What Americans Keep Ignoring About Finland's School Success

[Aura]

What Americans Keep Ignoring About Finland's School Success

This is an older article from 2011. My dd's professor showed this to her, and in turn, dd (math education major) showed it to me. I thought it was interesting. And yeah, my first thought was "That can't happen here." What doth the Hive think?

[Carol in Cal.]

It’s interesting that the article focused on the lack of private schools, not the equity and generosity of the public school offerings.

 

[wintermom]

I don't think it could happen in Canada, either, though not because of private school vs public school. Rather, because of super-powerful teacher's unions making it impossible to weed out poor teachers or ensure that teachers are current and strong with their own academic knowledge. In addition, it seems that politicians push educational content and methods, rather than subject and pedagogical experts. There is a lot of scientific research being done on how people learn and how the brain develops and functions, but politicians are not making decisions based on scientific findings, rather on public outcry of families desiring publicly funded daycare/all-day kindergartens, and low math and literacy marks. 

I think that Finland's key feature to educational success is hiring and keeping competent educators knowledgeable about the science of teaching/learning, then letting them go about the business of educating. 

[Mbelle]

I could not quite believe they didn't have private schools.  This was a quick google search and I did check tuition which they do charge.

https://www.expat-finland.com/living_in_finland/international_schools.html

 

[Liz CA]

2 minutes ago, wintermom said:

I don't think it could happen in Canada, either, though not because of private school vs public school. Rather, because of super-powerful teacher's unions making it impossible to weed out poor teachers or ensure that teachers are current and strong with their own academic knowledge. In addition, it seems that politicians push educational content and methods, rather than subject and pedagogical experts. There is a lot of scientific research being done on how people learn and how the brain develops and functions, but politicians are not making decisions based on scientific findings, rather on public outcry of families desiring publicly funded daycare/all-day kindergartens, and low math and literacy marks. 

I think that Finland's key feature to educational success is hiring and keeping competent educators knowledgeable about the science of teaching/learning, then letting them go about the business of educating. 

 

I agree this seems to be the core of it. If we could just institute this in the US, a lot of things would change already without making any other moves.

[Barb_]

In Finland local school funding isn’t tied to taxes on property values. Unless we vote to equalize funding if schools at the federal level Finland will never offer a valid comparison. 

[Aura]

 

3 hours ago, Mbelle said:

I could not quite believe they didn't have private schools.  This was a quick google search and I did check tuition which they do charge.

https://www.expat-finland.com/living_in_finland/international_schools.html

 

 

The article did say that there private schools, only few of them. It is interesting to note this from your link: Student intake at government schools is limited and entrance examinations are usually required. I wonder who they are limiting? The link looks to be a resource for non-Finnish looking for education in Finland. Are they limiting non-citizens? Or do they require examinations for their own student base?

ETA: I'm not expecting you, Mbelle, to go find those answers for me! I'm just thinking, musing aloud, not exactly asking rhetorical questions but not aiming them at you personally. ? 

[Aura]

I feel like we really have a lot of choices here in America, although those choices are definitely dependent upon economic abilities. Depending upon your area (and I consider the ability to move to an area that has more educational choices an economic factor), you might have have public schools, public alternative schools, charter schools, private religious schools, private prep schools, private alternative schools, true homeschools, co-op homeschools, hybrid schools, and combinations of all these, not to mention the online options. 

Yeah, I agree w/ Wintermom, and I'd also add that their view of responsibility vs accountability makes a difference. Not only do they expect their teachers to teach well, they expect their administrators to follow through and make sure that their teachers are doing just that. I think that unions here in America would make that difficult, too.

In the 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, one of the habits is thinking win-win. I don't think America thinks very win-win about anything, much less education. It seems like everything is us vs. them. And as Stephen Covey points out in his book, unless it is win-win, it's most likely doomed to lose. I feel like this is the key to Finland's success, and sadly also the key to America's failure. Unless America can change the way we look at education, that we need to help everyone to succeed, then we are going to continue to fail.

[Barb_]

Aura, you are correct. Zero sum thinking is foundational to the philosophy of the people currently in power. Anyone who would like to see win-win thinking should be prepared to fire their state, local, and national representatives in November if they aren’t properly representing you. 

[SKL]

I heard they had historically had a pretty rigorous system and that was largely why their scores went up.  Then the scores went down some time after they started implementing all the "reforms" that the articles keep touting.  Similar happened in Japan.  To understand good results, you have to look back a ways in the history, not only because kids are in school for many years before they take the international tests, but also because teachers have even more years of experience with whatever produces good results.  You can't take a snapshot of today to understand today's results.

Private school is about much more than just academic performance.  I'll keep mine, thanks.

Do they have homeschoolers there?

[scholastica]

25 minutes ago, Barb_ said:

Aura, you are correct. Zero sum thinking is foundational to the philosophy of the people currently in power. Anyone who would like to see win-win thinking should be prepared to fire their state, local, and national representatives in November if they aren’t properly representing you. 

I would go further and say that it is the de facto thinking of all those seeking power in this country. We have an adversarial two party system which makes every issue an either/or issue. As soon as one party takes a position, any position, the other party takes the opposite. Hence, all those who seek power must do so within the confines of the system and enter through the zero-sum game. It’s the basis for the idea that there is “wrong side of history”. It’s either/or thinking never both/and. There’s no room for compromise.

