142 Y. Li and F. Dervin in the previous sections: CPD lacks systematicity, induction is lacking, and funding is a big issue (see Heikkinen et al. 2015 for similar argu- ments). The last problem mentioned by TE is an important one, and we shall have the opportunity to present a project coordinator’s expe- rience of dealing with CPD in the next subsection. TE’s point is that, often, CPD is based on project-work and that this leads to short-term, inconsistent and incoherent use of resources created during the projects (Aspfors 2012). Although TE does not clearly define what she means by CPD in this first part of the interview, the short historical overview that she proposes sets a critical and reflexive tone for the rest of the inter- view. TE notes herself that she has tended to be negative about issues of CPD in Finland and attempts to correct her position halfway through the interview: TE: I am very pessimistic now because we have not succeeded to change… but still when I look at statistics I think that Finnish teachers in-service training there is quite a lot happening and different models for that but I see that we give to our teachers high quality training and we give them the capacity to make research based activities in schools but we don’t use this capacity enough… In a similar vein, at the end of the interview, when we suggest that Finland could learn from other countries how to implement CPD, she reminds us that Finland has a somewhat unequal approach to education provision based on decentralisation: TE: There are good examples. In Finland… I have seen very good examples but then the question is is it some areas project or is it sys- tematic project? We have also wonderful schools and wonderful pro- jects where teachers are supported, are trained so there are… there are wonderful principals who create so good atmosphere and they take new tools and different kinds of actions… so the whole neigh- bourhood is admiring what is happening in schools but then there are totally different kinds of schools…. That is a big problem in a decentralised system, how can we keep all these teachers and schools in high lines?
7 Paratexts to CPD … 143 Problems with CPD ‘Trustspeak’ is widespread amongst many teacher educators in Finnish education, especially when they work with the education export indus- try (see Itkonen et al. 2017). TE is quite critical of it in what follows: I: Another issue is trust of teachers… but sometimes it seems to be used as an excuse for not acting… TE: I think you are right it is used as an excuse for doing nothing or doing less as they could… I think that the danger is that teachers are get- ting too tired to repeat same things… there are some things to activate them to find new things then it is more rewarding… it is keeping them more interested in their work… the emphasis of the new curriculum is the learning community ideology and I discussed and even we wrote an article about what is the most important issue and it is how to create learning community and if they are not ready for that they can’t do it with their students… teachers and students work together and teachers and parents work together… and that creates a new culture… but there are problems in Finland… cooperation is difficult… we get this informa- tion from new teachers… TE refers to the 2016 Core Curriculum, which lays a strong emphasis on cooperation and community, to insist on the need for teachers to learn new ways of being, new ways of being a teacher. She first criticizes trustspeak as a potential barrier to learning new things. She even goes as far as claiming that it can be used as an excuse (by e.g. school leaders) to create some kind of state of inertia. She notes, however, like some of our respondents in previous sections, that “cooperation is difficult” in Finland… (see Huhtala and Vesalainen 2017). The fact that she men- tions that this is hinted at by new teachers might indicate a generation or a seniority gap between the latter and teachers who have been in the field for longer. The role played by school leadership in making CPD available—or not—is discussed by TE when we ask her about the “project culture” concerning CPD in Finnish education:
144 Y. Li and F. Dervin TE: projects can have nice outcomes… but… maybe because if there would be leadership in schools that would activate that kind of school- wide projects making community projects to collect data and make con- clusions I think they would have much more… I think that then it comes to the idea of teacher leadership and especially principals leadership in schools it varies… I published an article about ICT in Finnish schools and then we collected data in different schools and we could see how much it depended on the principal and on how he activates the school… we can see that some principals only blame that we don’t have resources we don’t have money we don’t have anything but others they say oh but we have a plan we have tried to get that that and that and that if there were calls for projects they were ready to apply because they had a plan… principal leadership is essential and they need to be trained for pedagogi- cal leadership and I think that this is the direction we could get… Again, TE is very much aware of the problems teachers face in their own schools in terms of CPD. She creates two categories of school lead- ers: on the one hand, those who spend their time complaining about the dire financial situation—and thus do not facilitate CPD, on the other hand, some principals take it seriously and make long-term plans and apply for extra funding to help their teachers. Although this picture is a bit ‘black and white’, it shows again that Finnish education seems to oscillate between different positions, especially because of the decentral- ization of decision-making (see OECD 2014). In the conclusion of her turn, TE insists on the central position of school leadership, especially in pedagogical terms. TE gives the following example to illustrate the gap between actions from school leaders and/or municipalities and the lack of training of teachers: TE: in the city of Vantaa [near Helsinki] when they decided that every- body in school… they have IPads every student in the school will have IPads two years or three years ago. The teachers didn’t have any capac- ity… to use IPads… what we are doing? Like all other respondents, TE also notes problems with the way(s) CPD is organized (see Aspfors 2012). In what follows, she also uses the
7 Paratexts to CPD … 145 metaphor of the ‘jungle’ to describe what is happening, especially in relation to providers (quality and choice of training): TE: It is a bit of a jungle and what we worry about is the quality of some of these providers… it is very much market driven… there is a variety of programmes too… VESO-days are also discussed. TE remembers that she was herself used as a trainer for such days in the past: TE: I have been there and younger I was very often a trainer and I can remember all these Saturday mornings when they came and they were knitting… and they were not interested at all to come Saturday morning it was so frustrating to be a lecturer there… Her memories of such days are far from positive… When we explain to her that we had heard similar stories from teachers and trainers, TE adds: TE: I can understand because they are planned somewhere and they are given information about what you should do… I think that different options to organise would be better and especially if people are not forced too… There should be discussions about how important these days are… and what they mean Need for Systematic CPD TE is convinced that CPD is essential to teachers and that ITT is never enough to ensure lifelong teacherhood. She explains: TE: I think that there is a misunderstanding because schools are so com- plicated places and contexts are all the time changing… and even if you have this high standard teacher education, it can lead you to all these changing situations… and that is especially for young teachers or those
146 Y. Li and F. Dervin who are newcomers… because even though they have good education, they have analytical thinking, and they have conceptual understanding of what happens… but when they are in school that is local circum- stances… and there happens so many things and you need to make deci- sions at the moment. During teacher training time you had the time to plan but then in one school day there are many decisions to be made… and different kinds of partners, if there are learning difficulties, the teacher must deal with school welfare, that means you have to meet with different groups of people and how you can get this experience during teacher education time, that is impossible. For TE, ITT gives a good background but it is illusionary to believe that it suffices (Hämäläinen and Hämäläinen 2011). As she explains, the school ecosystem is a complex one, which necessitates working with different kinds of actors and dealing with difficult situations, and some- times with urgency. So, in a sense, she argues that teachers are never fully prepared to work in such conditions and that CPD is needed (Hämäläinen and Kangasniemi 2013). Our readers will have noticed that until now TE has not really explained what she means by CPD or how she sees it. In what follows, she positions herself, preferring “long-lasting school-based projects” rather than “courses” (or at least not only courses): TE: (…) we want to promote more long-lasting continuous school based projects, not just courses, which are a consequence of the fund- ing procedure of what our minister of education and the NAE have used… you have had the opportunity to propose and apply for fund- ing but then they have split into small unit courses: one-day, three-day courses but anyways it does not make any kind of I could say learning community ideology that schools would take some project and move it forward… Based on her own experience of offering courses to teachers, she adds: sometimes I feel that these general big lectures they are not so useful … I remember once I was in school to tell about the new curriculum and when I left the hall… and when I left the place, a parent came to
7 Paratexts to CPD … 147 me and whispered: “do you think that your lecture has helped anything? ” (laughter). All in all, TE seems to follow the current trends pushed forth by deci- sion-makers of making teachers responsible for their own CPD, espe- cially with the school community, rather than them taking CPD courses (Hämäläinen et al. 2015). Project Work This last subsection is based on an interview with a project coordina- tor (P1) and a teacher (P2) who was taking part in the projects she led. They have both been trained as language teachers for basic educa- tion. The project coordinator worked in the same school as the other teacher two days per week as a complement to her project work, which was sponsored by the Ministry of Education for a couple of years. The projects she was leading aimed at promoting language awareness and multiliteracy in schools and ‘small’ and ‘rare’ languages. One important aspect of the projects was to organise CPD for teachers in a given city in Southern Finland. It is important to note that this interview was the liveliest and the most critical of all the interviews we did. The two project people did not mince their words. For example, like the other respondents, we sub- mitted the idea that ITT is so good in Finland that CPD may not be so meaningful. For the P1 and P2 this is a myth, a preconceived idea. Here are their reactions: I: what we hear is that teachers are autonomous and so well-trained that they don’t need CPD… P1: N’importe quoi [French: whatever] I: That teachers work together… P1: N’importe quoi… notez bien n’importe quoi… [French: whatever… please note what I am saying: Just whatever]
148 Y. Li and F. Dervin School Leadership Impacts CPD Clearly for P1 and P2, the role of school leadership is central for CPD. Depending on the school principal, teachers can have access to the kind of CPD they need or not (Heikkinen et al. 2015). P2 shares a bad expe- rience she had with her own principal in relation to a course she should have taken to be entitled to be an official examiner in the school: P2: I have like the best example with an official international French test… cos every year we are testing the students P1: Ah this is a nice story please listen! P1: When I started at the school, I was told that I had to be the exam- iner… so I needed to take the course… and my principal told me that you can’t take the course because we are not paying anything we are not pay- ing your substitute, your course so you can’t take it. So, we were trying to explain that yes but in 6 months I have to examine the students… other- wise we can’t organise it and it is part of the programme… but you are the new teacher and we have the policy that we don’t pay the new teachers… P1: yeah right P2: so I could not make it… nothing…so three weeks before the exam he realized that actually he needs me… so what are we gonna do?… so after fighting and like… half of the teachers taking part in this fight because everybody wanted to have their opinion on it… they called the institu- tion responsible for the test and got me special agreements so I could be an examiner if nobody says anything and if I promise to take the training in six months then… P1: The story ended with a huge hassle and because she could not have the official… she did not have the official diploma and what was the course? The course was like three days off and you had maybe ten or fif- teen lessons so let’s say if you had ten – half of the week – 350 euros for the substitute… one hour is 35 euros in general so it doesn’t cost any- thing and even if you whole week, 20 hours, 700 euros… This long narrative shows how decisions to send teachers to CPD courses can be Kafkaesque. In this case, what is surprising is that the
7 Paratexts to CPD … 149 training was somewhat self-evident if the school were to organize tests for the students. The way P1 and P2 enact the story by e.g. replaying some of the discussions with the school leader (use of (in)direct speech) somewhat adds to the oddity of the situation (Aveling et al. 2015). Following the narrative, a discussion ensues about financial politics at the school level: I: is there like extra money for CPD of teachers? P1: there is but it is like nothing… and it works in a way that the prin- cipal has the budget for the school that must… with which he must build the whole year and they don’t want to send people to the trainings because they are afraid they need to have the substitute… so if they have the same budget even though I get pregnant and someone needs to cover me… they need to have that money just in case so they are not wanting to use the training money because they are afraid someone gets sick or pregnant… P2: let us give you an example an extreme one, last year or two years ago we could not get new books so students are using the same textbooks… Money issues thus appear to be grim in the respondents’ context. However, there is another side to the coin. In what follows, our respondents are critical of the way money is saved for ‘political’ and competitive reasons: P1: Yes, it is about the money, but there is a real competition between schools here which school can manage to use less money. They are competing… P2: So, you are a good principal if you manage to use less money and on the ranking you are like… so it is like business management… P1 and P2’s testimonies add an interesting element to discussions of leadership, school management and CPD, which is reminiscent of ‘business practices’ to paraphrase P2. We were unable to find out if this is a real practice, and a practice supported by municipalities.
