An international comparison with US schools:

[Sancho]

The New Global Landscape of Educational Achievement
http://www.issues.org/26.3/realnumbers.html

"Levy and Murnane find that the skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the skills that are easiest to digitize, automate, and move offshore. The skills that will be more in demand in the future are expert thinking and complex communications, skills that require advanced high-quality education.
-snip-
Successful countries such as Finland, Japan, and Korea emphasize more classroom time and higher teacher salaries, whereas the United States invests more heavily in reducing class size and limiting salaries."

When the Today Show discussed education this week, Finland and international schools were cited as out-performing the US. As long as the "measure" of teachers and schools are a single multiple choice test, we will not compete with the rest of the world. Finland, btw, was reported to require all teachers to have a masters, and classrooms have up to three teachers per classroom. Look at the charts in this article to see how Finland went to the top of the chart over the last decade by emphasizing STEM subjects, higher-order thinking, and investing in high quality teachers.
Also note that some of the competition that beats the US have large percentages of immigrants.

Compare the most successful systems with the current US schools. Blaming teachers and unions is a red herring. Your state and school district leadership and politicians are creating the problem by wasting time and money on a false premise. Michelle Rhee and Arnie Duncan will never fix schools simply by firing the teachers and replacing them in a system that is misguided. (Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.)

Charter schools? Vouchers? Multiple-choice tests? Crazy textbooks? Crowded classrooms? Teacher bashing? Emphasis on basic three R's while getting rid of art and music? English only? NO!

Smaller class size? Good salaries compared to other college graduates? Parental involvement? Discipline? Emphasis on creative thinking, multiple languages, science, and technology? YES!

[mediaman007]

1. I like the idea of more than one teacher in a classroom. One person can only visit so many students

before the time runs out and a new subject must be taught. In addition, Finnish students begin public school at age 7 and complete high school at age 16.

Here's something special about Finnish schools from Wikipedia:

Compherensive school students enjoy a number of social entitlements, such as school health care and a free lunch everyday that covers about a third of the daily nutritional need.<2> In addition, pupils are entitled to receive free books and materials and free school trips in the event that they have a long or arduous trip to school.

[msongs]

2. and behavior issues decline substantially w/more than one adult present nt

[procopia]

3. Two teachers

or one teacher and an aide can provide faster feedback to the students and parents, which makes a huge difference.

[AdHocSolver]

5. But, but..two or more teachers in a classroom will make it harder...

...for Arne Duncan and his ilk to blame teachers for poor test scores.

[Sancho]

7. Yea...what teacher gets the credit/blame?

Also, lots of international schools keep students with the same teachers for two to three years before moving to the next "grade".

[AdHocSolver]

4. US education was designed long ago to turn out minions to man its factories and corporate offices.

The goal of education for the masses, especially the immigrant masses, was to provide a limited education to make them useful for manning the corporate bureaucracies. The curriculum was dumbed down (some of us remember "Dick and Jane" readers) to limit what was required to speed "learning" and to make for easier test giving and grading.

Schools were set up as production lines in which students would move from work station to work station (class rooms) at about 45 minute intervals.

Education was broken down into separate processes (differentiated subject matter) to make for "efficient" learning and stricter control of the curriculum.

This kind of system does not lead to a high level of knowledge and ability for the masses. Generations of students were educated in this way including many who went into teaching.

The curricula and organization of most schools are rigid and it is futile to expect them to produce a well-educated citizenry.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Rush To The Top (RTTT) are doomed to failure. They only serve to blame teachers for a truly horrendously lousy educational system, a system in which teachers have little control.

A system in which there is rigid control of a lockstep curriculum and rigid control of study time will never produce a large number of well-educated people. The current system of education was never designed that way.

What is needed to improve education? An integrated curriculum, an interdisciplinary approach to teaching, more learning through problem solving, giving the students the ability to spend more time on studying what interests them at the time in their lives will go a long way to improve education.

Of course, issues in which students are hungry due to poverty, who are distracted by problems at home, who have become pawns in religious and cultural conflicts, and similar issues need to be addressed.

None of the real problems in education are being addressed. Politicians and pundits talking about how "our" children can't compete with country "A"s children or country "B"s children is a cop-out.