[Bluegoat]

4 hours ago, Carol in Cal. said:

It’s interesting that the article focused on the lack of private schools, not the equity and generosity of the public school offerings.

 

 

I think the two are linked.  When almost everyone goes to the public schools, there is just a lot of will to make them good.  The rich, the intellectuals, the middle classes, people in politics - all will be dealing with the same schools.

IIRC, many of the "private" schools that they do have are religious schools, I think particularly Russian Orthodox which is the second major religion there.  So it isn't even like the parents using those schools are just anyone, it's a very niche group with a specialized interest.

[Mbelle]

50 minutes ago, SKL said:

 

Do they have homeschoolers there?  Yes, they do have homeschoolers.  In fact there have been quite a few Swedish homeschoolers going there for this reason, since homeschooling in Sweden is not allowed. 

[Frances]

6 hours ago, Barb_ said:

In Finland local school funding isn’t tied to taxes on property values. Unless we vote to equalize funding if schools at the federal level Finland will never offer a valid comparison. 

I used to think more equal school funding would make a big difference untilI I moved to my current state. Here, the majority of school funding comes from the state general fund which is primarily funded by income taxes. And some schools are given extra money based on things like poverty level, number of English language learners, rural bussing needs,etc. Through bond measures, local property taxes are used primarily for school buildings. 

I live in the largest school district in the state and the inequity of outcomes within the district is astounding, not to mention the inequity across the state. And we have one of the worst high school graduation rates in the country.

[Bluegoat]

3 minutes ago, Frances said:

I used to think more equal school funding would make a big difference untilI I moved to my current state. Here, the majority of school funding comes from the state general fund which is primarily funded by income taxes. And some schools are given extra money based on things like poverty level, number of English language learners, rural bussing needs,etc. Through bond measures, local property taxes are used primarily for school buildings. 

I live in the largest school district in the state and the inequity of outcomes within the district is astounding, not to mention the inequity across the state. And we have one of the worst high school graduation rates in the country.

 

My feeling is that it's a factor, but not the most important one.  The real issue is that people feel that all kids should have comparable access to a good education.  That can make them look to deal with issues caused by uneven funding, or also special needs in some schools.  But it also will make them look at other elements.  Just changing funding, say adding funding to schools in a place where the kids struggle with poverty at home, will have limited effect.

[Mbelle]

https://thecornerstoneforteachers.com/12-myths-about-education-in-finland-debunked/

This article has some info, but the comments section has more information.

 

[Aura]

15 minutes ago, Mbelle said:

https://thecornerstoneforteachers.com/12-myths-about-education-in-finland-debunked/

This article has some info, but the comments section has more information.

 

Great article. Thanks. I'll have to come back to read the comments.

[Aura]

2 hours ago, Mbelle said:

3 hours ago, SKL said:

 

Do they have homeschoolers there?  Yes, they do have homeschoolers.  In fact there have been quite a few Swedish homeschoolers going there for this reason, since homeschooling in Sweden is not allowed. 

I'm sorry, Mbelle, but I do not understand your answer. Where are Swedish homeschoolers going if homeschooling is Sweden is not allowed? Private schools? Japan? And if it's not allowed, are the homeschoolers there underground, so to speak?

[Tanaqui]

Presumably they're going to Finland.

[Ausmumof3]

13 hours ago, Barb_ said:

In Finland local school funding isn’t tied to taxes on property values. Unless we vote to equalize funding if schools at the federal level Finland will never offer a valid comparison. 

While I do think this is a problem Australia doesn't have the local funding model and our education system definitely has some issues.

[Mbelle]

13 hours ago, Aura said:

I'm sorry, Mbelle, but I do not understand your answer. Where are Swedish homeschoolers going if homeschooling is Sweden is not allowed? Private schools? Japan? And if it's not allowed, are the homeschoolers there underground, so to speak?

I read some time ago that Swedes who want to homeschool go to Finland to do it since its legal in Finland. Swedish is spoken in one part of Finland so it' convenient. I think the article I read focused on the island  Åland..spelling? I'm in car heading to beach, and I'm hopeless typing in phone. I'l check back tonight.

[lulalu]

16 hours ago, SKL said:

I heard they had historically had a pretty rigorous system and that was largely why their scores went up.  Then the scores went down some time after they started implementing all the "reforms" that the articles keep touting.  Similar happened in Japan.  To understand good results, you have to look back a ways in the history, not only because kids are in school for many years before they take the international tests, but also because teachers have even more years of experience with whatever produces good results.  You can't take a snapshot of today to understand today's results.

Private school is about much more than just academic performance.  I'll keep mine, thanks.

Do they have homeschoolers there?

This is what I am always thinking when I read articles about Finland. School "success" also depends on the parents education (and I am not talking higher ed). 

In America we are seeing schools struggle when parents cannot read or do basic math. The attitude towards school and learning can be passed down in families. Yes there are families that overcome this, but not always. 

Many times the history of education has a bigger impact than we can measure. 

[Barb_]

16 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

 

My feeling is that it's a factor, but not the most important one.  The real issue is that people feel that all kids should have comparable access to a good education.  That can make them look to deal with issues caused by uneven funding, or also special needs in some schools.  But it also will make them look at other elements.  Just changing funding, say adding funding to schools in a place where the kids struggle with poverty at home, will have limited effect.