150 Y. Li and F. Dervin Lack of Motivation from Teachers The two respondents share some interesting insights about their col- leagues’ motivation for doing CPD (see similar issues in Heikkinen et al. 2015). P1 and P2 seemed to infer that they do not want to go on CPD. P2 shares an interesting anecdote of a discussion she had had at school on the same day: I: So, teachers are not interested in CPD? P2: Yeah, most of them. I think the ones who have been working for a certain time, they are not interested anymore. Actually today I was telling that I was going away on a CPD for 4 days and everybody was like Oh four days in a hotel that’s unfair… but I said yes but it includes study, two hours of study on your own at home writing a report and you have to apply for it, write a motivation letter… so you could have done it. Oh no two hours writing, oh no I am so happy I did not apply and then everybody was… P1: Yes and they are all very jealous about free food, restaurants and hotels… because we are… P2: and if I even told them that they are offering a free drink that would be even more like… a disaster… The course that P2 was going to take was to be organized as part of one of the projects led by P1. The project covered all expenses and any teacher from the city could have applied to participate. Following this incredible discussion, we asked the respondents why they think that teachers are not so much interested in CPD: P1: I don’t know, is it because they haven’t been encouraged to? Because you don’t get any credit for that? You are laughed at if you go… You are crazy? Two hours of personal work… But OK we have an awful atmos- phere in this school… in my previous school a lot of people wanted to do CPD… but if they did you had to prepare all the lessons that will be substituted, which is so much work… The end of the excerpt about a different school shows again that Finnish schools can differ immensely (see Sahlberg 2018)—maybe we could talk
7 Paratexts to CPD … 151 about the Finnish school lottery for teachers. This excerpt thus helps us to clarify the context of the claims made by P1 and P2. They are talk- ing about a school that is presented as having problems with relations between teachers (“we have an awful atmosphere in this school”), a school leader who does not push people to do CPD, etc. Although this is not entirely relevant to the matter at hand here, we feel it is important to share the following excerpt, which tells us more about the atmosphere in the school: P1: We are done… I am not wasting my time for people who have no passion with what they are doing… but when you are with the students, it is great it is like compensation… and we have stopped, we don’t go to the staff room… never… of course, sometimes we have to… because when you enter there then you can hear “shitty students”, etc. Why isn’t there any coffee? And why the coffee is so bad? Etc. and we have been think- ing about starting a stand-up comedy show… In this excerpt and previous ones, the two participants keep mimicking their colleagues and school principal by making them talk directly (see highlighted parts in the excerpts). As a dialogical strategy to enhance the credibility of a statement, this seems to make the excerpts even more surprising and “authentic” (see Aveling et al. 2015). The System Is Cracking Up… Throughout the interview, P1 and P2 use qualifiers such as non-existent, not serious, not happening to describe CPD in Finland (see Heikkinen et al. 2015). We would like to use the image of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) to describe their experience of CPD. Going back to the story of P2’s prin- cipal not allowing her to take part in a CPD course, let’s see how she developed the right skills to be able to serve as an examiner: I: So what happened? Did you serve as an examiner? P2: yes, I did it without the license and without the diploma… but then I did it later…
152 Y. Li and F. Dervin P1: I am sorry to interrupt but what was the cost for everybody else? Because she did not have the training so how did they get the informa- tion to organise the test? With colleagues needed to explain to her… P2: yes, P2 was explaining what to do P1: I had to train her because how could she… I: Finnish CPD is like Ikea, DIY… P1: Yes, because we always know that someone is so professional that she understands that… if we are thinking it is the students who are suffering if it is not done correctly so they are using that… P1 and P2 explain that, on many occasions, they have had to train each other and other people because of the unavailability of funding for proper CPD. P1 seems somewhat upset by this: “it is always the same people who give… who do everything… but I also want to learn new things and not just support others!”. At the very end of the interview, P1 asserts that “the system is crack- ing”. We ask her to justify: I: The system is cracking? P1: yes… but that’s what it is… but even if you take our principal, our colleagues, they are laughing at this… they are like we are not even inter- ested in having an education like that… we are just trying to get through the day… P1 finishes this turn by even apologizing for being so negative: “and I feel also bad in a sense when I am presenting this like this, but it reflects the fact that there are so many things that are…”. P2 explains the cracking by referring to what she calls “the national- ism of Finnish education” (see Simpson 2018). In other words: even if there are so many problems, teachers keep up appearances because they are being told that they have the best education system in the world: P2: but I think that here is another story… this is like a nationalistic of Finnish education… I think that most of the teachers they can agree on
7 Paratexts to CPD … 153 it like… yeah in Finland we manage to do something and that’s like the story… but then everybody would agree also if you asked them what are your working conditions they’d go it is shit, we can’t breathe here, we don’t have money, we can’t buy the books, and the students are worse and worse every year… and that’s what they are complaining about. So it is like two stories next to each other and I think that everybody agrees on it so this is just a way to sell it but everybody to laugh at it also… So there is like the national story about education and then the reality… P2’s views correspond precisely to the critical work on Finnish educa- tion export (e.g. Dervin 2016; Schatz 2015; Itkonen 2018), and the contradictions that Finnish education experiences (see Chapter 3). P1 reminds us that lower secondary appears to face more of these problems than primary schools. She asserts that most teachers in the lat- ter are ‘diamonds’ who are engaged and professional, while the lower secondary level there are surely ‘diamonds’ but as, P1 puts it, they need to be ‘polished’: “That’s the place where CPD is needed there are so many problems…” (P1). Project Work for CPD In the previous sections, the respondents shared their frustrations and the contradictions that they face as far as CPD is concerned. In order to take action and make a change, P1 applied for project money at the Ministry of Education. Her first project started in 2016 as a development project for bilingual classes, with the aim to get more cooperation and interaction between teachers and to train teachers. When asked how successful this first project has been, she says: P1: I think that the cooperation between teachers has increased… we have had more positive attitudes… but most importantly we have understood why the lower secondary school is not working for bilingual classes. The teachers are not good and qualified enough… It is a realis- tic result, but I am in trouble what to do. Because we can’t do anything about.
154 Y. Li and F. Dervin The second project (2017–2020) is a government seed project which aims to test different models for early language learning to stimulate language awareness in all subjects (not just language education). P1 admits that she has been struggling to interest teachers in the project themes (although they are central in the Core Curriculum of 2016). P1: but we struggle… even though we have the money for substitutes, we have the trainings, but we don’t have the support of the principals… they don’t send the people… for this spring we have a lot of things and I will do… call them and say it is totally free, send them here… Without the pro- ject we could never be able to do this… This could show again the lack of engagement and/or motivation of some principals. Pause In this section, we have listened to what we referred to as the paratexts of CPD in Finland. Four different kinds of professionals were interviewed: Representatives of the NAE, a vice-principal, a teacher educator and a project coordinator. We note some similarities in the critiques of CPD in Finland, but also some discrepancies in expectations and satisfac- tions. It is obvious that the position of our respondents does influence their critical views. For example, it took more energy for us to try to obtain critical perspectives from the representatives of the NAE than with the project coordinator who has had to fight to motivate people to get more CPD. This chapter confirms that CPD in Finland faces a lot of issues, from money to a lack of professionalism (Heikkinen et al. 2015). Many of our respondents are aware of these issues, and although, as the teacher educator mentioned, these have been discussed for decades, very little seems to have been done recently to deal with them. What this chap- ter also confirms is that there are many myths about different aspects of Finnish education (Dervin 2013; Itkonen 2018), of which we hope our readers will now be aware.
7 Paratexts to CPD … 155 References Aspfors, J. (2012). Induction practices: Experiences of newly qualified teachers. Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Press. Aveling, E. L., Gillespie, A., & Cornish, F. (2015). A qualitative method for analysing multivoicedness. Qualitative Research, 15(6), 670–687. Dervin, F. (2013). La Meilleure Éducation au Monde? Contre-enquête sur la Finlande [The best education in the world. An ethnography of Finland]. Paris: L’Harmattan. Dervin, F. (2016). Is the emperor naked? Experiencing the ‘PISA hysteria’, branding and education export in Finnish academia. In K. Trimmer (Ed.), Political pressures on educational and social research (pp. 77–92). New York: Routledge. Genette, G. (1987). Paratexts. Thresholds of interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Guiden, V., & Brennan, M. (2017). The continuous professional development (CPD) of Finnish primary school teachers—Potential lessons to be learned for Ireland. Irish Teachers’ Journal, 5(1), 39–54. Hämäläinen, K., & Hämäläinen, K. (2011). Professional development for edu- cation personnel as a competence resource. A report on good practices and development measures in professional development for education personnel. Helsinki: Opetushallitus Hämäläinen, K., & Kangasniemi, J. (2013). Systemaattista suunnitelmallisuutta [Systematic planning]. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Hämäläinen, K., Hämäläinen, K., & Kangasniemi, J. (2015). Osaamisen kehittämisen poluille: Valtion rahoittaman opetustoimen henkilöstökoulu- tuksen haasteet ja tulevaisuus [Knowledge development direction: A state funded education in-service training, challenges and future]. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Heikkinen, H., Hästö, P., Kangas, V., & Leinonen, M. (2015). Promoting exploratory teaching in mathematics: A design experiment on a CPD course for teachers. LUMAT (2013–2015 Issues), 3(6), 905–924. Huber, S. G. (2012). The impact of professional development: A theoretical model for empirical research, evaluation, planning and conducting train- ing and development programmes. Professional Development in Education, 37(5), 837–853. Huhtala, A., & Vesalainen, M. (2017). Challenges in developing in-service teacher training: Lessons learnt from two projects for teachers of Swedish in Finland. Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies, 11(3), 55–79.
