Finland plans to replace classic school subjects with broader “topics” (2015)

https://theconversation.com/finlands-school-reforms-wont-scrap-subjects-altogether-39328

by akbarnama • 10 years ago

178 81 10 years ago

theconversation.com

mrtree• 10 years ago

This article is simply not true.

tlack• 10 years ago

Can you explain? I have many educators in my life and I'd love to share it, but not if it's BS.

asmala• 10 years ago

The Finnish news sources I follow paint this as a pilot initiative trialed primarily in Helsinki, and even then limited to a few courses. A country-wide scrapping of subjects seems still a long way off. The following passage from The Independent article seems the closest to the truth:

"Finnish schools are obliged to introduce a period of “phenomenon-based teaching” at least once a year. These projects can last several weeks. In Helsinki, they are pushing the reforms at a faster pace with schools encouraged to set aside two periods during the year for adopting the new approach. Ms Kyllonen’s blueprint, to be published later this month, envisages the reforms will be in place across all Finnish schools by 2020."

kettu2283• 10 years ago

This article is partly true. The headline is not. The changes came into effect few months ago (planned since 2012). Major changes include:

1) Some topics are introduced earlier (like Swedish, our second language)

2) More topic based learning. Learn multiple subjects for example during a project. (So subjects still remain)

3) Change of roles. Teacher should be seen more of a guide and the student should be more active in how the learning should take place.

4) More IT. For example programming is introduced in first grade.

5) "Extensive learning". Learn about learning, thinking, communications, taking care of yourself, working, entrepreneurship, sustainable future etc.

Source: I'm Finnish and checked from the official "Board of Education" site (in Finnish) http://www.oph.fi/saadokset_ja_ohjeet/opetussuunnitelmien_ja...

Edit: Subjects are not completely gone but there will be more topic based projects that combine multiple subjects

throwaway4891a• 10 years ago

Ah thanks for the link and analysis. Also found these:

http://www.oph.fi/english/current_issues/101/0/statistics_of...

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_kindergarten

finid• 10 years ago

For example programming is introduced in first grade.

That, I think, is the best part.

michaelkeenan• 10 years ago

This article gets all its information on from this article from the Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/finland-schoo...

I suggest changing the link to point to the Independent article (and also changing the exaggerated title to the more informative Independent headline).

sylvainkalache4• 10 years ago

That's the future of education, we need to get rid of this centuries-old model where students are passively learning. Schools are acting as the gateway to knowledge like in the old days when you had to travel to libraries and amphitheater to listen to lectures because that was the only way to access knowledge!

In the meantime, the Internet came up and anyone can access an infinite amount of information and knowledge. Workers need to be able to learn by themselves, be able to retrain and retool. Any good Software Engineer is already doing this, constantly learning new stuff to stay on top of their game, that will be true for any type of worker.

75j5• 10 years ago

Agreed! I'd like to see a wide variety of ever-improving open source curricula, and students given minimal structure in their day -- maybe two hours max of formal lecture in core subjects, three hours for socializing / lunch / exercise / play, and most importantly three plus hours of self-directed learning time. Teachers would act more as supervisors and check in frequently to give feedback and gauge their student's progress.

Unfortunately American schools are moving in the opposite direction, with massive emphasis on teacher evaluations, discipline, standardized testing, and about 20 minutes daily of highly supervised and sanitized recess (source: twelve years attending public schools and one year more recently working in one).

soufron• 10 years ago

Are you ready to pay for the teachers to be the interdisciplinary supervisors that you talk about?

sylvainkalache4• 10 years ago

three plus hours of self-directed learning time

Totally agree, a key here is that student should learn how to learn. There is all the knowledge that you need online, but the truth is that today there is too much information, something wrong, something not accurate. Students need to be able to find, analyze, sort, learn and apply the information they find. By reading the Internet or speaking with their peers or mentors (teachers).

As you said, teachers should be here to guide students, not to bring them a piece of knowledge they need to memorize and then spit out a few days later during the exam.

rimantas• 10 years ago

  > and most importantly three plus hours of self-directed
  > learning time

I guess you have never worked in education.

hkt3• 10 years ago

I support this kind of thing too. Independent learning is hugely important. I think kids are deterred from independent learning by stultifying practices in the classroom that make them feel that learning has to be bounded and dull. It doesn't have to be that way.

Edit: also,schools are vital places for socialising but most teachers insist on silence and attention. I think a better approach would be to allow socialising in a supervised environment, such that a teacher or some other role can suggest not being unkind etc, and in doing so foster constructive social skills. We often forget that social skills can be good or bad: furtive or open. Schools should encourage the right skills.

edblarney10• 10 years ago

"we need to get rid of this centuries-old model where students are passively learning"

Some things work.

Of all the experiments that have been tried, none seem to really do better.

Hint: The Finns themselves take a very boring and classical approach. They start late, they have highly paid teachers etc. etc..

They were never 'progressive' they were more 'antiquated' than anything - just focusing on the basics and doing it well.

I'm really weary about this change, it should be tested before anything.