 

Children cannot have access to education with no textbooks or supplies, desks that are falling apart, classrooms with mold, and teachers who are living in their cars. We aren’t talking about adequate funding across the board where some schools have more than others for fun things like smartboards and ipads. This is an example of what I am thinking of:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/may/26/us-school-funding-what-its-like-work-oklahoma-teacher?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+USA+-+Collections+2017&utm_term=276217&subid=21688839&CMP=GT_US_collection

[plansrme]

I don't know that what works in a significantly different society can be of much use in a completely different society, but I admittedly am coming from the point of view that schools are neither the entire problem nor the entire solution.  I think the issues lie largely with families.  Sure, there are some sucky teachers and bad schools in the U.S., but there are successful students coming out of the worst of the schools and failing students coming out of the best of them.  By and large, a family that values education will find a way to get their child a decent education.  Of course there are exceptions, but statistics aren't there for exceptions; they're snapshots of the "by and large."  I suspect that Finnish schools (or Finnish society) has (1) a larger percentage of kids in two-parent homes; (2) a larger percentage of parents who themselves are well-educated; (3) a smaller percentage of students who need FSL (Finnish as a Second Language?) services; and (4) as is true in a lot of countries, higher rates of abortion for children who are going to be born with Down's or other learning issues that can be detected prenatally. 

[Barb_]

18 hours ago, scholastica said:

I would go further and say that it is the de facto thinking of all those seeking power in this country. We have an adversarial two party system which makes every issue an either/or issue. As soon as one party takes a position, any position, the other party takes the opposite. Hence, all those who seek power must do so within the confines of the system and enter through the zero-sum game. It’s the basis for the idea that there is “wrong side of history”. It’s either/or thinking never both/and. There’s no room for compromise.

 

In the past couple of decades there has been more “my way or no way” adversarial attacks from a certain niche population of the government. And they are the ones responsible for the unconscionable situation I linked up above. That situation is playing out in Oklahoma now. We are getting close to that in arizona. This is what stripping schools of basic funding looks like. some states are in the early stages of a similar downslide and more schools will begin to look like this over the next decade as years of funding deficits take their toll.

Vote. 

[scholastica]

3 minutes ago, Barb_ said:

 

In the past couple of decades there has been more “my way or no way” adversarial attacks from a certain niche population of the government. And they are the ones responsible for the unconscionable situation I linked up above. That situation is playing out in Oklahoma now. We are getting close to that in arizona. This is what stripping schools of basic funding looks like. 

I live in a state with similar issues. I find it disheartening. I don’t however for a minute think there is anyone seeking office today who has anyone’s interest at heart except their own. I’m hoping for our country to radically change to a multiparty system and more, smaller congressional districts. More ideas representing fewer people might get us to a better place.

[Barb_]

8 minutes ago, scholastica said:

I live in a state with similar issues. I find it disheartening. I don’t however for a minute think there is anyone seeking office today who has anyone’s interest at heart except their own. I’m hoping for our country to radically change to a multiparty system and more, smaller congressional districts. More ideas representing fewer people might get us to a better place.

 

While that is a valid and laudable goal, hoping for radical change isn’t a concrete solution to the pillaging of our country’s schools. I refuse to believe there is no one running for office who has integrity and a spirit of public service. If we aren’t willing to vote for someone “in the other party” in a two party system then I fail to see how four or five parties will make a difference. Please don’t be so cynical. Get to know the people behind the campaign. It’s easier than ever now with social media. People of integrity are running, but they aren’t getting the attention they deserve because they’re running quiet, clean campaigns and aren’t part of the circus. They are looking for votes from people like you and me. 

[brehon]

What struck me about the article was the value the Finns put on education. Even more than equity, it seems that the foundational principal is placing a high value on having an educated populace. This seems born out by having qualified teachers empowered to actually teach and, if necessary, remediate their students, rather than teachers having to learn the “latest and greatest” methodology or curriculum each year. These teachers also seem to be paid commensurately with the high esteem the Finns hold education. Poor teachers are, according to the article, dealt with at the school level. 

The other thing that struck me was the fact that individual states could adopt a Finnish type model, even if they didn’t adopt everything wholesale. Of course, those states would probably have to be willing to give those almighty federal dollars which so many schools depend on. And the teachers’ unions would have to agree — and I strongly doubt this would ever happen.

I think until we Americans actually truly value education we’ll just be spinning our wheels. 

[Barb_]

Bingo. Large chunks of the US population view education and educated people with skepticism or outright hostility.

[Barb_]

We have competing scripts happening here in the US. We say we value education (and many of us do) and we wring our hands and cast blame and hold up other countries as examples of success to contrast with our failures. But then we scoff at facts and logic, denigrate knowledge and expertise, and vote to keep more and more of our tax dollars (and give them away to large corporations) while allowing school buildings and text books to literally fall apart in chunks. That is why Finland will never happen here.

[SKL]

I grew up and still live in a metro area where, even back to when I was a kid 50 years ago, there has always been much more money per capita pumped in to the low-income / low performing schools year after year, decade after decade.  The parochial schools where I attended and where my kids now attend have always had older books and fewer resources per kid.  Nevertheless the results in the poor-performing schools are still poor; the results in the less-resourced parochial schools are still better.  So I will always be skeptical about the public budget being the issue.

(I'm leaving out those few really expensive private schools that probably do have more per capita resources as well as higher scores; they serve such a tiny population that I consider them irrelevant to the discussion.)

