Matthew Yglesias » More Serious Friday Nordic Blogging

Dec 19th, 2008 at 2:24 pm

More Serious Friday Nordic Blogging

Writing in Newsweek, Obama education adviser Linda Darling-Hammond talks about lessons from Finland and she wasn’t even on my recent education policy junket to Finland. Dana Goldstein was on said junket and also writes about education policy lessons from Finland for The American Prospect.

For my own part, visiting Finland mostly confirms things that I think we already knew about education. But what’s interesting about visiting a prosperous, egalitarian social democracy with a high level of education is less that it teaches us things we didn’t know, but that it shows that certain kind of theoretical constructs we all understand can be realized in practice. I think if you asked just about anyone “would our school achievement be better if the child poverty rate were dramatically lower?” they would say that it would. Similarly, if you ask if school achievement would be more even if school funding were even, they would say that it would. And if you asked if providing higher-quality early childhood education more broadly would enhance achievement, everyone would say yes. And if you asked what would happen if we drastically increased the number of people who want to be teachers, such that slots in teacher training programs were highly competitive, people would tell you that student achievement would improve. And if you asked people whether higher levels of educational attainment would boost prosperity, people would tell you yes. And if you asked whether more equal education outcomes would lead to a more even distribution of income, they would tell you it would. And if you asked whether a more even distribution of income would lead to more even education outcomes, people would tell you it would.

But even though I don’t think anyone would really dispute any of that, we don’t just do that stuff. Instead, we’re trapped in a frustrating circle of passive acceptance of the idea that we just have to live in a country where public services are ill-funded and poorly delivered. And it’s not just that conservatives block reforms — progressives have let their horizons slip incredibly low. A country that once built transcontinental railroads and sent people to the moon has decided that for some reason it’d just be impossible to solve our current social problems. And when you point out to people that there are countries where the political system has taken decisive action to tackle these challenges, people kind of shrug and observe that the United States is very big. Which is true. But the country was also big years ago when we were building the world’s first mass literacy society. Indeed, it used to be considered advantageous to the United States that we were so big and people used to wonder whether small countries weren’t just inherently stuck in poverty.

The truth of the matter, however, isn’t that our problems couldn’t be solved it’s that we’re not seriously trying. And we’ve developed a political culture in which that’s considered okay.

Comments
46

Filed under: education, Finland,

46 Responses to “More Serious Friday Nordic Blogging”

James F. Elliott Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
For the love of Vishnu, close italics!!!
jeebus Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
this blog has been boring lately. ENTERTAIN ME BETTER
Tag Closer Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Cryptic Ned Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
So, which of this is a quote, and which is you talking?
Neil the Ethical Werewolf Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
When the Tsar leaves out an italics tag, everyone in Russia gets slanty.
Noah Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
I rarely comment, but just wanted to say thank you for this post.
Njorl Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I think if you asked just about anyone “would our school achievement be better if the child poverty rate were dramatically lower?” they would say that it would. Similarly, if you ask if school achievement would be more even if school funding were even, they would say that it would. And if you asked if providing higher-quality early childhood education more broadly would enhance achievement, everyone would say yes. And if you asked what would happen if we drastically increased the number of people who want to be teachers, such that slots in teacher training programs were highly competitive, people would tell you that student achievement would improve. And if you asked people whether higher levels of educational attainment would boost prosperity, people would tell you yes. And if you asked whether more equal education outcomes would lead to a more even distribution of income, they would tell you it would. And if you asked whether a more even distribution of income would lead to more even education outcomes, people would tell you it would.

Not if they chose to lie.
Chris Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Private companies were responsible for connecting the nation with railroads, not American government.

Further, you’re being a little too simplistic. For example, while it may be true that tight income distributions lead to tight educational achievement distributions, there are other things associated with tight income distributions beyond simply education. Surely there are some trade-offs that make these judgments more complicated than your text admits. In practice things tend to be a lot more complex than they seem to the armchair pundit.
salient Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
And it’s not just that conservatives block reforms — progressives have let their horizons slip incredibly low.

True. Thank you for saying it.

This post was a breath of relatively fresh air.
superdestroyer Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Does anyone really believe that in a country where the current president and the president elect attended public schools and the president-elect would not even consider sending his children to public schools that education will get better.

What is most amazing about education in the U.S. is that the rich and elite know what works because they send their own children to schools that actually educate children. Yet, they make one policy proposal after another that make the public schools less like the private schools their own children attend and more like day care centers for toddlers.

In addition, what can be said about the educational process in the U.S when the black presidential elect will not send his own children to schools that have more than a few black children?
harold Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
The comments section here seems to be messed up.

But I will venture to comment that the attitude here about education reminds me of the attitude people had about crime before Bratton (was it?) came in and said we are going to fix the crime problem. People were hopeless and cynical.

The situation is not hopeless, but I do think that right now the emphasis ought to be on service to the community –and not just one’s “synchronous” community of immediate contemporaries but the “diatonic” community of the past and future to which we all belong.