Some things require a structured approach in terms of thinking.

sylvainkalache4• 10 years ago

Alternative education is getting great results. I personally funded an alternative to college to train software engineers(Holberton School). We have no formal teachers, no lecture, students learn by practicing and collaborating with peers. We started 9 months ago but already got students at NASA, Dropbox, Docker and Apple.

Look at Andela as well, accelerated training, then teams of "students" are integrated into companies and they learn while working.

Finally, coding bootcamps have also their share of success stories.

There is honestly A LOT of broken, unless you are studying in an Ivy League, I really think the education far from what the current & next generation needs.

jacobolus2• 10 years ago

Of all the experiments that have been tried, none seem to really do better.

Plenty of things do better... if you have much more resources to spend.

The best is 1:1 or 1:few where the 1 is a world-class expert in the field of interest who also happens to be a world-class teacher. Something like a personal tutor/coach. Think Aristotle and Alexander.

This is basically how we train elite athletes, musicians, etc., and how some of the very wealthy provide training for their children. It’s very time-expensive though for the teacher, and doesn’t scale well because there aren’t that many world-class practitioner-teachers out there in any given subject.

jnbiche2• 10 years ago

I'm really weary about this change, it should be tested before anything.

It's "wary" not "weary" [1]. Normally, I'm not a grammar Nazi, but I've been seeing this mistake more and more on HN. The word "weary" means tired, whereas "wary" means cautious or on guard.

By the way, I'm also wary about these changes. I think multidisciplinary classes are great, but that you need a strong base before you can implement 100% cross-/multi-disciplinary classrooms.

1. http://grammarist.com/usage/wary-weary/

aaron6952• 10 years ago

People have for at least 100+ years had access to "an infinite amount of information and knowledge"

No one has finished reading a whole library.

This sort of attitude is the problem. Trinkets like giving students things don't help.

Students need to do work to get ahead.

The best way 'so far' is boring repetition.

je42• 10 years ago

no. repetition should be a result of the child wanting to be better. if commanded to repeat the child will approach the subject to learn with minimalism.

if child is influenced to like the subject and repeatition is a result of a drive to get better; it will not minimise the effort but maximise instead.

belorn• 10 years ago

Repetition work for some problems but not others, and you need to repeat the correct activity. For example, repeating facts rarely help problem solving, while training at unique problem solving do help to be better at problem solving.

We also need to be careful, as one of the best way to burn people out is to do repeated activity on something they already mastered and feel impowered and hopeless by being forced to repeat them over and over again.

hkt3• 10 years ago

There is an element of tech company led social engineering going on here: everyone and their dog want to be able to sell their kit as educational if they can. So we get told about the wonders of the internet constantly and schools end up buying iPads instead of books. Your point about libraries stands admirably in light of this. Using different ways to find out information is a skill in itself.

That said, nobody is disputing the need to work, only the manner in which that work is carried out.

Pica_soO3• 10 years ago

The problem with education is, its self referential, as in you might not know at the start why you learn and you might be able to evaluate the goal of the whole endeavor only after you are halfway through it.

From the Napoleon hill of history, looking at it and assuming those down there in the trenches below the powder smoke can see the same whole picture of a worthwhile sacrifice of time - might be a big assumption based upon only your own accumulated post-experience knowledge.

A kid might not have a Feynman as father that encourages it to explore the world. Forcing this kid through mathematics, giving it the chance to later discover- hey you can program games with this or control drones- and live a different live then your dad who sits drinking in front of the TV all day - that is what the old teaching method provides. It sucks for those who educate there kids to have a expedition and curiosity mindset, but its hugely beneficial to those parts of society who do not understand the real benefits of education.

mbrock• 10 years ago

But only a few students will actually be motivated enough by classroom math to learn enough to later program games or drones. Most students develop an allergic reaction to anything that even reminds them of the horrors of school math.

arithma• 10 years ago

Probably better if kids learned math by directly controlling drones or programming games.

known• 10 years ago

I like http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland-...

zerr• 10 years ago

Not sure. Subjects give you an ability to concentrate and achieve more (better grades) in subjects you like and spend less time on another set of subjects you're not interested (for the expense of grades).

dang• 10 years ago

We changed the URL from https://brightside.me/wonder-curiosities/finland-will-become... to what appears to be a more substantive (and properly dated) article on the subject.

aaron6952• 10 years ago

There's a theory Finland got to the top with the simple three Rs (Which is was doing more recently than many western systems) and is currently just screwing it up.

Guess we'll see.

crisp• 10 years ago

A 25-year-old Finn here.

Like kettu228 explained, those major changes took place a few months ago when the schools started again this fall.

Along with these changes, some teachers have started to try new techniques in teaching such as removing all the tables from the class and replacing them with couches and beanbags [0]. Instead of the traditional (and frankly boring) ways of teaching, they try to cheer up pupils and make learning more fun. Some of the pupils are even able to participate in class planning.

I wish these changes had been there when I was in elementary school. Personally, it really seems to be the right way to go, though only time shows how it will affect. I'd wanted to learn, discuss and debate more about current hot topics, learn (more) IT and be part of influencing what we are taught.