[Tanaqui]

Quote

I grew up and still live in a metro area where, even back to when I was a kid 50 years ago, there has always been much more money per capita pumped in to the low-income / low performing schools year after year, decade after decade. 

 

I'd like to see the stats, SKL. To my knowledge, the USA is one of two nations in the world that spends more public money on wealthy students than poor ones. (The other nation is either Turkey or Israel.)

[Bluegoat]

3 hours ago, Barb_ said:

 

Children cannot have access to education with no textbooks or supplies, desks that are falling apart, classrooms with mold, and teachers who are living in their cars. We aren’t talking about adequate funding across the board where some schools have more than others for fun things like smartboards and ipads. This is an example of what I am thinking of:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/may/26/us-school-funding-what-its-like-work-oklahoma-teacher?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+USA+-+Collections+2017&utm_term=276217&subid=21688839&CMP=GT_US_collection

 

That kind of funding issue is obviously a problem.  I don't think though there is only one answer to how to set up a good funding model.  There are a lot of variables and different situations might not want to do it the same way - Alaska and Main might not have the same needs, for example.  But if people are really committed to making sure kids have equal access, they'll work to find something that makes that happen.

I aways find it weird when people look at a system and say, oh, the details couldn't work for us.  Maybe not, but that's not generally the most important thing, it's to see the principle - like equality of access, or depoliticizing and using best practice, or giving teachers and administrators real autonomy to do their jobs. Then you figure out how that might work in the place you are. 

[alewife]

4 hours ago, Arctic Mama said:

(snip).  Pouring more and more money into fundamentally broken and mismanaged systems doesn’t fix them, it really just worsens the corruption and lessens the resources each individual family has to try and fix what the state has failed in administrating.(snip).

I agree.  I don't know what the answer is, but pouring more money into failing schools is not fixing things in my state.  Some of the schoosl that spend the most per student, also have the worst outcomes.

[Clemsondana]

Over the past few years, I've really come to see education problems as an intractable issue, with so many factors that fixing any one won't lead to much improvement.  For the past 3 years, I've volunteered once/week at an afterschool program for underpriviledged kids.  My particular group attends a public charter that was started in cooperation with a church that has heavily invested in afterschool and community programs in a poor part of town.  The kids have a longer school day most days so that they can participate in different programs, and I volunteer on the one day that they get out at the same time as most local kids.  They are not hungry - they are fed at school, and have enough that I frequently see them turn down their afternoon snack if what is offered is not a favorite.  I started with a group of K and 1st kids, who are the same age as my younger child.  In math and reading, they started at a comparable level.  By the end of K or the middle of 1, my child was ahead.  Now at the end of 3 years, it's not even possible to compare.  The building is fine, and, as a member of the denomination affiliated with the founding of the school, if they had no books, I'm sure I would have heard about it.  They have, at times, been offered extras like music lessons but they typically refuse to go even if their parents request them.  

The biggest difference that I see isn't academic, though.  When I tried to play Uno with the kids, they couldn't go around a circle and take turns.  They don't have much respect for authority - it is not unusual for them to argue that I don't know how to do an addition problem if I tell them that they have the wrong answer.  They see all schoolwork as something to get done with as little effort as possible and actively resist learning anything, and they get angry if I tell them to do their own work and not copy.  While the academic issues are concerning, the 'free time' behavior is equally problematic.  I've spent a lot of time hanging out with these same kids - I've rocked the overwhlemed, broken up fights, and helped clean up messes.  Very few of these kids show any creativity or imaginative play...to the extent that, of the 20, I can name the 2 who like to write about or draw aliens and dinosaurs.  Given a couple of toys, they fight over them, or throw them, but they don't play with them.  When given balls or jump ropes, most of the time they will use them to pester each other - it is rare for them to settle into a game, and I can't imagine them organizing themselves, even in small groups, into the basketball shooting games like mule that my kids play.  

I'm not sure where to go with this.  Because I volunteer one day and then go to my co-op the next day, the disparity in behavior is dramatic.  While both the volunteer kids and the co-op kids have a mix of smart, average, and struggling students, the difference in what they learn is huge.  While I keep showing up and help where I can, I see the kids that I volunteer with falling further behind and I have no idea how to fix that.  

[SKL]

4 hours ago, Tanaqui said:

 

I'd like to see the stats, SKL. To my knowledge, the USA is one of two nations in the world that spends more public money on wealthy students than poor ones. (The other nation is either Turkey or Israel.)

I was just looking at this a year ago - the funding policy here puts way more money into low-income school districts statewide.  I'm not going to share which state.

When I was a kid, the public schools were constantly building new, modern buildings and adding satellites and all sorts of resources.  Our building, which is still being used as a parochial school, is over 100 years old.  My school was using really old textbooks, possibly discarded by the public schools.  We had no playground, and very limited gym equipment.  Every public middle and elementary school had modern equipment indoors and out.  We had no school library.  Every public school had a well-stocked one.  (All these are still true in this location.)

