Why Can't Our Education System in the US Be Like the One in Finland?
The idea of an education system where students have minimal homework, short school days, and more freedom to choose what they study is appealing. Many cite the Finnish model as an ideal. However, there are several reasons why trying to replicate the Finnish system in the United States is not practical. Let's explore these differences and their underlying cultural and policy contexts.
Accurate Description of the Finnish Education System
Primary Education: In Finland, the primary instruction for students aged 7 to 16 follows a structured curriculum. While there is limited choice until the last three years, elective courses are still part of the curriculum. The education system is not as flexible as described in some narratives. Finnish students do not have the freedom to choose their entire curriculum.
Teacher Contact Hours: Finnish teachers have about 600 contact hours with students per year, compared to nearly double that in the United States. Along with collaborative teaching and reduced class sizes, this structured approach significantly impacts the quality of education in Finland. As a result, school districts in the U.S. would need to significantly increase their tax rates to match these standards.
Additional Cultural and Policy Considerations
Daycare Functionality: American schools serve as day care facilities for many parents, providing a safe environment for children during the day so that adults can work. In contrast, Finland mandates three years of paid maternity leave and offers monthly stipends to parents for children up to the age of 17. This family-friendly policy reduces the pressure on schools to act as childcare centers.
Extracurricular Activities: In Finland, organizations provide after-school activities and extracurriculars, which are not organized by schools. This approach keeps the school day shorter and focused on education.
Economic and Social Spending Disparities
Public Spending on Older vs. Younger People: The United States typically spends more on older people due to higher voting blocs. This shift in public spending priorities is partly because of a larger demographic of older adults. Therefore, there is less funding available for youth-oriented initiatives.
Cultural Emphasis on Family Independence: The U.S. has a strong cultural emphasis on families being self-sufficient, reminiscent of the pioneer days. This cultural value impacts the perception and allocation of resources towards youth, as it is viewed as less essential to support youth education than to support aging populations.
Future of the Education System
Adaptability and Standards: While the Finnish model is admirable, it would be challenging to replicate in the U.S. due to cultural, economic, and policy differences. However, there is always room for adaptation. Schools in the U.S. can benefit from culturally relevant policies that balance educational quality with practical considerations such as family and community needs.
In conclusion: The education system in Finland is a testament to a well-funded, collaborative, and structured approach. However, attempting to implement this system in the U.S. without aligning it with cultural and financial realities would be impractical. Instead, we must strive for a balance that meets the unique needs of American students and families.