Education involves dialog between the past and the future.
This is not possible where social insecurity is so great that one’s own immediate survival and that of one’s children cannot be counted on — thus we have gotten the hyper-individualism of the Reagan years to the present, where education was seen only as a means of individual advancement through the accumulation of riches, rather than as something involving the transmission of invaluable (and intangible) cultural resources.
DMonteith Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Private companies were responsible for connecting the nation with railroads, not American government.

From Wikipedia:

Besides land grants along the right-of-way, each railroad was subsidized $16,000 per mile ($9,940/km) built over an easy grade, $32,000 per mile ($19,880/km) in the high plains, and $48,000 per mile ($29,830/km) in the mountains.

I’m shocked, shocked(!), to discover that a wingnut troll commenting on Matt’s blog is wrong!
robertdfeinman Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
The truth of the matter, however, isn’t that our problems couldn’t be solved it’s that we’re not seriously trying.

Who is this “we” that’s not seriously trying. The truth of the matter is that with wealth and power as concentrated as it is in this country the “we” who maintains the status quo can do so even thought the vast majority of the people want something else.

Look up the stats on the percent of people that support public education, or universal health care, or even getting out of our two wars. Then look at how responsive government is to these opinions. Why should legislators do anything? They generally get re-elected at rates of 90% or better. They get their campaign funds from the wealthy, so that’s whose interest they support.

Even Obama, for all his grass roots support, got half his funds from big donors and bundlers.

Perhaps Matt is suggesting that people take to the streets as they have done in France over the past few years. If that’s not what he has in mind then let’s hear some concrete suggestions as to how “we” could be doing more.
John Emerson Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Social problems make conservatives happy because it proves to them that their world view is right.
harold Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Among those who have benefited from the educational status quo in this country have been the real estate speculation industry. Now might be a good time to hit them while they are down.
ed Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
If you ask if school achievement would be more even if school funding were even, they would say that it would.

I’m highly skeptical. I believe the big urban districts with the worst performance generally have above average funding per student. As far as I’m aware, the link between funding and outcomes is pretty weak. And making funding “even” would involve things like cutting expenditures in Washington DC and raising them in Utah, which would, if anything, make the gaps bigger.

Is there some evidence I’m not aware of.
ed Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
To clarify my last comment, I think it would make sense to give MORE funding to the poorer districts, rather than an equal amount. But I don’t hold out a lot of hope that this will do much at all the close the achievement gap. As far as I know, the gaps are still huge in states where there is little or no funding gap. Anybody know about any research on this?
harold Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
The poorer districts’ apparent large funding numbers are swelled by the costs of caring for special ed. students (often severely handicapped), and do not reflect amounts budgeted for educating regular students, which is minimal. On the other hand, the amount per pupil at wealthy suburban districts surrounding NYC, for instance, is comparable to the amounts spent by the wealthiest prep schools, or was when my kids were in school.
Cleve Clailer Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Instead, we’re trapped in a frustrating circle of passive acceptance of the idea that we just have to live in a country where public services are ill-funded and poorly delivered.

Untrue: we actively blame all of the problems on the darkies, close our eyes really tight and wish they’d vanish.
Glaivester Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
But I will venture to comment that the attitude here about education reminds me of the attitude people had about crime before Bratton (was it?) came in and said we are going to fix the crime problem. People were hopeless and cynical.

It’s not that the problem is insoluble, it’s just that we don’t trust in solutions that involve throwing more money at the problem with no other serious reforms.

And “Cleve Clailer,” no one is arguing that we should ignore the problem because it involves “darkies.” What we are saying is that unless we face the likely probability that people from different races on average vary in their faculties, and then ask “how do we work with that,” we won’t be able to deal with our problems.

Interestingly enough, some of the reforms Obama promised - judging teacher performance on student improvement from grade-to-grade instead of based on raw student performance*, are actually consistent with such a policy shift and would likely do some good.

*A 5th grade teacher who takes kids with 1st-grade level reading skills (4 years behind) and brings them up to 3rd or 4th grade level by the time they become 6th graders (now only 2 or 3 years behind) would be a considered a failure based on raw scores, but would actually be getting the kids caught up by 1 or 2 grades.
Steve Lieber Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Suddenly I want to hear a group of Finnish schoolboys singing “Way down in the Hole.”
Trevor Says:
December 20th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
When the new elite first began pullulating around thirty years ago - it was quickly evident that their only value was the almighty dollar. “Greed is good!” became the mantra and all values beyond it quickly began to rot.
Jasper Says:
December 20th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
And when you point out to people that there are countries where the political system has taken decisive action to tackle these challenges, people kind of shrug and observe that the United States is very big.

They also love to point out that having the US government do more might also create the risk that a black or brown person somewhere might get some taxpayer help, too (”Sweden’s so much more, er, homogeneous than America!”). And we can’t have that, can we?
Jasper Says:
December 20th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
As far as I know, the gaps are still huge in states where there is little or no funding gap. Anybody know about any research on this?

