"The Scandinavian country is an education superpower because it values equality more than excellence.... The problem facing education in America isn't the ethnic diversity of the population but the economic inequality of society, and this is precisely the problem that Finnish education reform addressed. More equity at home might just be what America needs to be more competitive abroad."
Evidence:
"Like Finland, Norway is small and not especially diverse overall, but unlike Finland it has taken an approach to education that is more American than Finnish. The result? Mediocre performance in the PISA survey. Educational policy, Abrams suggests, is probably more important to the success of a country's school system than the nation's size or ethnic makeup."
"Like Finland, Norway is small and not especially diverse overall, but unlike Finland it has taken an approach to education that is more American than Finnish. The result? Mediocre performance in the PISA survey. Educational policy, Abrams suggests, is probably more important to the success of a country's school system than the nation's size or ethnic makeup."
The US is doing much better than Norway... and Sweden. The idea that Sweden doesn't value equality is just absurd.
I don't think they mean that Sweden/Norway don't value equality, but that there seems to be more focus on other aspects that are focused on in the US (e.g. competition, mix of private/public schools, options of cheap/expensive schools, possibly not as high teacher standards, etc.). It doesn't have to be a zero-sum game.
I think there's also a difference between what equality is focused on. Sweden pushes equality in some ways probably more than any other country (e.g. gender equality), but that doesn't necessarily mean there is as much focus in other areas (e.g. socio-economic equality -- though I don't know if that's a good example or not).
I love Finland but they don't have the diversity problems the US has. If you go to a non diverse school in Minneasota for example, it will be similar to a Finnish school.
No. It wouldn't. The kids would be smart and might be able to overcome the adversity of going to an "excellent" school. But that's not the same thing at all.
"Excellent" US schools have excelled at cheating and looking busy. Most "excellect" schools have amounts of homework that are nearly impossible to finish in an evening. Why do they do that? Because the main window into school that parents have is homework. Ratchet up the homework and you make your school seem "excellent".
My daughter is going to a dual-language public school and the way they teach involves constant collaboration, language, math, and art. The school is 67% economically disadvantaged and is doing fantastically on standardized tests.
Diversity is not the problem. The market is. It's providing the most attractive education. It provides an education with "excellence" that confers status upon the recipient.
But that should not be confused with the education that educates the best and has the most benefit to society.
Key point:
"The Scandinavian country is an education superpower because it values equality more than excellence.... The problem facing education in America isn't the ethnic diversity of the population but the economic inequality of society, and this is precisely the problem that Finnish education reform addressed. More equity at home might just be what America needs to be more competitive abroad."
Evidence:
"Like Finland, Norway is small and not especially diverse overall, but unlike Finland it has taken an approach to education that is more American than Finnish. The result? Mediocre performance in the PISA survey. Educational policy, Abrams suggests, is probably more important to the success of a country's school system than the nation's size or ethnic makeup."