[ktgrok]

58 minutes ago, ClemsonDana said:

Over the past few years, I've really come to see education problems as an intractable issue, with so many factors that fixing any one won't lead to much improvement.  For the past 3 years, I've volunteered once/week at an afterschool program for underpriviledged kids.  My particular group attends a public charter that was started in cooperation with a church that has heavily invested in afterschool and community programs in a poor part of town.  The kids have a longer school day most days so that they can participate in different programs, and I volunteer on the one day that they get out at the same time as most local kids.  They are not hungry - they are fed at school, and have enough that I frequently see them turn down their afternoon snack if what is offered is not a favorite.  I started with a group of K and 1st kids, who are the same age as my younger child.  In math and reading, they started at a comparable level.  By the end of K or the middle of 1, my child was ahead.  Now at the end of 3 years, it's not even possible to compare.  The building is fine, and, as a member of the denomination affiliated with the founding of the school, if they had no books, I'm sure I would have heard about it.  They have, at times, been offered extras like music lessons but they typically refuse to go even if their parents request them.  

The biggest difference that I see isn't academic, though.  When I tried to play Uno with the kids, they couldn't go around a circle and take turns.  They don't have much respect for authority - it is not unusual for them to argue that I don't know how to do an addition problem if I tell them that they have the wrong answer.  They see all schoolwork as something to get done with as little effort as possible and actively resist learning anything, and they get angry if I tell them to do their own work and not copy.  While the academic issues are concerning, the 'free time' behavior is equally problematic.  I've spent a lot of time hanging out with these same kids - I've rocked the overwhlemed, broken up fights, and helped clean up messes.  Very few of these kids show any creativity or imaginative play...to the extent that, of the 20, I can name the 2 who like to write about or draw aliens and dinosaurs.  Given a couple of toys, they fight over them, or throw them, but they don't play with them.  When given balls or jump ropes, most of the time they will use them to pester each other - it is rare for them to settle into a game, and I can't imagine them organizing themselves, even in small groups, into the basketball shooting games like mule that my kids play.  

I'm not sure where to go with this.  Because I volunteer one day and then go to my co-op the next day, the disparity in behavior is dramatic.  While both the volunteer kids and the co-op kids have a mix of smart, average, and struggling students, the difference in what they learn is huge.  While I keep showing up and help where I can, I see the kids that I volunteer with falling further behind and I have no idea how to fix that.  

A lot of these behaviors could be tied to things like lead exposure. http://www.justicepolicy.org/news/11489

And why funding the schools isn't enough. 

[Frances]

6 hours ago, SKL said:

I grew up and still live in a metro area where, even back to when I was a kid 50 years ago, there has always been much more money per capita pumped in to the low-income / low performing schools year after year, decade after decade.  The parochial schools where I attended and where my kids now attend have always had older books and fewer resources per kid.  Nevertheless the results in the poor-performing schools are still poor; the results in the less-resourced parochial schools are still better.  So I will always be skeptical about the public budget being the issue.

(I'm leaving out those few really expensive private schools that probably do have more per capita resources as well as higher scores; they serve such a tiny population that I consider them irrelevant to the discussion.)

Do the parochial schools in your area accept all students, including those with profound special needs, and provide all of the special services they need? Certainly I think there are money issues with some public schools. In my state, the main issue is the old pension system which is draining public school budgets, and the problem will only end when most of the beneficiaries die. So even though the problem has been corrected for future retirees, it’s still hard for schools to have enough resources now. But in general, I don’t think you can really compare private schools that can pick and choose students and public schools that must educate everyone one, regardless of learning or behavorial issues.

[SKL]

40 minutes ago, Frances said:

Do the parochial schools in your area accept all students, including those with profound special needs, and provide all of the special services they need? Certainly I think there are money issues with some public schools. In my state, the main issue is the old pension system which is draining public school budgets, and the problem will only end when most of the beneficiaries die. So even though the problem has been corrected for future retirees, it’s still hard for schools to have enough resources now. But in general, I don’t think you can really compare private schools that can pick and choose students and public schools that must educate everyone one, regardless of learning or behavorial issues.

The parochial schools do accept special needs up to a point.  They don't "pick and choose," but there are parents who (correctly) decide their individual children would be better served in a public school.  That said, mainstream public schools don't serve all the special needs either.  (Our state has scholarships for kids who need to attend special schools because no regular schools can really accommodate them.)  But yeah, some public money (federal and state) goes to severe special needs.  But even regardless of that, the day-to-day resources provided to typical students in the public school involve much more spending per capita (per typical child) than what is provided to the parochial school students.  (I should note that parochial school parents are paying for their own kids' education AND contributing to public schools just as much as if their kids attended public schools.  So this is not a situation where government is taking money from poor kids and giving it to more advantaged students.) 

Even among public schools, a much higher per capita amount is spent on those in low income / low performing districts.  At least in our area, the argument that our funding system disadvantages low-income neighborhoods just isn't true.  There is a clear inverse relationship between funding and performance.

And I don't know where they have kids with no textbooks, no desks, etc. due to funding.  I mean I know there is a trend toward teaching without textbooks, but that is a method change, not a funding issue.  If there are districts that actually don't have money for basic books and desks, that is the exception rather than the rule.  Wherever that is, I'm sorry for them, but that unusual situation does not explain why so many US public schools are not able to maintain high standards.

I have heard of some schools where the population is so rough that they vandalize and destroy property along with terrorizing kids into going truant.  Also an unfortunate amount of time and money is spent on discipline and "security" rather than education.  Again, that's terrible, but it isn't about the funding model.