156 Y. Li and F. Dervin Itkonen, T. (2018). Contradictions of Finnish education: Finnishness, intercul- turality and social justice. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Itkonen, T., Dervin, F., & Talib, M.-T. (2017). Finnish education: An ambig- uous utopia? International Journal of Bias, Identity and Diversities in Education, 2(2), July–December 2017, 13–28. Niemi, H. (2015). Teacher professional development in Finland: Towards a more holistic approach. Psychology, Society & Education, 7(3), 279–294. OECD. (2014). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Paris: OECD Publishing. Pöntynen, L., & Silander, T. (2015). Opettajat koulutuksessa - nappikau- pasta rohkeisiin ratkaisuihin [Teachers in training—The most daring solutions]. Available at https://www.sitra.fi/blogit/opettajat-koulutuksessa- nappikaupasta-rohkeisiin-ratkaisuihin/. Sahlberg, P. (2012). A Model Lesson: Finland Shows Us What Equal Opportunity Looks Like. American Educator, 36(1), 20. Sahlberg, P. (2018, March 1). Teachers need a sense of mission, empathy and leadership. The Conversation (Zhuoying, Z.). Available at https://www.jie- modui.com/N/90187. Schatz, M. (2015). Toward one of the leading education-based economies? Investigating aims, strategies, and practices of Finland’s education export landscape. Journal of Studies in International Education, 19(4), 327–340. Simpson, A. (2018). The dialogism of ideologies about equality, democracy and human rights in Finnish education. Many voices and many faces. Helsinki: University of Helsinki Press. Sitomaniemi-San, J. (2015). Fabricating the teacher as researcher: A genealogy of academic teacher education in Finland. Oulu: Acta Universitatis Ouluensis.
8 Conclusions After a recent series of lectures on critical intercultural education in a major department of teacher education in Finland, we received the following e-mail from a future teacher. He had been critical of our questioning of ethnocentric (the belief that ‘our’ group is better than others) and culturalist perspectives (culture as a biased explanation for others’ behavior and thinking patterns) on migrant students in Finland (Holliday 2010): To quote Carl Benjamin, Western culture is at the top of anything that can be considered good. Some examples: Human development index. Internet connectivity. Freedom of the press. Property rights for women, and women’s physical security. LGBT rights. An absence of child labor. An absence of slavery. Overall, it’s an indisputable fact that Western countries have better values than the rest of the world. (…) © The Author(s) 2018 157 Y. Li and F. Dervin, Continuing Professional Development of Teachers in Finland, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95795-1_8
158 Y. Li and F. Dervin The series of lectures (four hours) is the only contact student teachers have with critical and reflexive ideas about the burning issues of inter- culturality and diversity in education. The reaction of the student shocked us: How could a young person (he was in his twenties) who was going to teach at school in a year or two, think that (it is worth quoting him again) “it’s an indisputable fact that Western countries have better values than the rest of the world”? He would enter the class- room soon and potentially spread this ideology to his students, col- leagues and others. Should no further reflection be offered, through e.g. CPD, what would be the long-term consequences? Although one might think that the student’s reaction is marginal, one of our colleagues, who has a long experience in teacher education, explained that “I have met this kind of students during previous years, which is sad”. When we shared this with student teachers who chose to specialize in multicul- tural teacher education (a minority in teacher education), they asserted that they had heard similar comments from non-specialists, with one student remembering someone claim that “he would never want to work with migrants; they are strange and dishonest”… The Play That Goes Wrong? The Play That Goes Wrong (2012) is a British play by Henry Lewis, Jonathan Sayer, and Henry Shields. One of the most popular plays in London (UK) in the last years, the play is about a drama society putting together a murder mystery play. During the production the actors face countless disasters such as doors sticking, floors collapsing, lines forgot- ten, etc. At the end of the play, what remains of the set collapse entirely. At the end of our book on CPD in the ‘miraculous’ education of Finland, we find the title of the play to be well fitted to what we found out about the practices and discourses about CPD. Interestingly, Heikkinen et al. (2015) had described Finnish CPD as “incidental”. The testimonies that we collected from CPD providers, teachers and “paratexts” (decision-makers, a vice-principal, a teacher educator and a project coordinator) deconstruct the myth of the ‘wonders’ of Finnish education (Niemi et al. 2012) and point at an obvious Achilles’ heel.
8 Conclusions 159 CPD represents a fascinating ‘Achilles’ heel’, which can tell us a lot about what is happening behind the scene of an ‘education super- power’ promoted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), before the set collapses… We found that formal CPD is a lottery and that, depending on the context, teachers may enjoy different forms of CPD or not. Throughout our ‘detective’ work on Finnish CPD we came across this argument again and again. For instance, Olli Luukkainen, Director of the Trade Union in Finland (Opetusalan Ammattijärjestö, OAJ), has repeatedly described how the play is going wrong (see e.g. OECD 2011: 126). One aspect and common misconception about Finnish education that was discussed in our book is the fact that it is not unified at all (Sahlberg 2018). Like other education systems, it experiences (contra- dictory) dynamics (continua), such as a social democratic tradition of equality and a market-liberalist version of equity (Simola et al. 2017). The decentralization of education, by giving ‘power’ to municipalities (OECD 2013: 16), seems to create clear inequalities in terms of CPD. Although it has some advantages, it often appears to be a neoliberal and ‘wild’ way of delegating ‘decision-making’. While some municipalities/ schools invest seriously in CPD, others do not allow their teachers to train further. This can create cynicism and resentment amongst teach- ers who experience this injustice. There needs to be an awareness of these issues and contradictions to move away from an ‘angelic’ image of Finland as an education superpower. We also noted that provision of CPD is fragmentary and somewhat inconsistent. There does not seem to be long-term planning, system- atic quality control and fair access. Our study confirms Huhtala and Vesalainen’s (2017) claims that Finnish teachers are not always willing to cooperate with each other, and that some are hesitant and passive to explore ‘modern’ teaching methods. CPD appears to be a matter of vol- untary commitment (Craft 1996; Pöntynen and Silander 2015) in the Finnish context, which does not really serve the purpose of offering a continuation of ITT (Helin 2014). In Chapter 3 we mentioned an article from The Guardian dated 8 October 2013 in which a British scholar, who travelled to Finland to study CPD, claimed that Finland excels in teachers’ CPD and that,
160 Y. Li and F. Dervin unlike Japan, its CPD model is “much less formal”. His explanations were based on the cultural differences “rather than systematic or pol- icy driven.” However, financial issues seem to be at the centre of most problems concerning CPD in Finland (rather than “culture”), as e.g. Chinese researchers Liu and Zhang (2017) already noted. In a simi- lar vein, the rhetoric about trust (“trustspeak”) and Finnish teachers’ excellency can often serve as an excuse for laissez-faire. Finally, there is a trend to over-rely on teachers cooperating with each other, learning how to ‘coach’ others as a substitute for formal CPD (see Geeraerts et al. 2015). Mentoring and cooperation are not problems as such, but they tend to serve as excuses for not allowing teachers to get new ideas, new knowledge from formal learning. Some of the individuals to whom we talked argued that what we found is ‘better’ in any case compared to the situation in other contexts. But we have doubts about such claims: Can one compare apples and oranges? And is it constructive enough to always compare to others? Isn’t there a risk of becoming self-sufficient and to remain somewhat passive by doing so? Comparison should lead to improvement… and not just observation… (see Li and Dervin 2018 and the Afterword). We propose the following figure to summarize the (complex) ways CPD seems to function in Finland. We have included all the main actors that we have identified and how they relate to each other in order to provide CPD to teachers (Fig. 8.1). Recommendations for Finland… and the World? I will make continuous efforts to maintain and develop my professional skills, committing myself to the common goals of my profession and to the support of my colleagues in their work. (Oath for Finnish teachers, 2017) In this final section, we draw conclusions from the problems that we identified. Finland, and other countries, have now “long ridden the wave of Pisa hysteria” (Sitra 2015) and it might be time to refocus our attention to what is really happening in the classroom and teacher
8 Conclusions 161 'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚ ͬWĂƌůŝĂŵĞŶƚ DŝŶŝƐƚƌLJŽĨ ĚƵĐĂƟŽŶĂŶĚƵůƚƵƌĞ;DŽ Ϳ ;ƵĚŐĞƚ͕ƉƌŝŽƌŝƟĞƐŝŶĞĚƵĐĂƟŽŶͿ ;ƉůĂŶƐ͕ŽƵƚůŝŶĞƐĂŶĚŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚƐ ŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƉŽůŝĐŝĞƐĂŶĚďƵĚŐĞƚ͖ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚ ƚŽƚĂŬĞĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƐͿ ůůŽĐĂƚĞ ĨƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŽ͙ EĂƟŽŶĂůŐĞŶĐLJŽĨĞĚƵĐĂƟŽŶ ;E Ϳ ;ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŐĞŶĐLJƚŚĂƚĚƌĂǁƐƵƉƚŚĞŶĂƟŽŶĂů ĐŽƌĞĐƵƌƌŝĐƵůĂ͖ KƌŐĂŶŝƐĞƐƐŽŵĞW͕ĂŵŽŶŐƐƚŽƚŚĞƌƐͿ DĂŬĞƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƌƐĐŽŵƉĞƚĞĨŽƌĨƵŶĚŝŶŐ WŽŽůŽĨƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƌƐ ^ŚŽƌƚͲƚĞƌŵWƌŽũĞĐƚƐ ;WƌŝǀĂƚĞĐŽŵƉĂŶŝĞƐĂƩĂĐŚĞĚƚŽƵŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƟĞƐ͕ ;ƐƉŽŶƐŽƌĞĚďLJƚŚĞDŝŶŝƐƚƌLJĂŶĚͬŽƌƚŚĞ ^ƚĂƚĞͲŽǁŶĞĚƉƌŝǀĂƚĞĐŽŵƉĂŶLJ ĚƵĐŽĚĞ͕ E ƚŽƉƌŽŵŽƚĞĐĞƌƚĂŝŶĂƌĞĂƐŝŶ ƉƌŝǀĂƚĞĐŽŵƉĂŶŝĞƐĂŶĚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚƐͿ ĞĚƵĐĂƟŽŶͿ ŶĚƵƐĞƌƐ dĞĂĐŚĞƌƐ͕ĞĚƵĐĂƚŽƌƐĂŶĚ ĞĚƵĐĂƟŽŶĂůůĞĂĚĞƌƐ KƌŐĂŶŝƐĞW ^ƉŽŶƐŽƌƉŽƚĞŶƟĂů ;Ğ͘Ő͘sĞƐŽĚĂLJƐͿ ƉĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŽŶŝŶW DƵŶŝĐŝƉĂůŝƟĞƐĂŶĚƐĐŚŽŽůƐ Fig. 8.1 CPD organisation and funding education, and to pay attention to the reality rather than promoting certain myths (leading to self-satisfaction and pride) about the ‘best sys- tems of education in the world’. The official discourses that have been created around Finnish education (often shared by researchers and some teachers, see Aspfors 2012) need to be put aside to let alternative ‘truths’ emerge—and act upon them. As we saw, many of the practitioners we interviewed question these discourses (about e.g. teachers’ empower- ment and high status, ‘trustspeak’, etc.).
