Ahso May Have A Point

[Accountable]

Back when Ahso was Rjwould he would occasionally deride competition. It seems that when it comes to education, he may have a point:

What Americans Keep Ignoring About Finland's School Success - Anu Partanen - The Atlantic

And while Americans love to talk about competition, Sahlberg points out that nothing makes Finns more uncomfortable. In his book Sahlberg quotes a line from Finnish writer named Samuli Paronen: "Real winners do not compete." It's hard to think of a more un-American idea, but when it comes to education, Finland's success shows that the Finnish attitude might have merits. There are no lists of best schools or teachers in Finland. The main driver of education policy is not competition between teachers and between schools, but cooperation.

Finally, in Finland, school choice is noticeably not a priority, nor is engaging the private sector at all. Which brings us back to the silence after Sahlberg's comment at the Dwight School that schools like Dwight don't exist in Finland.

"Here in America," Sahlberg said at the Teachers College, "parents can choose to take their kids to private schools. It's the same idea of a marketplace that applies to, say, shops. Schools are a shop and parents can buy what ever they want. In Finland parents can also choose. But the options are all the same."

Herein lay the real shocker. As Sahlberg continued, his core message emerged, whether or not anyone in his American audience heard it.

Decades ago, when the Finnish school system was badly in need of reform, the goal of the program that Finland instituted, resulting in so much success today, was never excellence. It was equity.
I think the idea may be too radical for the US at the moment, but maybe not for one of the states. This is the beauty of the USA that is being destroyed: that we have 50 chances to get it right. Nationalizing our education system - nationalizing just about any domestic program - is a bad idea. If one state could adopt the Finnish model and prove successful, it would ironically show that the best way to be competitive globally may be to abandon competition in education.

[Accountable]

Bump.

[Accountable]

More support. This video isn't about competition, but it is about extrinsic rewards such as those that competition produce.

[Ahso!]

Perhaps it's best to read my posts 6 years after I write them. That might be one solution to all this misinterpreting.

[gmc]

It's an age old argument - what isthe purpose of education. The most successful (IMO) is when the purpose is seen as turning out well rounded individuals with as broad an education as possible, Really hard to do nd so easy to destroy such a system when it is in place. Our politicians here are busy doing just that at the moment. When education is seen as a commodity to be sold to those who can afford it society suffers. Just as bad when they try and quantify it's effectiveness and the act of measurement becomes more important than that which is being measured.

Finland has a socialised education system. Why does the word socialist or ised freak americans out so? You react like it's all the swearwords in one - it seems to mean you can't have a rational discussion about what would be the best way for the country as a whole. Jesus was a socialist - did he not redistribute the loaves and fishes and get everybody pissed?

Real winners do not compete




In life generally very true think, not on the sports field perhaps. as rabbie burns put it

A prince can mak a belted knight,

A marquis, duke, an' a' that;

But an honest man's abon his might,

Gude faith, he maunna fa' that!

For a' that, an' a' that,

Their dignities an' a' that;

The pith o' sense, an' pride o' worth,

Are higher rank than a' that.




I've had fun arguing with people over exactky what he meant. It's a concept you either understand in a visceral sense or you just don't get it. People with a sense of self worth don't need the approval of others or feel the need to prove themselves.

What's the beef with you two? I've disagreed with both of you at various times quite viciferouslyhopefully without things becoming personal. Why can't people just agree that they disagree and have fun arguing about it. Maybe you should learn to be more british, take the piss out of each other and have a good laugh. Life is a joke we just dont know the punchline.

[Accountable]

gmc;1426184 wrote: It's an age old argument - what isthe purpose of education. The most successful (IMO) is when the purpose is seen as turning out well rounded individuals with as broad an education as possible, Really hard to do nd so easy to destroy such a system when it is in place. Our politicians here are busy doing just that at the moment. When education is seen as a commodity to be sold to those who can afford it society suffers. Just as bad when they try and quantify it's effectiveness and the act of measurement becomes more important than that which is being measured. That seems to have been the downfall in our country.

gmc;1426184 wrote: Finland has a socialised education system. Why does the word socialist or ised freak americans out so? You react like it's all the swearwords in one - it seems to mean you can't have a rational discussion about what would be the best way for the country as a whole. Jesus was a socialist - did he not redistribute the loaves and fishes and get everybody pissed? Our school system is just as socialized, except that we also have private schools for those who can afford it and Catholics .

[gmc]

Accountable;1426201 wrote: That seems to have been the downfall in our country.

Our school system is just as socialized, except that we also have private schools for those who can afford it and Catholics .


When they were reforming education in the sixties instead of ending grammar schools what they should have done was ban private schools. Selection on ability perhaps has a place - although I can put a counter argument selection on ability to pay gives an major advantage. The irony is ity was a socialist government (supposedly, new labour should be new tory) ) that ended free University education.

Catholic schools major political issue here. they are responsible for the continuing sectarianism both here and in northern ireland. To me the argument that you should be free tp decide where you child gets educated ends when it means you allow sectarianism a fertile feeding ground. OK I know that's not an issue in the states

or is it

Dr. R.C. Sproul: It's Sin For A Born Again Christian To Remain With Roman Catholic Church.m4v - YouTube