Finland's population is smaller than that of some metropolitan areas in the USA.  There are more kids in the NYC public schools than there are in the whole country of Finland.  Also there are various demographic differences that may be relevant.  For example, the majority of Finnish families have only 1 kid, whereas the majority of US families have more than 1 kid.  A far higher % of US kids are in single-parent households.  I'm sure there are hundreds of other differences with varying relevance to educational readiness / attainment.  Not saying wealth isn't one of them, but it's only one, and probably not the most important one.

[kiwik]

NZ has relatively few public schools and centralised funding (with more for poor schools) and teacher training and pay but we still have massive variation of outcomes.  Within an hour of me there are 3 private schools - a Steiner (Waldorf) primary and 2 prep schools (one boys one girls so really only one) that cover years 7 and 8 (grades 6 and 7) only.  High School starts at Year 9 generally.

[Clemsondana]

22 minutes ago, SKL said:

 

I have heard of some schools where the population is so rough that they vandalize and destroy property along with terrorizing kids into going truant.  Also an unfortunate amount of time and money is spent on discipline and "security" rather than education.  Again, that's terrible, but it isn't about the funding model.

 

Even with the early elementary kids that I volunteer with, we have to step in and stop them from doing things like systematically breaking the new crayons.  One got mad when I told him to finish up his work and threatened to break his new pencil in half.  He seemed shocked when, in frustration, I asked where he though that the school supplies kept at the after school center came from and pointed out that they come from people donating them, and people won't keep giving supplies just to watch them get destroyed.  I had debated rallying some friends to try to stock a play room with legos, blocks, action figures, etc, but after watching the way that everything else is treated, I decided against it.... and then I realized how often this cycle must repeat itself.  The kids destroy what nice things they have, so they don't have them, and because they were purposefully destroyed, nobody will buy more, and then they don't get practice with the nice things...  and I'm sure that it plays out in terms of human resources, too.  As a teacher or volunteer, it's exhausting to continue to pour time, energy, and $ into trying to teach students who will insist that you don't know how to add, or that they don't need to capitalize, when there are students who are more teachable.  These kids absolutely still need and deserve an education, but teaching is hard enough when you have willing students, and a whole different level of difficult when you add other issues.  

[Lang Syne Boardie]

1 hour ago, ClemsonDana said:

Even with the early elementary kids that I volunteer with, we have to step in and stop them from doing things like systematically breaking the new crayons.  One got mad when I told him to finish up his work and threatened to break his new pencil in half.  He seemed shocked when, in frustration, I asked where he though that the school supplies kept at the after school center came from and pointed out that they come from people donating them, and people won't keep giving supplies just to watch them get destroyed.  I had debated rallying some friends to try to stock a play room with legos, blocks, action figures, etc, but after watching the way that everything else is treated, I decided against it.... and then I realized how often this cycle must repeat itself.  The kids destroy what nice things they have, so they don't have them, and because they were purposefully destroyed, nobody will buy more, and then they don't get practice with the nice things...  and I'm sure that it plays out in terms of human resources, too.  As a teacher or volunteer, it's exhausting to continue to pour time, energy, and $ into trying to teach students who will insist that you don't know how to add, or that they don't need to capitalize, when there are students who are more teachable.  These kids absolutely still need and deserve an education, but teaching is hard enough when you have willing students, and a whole different level of difficult when you add other issues.  

 

Do you think that if there were resources or funding, these children might respond to the Montessori method? I am not sure we are ready to designate a new category of special needs learners, when the designation would mean that they would get better educational opportunities than the children who are not considered to need as much explicit help...anyway. What do you think? I've never thought until this moment that Montessori might be the answer for children so at risk today - you describe my city township schools' challenges very well, I know exactly what you are talking about, because I know a lot of local teachers. Imagine if they had a Montessori environment in which to acclimate the children to school.

[Frances]

2 hours ago, SKL said:

The parochial schools do accept special needs up to a point.  They don't "pick and choose," but there are parents who (correctly) decide their individual children would be better served in a public school.  That said, mainstream public schools don't serve all the special needs either.  (Our state has scholarships for kids who need to attend special schools because no regular schools can really accommodate them.)  But yeah, some public money (federal and state) goes to severe special needs.  But even regardless of that, the day-to-day resources provided to typical students in the public school involve much more spending per capita (per typical child) than what is provided to the parochial school students.  (I should note that parochial school parents are paying for their own kids' education AND contributing to public schools just as much as if their kids attended public schools.  So this is not a situation where government is taking money from poor kids and giving it to more advantaged students.) 

Even among public schools, a much higher per capita amount is spent on those in low income / low performing districts.  At least in our area, the argument that our funding system disadvantages low-income neighborhoods just isn't true.  There is a clear inverse relationship between funding and performance.

And I don't know where they have kids with no textbooks, no desks, etc. due to funding.  I mean I know there is a trend toward teaching without textbooks, but that is a method change, not a funding issue.  If there are districts that actually don't have money for basic books and desks, that is the exception rather than the rule.  Wherever that is, I'm sorry for them, but that unusual situation does not explain why so many US public schools are not able to maintain high standards.

I have heard of some schools where the population is so rough that they vandalize and destroy property along with terrorizing kids into going truant.  Also an unfortunate amount of time and money is spent on discipline and "security" rather than education.  Again, that's terrible, but it isn't about the funding model.