162 Y. Li and F. Dervin The following recommendations will be of interest to the different actors of CPD in Finland and elsewhere. The recommendations are aimed at different actors of CPD: Decision-makers, providers, teacher educators, and teachers. In the category decision-makers, we include governmental, ministerial and local levels (principals included). Decision-Making Level In general, it appeared quite ironic that CPD for teachers is in a some- what dire state in Finland, when the Nordic country has been offering formal CPD abroad for many years as part of its education export (see Cai and Kivistö 2010; Schatz et al. 2015; Xing et al. 2017). While for- mal CPD does not seem to be in vogue in Finland, and teachers having to self-train or mentor each other, education exporters (including state and university actors) have no qualms in offering CPD for educators abroad in very formal ways. In a similar vein, the Finnish education export industry often tries to sell study tours to explore the work of (selected) school principals. One such company claims that the participants will learn how “(princi- pals) make sure that teachers and students can perform at their best and achieve outstanding results” (anonymised). CPD is never mentioned in such tours, which means that ‘pedagogical tourists’ might miss out on this important ‘botch’ in Finnish education, especially in relation to the role of leadership. Ethically, there might be a need to pause for a while and reflect on these two very different trends, which are somewhat contradictory and incoherent. The government, through the NAE and MoE, as well as municipal- ities, should also take a more ethical position towards CPD, and move away from ‘laissez-faire’ models that do not ensure equality between teachers and schools. In our study, we show that “trustspeak” might have gone past its ‘best before’ date and needs to be reconsidered in Finland. In agreement with Li and Chen (2013) a system of qual- ity insurance would be useful to see if and how teachers develop (see Huber 2012). Most CPD actors know that many teachers do not do
8 Conclusions 163 CPD every year, but nothing is being done to meet this challenge. This matters for the students too as, when teachers get properly profession- ally developed, they can have a positive influence on learning and possi- bility to succeed. In February 2018 the Minister of Education announced that 2300 tutors had been trained to help other teachers to “use the new curric- ulum and new working methods in Finland”. This was financed by the state (26 million euros; Grahn-Laasonen 2018). This laudable ini- tiative does not actually say which part of the country is covered, and who would benefit from these tutors. Furthermore, how sustainable this tutorship model is, is a mystery: it won’t take too many years for teachers to get to know the new curriculum; new working methods are appearing all the time so how do we ensure that the tutors develop new skills about them too? Governments and localities do spend money on different forms of CPD, as this example shows, however, there is a need to think about long-term engagement and investment, and to invest in more structured activities (TALIS 2009). We agree with Weiss and Pasley (2006) that teachers are more likely to be transformed if CPD is sustained, coherent, and intense. The role of the trade union could be more central by connecting the different actors of CPD, assisting the government and Parliament and voicing clearly teachers’ concerns and supporting them. If we summarize recommendations to decision-makers, what could be expected of them should consist in: Providing a clear framework for CPD; Guiding and coordinating CPD; Supervising the way it is done, by whom and for whom. Teacher Education Level Teacher educators are not involved directly in CPD. Some give lectures and courses for CPD providers, on top of their work. However, depart- ments of teacher education are not responsible for CPD. There needs to be a stronger link between ITT and CPD—not just at induction as is currently proposed but throughout teachers’ careers (see Aspfors 2012).
164 Y. Li and F. Dervin The rhetoric of the need for linking ITT and CPD has been omnipres- ent in Finland for decades but very little is happening. This would be beneficial for teachers but also for teacher educators who seldom spend time in schools, except maybe in teacher training schools attached to universities. This has created a gap of ‘reality’ between teachers and teacher educators. We have noted in our book that the provision of teacher educa- tion can differ immensely depending on where teachers were trained, in terms of paradigms, practices, etc. There is not one way of training teachers in Finland but many different ways. In a sense, this adds to the richness of the teaching landscape, but it can also lead to gaps in knowl- edge and practices. This must be discussed openly with and amongst teachers and leaders in schools so as to see what the individual needs of each teacher are and what teachers could learn with each other, based on their ITT. Teachers must be enabled to mix all the “good” parts of ITT together. CPD Providers CPD provision appears to be a ‘jungle’ in Finland as our respondents asserted. Many different kinds of providers are involved. There is hardly any control over the quality of what providers offer, which is very prob- lematic. Also there does not seem to be much coherence in the topics chosen for CPD, level of seniority and inconsistent one-off events are still prevalent for financial reasons (Aspfors 2012). Although Fuller’s (1969) classic stage theory of professional development might appear a bit passé and Westerncentric, it could help providers reflect on how to think about and organize CPD. Fuller’s model is meant to be accumula- tive and chronological, however we find the three stages of self concerns (concerns in relation to survival as teachers), task concerns (performance as teachers) and impact concerns (influence on their pupils) to be use- ful to differentiate CPD for teachers. The current neo-liberal system of making these providers compete for funding is unsustainable. As busi- nesses, they need to compete and look attractive to both decision-mak- ers and teachers. However, there is a need to find a way to help these
8 Conclusions 165 providers compete with each other healthily, communicate and cooper- ate with each other and to specialise in certain areas of CPD to avoid stepping on each other’s foot. For the decision-makers this could mean better use of budgets and less repetitions and overlappings. It would also be important for them to offer trainings that are long-term, and that allow teachers to develop pedagogically rather than just technolog- ically—this was a trend observed in 2017. CPD that relates to teachers’ ‘real’ questions and concerns is essential (Feiman-Nemser 2001: 1042). In terms of teaching methods, there seems to be a wide array of methods proposed by the providers. We believe, however, that there is a need to include alternative views in these trainings (which are often given by ‘white’ Finns) to help teachers open up their minds, and accept knowledge and methods from outside Finland, and the ‘West’. Summa summarum, a culture of mutually beneficial win-win situ- ations must be established, in order to optimize resource allocation. Furthermore, providers must take their responsibility in a more system- atic and transparent way: They do have a societal responsibility as edu- cation providers. Teachers In general, we found teachers to be blasé about CPD being “fragmen- tary, non-systematic and even unnecessary” (Huhtala and Vesalainen 2017: 74) in Finland. They were all aware of the problems they face when ‘begging’ for CPD, and of the financial ‘game’ played by both municipalities and schools. Although most of the teachers we inter- viewed wanted to develop more, it did not seem to be a matter that concerned them so much. Following Hämäläinen and Hämäläinen (2011), teachers should “commit themselves to regular development of their own professional competence in co-operation with their employers” (our emphasis). The needs of teachers in terms of CPD must be put on the table reg- ularly and systematically, and renegotiated. It must also be a lifelong endeavour (Hämäläinen and Kangasniemi 2013). Teachers must thus be brave enough to question some of the assumptions about who they
166 Y. Li and F. Dervin are as professionals, speak out their desire to be trained further and use their rights to be provided with more CPD (Stoll et al. 2012). For example, the much criticised VESO-days—although they have been ‘celebrated’ by e.g. Guiden and Brennan (2017)—would need to be more focused and less ‘macdonaldised’ as too many teachers seem to find them useless—a mere duty. For those teachers who do formal CPD, passing the acquired knowl- edge to others must be imposed as there seems that too much knowl- edge is lost. Teachers’ personal and professional change through the acquisition of new knowledge during CPD should be discussed and reflected upon with others (Girvan et al. 2016). Darling-Hammond (2009) argued that CPD is more effective when it becomes a coherent part of a school effort. For All Actors To finish, it is important for all actors involved (in-)directly with CPD to consider, together or separately (Perez et al. 2007), the following elements. First and foremost, all actors must find ways to justify fully the importance of CPD, and to motivate each other to take it seriously. Coordinating the interests of different actors might help to do so. Fullan’s (2005) ‘capacity building’, or the development of a collective ability, i.e. dispositions, skills, knowledge, motivation and resources, is essential in this regard. Throughout the study, we felt that many of our respondents were not aware of what was happening elsewhere in terms of CPD, and relied overly on Finnish ‘know-how’. We believe thus that there is a need for Finland to listen to others, to learn with others in terms of CPD. There are great practices abroad that could be tested in the Nordic country too. Benchmarking from abroad could help to develop a good and relia- ble system of CPD. Our next point concerns our surprise at the fact that very little research has been done in Finland and abroad about Finnish CPD (Niemi 2015). A few reports have been published (e.g. Hämäläinen