No specifics, but everything credible-sounding I’ve read on the subject suggests the socioeconomic status of a child’s parents accounts for a frustratingly large part of a child’s chances for academic success — no matter how much taxpayers are spending on his education.
Stephen Myles St. George Says:
December 20th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Why not Sweden? Sweden has liberalised its education system to such an extent that there is significant for-profit private participation in the system (i.e. charters, even charter “chains” and “franchises”), as well as a fully funded system of vouchers.

Sweden is also one of the most successful education systems in the world, but with much greater choice and freedom than the Finnish system. Why does Prof. Hammond-Darling not investigate this? Or is she being inhibited by her socialistic fantasies?
harold Says:
December 21st, 2008 at 3:06 am
“For-profit Schools”? — Let’s stop the fantasy that education can be opportunity for companies to make a quick buck.

http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/htimes/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4325:an-academic-star-finlands-focus-on-education-translates-into-top-achievement&catid=15:finland-in-the-world-press&Itemid=161
Excerpt:

Finland’s education system is given another close look, this time by Iowa newspaper Des Moines Register.

…there’s nothing stopping Iowa – or the nation – from adapting … approaches that are making a difference in Finland and other top-performing countries on PISA, including:

– Careful selection and lengthy preparation of teachers.

– A clear, rigorous national curriculum.

– Constant, enthusiastic help for struggling students.

– Ongoing, even daily, review of how to improve education.

Finland’s experience also shows that smart education reform can power economic success, a long-term view that’s vital in a time of financial crisis.

Until the early 1970s, Finland’s system split children into two educational tracks at around age ten or eleven – one group headed to universities, the other to work. A law enacted in 1968 set a new goal of top-notch basic education for all… Today, PISA results confirm equality of opportunity across the country, with only slight differences in student performance between schools.

That’s helped transform a country that once relied largely on natural resources, such as forestry, into a prosperous, high-tech powerhouse with one of the highest per capita incomes in Western Europe and a name almost synonymous with Nokia.” –Linda Lantor Fandel - Des Moines Register 23th November 2008
Heikki Saukkomaa - Lehtikuva
harold Says:
December 21st, 2008 at 3:35 am
The Education Olympics
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/dec/11/primary-maths-science-politics
Excerpt:

This week the results were announced for the Olympics of education. As they have for many years now, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan took home the medals. The contest was the quadrennial match of brainpower called the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, known fondly as the Timss, a worldwide measure of schoolchildren’s achievements, coordinated by Boston College and the non-profit International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
………
The US and England are both attuned to the need for education, and both ranked in the top 15 in this year’s Timss. But in the champions’ league were Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Japan. The same few countries dominate Pisa results, too. Finland was top science performer and second in reading and maths in the latest results, announced last year, while South Korea was first in reading and Taiwan topped the maths table. Study the winners and you’ll see that success isn’t tied to class size, facilities, study time or money. The key is simply the winners’ care for and attention to their education system, focused in three important areas.

First, individualism. In Finland students start school later and spend fewer hours there than almost anywhere else, but schools emphasise “learning to learn”, not to get a job or a university degree. They focus on personalised, diagnostic assessment that works to “support and guide pupils in a positive manner”, as the Finnish education board phrases it. Students are carefully monitored so that specially trained teachers can catch them the moment they fall behind and intervene quickly to help them catch up.

Second, technology. High-scoring countries like South Korea use technology to make connections and to share information. Teachers share ideas online and parents become more involved in their children’s instruction. The South Korean education minister recently said access to technology over the last 10 years has changed how their students relate to teachers, so they question rather than merely absorb. South Korea is obviously doing more than just that right. About 60 years ago, only half the children in the country went to any school at all. Today 97% of 25- to 34-year-olds have completed upper secondary education - the highest rate among OECD countries.

And finally, teachers. Probably most important, the best-performing countries tend to set great store by how they select and train teachers, starting a virtuous circle that elevates teaching to a noble and honourable status and attracts the best. “Are You the Right One?” Singapore’s education ministry asks aspiring teachers visiting its website. Only one in five applicants is admitted to teacher education, and of those who train, nine out of 10 become teachers. Applicants are advised that “teaching is not for the short term” and are assessed for communication skills, willingness to learn and “the passion to teach and the belief that you can make a difference”.
cm Says:
December 22nd, 2008 at 2:54 am
You should start more sentences with “And if you asked…”

I didn’t get enough of them in a row in that one paragraph. Could you do like 150 more of them, please?
viagra Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:32 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
zyban Says:
March 12th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
I want to say - thank you for this!
tramadol Says:
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:06 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
brand viagra Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:10 am
I want to say - thank you for this!
buy cheap viagra
viagra brand Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 am
I want to say - thank you for this!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
cheap viagra Says:
April 9th, 2009 at 5:26 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right viagra

Matt Yglesias

More Serious Friday Nordic Blogging

46 Responses to “More Serious Friday Nordic Blogging”

Blogroll