Finland's population is smaller than that of some metropolitan areas in the USA.  There are more kids in the NYC public schools than there are in the whole country of Finland.  Also there are various demographic differences that may be relevant.  For example, the majority of Finnish families have only 1 kid, whereas the majority of US families have more than 1 kid.  A far higher % of US kids are in single-parent households.  I'm sure there are hundreds of other differences with varying relevance to educational readiness / attainment.  Not saying wealth isn't one of them, but it's only one, and probably not the most important one.

It’s similar here that schools with a higher % of students living in poverty get more funding. Lots of other things, including special needs, English language learners, rural with large transportation needs, etc. also get more funding. As I stated up thread, living in a state where most of the funding comes from the general fund and not property taxes made me realize that funding inequity, at least here, is not really driving inequity of outcomes.

I still think though that in general, though, private schools are not dealing with many of the issues plaguing public schools, especially poor performing ones. Private school parents have sought out and are paying for their child’s education (or applying for financial aid). Right there you are starting with a somewhat different demographic. At least here, behavorial issues much outside the norm are not tolerated at private schools. Students will be asked to leave. Some public schools have to devote significant resources to truancy and behavorial problems.

And private school students here can get some of their lower level special education needs (speech, reading problems, etc.) met at public schools if schedules can be arranged. We have very few private schools in the largest school district in the state, and none will take students with any serious special needs, only minor ones that can be dealt with in a regular classroom. So no special education classrooms and no special education aides.

Add to that the larger $ needed for pension funding and the much higher administration costs (some likely necessary due to running a large district with 50+ schools and lots of local, state, and federal oversight and some likely unnecessary waste), and it’s not at all surprising that it costs much more per student at public schools vs parochial schools.

However, to truly meet the needs of students from disadvantaged backgrounds, we likely have to devote far, far more resources than we currently do, and starting much younger than school age. Of course not all of that needs to come from government funding, as volunteers and non-profits can definitely be part of the mix. But having volunteered extensively at such a school and with a program for homeless families, a regular school with just basic services is not going to be nearly enough to really educate and make a difference in the lives of kids from tough situations.

 

[Clemsondana]

7 hours ago, Tibbie Dunbar said:

 

Do you think that if there were resources or funding, these children might respond to the Montessori method? I am not sure we are ready to designate a new category of special needs learners, when the designation would mean that they would get better educational opportunities than the children who are not considered to need as much explicit help...anyway. What do you think? I've never thought until this moment that Montessori might be the answer for children so at risk today - you describe my city township schools' challenges very well, I know exactly what you are talking about, because I know a lot of local teachers. Imagine if they had a Montessori environment in which to acclimate the children to school.

I think that some of these kids could benefit from something that is more hands-on.  What I'd really like to see, although I don't know if it would work, is a return to play-based K.  I know that the concern is that they'd be even more behind than the kids who are getting more academic K, but I think that a year of learning to share, take turns, and keep their hands themselves would cause a lot less time to be spent on discipline once they start academics.  Instead of a day of work, they could spent a couple of 15 in blocks being read to, do some hands-on math, and do some preschool-style 'letter of the day' work, and let that be it.  My MIL was an elementary school teacher, and in her rural area nobody went to K. They  came to school unable to count, read, know colors, etc, but were mostly reading at the end of 1st grade because they did know how to behave.  A year spent in play, or with Montessori-style hands-on activities, might help these kids get in a place where they could be taught (by whatever method is best for them as they get older).  There's a lot going on with these kids - after reading that kids who are always running into things and can't keep their hands to themselves may be looking for touch, I got in the habit of putting my hand on the back of whatever kid I was helping, and it seemed to calm down some of the rowdy boys.  There have been days multiple kids sat on my lap, and I'd guess that it's why they want to wrestle or be picked up by the younger counselors (most are college age, while I'm old like their parents ?  ).  Some of these kids are super smart, and I see them being held back by the behavior of classmates and over time they become apathetic because so much of their life involves consequences given to the group...while I don't see a way to avoid that easily, I can understand them thinking 'why should I behave when we're all going to get in trouble anyway'.  They whole situation is just frustrating!  

[Innisfree]

59 minutes ago, ClemsonDana said:

I think that some of these kids could benefit from something that is more hands-on.  What I'd really like to see, although I don't know if it would work, is a return to play-based K.  I know that the concern is that they'd be even more behind than the kids who are getting more academic K, but I think that a year of learning to share, take turns, and keep their hands themselves would cause a lot less time to be spent on discipline once they start academics.  Instead of a day of work, they could spent a couple of 15 in blocks being read to, do some hands-on math, and do some preschool-style 'letter of the day' work, and let that be it.  My MIL was an elementary school teacher, and in her rural area nobody went to K. They  came to school unable to count, read, know colors, etc, but were mostly reading at the end of 1st grade because they did know how to behave.  A year spent in play, or with Montessori-style hands-on activities, might help these kids get in a place where they could be taught (by whatever method is best for them as they get older).  There's a lot going on with these kids - after reading that kids who are always running into things and can't keep their hands to themselves may be looking for touch, I got in the habit of putting my hand on the back of whatever kid I was helping, and it seemed to calm down some of the rowdy boys.  There have been days multiple kids sat on my lap, and I'd guess that it's why they want to wrestle or be picked up by the younger counselors (most are college age, while I'm old like their parents ?  ).  Some of these kids are super smart, and I see them being held back by the behavior of classmates and over time they become apathetic because so much of their life involves consequences given to the group...while I don't see a way to avoid that easily, I can understand them thinking 'why should I behave when we're all going to get in trouble anyway'.  They whole situation is just frustrating!  