8 Conclusions 167 et al. 2015) but they are usually not known to the individuals we spoke to. This is a crucial point as research could help the different actors to get a sense of the problems that CPD faces in Finland, to become aware of action research in Finland and abroad to get some inspiration and to take new steps towards ‘refreshed’ CPD. The work of the Advisory Board for Professional Development of Education (2008–2015), which described many of the problems that we identified and proposed some solutions, needs to be made known to the different actors. To conclude, we would like to insist on an important element, which has crossed this book regularly. All the actors involved in CPD must talk to each other systematically, (re-)negotiate what CPD could be about and learn with each other (not from each other) (Darling- Hammond and McLaughlin 1995; Fullan 2005). An open and complex dialogue between these actors cannot but transform CPD and make it more consistent and coherent, and fairer. Since 2016 Finland has tried to reform its Teacher Education and Training through the Teacher Education Forum (Opettajankoulutus foorumi ). The Forum identified very similar issues as we did in this volume: fragmented models for continuing training will not accomplish the desired change. Activities supporting teachers’ professional development must be managed, effective, systematic and long-lasting. We hope that Finland, but also other countries, will take these (old and well-known) issues seriously in the near future. A ‘good’ system of edu- cation, which believes in the ideas of autonomous learning (a skill that must be learnt and developed; it is never a ‘given’), responsibility and lifelong learning and excellence in education, cannot do without prop- erly structured and (in-)formal CPD. Each system of education, from the ‘superpowers’ to ‘poor perform- ers’, have their Achilles’ heel. Achilles’ tendon problems (which are often overuse injuries) can be repaired naturally by the body. Sometimes the tendon needs to be treated by reducing mileage and/or frequency of sports, taking pain-killers or getting an operation. Prevention is also important, by e.g. stretching and warming up the tendons. CPD, as
168 Y. Li and F. Dervin an important backbone (but potentially failing tendon) to education, should serve the purpose of preventing ‘injuries’ and/or of recovering from educational ‘inflammation’… References Aspfors, J. (2012). Induction practices: Experiences of newly qualified teachers. Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Press. Cai, Y., & Kivisto, J. (2010). Towards a fee-based education in Finland: Where to go? IMHE General Conference, Paris, France. Craft, A. (1996). Continuing professional development. A practical guide for teachers and schools. London: Routledge. Darling-Hammond, L. (2009). Recognizing and enhancing teacher effectiveness. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 3, 1–24. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. (1995). Policies that support pro- fessional development in an era of reform. W. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 597–604. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a contin- uum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership and sustainability. System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental study of teacher con- cerns across time. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA. Geeraerts, K., Tynjälä, P., Heikkinen, H. L., Markkanen, I., Pennanen, M., & Gijbels, D. (2015). Peer-group mentoring as a tool for teacher develop- ment. European Journal of Teacher Education, 38(3), 358–377. Girvan, C., Conneely, C., & Tangney, B. (2016). Extending experiential learn- ing in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 129–139. Grahn-Laasonen, S. (2018). Government’s question time in parliament: Equality in education. 28 February 2018. Available in Finnish at http:// minedu.fi/artikkeli/-/asset_publisher/hallituksen-vastaus-valikysymykseen- koulutuksen-tasa-arvosta-28-2-2018. Guiden, V., & Brennan, M. (2017). The continuous professional development (CPD) of Finnish primary school teachers—Potential lessons to be learned for Ireland. Irish Teachers’ Journal, 5(1), 39–54.
8 Conclusions 169 Hämäläinen, K., & Hämäläinen, K. (2011). Professional development for edu- cation personnel as a competence resource. A report on good practices and development measures in professional development for education personnel. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Hämäläinen, K., & Kangasniemi, J. (2013). Systemaattista suunnitelmallisuutta [Systematic planning]. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Hämäläinen, K., Hämäläinen, K., & Kangasniemi, J. (2015). Osaamisen kehittämisen poluille: Valtion rahoittaman opetustoimen henkilöstökoulu- tuksen haasteet ja tulevaisuus [Knowledge development direction: A state funded education in-service training, challenges and future]. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Heikkinen, H., Hästö, P., Kangas, V., & Leinonen, M. (2015). Promoting exploratory teaching in mathematics: A design experiment on a CPD course for teachers. LUMAT (2013–2015 Issues), 3(6), 905–924. Helin, M. (2014). Opettajien ammatillisen kehittymisen jatkumo: yliopiston ja koulujen kumppanuus [Teachers’ professional development as a con- tinuum—Educational partnership between the university and schools]. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Holliday, A. (2010). Intercultural communication and ideology. London: Sage. Huber, S. G. (2012). The impact of professional development: A theoretical model for empirical research, evaluation, planning and conducting train- ing and development programmes. Professional Development in Education, 37(5), 837–853. Huhtala, A., & Vesalainen, M. (2017). Challenges in developing in-service teacher training: Lessons learnt from two projects for teachers of Swedish in Finland. Apples: Journal of Applied Language Studies, 11, 55–79. Li, L., & Chen, S. (2013). In-service training of primary and secondary teach- ers in Finland. Contemporary educational science, 8, 45–48. Li, Y., & Dervin, F. (2018). Education systems and social justice: Comparing and contrasting in China and Finland. London: Routledge. Liu, X., & Zhang, W. (2017). Possible paths for teacher professional devel- opment—Based on the comparative analysis of TALIS 2013 Shanghai and Finland. Journal of the Chinese Society of Education, 9, 1–8. Niemi, H. (2015). Teacher professional development in Finland: Towards a more holistic approach. Psychology, Society & Education, 7(3), 279–294. Niemi, H., Toom, A., & Kallioniemi, A. (Eds.). (2012). Miracle of education. London: Sense Publishers. OECD. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Paris: OECD.
170 Y. Li and F. Dervin OECD. (2011). Strong performers and successful reformers in education lessons from PISA for the USA. Paris: OECD Publications. OECD. (2013). Teachers’ professional development Europe in international com- parison. Paris: OECD. Perez, L., Uline, C., Johnson, J., James-Ward, C., & Basom, M. (2007). Foregrounding fieldwork in leadership preparation: The transformative capacity of authentic inquiry. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 217–257. Pöntynen, L., & Silander, T. (2015). Opettajat koulutuksessa—nappikau- pasta rohkeisiin ratkaisuihin [Teachers in training—The most daring solutions]. Available at https://www.sitra.fi/blogit/opettajat-koulutuksessa- nappikaupasta-rohkeisiin-ratkaisuihin/. Sahlberg, P. (2018, January 3). Teachers need a sense of mission, empathy and leadership. The Conversation (Z. Zhuoying). Available at https://www.jiemo- dui.com/N/90187. Schatz, M., Popovic, A., & Dervin, F. (2015). From PISA to national branding: exploring Finnish education®. Discourse: Studies In The Cultural Politics Of Education, 38(2), 172–184. Simola, H., Kauko, J., Varjo, J., Kalalahti, M., & Sahlstrom, F. (2017). Dynamics in education politics: Understanding and explaining the Finnish case. London: Routledge. Sitra. (2015). https://www.sitra.fi/en/news/finnish-education-based-meeting- yesterdays-standards/. Stoll, L., Harris, A., & Handscomb, G. (2012). Great professional development which leads to great pedagogy: Nine claims from research. Nottingham, UK: National College for School Leadership. Weiss, I., & Pasley. J. (2006). Scaling up instructional improvement through teacher professional development: Insights from the local systemic change ini- tiative. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) Policy Briefs. Xing, X., Dervin, F., & Fan, P. (2017). Truths, omissions and illusions in the era of Marketization Chinese university leaders’ perceptions of Finnish edu- cation. Journal of the European Higher Education Area, 4, 33–50.
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative and International Education We cannot wander at pleasure among the educational systems of the world, like a child strolling through a garden, and pick off a flower from one bush and some leaves from another, and then expect that if we stick what we have gathered into the soil at home, we shall have a living plant. (Higginson 1979: 49) This book shows that the ‘miraculous’ system of education of Finland hides many imperfections and ‘white lies’, which most observers have missed (or ‘pretended’ to miss, see the idea of “Finnish education as an excuse”). The topic of teachers’ CPD was useful in unearthing many of these ‘imperfections’ in the Nordic country. We have decided to include this afterword as we feel that there is an urgent need to discuss again the meanings of comparing and contrasting in international and compara- tive education. The objectives of this afterword are as follow. Firstly: we are very much interested in reflecting on the meanings of comparing and con- trasting in international and comparative education: what do these two words mean and what do they entail? Which approach seems best © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018 171 Y. Li and F. Dervin, Continuing Professional Development of Teachers in Finland, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95795-1
172 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … suited to avoid comparing ‘apples and pears’, which is necessarily detri- mental to one of the compared objects? Secondly: Can we take a thorny and popular concept like social justice (which was central in discuss- ing CPD) and compare and/or contrast how it is ‘done’ in two differ- ent countries? What meaning(s) does it have in the two contexts? How do people get prepared to deal with it in education? Finally: Based on our observations in schools in China and Finland, and deriving from our approach to comparison and understanding of social justice, are there similarities in the ways the teachers and school leaders in the two schools implement social justice? In accordance with Birkeland (2016: 79), we try to bridge the macro-aspects of e.g. the study of educational systems, institutions and policies (typical of comparative education) with more micro-aspects, “the internal and intrinsic aspects of schooling” (ibid.), for instance, in the specific context of a given classroom. We believe that macro-aspects can often hide certain ‘truths’ about the complex realities of an educa- tional system that micro-aspects can better reveal. Our readers might wonder how social justice can be used to com- pare two very different countries such as China and Finland, especially in relation to the work and training of the teacher. Calling for a per- spective that takes into account the enmeshment of broader contexts (e.g. the residence permit-hukou system in China and the current edu- cation export initiatives in Finland) and of micro-contexts such as the work of a specific teacher in a classroom, the afterword also proposes an approach to comparing which takes into account difference and simi- larity between contexts, thus avoiding potentially unjustified and biased comparisons—which are damaging the way we speak about ‘our’ and ‘their’ education. A preliminary presentation of our observations in the schools in China and Finland illustrates this perspective. Our main goal is to explain why there needs to be a shift in the way we compare education systems and give some recommendations as to how this could occur. We also suggest moving from the ideology of ‘learning from other countries’ to ‘learning with each other’ when one deals with social justice in education, as every single country faces issues of injustice.