[JDPriestly]

6. A lot of US teachers have MA's. I read that in Finland,

the teachers not only have MA's in education but they also have them in the subject matter that they teach.

Here are excerpts from a teachers' magazine I recently got a copy of (I am not a member of the organization that published this and am not a teacher):

In a recent analysis of educational reform policies, Finnish policy analyst Pasi Sahlberg describes how, since the 1970s, Finland has changed its traditional education system “into a model of a modern, publicly financed education system with widespread equity, good quality, large participation—all of this at reasonable cost.” (Sahlberg, 2009, p. 2.) More than 99 percent of students now successfully complete compulsory basic education, and about 90 percent complete upper secondary school. Two-thirds of these graduates enroll in universities or professionally oriented polytechnic schools. More than 50 percent of the Finnish adult population participates in adult education programs. Ninety-eight percent of the cost of education at all levels is covered by government rather than by private sources.

. . . .

The process of change has been almost the reverse of policies in the United States. Over the past 40 years, Finland has shifted from a highly centralized system emphasizing external testing to a more localized system in which highly trained teachers design curriculum around the very lean national standards. This new system is implemented through equitable funding and extensive preparation for all teachers. The logic of the system is that investments in the capacity of local teachers and schools to meet the needs of all students, coupled with thoughtful guidance about goals, can unleash the benefits of local creativity in the cause of common, equitable outcomes.

. . . .

Beginning in the 1970s, Finland launched reforms to equalize educational opportunity by first eliminating the practice of separating students into very different tracks based on their test scores, and then by eliminating the examinations themselves. This occurred in two stages between 1972 and 1982, and a common curriculum, through the end of high school, was developed throughout the entire system. These changes were intended to equalize educational outcomes and provide more open access to higher education. During this time, social supports for children and families were also enacted, including health and dental care, special education services, and transportation to schools.

http://www.nea.org/home/40991.htm

Great article. These are only short excerpts. If you are interested in education, you should read the whole article.

[Sancho]

8. The social support and extensive teacher training are keys.

US schools are compartmentalized. Shut the door - do a little bit - send 'em on the the next class. Some of these Scandinavian schools make more sense than Rhee's ranting.

[JDPriestly]

19. The article on education in Finland is very instructive.

I wonder whether our so-called leaders study what is going on there and in the other top-performing countries.

Teacher tenure is pretty much a given in Europe in my experience -- and my husband taught there for years, so I have experience.

[Hannah Bell]

9. also note that both japan & finland have strong teachers' unions.

and "tenure".


i didn't know finland didn't do testing & tracking.

it appears that the paragon finland doesn't do *anything* the deformers want to do, yet they still hold it up like it supports their bogus game plan.

[Sancho]

11. Thanks...I didn't know that...

but I wonder why Oprah, Gates, Arnie, Rhee, etc. continue to harp on the international success, but don't want to do what they do! Sort of like health care, too.

[Hannah Bell]

16. +100

[AdHocSolver]

20. Since corporations are offshoring most jobs, there is no need for an educated populace.

Besides, an educated and thinking electorate would be bad for The Powers That Be.

TPTB can blame the unemployed masses as not having enough skills to be hired if they make sure that the masses don't get an education. Also, the government money not wasted on education can be used to give more tax breaks for the wealthy.

There is no need to wonder any longer.

[Mimosa]

10. Excellent article! Thanks. n/t

[Starry Messenger]

12. k&r

[AngryAmish]

13. Could it be that folks in Korea, Japan and Finland are just smarter than us?

Higher IQs and all that? Smart kids tend to excel no matter what teaching method is used.

[Sancho]

14. Maybe, but the trend in Finland is planned education...

in the article, the Fins were behind the US and the rest of the world. They were mainly an agriculture based economy with traditional schools and a post WWII recovery. In the 70's, they made a decision to invest in excellent education. You can see Finland move up consistently over three decades as their plan worked. I doubt that is IQ as much as the pay off for a good effort.

[Hannah Bell]

17. no.

[Uncle Joe]

15. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Sancho.

[fishbulb703]

18. Eh, I dunno if I would call Japan "successful". Thats a pretty miserable country. nt

[AdHocSolver]

21. On what basis do you refer to Japan as "a pretty miserable country?" nt