Michael Gove MP and Education Secretary said recently that we should learn from other countries. According to the Programme for International Student Assessment in the last 3 assesments made (in 2000, 2003 and 2006) Finland came top of the league table.
“The Finnish education system is an egalitarian Nordic system, with no tuition fees for full-time students. Attendance is compulsory for nine years starting at age seven, and free meals are served to pupils at primary and secondary levels (called lukio in Finnish), where the pupils go to their local school. Education after primary school is divided into vocational and academic systems." (Source Wikipedia)
“The Finnish education system is an egalitarian Nordic system, with no tuition fees for full-time students. Attendance is compulsory for nine years starting at age seven, and free meals are served to pupils at primary and secondary levels (called lukio in Finnish), where the pupils go to their local school. Education after primary school is divided into vocational and academic systems." (Source Wikipedia)
You can read a full report on Vocational Education and Training in Finland at this link: PDF download
6 comments:
Thank you for this AT.
After listening to Mr Gove and the spokesman for university vice-chancellor's on the radio this morning I fear for our education system.
What's the chances over here of 'copying best practice'?
Finland is much the same as other Nordic countries. What Gove doesn't mention is the high taxation (alternative way of looking at it: investing in society) through which such excellence is achieved.
Perhaps, if the Tories weren't so enthusiastic to help their rich compatriots get richer, they'd tax in a more sophisticated, equitable manner. But that won't be swung into effect any time soon. Oh no!
I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of using ex-soldiers as teachers.
And I thought the government had just been advocating a masters degree as a requirement to become a teacher.
Not sure which government though, as I can't tell the difference between them any more, even more so since Mr Cameron decided to use quality of life (happiness) as a social benchmark - not that I disagree with him - I've always thought that using financial measures as a mark of success was only half the picture.
I also read an article about £50K being the level above which theres no appreciable difference in the happiness quotient (Quality of life) with increase in income.
AT:
How do we send stuff to you directly - you don't have a 'contact' link?
Hi contact page now added.
Thank you
Post a Comment