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 173 During our visits to the schools in China, we were quite astonished by the lack of sufficiently available and well-maintained facilities and equipment in the Chinese school. Furthermore, the demoralization of some teachers—about which one can often read in the literature (Wang 2013)—was palpable. Yet, we were nicely surprised by the teachers’ general care about the students, especially in relation to well-being and motivation. Although the context was materially and psychologically difficult, the teachers still seemed to believe that education can make a difference. Although Finland is not listed as achieving high levels of performance and equity in education outcomes in the latest OECD report on PISA and equity (OECD 2016), as asserted many times in this book, the Nordic country is known for its emphasis on social justice, equality and equity in education (Sahlberg 2011), and is often an object of desire and copy for many countries. It is also considered a hallmark of high quality education, while China is often described as authoritarian, com- petitive and unequal in terms of distribution of educational resources by geographical region; by class or other social group such as ethnicity; and at different levels from primary and secondary to tertiary (Wu and Morgan 2016). The visits to Finnish schools represented an opportu- nity to see how social justice was ‘done’ in this context and to compare and/or contrast it to what we witnessed in China—and potentially learn from it (see Higginson’s quote at the beginning of the article: can we stick a flower and some leaves from another garden and have a living plant in another?). On Comparing and Contrasting China and Finland: Two Different Educational Utopias At first sight, China and Finland have very little in common. Let us review some basic elements to confirm this impression. While the People’s Republic of China has a population of 1.4 billion people, Finland’s population is 5.4 million. The Nordic country covers an
174 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … area of 338,424 km2 and China 9.6 million. China is a unitary one- party socialist republic while Finland a unitary parliamentary republic. China has 56 nationalities (55 minorities) and Finland has one offi- cial minority (Swedish-speakers, 5.29% of the population) and a rec- ognized regional language (Sami with 0.04% of the population). The two countries’ Gross Domestic Products are: $23.2 trillion ($16,676 per capita; China) and $239.662 billion ($43,545; Finland) (ESA.UN.org). Finally, China has the largest education system in the world with 474,000 schools, 10 million teachers and 200 million students (China Education and Research Network 2011). Although they are very different, these two countries both represent ‘educational utopias’ today. The word utopia was coined by English statesman, lawyer, philosopher and Renaissance humanist Sir Thomas Moore. The etymology of the word is from the Greek ou-topos mean- ing ‘no place’ or ‘nowhere’ (Giroux 2003). In 1516, Moore published Utopia about an imaginary ideal nation with highly coveted and/or nearly perfect qualities. China and Finland represent different types of utopias, especially in relation to their excellent positions in interna- tional rankings in education. Many countries wish to copy Finland for e.g. her fun-learning approaches, student-centeredness and autonomous learning-teaching. China is inspiring for e.g. mathematics education to the rest of the world. As asserted in the introduction, on the one hand, Finland is said to lay a strong emphasis on equality and social justice, on the other hand, China is often said to be hierarchical, competitive and a victim of varied inequalities (Zhao 2014). Comparing and Contrasting Beyond Quantitative Indicators? The Importance of (Hidden) Contextual Knowledge International comparisons of systems of education (“rankings”) have become popular and widespread, as asserted earlier in this book. Simola et al. (2017: n.p.), amongst others, are critical of how quantita- tive indicators such as the ones provided by PISA studies are believed to
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 175 “provide valid comparisons of education systems”, without further anal- ysis—and many scholars, decision-makers and practitioners from China and Finland have fallen into this trap (Liu and Dervin 2016; see intro- duction to this book). They insist that “these remain value-loaded col- lections of indicators of development that offer at best parallel lines of comparative analysis” (ibid.). Finally, for the scholars, these often lead to politically and ideologically motivated comparisons but also to a push for ‘borrowing’ practices (ibid.). It is clear that comparing/contrasting Finland and China in order to try to identify practices from Finland that could be implemented in China in relation to social justice in education (this is often the one-way direction people use) is problematic. Simola et al. (2017: n.p.) argue that there is a need for “a strong and ambitious theory-based framework with the potential to incorporate sociohistorical complexity, cultural relationality, and sociological contingency”. Harris and Jones (2017: 431) also explain that one needs to see “the whole picture”, which requires a “more sophisticated analysis of the cultural dynamics that operate within an education system”. We share similar patterns in what follows, but with an emphasis on current practices of the economization of Finnish education through education export, which, to us, must be borne in mind when comparing/contrasting with other countries. Since Finland’s ‘victory’ in PISA studies in 2001 the country has attracted worldwide attention. As a direct consequence of Finland’s suc- cess in PISA studies, a sharp increase in activities related to education export has taken place (Cai and Kivistö 2011; Dervin 2016). Through its current proactive education export (Dervin 2013; Schatz 2016), Finland has been visited by so-called ‘pedagogical tourists’ from China and elsewhere. Finland has also sold schools abroad (e.g. kindergar- tens in Inner Mongolia), trained foreign school leaders and teachers (e.g. from Saudi Arabia), and taken part in education reforms abroad (e.g. Serbia), amongst others. According to the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture (2010: 13), “Higher education institutions will be encouraged to be active and assume a major role as education export operators.” Concretely, this means that faculties of education and, especially departments of teacher education in Finland, are very
176 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … active in ‘selling’ Finnish education around the world with the help of private businesses, start-ups and companies attached to universities. What is more, scholars and administrators often accompany education decision-makers or politicians in their business-related trips abroad. The consequences of the emergence of Finnish education export include: ready-made discourses on Finland/Finnish education, including white lies about equality (e.g. “there are no social classes in Finland”; “there are no poor people”), manipulation (e.g. “teachers are highly respected”; “young people want to be teachers”) and unfounded comparisons/con- trasts (e.g. “there are no bad teachers in Finland”). It is important to note here that the ready-made discourses on the ‘miracle’ of Finnish education, embedded in business practices, somehow camouflage some ‘realities’ of Finnish education (Niemi and Nevgi 2014; Simpson and Dervin 2017; Liu and Dervin 2016). For practitioners, decision-makers and even scholars, these can easily lead to a loss of criticality, but also to contradictions and (auto-) censorship. It is important to note that foreign media have also very much contributed to promote Finnish education and to construct nar- ratives and preconceived ideas about its ‘wonders’ (see Itkonen et al. 2017 on documentaries about Finnish education). It is, however, becoming clearer that Finnish education is experiencing contradictions and similar problematic phenomena as many other countries around the world such as a lack of pedagogical innovations, school shopping, teacher burnout, boys’ lower test results, etc. For instance, a study by Simola et al. (2015) on primary schools in the capital city (Helsinki) shows clearly that the pedagogy in practice “appears to be a curious combination of traditional, teacher-centered tuition and progressive, student-centered caring.” In brief, if one wishes to compare/contrast Finnish education with another system, the first step should consist in (1) questioning the pre-discourses that the world has been fed with about Finland, (2) revising one’s own biases about one’s own education system, and (3) asking the questions: Can one compare/contrast the incomparable/ uncontrastable?
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 177 Comparing or Contrasting? Towards Difference and Similarity While we started with the idea of getting potential inspiration from the ‘best’ education in the world for dealing with social justice in China (after having witnessed the lack of resources in Chinese schools, and the somewhat luxurious atmosphere of the Finnish ones), we are now wondering if this approach is worthwhile: Maybe there is more than meets the eyes in the two schools, maybe our comparative/contras- tive perspectives are biased, maybe social justice is noticeable beyond appearances. This is where a critical review of the words that we use to discuss what we are trying to achieve is needed: to compare and to contrast (Chinese and Finnish education). When we verified the etymol- ogy of these two verbs, we noted that they refer to opposite real- ities: Compare comes from the Latin comparāre, which means to place together, to match while contrast comes from the Italian con- trastare (to resist, to withstand), and from Latin contra (against). A look at current definitions of the two verbs (Merriam Webster) also shows that to compare seems to correspond more to an approach that goes beyond differentialism, whereby only differences matter (Dervin 2016), than to contrast: (to compare) “to estimate, meas- ure, or note the similarity or dissimilarity between”; (to contrast) “to set in opposition in order to show the difference or differences between”. In the rest of the article, we have decided to use the verb to compare as it concentrates on both similarity or dissimilarity. We believe that this approach can help us to go beyond hyper-differen- tialist observations which can blind us and push us towards flawed generalisations. Finally, we note that we prefer to add ‘and’ to the aforementioned definition of to compare—rather than ‘or’—as we are interested in both similarities and dissimilarities between the two contexts.
