Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS IN FINLAND
Sahlberg (2010: 1) and Darling-Hammond (2009: 15) reported that Finland has emerged as the “leading Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) country in educational achievement over the last decade”. The main reason Finland was considered a leader in the “international pack in literacy, science, and mathematics” was because they valued and invested in teachers and the teaching profession as a whole (Sahlberg, 2010: 1). According to Wei et al., the recipe of success for Finland lies with a series of reforms of the Finnish educational system which led to a “decentralisation of authority and granted local municipalities, schools and teachers a high level of autonomy” (Wei et al., 2009: 9).
Becoming a teacher
Teaching is an attractive career choice in Finland. The entry requirement for teaching in Finland is a master’s degree (Sahlberg, 2010: 2). Finland follows very stringent processes and procedures to identify the most suitable candidates to pursue teaching as a profession. Prospective candidates are selected based on best matriculation examination results, relevant records of school accomplishments and only the top candidates proceed to the final stage of the interviews (Sahlberg, 2010: 2).
The successful candidates undergo a “high-quality, graduate-level preparation completely at state expense” in both content and pedagogy (Darling-Hammond, 2009: 17). The strength of the teaching training in Finland lies with the integration of both the “theoretical and methodological studies” conducted over a period of five years (Sahlberg, 2010: 4). During the five years’ teacher training, student teachers “observe lessons from experienced teachers, practise teaching under the supervision of supervisory teachers, and deliver independent lessons to different groups of pupils while being evaluated by supervising teachers and Department of Teacher Education professors and lecturers” (Sahlberg, 2010: 4). The Finnish teacher training focuses on “continual reflection, evaluation, and problem solving at the level of the classroom, school, municipality and nation” (Darling-Hammond, 2009: 22).
Professional learning and development
There are no formal national teacher development programmes in Finland. Teachers attend annual mandatory training for some days (Wei et al., 2009: 27). The “government determines the focus of the training provided by service providers on a competitive basis based on the national educational development needs” (Sahlberg, 2010: 6). Some Finnish municipalities organise “in-service programs for all teachers while, in others, it is up to individual teachers or school principals to decide how much and what type of professional development is needed” (Sahlberg, 2010: 6). The purpose of conducting in-service programmes is to increase “teacher professionalism and to improve the abilities to solve problems within their school contexts by applying evidence-based solutions, and evaluating the impact of their procedures” (Sahlberg, 2010: 6).
Teachers within schools work together to develop the curriculum and to plan the instructional strategies for teaching the curriculum to the specific students in their schools. Time is allocated for joint planning of the “teachers’ work week, with one afternoon each week designated for this work” (Barber and Mourshed, 2007). This suggests that a team approach is followed when teachers plan lessons and solve problems together. To this effect, Darling-Hammond (2009: 23) and Wei et al. (2009: 20) indicated that teachers in Finnish schools meet once a week in the afternoon to develop lesson plans in line with the national curriculum.
According to the Education in Finland (2012: 26) and Darling-Hammond (2009: 24), much emphasis is placed on continuing education for educators. Teachers pursuing their doctoral studies in education, are required to “complete advanced studies in the educational sciences” (Sahlberg, 2010: 5). This suggests that these teachers must shift their focus from the initial academic concentration or subject specialisation to something else in order to broaden their knowledge base and to teach the content in an advanced way (Sahlberg, 2010: 5).
Curriculum and assessment
As stated above, curriculum planning is the responsibility of schools and municipalities in Finland. The Education in Finland (2012: 13) reported that the activities of education providers are guided by objectives stated in legislation, the national curricula and qualification requirements. The national curriculum is flexible, decentralised, and less detailed. The intention is to provide teachers with a “high level of pedagogical and curricular autonomy” (Sahlberg, 2010: 6).
Finnish teachers select the textbooks and make significant “input into the development of course content, student assessment policies, the course offerings and budget allocation within a school” (Wei et al., 2009: 27). The “school-level curriculum, approved by local education authorities, teachers and school principals, provides teachers with well-developed curriculum knowledge and planning skills” (Sahlberg, 2010: 6). It is obvious that the education system in Finland relies on the proficiency of educators; hence, there is a strong focus on both self-evaluations of schools and education providers and national evaluations of learning outcomes (Education in Finland, 2012: 13).
CHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.3 RATIONALE OF THE STUD
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
1.5 PURPOSE STATEMENT
1.6 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.7 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
1.8 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
1.9. DATA ANALYSIS
1.10. ENHANCING THE QUALITY AND CREDIBILITY OF THE STUDY
1.11. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
1.12. STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY
1.13. SUMMARY
CHAPTER 2 THE LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT OF EDUCATOR SUPPORT IN SOUTH AFRICA
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 LEVELS OF SUPPORT FOR EDUCATORS IN SOUTH AFRICA
2.2.1 Support from the National Department of Education
2.2.2 Support from the provincial education departments
2.2.3 Support from the school districts
2.2.4 Support from the circuit offices
2.2.5 Institutional-level support
2.3 WHOLE SCHOOL EVALUATION
2.4 POLICY ON SCHOOL SUPPORT
2.5 TARGETED SUPPORT
2.6 THE FUNCTIONS OF SUBJECT ADVISORS
2.7 INITIATIVES AIMED TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY EDUCATION AND LEARNER ACHIEVEMENT IN SCHOOLS
2.8 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3 LITERATURE REVIEW ON SUPPORT FOR EDUCATORS IN THE SOUTH AFRICA AND INTERNATIONAL CONTEXTS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 PURPOSE OF SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS
3.3 SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
3.3.1. SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS IN FINLAND
3.4 SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS IN AUSTRALIA
3.5 SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS IN SELECTED STATES IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (USA)
3.6 SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS IN JAPAN
3.7 SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM (UK)
3.8 SUPPORT FOR EDUCATORS IN SOUTH AFRICA
3.9. CONCLUSION/SYNTHESIS
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY.
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 PHILOSOPHICAL ASSUMPTIONS
4.3 RESEARCH PARADIGM
4.4 RESEARCH APPROACH
4.5 RESEARCH DESIGN
4.6 DATA COLLECTION
4.7 DATA ANALYSIS
4.8 THE ROLE OF THE RESEARCHER
4.9 TRUSTWORTHINESS
4.10 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
4.11 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
4. 12. CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5 DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
7. LIST OF REFERENCES
