret and understand in their own way. They are useful when building political consensus or affirmation. But the phrases are often too vague when trying to communicate and understand education and educational leadership because they obscure the elements in the phrase: who is the political agent, and what are the relations between policy, research, school and staff. They also

2023

This chapter presents the conceptual evolvement of Finnish pedagogical leadership in the international setting. There are three main scopes. First, we discuss the historical evolvement of school leadership in Finland. This started in the 1950s with the first initiatives towards pedagogical leadership. Then, we describe the findings of the studies of several researchers to identify various aspects and nuances of pedagogical leadership till today. Second, we discuss the findings of one of the latest theorising studies on Finnish pedagogical leadership, present its four axioms of pedagogical leadership and connect these with various international studies ending with a new understanding of the core of Finnish pedagogical leadership. Third, we combine the findings of the historical scope, and several recent Finnish studies in pedagogical leadership. Finally, we present the novel understanding of Finnish pedagogical leadership in more detail, its core, its orientations, its goals and its processes. Last, we make a proposal for a paradigm shift for teachers, day-care centre and school leaders, and educational leader educating organisations.

2013

This study was developed in the frame of the European Policy Network of School Leadership (EPNoSL) project’s second work package (WP) entitled “The State of Affairs on School Leadership in Europe”. The objectives of this WP were a) to review and define critical factors for the implementation of LLL Strategy and Policy under the scope of equity and learning and the perspective of school leaders (SL), b) to reflect on the need for a renewed research agenda on SL, and c) to critically review the knowledge base for the construction of a common European Policy Indicators Framework on/for SL. The EPNoSL project considers school leadership as a multi-faceted process of strategically using the unique skills and knowledge of teachers, pupils, and parents, toward achieving common educational goals. It is more about relationships rather than people or processes. Under the EPNoSL’s perspective, within the framework of educational goals, leadership is present at all levels of an organization, directed at serving the most important stakeholders, through inspiring others in the organization to take part in the management process. Chapter one offers a review of the literature on school leadership and equity in order to help provide policy with an evidence base on school leadership from the perspective of equity. This chapter cautions that literature on the efficacy of school leadership and equity may help constitute a “de-stated” account of governance that places onus on school leaders to take responsibility for social processes that may, in reality, lie beyond their control. In chapter two it is argued that as the issues Europe faces become more testing, so schools are faced with intensifying difficulties in offering an equitable education to all. As it is argued, the causes of inequality are of course multiple and complex and not all under the control of school leaders, but the latter have the opportunity to minimise or exacerbate inequality. In chapter three, decentralisation is discussed in relation to school autonomy types and the space for manoeuvres to schools and school leaders in related to critical issues such as finances, staff management, curricula etc. It is identified a trend of restructuring following New Public Management patterns of redistribution of power and governance between the State, local authorities and organisations. The couplings to local, municipal and national authorities have been loosened on how to spend public funding, how to manage staff and how to run schools, but the aim and curriculum of education has been tightened at the same time: standards are being detailed more and there are more control and accountability. This autonomy has been established according to bureaucratic and market place logics, using new social technologies like tests and quality reporting or inspection. Following those trends is a trend to empower school leaders more in the style of private sector top down management and leadership. In chapter four the focus is on the leadership and management of change within organisations. Important questions have to do with how do we ensure that change is led and managed successfully - what do we need to consider when leading and managing the change process? Chapter five on policy response explores the concept of policy, and considers what is meant by policy response. In this chapter it is provided an analysis that acknowledges that policy is in part extemporized, and in part the attempt to promote a “de-stated” account of governance. Chapter six offers an analysis of policy briefs from 15 EU countries that were drafted by the EPNoSL partners. The analysis focuses on a) the policy emphasis that is placed on issues of equity and learning achievement at school, and on b) how the role of school leaders is (re)conceptualized in legislative frameworks and policy documents emphasizing on the relationships between leadership in schools, equity and learning outcomes, and c) outlines the organization, the content, and the duration of principals’ and other school leaders’ training that is available, focusing in particular to training on issues related to equity and learning outcomes. What this analysis reveals is that while there is some policy emphasis on equity and learning achievement at school drawing mostly from the PISA results, less emphasis is placed in the training of school leaders on how to deal with issues of equity and learning outcomes. Chapter seven provides the Swedish Ministry of Education’s perspective on policies to support equity and improved learning outcomes and the role of principals in achieving these aims. As it is noted, equity and learning – linked to improved student outcomes - is not an easy task. The variation between high- and low-performing students as well as high and low performing schools and school districts in Sweden has increased over time, and concerns are raised about equity and learning linked to the quality of student outcomes in the context of Sweden’s highly decentralized school system. Chapter eight offers an in-depth account of the state of affairs on school leadership in Finland. The goal of this chapter is to highlight the academic underpinning on school leadership in Finland and, on such a base, to review the current policy and trends in this country. As it is argued, a major re-orientation to school leadership is taking place in this country. Principals in Finland are called not only to act as educational leaders of their schools but also as managers who are responsible for financing and personnel issues, and also are held accountable for the results of their institutions. Chapter nine provides a comprehensive overview of the research orientation of studies on school principals across the northern European community --its content, research designs, major findings - and offers conclusions and recommendations for advancing research on school principals. Key research areas identified are the following: 1) important educational challenges in order to inform policy makers, 2) implementation processes in relation to national policy on the local governing structures, 3) effects of national policy on changes processes on the local school level, 4) effects of international testing schemes on student outcomes, 5) effects on change processes in local schools in relation to the local governing structures, 6) principals and their decision making in relation to school governance, 7) principals’ strategic decision making in relation to school improvement, 8) effects of principal training programs, 9) effects of the relation between principals and teachers on improved student outcomes, and 10) effects of school leaders’ behavior on schools results analyzed with an organizational lens. Chapter ten deepens into the discussion on policy response by focusing on the implementation of policy on school leadership and equity in Scotland. In particular, in this chapter it is acknowledged that such policy is in part extemporized and in part an attempt to make inevitable a “de-stated” account of governance, as argued in chapter 5. On this basis, it is asked what practices such policy does, and does not permit in the context of Scotland. Chapter eleven presents a new analysis of the PISA 2009 datasets in relation to school leadership. In this study the hypothesis that the intake of schools related to the socio-economic and cultural background of their students is a critical factor for basing policy on equity and learning was supported by evidence from PISA 2009 showing that students in schools with a high share of students coming from low socio-economic and cultural backgrounds perform on average much lower than their peers in medium or high SES schools. Low SES schools pose therefore much more pressing challenges to school leaders as compared to more privileged schools in terms of their intake. This reality observed in almost all EU countries has or should have implications regarding the training, professional development, retention and replacement of school leaders in low SES schools. Furthermore, the analysis of the relationship between principals’ leadership behaviour in low SES schools and student performance showed two dominant patterns between EU countries: the “reactive school management” pattern and the “proactive school management” pattern. As it is argued, these two patterns possibly use different fields of comparison, and is likely to reflect different underlying cultures of school management. On the basis of the first eleven chapters of this report, as well as the documentation that was produced during the first year of the EPNoSL, in chapter twelve a number of critical factors are identified that may shape the capacity and potential of school leaders to exercise effectively school leadership in order to implement strategies and initiatives that are targeting to combat inequalities in access, opportunities and outcomes and promote learning performance in schools. The critical factors identified are the following: a) policy ownership, b) empowerment of different stakeholders and trust in their professionalism, c) supportive shared dispositions to inclusive schools, d) sound scientific evidence supporting the design, implementation and evaluation of policies, e) human resources: school leaders’ capacity building, f) political commitment and priorities, g) policy coherence and h) financial resources. Finally, in chapter thirteen a preliminary European Policy Indicators framework is proposed to support policy development that is aimed to promote culturing and structuring of school leadership from the perspective of equity and learning. The framework builds upon the critical factors on policy implementation identified and discussed in the previous chapter.