178 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … Introducing Social Justice: China and Finland One central concept under review in order to problematise the compar- ison of the two contexts is that of social justice—a central concept in today’s academic, educational and political discussions. For many read- ers, comparing China and Finland in relation to social justice might sound surprising. Let us note first that a sizable literature has been produced glob- ally on the concept and that, as a result, its meanings are disparate, inconsistent and shifting over time and space (see e.g. Kaur 2012). Its definitions may thus vary from context to context, especially when transmitting values across nations—although many values might con- cur beyond the borders of a given context. It is also important to note that problems of inequality and inequity are experienced throughout the world, often in different levels of importance and forms. Depending on the context, social injustice may concern different genders; minori- ties; those with special needs or disabilities; certain kinds of immigrants; poor people; etc. Most governments around the world have included the words social justice, equality or equity in national curricula and policies. In their 2016 article entitled Subtle discourses on equality in the Finnish cur- ricula of upper secondary education: reflections of the imagined society, Lappalainen and Lahelma note that the idea of equality has been pres- ent in Finnish educational politics and policies for the past 40 years. They explain that the meaning and conceptualization of the concept have changed with the political orientations of different periods of time. Finally, they show that a clear neo-liberal educational restructuring into Finland is noticeable in their diachronic study of the presence of the word equality in policy documents. It is obvious from this example and others that concepts and notions associated with social justice fluctu- ate over time and space. It is without any surprise that the same has occurred in China. If we look at more macro-levels of both societies, we note that, for instance, many words included in China’s Core Socialist Values, which are divided into three categories (national, social and individual) the
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 179 values of democracy (national), equality and justice (social) and dedica- tion and friendship (individual) are included (see Fig. 1) (Zhao 2016). These values represent Chinese socialism as promoted at the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2012. What these values mean in their English translation or in reality is difficult to decipher. As such scholars like Yang (2016) have noted that Chinese education faces different kinds of social injustice, that would contradict these val- ues, especially at the structural level. The first issue relates to the entire social system and e.g. the way migrant populations are dealt with in the country. The issue of college entrance examination (Gaokao) is also a major problem as it somewhat discriminates against certain types of students such as those from rural areas. In general, Yang (2016) argues Fig. 1 China’s core socialist values
180 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … that the differential treatment of rural and urban areas (financial invest- ments in education, availability of teachers, etc.) contributes to social injustice in China. The dichotomy of rural and urban relates to the hukou (户口) regime, otherwise known as the household registration which constraints people’s migration to other parts of the country. The hukou divides people into two categories (rural and urban) with dif- ferent access to education, health care and other social benefits within and outside of their original locations. The urban and rural population of China was respectively about 771 million people and 603 million in 2015 (Statista). In the Middle Kingdom, rural schooling can both refer to the educational experiences of migrant children in Chinese urban contexts and to those of children who live and study in Chinese rural areas. Migrant children often follow the 282 million rural migrant workers employed in an urban workplace (2015, National Bureau of Statistics). Since 2001 rural migrant children have been allowed to attend urban public schools regardless of their household registration. Although progress has been made in promoting access to public schools many migrant children attend private schools sponsored by local com- munities or private business institutions. It is important to note that many migrant workers leave their children behind. In 2010, more than 61 million children between birth and 17 years old were “left behind” (Chinese National Census). Chinese rural areas are said to often experience poverty and there seems to be a rural-urban divide in the country, especially in terms of income and educational investment. Undernourishment and food inse- curity are also said to be widespread in many rural areas (Wang 2013). It is important to note however that some urban areas also experience inequalities from within and that certain ethnicities from rural areas fare worse than others. If one looks at the Finnish constitution (731/1999, amendments up to 1112/2011 included, http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1999/ en19990731.pdf ), Section 6 is dedicated to the idea of equality: Section 6 Equality
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 181 Everyone is equal before the law. No one shall, without an acceptable reason, be treated differently from other persons on the ground of sex, age, origin, language, religion, con- viction, opinion, health, disability or other reason that concerns his or her person. Children shall be treated equally and as individuals and they shall be allowed to influence matters pertaining to themselves to a degree corre- sponding to their level of development. Equality of the sexes is promoted in societal activity and working life, especially in the determination of pay and the other terms of employ- ment, as provided in more detail by an Act. Finland, like other Nordic countries, is regarded as one of the most gen- der-equal countries in the world. The last paragraph of the Section is very clear about equality of the sexes (and the ensuing social justice). Yet there are still very strong gender equality problems in the Nordic country, espe- cially in relation to the gender pay gap (Saari 2011). Let us give an exam- ple of how this is (not) dealt with in Finland. In August 2017, a Finnish firm attempted to offer women-only discounts to reflect gender wage gap (which the company claimed was 17%). Complaints about gender dis- crimination were sent to Finland’s Equality Ombudsman, who decided that this was illegal. The firm then changed its marketing strategy and offered the discount to everyone (Yle News, 25 August 2017). If we make a short summary of our discussions until now, we can see that both countries seem to take into account certain ideas of social justice at a macro-level. However, the way social justice is applied (dis- course vs. action) can be questioned. Actually, the idea that Finland is said to be very good at it and that China is not, could potentially be revised. Going back to the discussions about gender wage gap, we realized while writing this paper that China has a 20% gap (National Census 2015) versus and an official 19.6% gap for Finland (OECD 2015).
182 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … Social Justice in Finnish and Chinese Teacher Education In this section, we concentrate on the context of education. We agree with McArthur (2010: 493) that “education and society are intrin- sically inter-related and that the fundamental purpose of education is the improvement of social justice for all.” In most contexts, teachers are viewed as being central in guaranteeing and promoting some form of social justice in schools and beyond (Cochran-Smith 2010). Yet, depending on the kind of initial training and professional development they receive, some teachers may be readier than other to implement forms of social justice in their class. Teacher education plays a key role in shaping the future of educa- tion. According to Menter (2016: 3), teacher education influences the “practice of teachers in schools and colleges and thereby [it has] a strong effect on the quality of educational experiences for learners”. In the Finnish context, although words such as inclusion and equality/equity are omnipresent in discussing education, these words are nearly absent from e.g. the recent review article entitled The last 40 years in Finnish teacher education (Tirri 2014). Teacher education is multiform in the country. Depending on the department and university, emphases might differ. Some student teachers might get specific courses on social justice in education, while others may not. Social justice might also be lim- ited to e.g. knowledge on different cultures, worldviews and religions and the development of an ethno-relative position amongst student teachers (e.g. Kuusisto et al. 2016) or it might be substituted by mul- ticultural/intercultural education especially in relation to migrant stu- dents (Layne and Dervin 2016). Some courses might concentrate on gender diversity (Brunila and Kallioniemi 2017). The research inter- ests and ideologies of professors and lecturing staff have a direct influ- ence on what, how and why student teachers study specific aspects of social justice. We also note with Brunila and Kallioniemi (2017: 4–5) that many initiatives related to social justice in Finnish teacher educa- tion “have become caught up in project-based activities. The rise of pro- ject-based work or projectisation (…) is a part of a larger societal shift
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 183 towards market economics that has started to challenge the Nordic wel- fare states”. This means that social justice education in Finnish teacher education is often short-term and somewhat short-sighted. Chinese teacher education is also multiform, and is provided by many different kinds of institutions. The issue of social justice is hardly taught in teacher education as such, and that seems to be reflected in the ways teachers reflect on their job. Wong (2014) shows, for instance, how little engagement with the issue is to be noted in teachers’ indi- vidual publications or research activities, which serve as school-based professional development in China. She writes: “To promote a research atmosphere in schools, local education departments and educational research institutes from the state and universities are responsible for discussing and determining research topics for some selected schools to conduct. Such research collaboration is usually expert-led. Teachers, however, are also able to conduct small-scale school-based research, either at the individual or subject level, based on their interests and students’ needs” (Wong, ibid.: 79). These practices have been common since the late 1980s and are used for teachers’ annual appraisals and can lead to teacher promotion. In her analysis of teachers’ publications, she found that none had engaged with critical reflection on social justice and equality/equity. She argues that this relates to the lack of discussions of these issues, and of the wider social context, in initial teacher educa- tion. In a similar vein, Wang and Gao (2013) show that social justice and equity were rarely discussed in the 2007 Free Teacher Education (FTE) program. The program, which was set up by the Chinese gov- ernment, aimed at “attract(ing) outstanding students into the teach- ing profession and to channel quality teachers into schools located in underdeveloped rural areas” (Wang and Guo, ibid.: 68). In return, a strong economic incentive is provided to the students. In interviews with some of the student teachers, the scholars have identified that they have a sense of superiority and moral ambivalence towards to objectives of the programme. The lack of engagement with discussions of social injustice and inequality during the training programme might have led the students to such attitudes. One rare publication in English about social justice in Chinese education (and directly in teacher education) is included in the
184 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education (Benedict et al. 2015). In their chapter, Ho and Law (2015) examine how social jus- tice is ‘done’ through the guise of citizenship education in China. They show that the Chinese government uses citizenship education as a way of maintaining social stability and of consolidating its political lead- ership. Teachers are taught to promote a love for traditional Chinese music (such as Beijing opera) and an understanding of the various styles of China’s 56 ethnic groups (Ho and Law, ibid.) in their music lessons. Social justice here means including the minorities in teaching. This short review of how social justice is problematized and imple- mented in teacher education in the two countries shows a diversity of meanings, approaches and ideologies, between and within the two countries. A similarity-based comparison shows that there are signs that the two countries make attempts at helping teachers to include the ‘Other’ in education (in Finland: migrants; in China: minorities). How this is done and taught about in teacher education appears to be multifaceted. Comparing Practices of Social Justice in Two Schools In this final section, we wish to reflect on our observations in two schools that we visited in relation to how social justice was ‘done’ by teachers and school leaders. Before we share our observations, there is a need for us to review definitions of social justice in education. Social Justice as a Multifaceted and Political Construct As noted before, the two contexts problematize social justice some- what differently, although it is important to remember that (1) There is variety from within in terms of how it is discussed and (2) Discourses on what social justice is and how it should be implemented can differ highly,
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 185 especially if one examines micro-contexts (e.g. work in a given classroom). We argue that the polysemy and somewhat political-correctness of the idea of social justice also leads to the different ways it is dealt with between the two countries and from within. In general, we believe that social justice can be approached as an empty signifier (Laclau 2005), which leads to hegemonic struggles. As such, as the word is ‘floating’, it can be used to impose certain interpretations as the right one. It also means that there cannot be a common strategy to ‘do’ it, from within or across countries. These arguments have important consequences. Since social justice is polysemic, it can be misused and abused in comparing countries: some countries are said to be ‘better’, ‘worse’, ‘more civilised’. We thus need to avoid such implicit/explicit judgments. Second, the instability of the concept convinces us that every single country in the world faces issues of social injustice. Finally, we have seen many times until now, there are hidden realities and discourses about social justice in the two con- texts that need to be unearthed if comparison between the two could be. In the case of Finland, there need to be critiques of the somewhat empty beautification of how successful the country is at ‘doing social justice’. In what follows, we try to look into the polysemy of social justice in global research in order to form a potential definition that could serve to compare these aspects in the two schools, as a preliminary anal- ysis. At this stage, we must admit that we feel uncomfortable about this ‘exercise’. Most of the identified literature originates from the ‘West’. We feel rather awkward about using ‘Western’ ideas to discuss the Finland–China contexts although we believe, based on our experi- ence, that there are similarities between the ideas below and the ways social justice is discussed and problematized by Chinese educators and that some of the Finnish teachers (who would be classified as ‘Western’) might disagree with them. Concentrating on ‘Western’ research dis- courses might also give the impression that social justice is exclusively ‘Western’—an idea which we refute (Sen 2005). The end-product of this review will be, of course, limited and biased. We believe that it can still help us introduce similarity and dissimilarity in the practices observed in the two schools.
