Conclusion

The groundwork for Finland’s educational change was set during the 1970s in response to declining economy. During this time the Finnish government implemented new policies and procedures for education institutions based on building equality and lessening competition. It placed the responsibility firmly in the hands of the teachers and their administrators and made sure each teacher was highly educated and highly regarded in the community. In the article Rethinking Accountability in a Knowledge Society, author Pasi Sahlberg (2010) explains Finland’s response to improve learning of all students has relied on four strategic principles:

“(a) guaranteeing equal opportunities to good public education for all;

(b) strengthening professionalism of and trust in teachers,

(c) steering educational change by enriched information about the process and performance of teaching and schooling; and

(d) facilitating network-based school improvement” (Sahlberg, p.56).

            In his article, Pasi Sahlberg (2010) contends that accountability should be incorporated into students’ progress and development and not as a standard of measurement for teachers or their ability. He explains that in Finland, “The global accountability movement has been reflected in clearer responsibilities, moral purposes and adoption of development-oriented education evaluation policies that integrate ‘accountability’ with overall educational progress in schools” (Sahlberg, p. 56). Creating a successful society in the 21^st century is necessary if nations want to remain competitive in a global marketplace. Finland’s government realized the creation of a strong society begins in its schools and with the education of their students. They also realized the schools could not do this strenththening of society alone but would need the support of the community. In order to gain the support of parents and businesses they would need to build a strong level of trust. Pasi Sahlberg explains, “Specific strategies for building trust included, among other things, raising the professional status of teachers, enhancing school leadership and building professional learning communities in schools (Sahlberg, p.57). Hiring highly educated teachers and requiring Master’s level degrees was one step in the revamping of their schools. By hiring teachers of high quality, they began placing more responsibilities for curriculum development and lesson creation on the shoulders of teachers and administrators. By transforming schools into a hub of educational experts, trust was gained throughout communities and with that trust came support from parents and business leaders. With this trust came less reliance on test based accountability practices. When the community had trust in the educational system, it seems they no longer needed ‘proof of learning’. In Sahlberg’s article he explains, “Finnish experience suggests, after all, that it is possible to create an equity-based, high-performing educational system for a knowledge society relying on responsibility and trust instead of test-based accountability policies” (Sahlberg, p.57).

            In stark contrast, the United States system of education relies on accountability measures through the implementation of “Race for the Top” kinds of programs which tie accountability to financial incentives for schools and through the “No Child Left Behind” act which implements deadlines for meeting ever increasing adequate yearly progress percentages and holds only teachers accountable for student learning performance on standardized tests. But Mr. Sahlberg is not suggesting a deletion of accountability in total but instead to consider it in a different way. He contends the question is not whether schools, teachers, and students should be held accountable or not but that the challenge is to establish an accountability system that would “support worthwhile learning, increase social capital and thereby help schools to be active players in developing our societies” (Sahlberg, p.58).

            Standardized tests rely on student demonstration of the most basic type of knowledge and does not ask students to show how to problem solve or show their critical thinking skills. In his article Mr. Sahlberg explains, “Policies that judge the quality of an educational system, province, or school by assessing student learning using common standardized tests, implicitly define what kind of learning is important in school. Most current accountability tests assess too much standard knowledge delivered by a prescribed curriculum—the outcomes that are easily measurable, and not necessarily the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that students will need in their lives within a knowledge society” (Sahlberg, p. 58).

            By demanding highly trained educational experts in the field of education to teach students, building trust in the community, removing standardized testing practices any by default ideas of teacher accountability, Finland has shown its educational system to be highly successful. Mr. Sahlberg suggests student assessment needs to be “designed in ways that support learning—not just achievement—in schools. Therefore, school accountability should be based on better tests and broader range of assessment methods that focus on meta-cognitive and skill learning, rely more on sample-based test data, and be matched by stronger parental involvement and community responsibility. Furthermore, collective responsibility for learning, well-being and happiness of young people in schools should supersede administrative accountability that is externally applied to schools” (Sahlberg, p. 58).

            In conclusion, Pasi Sahlberg makes several suggestions for educational system who have a desire to learn from the successes of Finland. First, education policies and efforts to change need to focus on building trust and collective responsibility in schools and communities. He further explains, “teachers belong to a community of high-professionals, just as medical doctors and engineers, where trust in and among professionals is the prime code of work” (Sahlberg, p. 60).  Next, education policies should not focus on accountability methods that discourage teachers but instead “should promote more intelligent forms of school accountability and match them to external accountability needs. Test-based accountability, public ranking of schools based on those tests, and related rewards and sanctions are not contributing to ongoing efforts to sustainable improvement of the quality of public education. More intelligent accountability involves all stakeholders, including students and parents, in discussing and determining the extent that jointly set goals have been attained” (Sahlberg, p. 60).

            It seems our school systems have lost sight of what is most important in the education of our youth. They have slowly veered away from investigative type learning where students are given time to handle and manipulate their surroundings in order to form their own conclusions and create their own knowledge. School systems and policy makers have lost sight of the importance of children’s happiness in schools. Pasi Sahlberg has examined and made countless studies of what ideas contribute to the strength of Finland’s educational institutions and has come to some important conclusions. He explains, “collective responsibility for learning, well-being and happiness of young people in schools should supersede administrative accountability that is externally applied to schools” (Sahlberg, p. 58). If American schools intend to be successful and if the U.S. is to remain forceful in a global market place, many lessons can be learned from Finland about how to strengthen our society one child at a time.