Educational governance research, 2023

This chapter investigates the educational policy and governance, and also leadership in educational contexts in Finland from the 1950s into today's ongoing reforms. The investigation continues the debates of several Finnish researchers on past Finnish educational policy and administration. In addition, it follows the recent research on how school keeping has evolved into the present educational leadership in Finland. This research also presented the general definition for Finnish educational leadership applied in this chapter. As to the description and definition of educational policy and governance, the handling will follow research on the development of Finnish educational policy and governance in the Finnish complex and dynamic operational environment during the 2000s. Finally, the chapter investigates how Finland appears to be directing and developing its educational policy, governance, and leadership into the future. This includes the analysis of the Finnish government Education Policy Account 2021, which maps Finnish educational policy, governance, and leadership into 2040, and of other relevant topical education policy documents. With the analysis, we present both future aspirations and educational policy mechanisms, efforts, and experimentation to reach the aspired education policy goals.

ECPS - Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies, 2015

This article draws on the work conducted within the context of the European Policy Network on School Leadership. Its aim is to discuss and reflect upon school leadership policy development in the context of European education systems. The first section focuses on the concept of school leadership, identifying connections between school leadership practices and the promotion of equity and learning in schools. The second section discusses critical factors in policy implementation that shape the capacity of school leaders to combat inequalities and promote learning performance in schools. The article ends with an outlining of key policy actions for the promotion of distributed leadership practices in schools. In effect, this section stresses the need for a conceptual shift in understanding school leadership, from the position, roles, responsibilities, traits and capacities of the individuals holding formally assigned leadership roles in schools, to leadership as a function inside schools. As it is argued, such a conceptual shift calls for a policy shift in school leadership capacity-building that strengthens, but also goes beyond, the traditional repertoire of policies that focus on the preparation and professional training of school heads or other members of formal teams responsible for school management.