1 / 23

Improving the Quality of Education in Finland

Improving the Quality of Education in Finland . Belgrade 6-7 December 2012 Raakel Tiihonen Director Information and Evaluation Services Finnish National Board of Education. Examples of Evidence-based Tools in Finland. Assesment of learning outcomes in basic education

kieu
Download Presentation

Improving the Quality of Education in Finland

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improvingthe Quality of Education in Finland Belgrade 6-7 December 2012 Raakel Tiihonen Director Information and Evaluation Services Finnish National Board of Education

  2. Examples of Evidence-based Tools in Finland • Assesment of learningoutcomes in basiceducation • Performancebasedfunding in VET • Studentadmissions

  3. Why do we evaluate? • The aim of the national evaluation system is to support the national and local education administration to develop schools and to produce and provide up-to-date and reliable information on the context, functioning, pedagogical processes and learning outcomes and effectiveness of the education system. • Evaluations are implemented to find evidence to support the continuous development of education and learning.

  4. Parliament Government MoE Adulteducation Higher education General education Vocational education ResearchInstitutes Pisa et.al, TIMMS PIAAC etc.. The Educational Evaluation Council Evaluating Educational Arrangements etc. The Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council (teacher education et.al.) MatriculationExamination Board for uppersecondaryschools FNBE Learning Outcomes National level Local level Local Schools Education Providers Evaluation and Assessment in Educational Sector in Finland

  5. Evaluations of Learning Outcomes • The evaluations are directed at the correspondence between school achievements and the objectives set in the national core curricula. • The sample size is 5-10% of the age group, typically around 3000 to 6000 pupils.

  6. Evaluations 2012-2013 in basiceducation (9th graders)

  7. Main principles in implementing an Assessment Project • The project manager is responsible for the process and reporting the results. Reports are published. • The results of individual schools or students are not published. (No ranking lists!) • Still, every school, within the sample, will always receive its own results and some reference information about the whole sample. • The provider of the school will receive the same information as the school. • These school-based reports are delivered to the schools as soon as possible, typically within 6-8 weeks after the data collection. • Headmasters and teachers at schools are in key position in using the results to develop the quality of teaching and learning

  8. PerformanceIndicatorand Performance-basedFundingin InitialVocationalEducationand Training http://www02.oph.fi/asiakkaat/rahoitus/tulosr11/Performance_Indicator_for_initial_vocational_education_and_training_in_Finland.pdf Moreinformationin English

  9. Performanceindicator and performance-basedfunding • To support improvement of educational outcomes and to encourage education providers to engage in longtermand goal-orienteddevelopmentwork • To facilitate achievement of the goals set for vocational education and training. • Offers information for development and steering for both education providers and educational administration. • Indicator is calculated and used annually for allocation of performance-based funding.

  10. The Performance Indicator Consists of three indicators • Outcome Indicator, weight 90 % • Teacher Competence Indicator, weight 7 % • Staff Development Indicator, weight 3 %

  11. The OutcomeIndicator • Measures the performance of education providers based on the outcomes of their students. • Detailed individual-level data is used to estimate the impact of the education provider on the outcomes, while also controlling other factors that may affect these outcomes. • The indicator is calculated on the basis of the estimates from this model.

  12. The OutcomeIndicator • The data used is compiled from several registers at Statistics Finland • Individual data on students and graduates • their enrolment, completed qualifications • their labour market status, place of domicile, etc. • The data is processed with due consideration for statistical data privacy and data security specifications • Information concerning individuals cannot be identified from the indicator results. • No separate surveys for students are conducted.

  13. Students at school Period of analysis, where the studentsare? 20.9.2007 2007 2008 2009 2010 Period of Time Used in OutcomeIndicator in 2013

  14. Placement of students into the five outcome categories

  15. The performance of education providers is measured by the outcomes of their students

  16. Online Joint Applications In Finland

  17. General information about applications • Allapplicationsincludeinformationaboutapplicant’s: • Personal details • Educationalbackground and relevantgrades • Otherrelevanteducational info, e.g. languageskills • Whereapplicant is applying to • Examinationresults • Acceptance of studyplace • Allapplicationsareconducted on the specificadmissioncriteria, so the educationalbackground is alwaysspecific to the application

  18. Joint application to upper secondary level education • Joint application to general upper secondary schools and upper secondary vocational education and training • Established in 2008 • Annually approximately 120 000 applicants, approx 600 educational institutions • Application and subsequent admission is maintained online via the application website and the joint application system register, the admission process is based on legislation • Educational institutions are provided information of applicants and lists of selected students

  19. Online Joint Application to Polytechnics (Universities of Applied Sciences) • Different applications to programmes conducted Finnish/Swedish and English • Service launched in 2003 • Annually approx. 130 000 applicants and 25 polytechnics • Polytechnics are provided information on applicants and list of selected students • Process based on legislation and admission criteria set by the polytechnics

  20. Universities • Service launched in 2008 • Annually approx. 67 000 applicants and 17 universities • Univerisities are provided information on applicants

  21. Vocational teacher education • Joint application service launched in 2004 • Annually approx. 6000 applicants/5 schools of Vocational Teacher Education • Schools are provided applicant information and list of selected students • Process based on legislation and admission criteria set by the schools

  22. Pros of joint applications • ”A tool” for studentselectionthathelps in planning and developing the admissionprocess lessoverlappingwork • Sameapplicationperiod and applicationform • Equaltreatment of applicants and transparency of the applicationprocedure • Applicantreceivesgeneral informationfrom the onlineapplicationwebsite

  23. Information on joint applications provided to: • Educational institutions, for admission • Ministry of Education and Culture, helps in guiding the educational policies • Statistics Finland for educational statistics • Social Insurance institution of Finland for student aid matters • Ministry of Employment and the Economy for employment matters • Other authorities that deal with student matters (municipalities, Finnish Immigration Service etc) • Citizens via statistics

More Related