[0] http://nyt.fi/a1305870531097 (Pardon me, the article is in Finnish but it proves the point)

Shalle1353• 10 years ago

I myself went to a high school which functioned this way. We started the week in our groups for a 30 min meeting where we set the goals for the week. After that we studied what we wanted. There were workshops all day with english, math etc that you could go to if you had any questions. But mainly you sat with your friends in small groups and studied.

And yes, you were alone responsible for when you took breaks etc. This way of studying were in my opinion much more effective. Sure I perhaps didn't put in as much time studying as people who went to traditional schools did. But once i studied I were much more focused and to be honest. When you sit in a class and the teacher ramps on about something that is of no interest to you, how much are you able to recollect?

Also another positive side of it were that if I had it easy for some topics I could focus others which I had a hard time for. I remember that I didn't study either swedish or math at all in 6th and 7th grade.

dibstern2• 10 years ago

Out of curiosity, did any students from that school go to any of the top global universities? Like Oxbridge/Ivy League/Etc? I wonder how those students do in comparison.

Also, as a kid who learned much better through class interaction with a teacher, your school would have been a nightmare for me, instead of doing so well in school I likely would have failed. Undiagnosed ADHD is terrible for self-driven learning.

monk_e_boy• 10 years ago

How did they make sure you learnt things like history or French?

How were you tested?

For example in our country (UK) we have a curriculum that we teach to, so this week we had to teach our kids about hard drives, CDs, Blu-ray and USB sticks. Then we test them on the details and when you would use each.

dash2• 10 years ago

The problem here is in the first two words.

The idea sounds interesting and maybe it will work. But why should it be tried at national level? Real progress would mean letting individual schools innovate.

Imagine if the headline read "Finland plans to replace PCs with modern tablets". That would be crazy, right? Computer purchasing decisions should not be enforced at national level. Why is education different?

naasking3• 10 years ago

But why should it be tried at national level? Real progress would mean letting individual schools innovate.

Because then the new schools can be discriminated against, thus skewing the data on the effectiveness of this approach. No such problem if everyone has the same background.

xherberta2• 10 years ago

They are letting schools innovate. That was one of the main points of the article, that in Finland, local districts enjoy plenty of autonomy in curriculum decisions.

joggery• 10 years ago

Changing curriculums is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, I'm afraid. Future generations will wonder how we could be so heartless as to coop children up in classrooms and require them to study random subjects.

The correct approach to maximising learning is as follows. Help children to do more of what they like and try to find things they'll like even better. This includes all video games, btw.

gens2• 10 years ago

Am i the only one that sees the massive problems with this ?

But with the new basic school reform all children will also learn via periods looking at broader topics, such as the European Union, community and climate change, or 100 years of Finland’s independence ...
The concept of “phenomenon-based” teaching – a move away from “subjects” and towards inter-disciplinary topics – will have a central place in the new NCF.
The answer is that educators in Finland think, quite correctly, that schools should teach what young people need in their lives rather than try to bring national test scores back to where they were.

I'm all for teaching with current-time examples, but making them the central point ? Teaching children "what they need in their lives" (the what) instead of the how ?

Well they have money so i guess a general education is not that important for them.

xherberta2• 10 years ago

Real life consists of interdisciplinary subjects and requires interdisciplinary learning. What's the value of picking things apart and studying "science" and "math" and "literature" in isolation?

In the world around us, these subjects are intricately tangled together. Awareness of the relationships between these subjects makes the world interesting and is one mark of a well-educated person. Isn't it impressive and fascinating when someone can speak on the co-evolution of math and science, or the impact of literature on history?

In my experience, interdisciplinary study offers an abundance of opportunities to get at "the how," whereas single-subject study prioritizes "the what."

gens2• 10 years ago

Literature has not much to do with science, but a bit with history (depends though on if you count social sciences as science, but even then art is art). Math is a pure.. topic, although it is very much used in all other education.

Note that in my country there is no "science" topic, but physics, biology, geology, etc.

Isn't it impressive and fascinating when someone can speak on the co-evolution of math and science, or the impact of literature on history?

Most certainly, but that is not what the linked article suggests will happen. The article is a bit more on the pragmatic side (the current world state). I, myself, would very much love for a physics teacher to talk about how completely new mathematics was invented when Newton or Maxwell were faced with the problem of expressing physics in mathematics (we did for Newton in my school, as i'm sure many other schools do the same for many other similar examples). Physics and math are very much related, but do you abolish pure mathematics in favor of only biased topics (towards spacial and forces in the context of physics, statistics in the context of some social topic, and such)?

When you look at it, how many things are actually interdisciplinary ? Sure many things are (arguably everything), but how many do you think need their own.. class ?

Climate change is covered by geology. Community (whatever that means) i didn't cover much in school because i went to a technical school, but i'm sure my sister did (although i remember that there was, but i don't remember what topic it was under).

Things were never pure to begin with, but why go into the other extreme ?

I'm sorry. But even though i think that some things in education should be changed, this change is, to me, just moronic. (if it is as the article says, that is)

Finland plans to replace classic school subjects with broader “topics” (2015)

Related Stories