186 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … The first point that we wish to make about social justice is: Based on observations and previous research, we agree with De Silva (2013) who claims that social injustice is often seen as a consequence of a problem related to the individual child, his/her socioeconomic or cultural back- ground, and/or his/her parents’ education level and their perception of the importance of education. The more macro-level aspects such as the educational set up or teaching practices are not always seen as being part of the problems. This is often the case in China and Finland. In our observations of the two schools presented in the next section, we’ll con- centrate on the practices of both teachers and leaders. In the English-speaking literature, the idea of social justice in relation to teachers’ work can have many different meanings. In order to discuss it, we agree with Shields (2013: 329) that it is interesting to think about social justice in education by reflecting on what a social justice educa- tion could be. She explains (ibid.): an education that begins with, promotes, and requires a more com- plete understanding of the social (in)justice issues in the school, the community, and the world in which students live now and in which they will work as thoughtful, contributing adults (…) A social jus- tice education therefore teaches students about the world in which they live, prepares them to become fully participating citizens in that world, and helps them to take proactive positions for justice, equity, dignity, and human rights. In her review of different definitions of social justice, Bialystok (2014: 418) identifies a very important commonality: social justice educa- tion “takes up to various degrees the goals of anti-oppression politics, anti-colonialism, environmentalism, and a critique of corporate globali- zation, with more or less overt sympathy for the social welfare state and resistance to educational policies characteristic of neoliberalism. It tends to depend on or endorse a robust notion of democracy and sees educa- tion as an indispensable site of social and political participation.”
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 187 This is one very first aspect of social justice in education: teachers try to empower the students to reflect on the world around them, to criticise it and to take action to make it better. Giving the students a voice in the classroom and school contributes to empower them and prepare them for the outside world. Sleeter (2015), who has proposed overviews of the concept, can help us to add other dimensions of social justice. Let us start with Sleeter (ibid.), who summarized different frameworks for social justice educa- tion for teachers into four dimensions: Reject interpreting problems of students mainly as personal failures but by looking at the effects of unfair policies and systems (e.g. limited access to health care) and their influence within and outside the school and classroom. Develop reciprocal relationships with students and families (encouraging, building trust, listening to parents, etc.). Have high academic expectations by using the students’ intellectual resources. Create and teach a curriculum integrating marginalised perspectives and discussions of social justice. The second aspect of social justice presented here relates to the role of the teacher as an active social justice actor in her/his classroom, school and beyond. The teacher should take into consideration the ‘world’ and ‘people’ outside the classroom. S/he should also try to integrate knowl- edge and perspectives from the margins to try to include all students. To summarize the basic components of social justice in education, we could include the following aspects: the students are treated fairly and equally, and engaged in dialogues with their teachers; they are empowered to analyse the world around them against inequalities and social injustice; visions, ideas and knowledge from the marginalized are included in teaching-learning.
188 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … Similar Signs of Struggles for Social Justice in the Schools? 假作真時真亦假, 無為有處有還無。 Truth becomes fiction when the fiction’s true; Real becomes not-real where the unreal’s real. Dream of the Red Chamber In this final section, we share some of our observations of a Chinese and Finnish school, and at the same time, question the truths and fictions of certain discourses about Finnish and Chinese education. This section serves as an illustration rather than a systematic analysis of data. As a reminder, this afterword serves as a reflective piece about concepts and methods. When we visited the Finnish school, we were amazed by the school. The facilities and equipment were new, clean and working. The atmos- phere in the classrooms and the whole school was relaxed. The teach- ers seemed confident about their work. In the Chinese school, the facilities and equipment often left to be desired. The teachers looked stressed and some sounded demoralized. However, when it comes to the issue of social justice, we are not sure if one context was bet- ter than the other. Of course, at a macro-level it is obvious that the Finnish school had more means. But what about what was happen- ing in the classroom? How did the teachers support e.g. the students’ inclusion and equality? Sitting in different classrooms, observing and sometimes participat- ing, we noted that the Chinese and Finnish teachers had similar strat- egies to ‘do’ social justice. We note that the social justice perspective of including visions, ideas and knowledge from the marginalized in teach- ing-learning was not noted in either schools. Let us start with inclusion in the classrooms. Observing the lessons, we could clearly see that all the teachers made sure that all the students
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 189 were included, and that they were being treated fairly and equally. In Finland, one teacher systematically raised her hand and waited until all the students raised their hands and became silent to make sure that they were on task when she needed their attention (they spent most of their time working independently on their computers). In the Chinese school, one teacher made every single student participate in the les- son, making them repeat what she was saying or asking them questions about a text. She was also very willing to answer individual questions at the end of the lessons (something we did not observe in the Finnish school during our visit). Another aspect of inclusion in the two schools was included in the posters on the walls. In Finland, there were post- ers about the dangers of bullying, while in the Chinese school, posters reminded all the students of the importance of respecting each other but also of hygienic practices. The second common aspect was related to empowering the stu- dents to look around them and reflect on e.g. inequalities. In both schools, the principals gave speeches about the importance of taking one’s own responsibilities. In the Chinese school, the context was that of the end-of-the-year graduation ceremony during which the principal spoke about creating respect for others. Similarly, in the Finnish school the principal talked about the misbehaviours of some students who had damaged equipment or disrespected others by not letting them sit next to them. He advised all the students to pay more attention to these issues. Another way of empowering the stu- dents was to provide them with new learning opportunities. While the Finnish school had courses on aviation and ‘rare’ languages, the Chinese school hired a teacher to provide the students with P.E. and music. One final commonality between the Chinese and Finnish teacher relates to what we could call their professional ethics. We were surprised to find similar discourses about teachers’ loss of motivation, wishes to quit their jobs, etc. However, interestingly, at least in the case of two teachers, although they both had experienced some form of burnout, they decided to stay in the schools to help the students.
190 Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … Concluding Remarks Talking about American education and Chinese education, Wen Ma (2014: 173) argues that “Clearly, there is no “best” system. Both the American perspective and the Chinese perspective evolved as a product of their own sociocultural circumstances, and both can be strengthened with complementary elements from the other.” At the end of this after- words, we argue that a similar ideology should apply to comparative initiatives on Chinese and Finnish education. This foreword served as a reflective piece on comparing two systems of education, often described as utopias in their own ways. It was trig- gered by our work on CPD in Finland, that has revealed many myths and ‘white lies’ about Finnish education. We took the issue of social jus- tice and reflected on how it could be used to compare the two contexts. Visits to a school in each country convinced us that there is a danger in relying on preconceived ideas about Chinese and Finnish education to do comparative work, and that an emphasis on difference rather than the continuum similarity-dissimilarity, is counterproductive as it leads to “comparing apples and pears”. Furthermore, the importance of bearing in mind the influence of wider contexts was discussed (e.g. the influence of Finnish education export on how Finnish education is seen around the world). In what follows we wish to explain further why we feel a change of perspective is essential. First of all, when comparing systems of edu- cation, there is a need to find a common language to understand the meanings of things and phenomena as well as implicit, hidden politi- cal and contextual aspects. Moving from appearances to multiple real- ities from within is also primordial (for example, when visiting schools in Finland, move away from the ‘centre’). Second of all, through the current practices of ranking countries in order of performance, there is a need to empower those who are said to be ‘weak’ or ‘bad’ and to give them strength rather than discouragement, to allow them to look at what they are doing and to find some ‘good’ in it. Third of all, and directly linked to the previous point, there is a need to force those who are said to be ‘very good’ to be more modest and to face their own issues by e.g. learning from others. This will contribute to lessen the current
Afterword: Learning with Each Other in Comparative … 191 intercultural hierarchies created about ‘good’ and ‘bad’ systems of edu- cation. This is also a very important message to education exporters and their customers: Social justice is what exporters claim they are selling but it is often meaningless or exaggerated. If critical ideas about educa- tion and social justice are not taken seriously, there is a risk that educa- tion exporters will create more social injustice elsewhere. There is also a need to move away from ready-made discourses (Finland = equality), exoticism, and negative discourses about ourselves. More specifically about social justice in comparing education sys- tems, we wish to make the following recommendations. We should open up discussions of social justice by comparing contexts said to be ‘good’ or ‘poor’ to deepen our understanding and actions for social jus- tice. This means that we also need to learn to identify and examine and familiarize oneself with similarities and differences in social justice prac- tices across contexts. As the anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss asserted (2011: 112): “when the traveller convinces himself that practices in complete opposition to his own, which by the very fact he would be tempted to despise and reject with disgust, are in reality identical to them when viewed in reverse, he provides himself with the means to domesticate strangeness, to make it familiar to himself.” As a ‘traveller’ an education comparatist might want to adopt the attitude of making the unfamiliar familiar to him/herself and to reverse his/her differential- ist views. To conclude: social justice cannot but be political, as we have seen in this afterwords, there is thus a strong need to dig into hidden aspects and ideologies of social justice in a given context and in the way people discuss and act upon it. We believe that comparative and international education can lead to better results if the idea that one context can learn from each other is systematically put into practice through, e.g. action research. But maybe the idea of learning from each other still creates unfair hierarchies (one context might want to learn more from the other because of their reputation or thanks to their great marketing strategy), wouldn’t it be better to talk about learning with each other then, i.e., by entering into real dialogues and making a conscious effort to give and take? Social injustice is a global ‘wicked problem’ against which we may want to join forces.
Search
Read the Text Version
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
- 133
- 134
- 135
- 136
- 137
- 138
- 139
- 140
- 141
- 142
- 143
- 144
- 145
- 146
- 147
- 148
- 149
- 150
- 151
- 152
- 153
- 154
- 155
- 156
- 157
- 158
- 159
- 160
- 161
- 162
- 163
- 164
- 165
- 166
- 167
- 168
- 169
- 170
- 171
- 172
- 173
- 174
- 175
- 176
- 177
- 178
- 179
- 180
- 181
- 182
- 183
- 184
- 185
- 186
- 187
- 188
- 189
- 190
- 191
- 192
- 193
- 194
- 195
- 196
- 197
- 198
- 199
- 200
- 201
- 202
- 203
- 204
- 205
- 206
- 207
- 208
- 209
- 210
- 211
- 212
- 213
- 214
- 215
- 216
- 217
- 218
- 219
- 220
- 221
- 222