Do you know if any of these kids have been in a head-start sort of program? It sounds like they need something of the sort, and perhaps evaluations for special needs and early intervention. It must be heartbreaking to watch. 

[Bluegoat]

15 hours ago, ClemsonDana said:

Even with the early elementary kids that I volunteer with, we have to step in and stop them from doing things like systematically breaking the new crayons.  One got mad when I told him to finish up his work and threatened to break his new pencil in half.  He seemed shocked when, in frustration, I asked where he though that the school supplies kept at the after school center came from and pointed out that they come from people donating them, and people won't keep giving supplies just to watch them get destroyed.  I had debated rallying some friends to try to stock a play room with legos, blocks, action figures, etc, but after watching the way that everything else is treated, I decided against it.... and then I realized how often this cycle must repeat itself.  The kids destroy what nice things they have, so they don't have them, and because they were purposefully destroyed, nobody will buy more, and then they don't get practice with the nice things...  and I'm sure that it plays out in terms of human resources, too.  As a teacher or volunteer, it's exhausting to continue to pour time, energy, and $ into trying to teach students who will insist that you don't know how to add, or that they don't need to capitalize, when there are students who are more teachable.  These kids absolutely still need and deserve an education, but teaching is hard enough when you have willing students, and a whole different level of difficult when you add other issues.  

 

I read about a very successful program for early elementary that addressed these kinds of things.  It was built around te idea of improving executive function.  So, they would do a lot of games and things that practiced executive skills, like Simon Says, or games that involved waiting.  But another thing they did is the kids had to create a plan for themselves for what they were going to do - I think it might have been daily but I don't remember the details.  So, something like, I'll first play in the pretend store, then I will do some exercised, the I will read a book.  And then they had to follow their plan.

It was more complex obviously, but most of the kids after two years in the program no longer needed special services. (Or at least, they no longer qualified as they were close enough to the regular kids in performance.)

[SKL]

11 hours ago, Frances said:

It’s similar here that schools with a higher % of students living in poverty get more funding. Lots of other things, including special needs, English language learners, rural with large transportation needs, etc. also get more funding. As I stated up thread, living in a state where most of the funding comes from the general fund and not property taxes made me realize that funding inequity, at least here, is not really driving inequity of outcomes.

I still think though that in general, though, private schools are not dealing with many of the issues plaguing public schools, especially poor performing ones. Private school parents have sought out and are paying for their child’s education (or applying for financial aid). Right there you are starting with a somewhat different demographic. At least here, behavorial issues much outside the norm are not tolerated at private schools. Students will be asked to leave. Some public schools have to devote significant resources to truancy and behavorial problems.

And private school students here can get some of their lower level special education needs (speech, reading problems, etc.) met at public schools if schedules can be arranged. We have very few private schools in the largest school district in the state, and none will take students with any serious special needs, only minor ones that can be dealt with in a regular classroom. So no special education classrooms and no special education aides.

Add to that the larger $ needed for pension funding and the much higher administration costs (some likely necessary due to running a large district with 50+ schools and lots of local, state, and federal oversight and some likely unnecessary waste), and it’s not at all surprising that it costs much more per student at public schools vs parochial schools.

However, to truly meet the needs of students from disadvantaged backgrounds, we likely have to devote far, far more resources than we currently do, and starting much younger than school age. Of course not all of that needs to come from government funding, as volunteers and non-profits can definitely be part of the mix. But having volunteered extensively at such a school and with a program for homeless families, a regular school with just basic services is not going to be nearly enough to really educate and make a difference in the lives of kids from tough situations.

 

Of course I realize there are demographic differences between parochial school kids and public school kids - though not as vast as some people seem to think.  (In my kids' class, there are multiple kids whose parents are currently or recently in prison for example ... many from broken or single-parent homes, including some being raised by grandparents ... a number with learning disabilities or ADHD ... but yes, also some gifted kids and kids with professional parents who want their kids to have an education like they had as kids.)  Not to say there aren't gifted kids or materially well-off kids in public schools - of course there are, and they have more money spend on them than the kids in parochial schools too.  My only point is that the performance of a given school is not clearly related to the amount of $ spent on the school.

So let's focus just on the public schools in different districts across the state.  In my state, the amount of $ spent on a given public school is inversely related to the performance at that school.  Surely the incidence of special needs is spread across districts.  You don't get Down syndrome, autism, or congenital blindness by being born in a low-income community.  (Let's say it's confirmed that lead in the water is not the issue either.)  Those of us who have worked with at-risk children in low-income communities can attest to how brilliant many of them are.  And also the fact that their parents - at least those who are not high all the time - really care that they get educated.

The fact is that public schools have the financial means to give kids a good education, but that isn't happening in some communities.  Why?  Focusing on money is preventing a real inquiry into what can and should be done differently with the money and time that they do have.

PS as for funding, the money does come partly from property taxes in my state (also from state income taxes), but it gets redistributed from the wealthy neighborhoods to the poor ones.

[Dmmetler]

4 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

 

I read about a very successful program for early elementary that addressed these kinds of things.  It was allegedly built around te idea of improving executive function.  So, they would do a lot of games and things that practiced executive skills, like Simon Says, or games that involved waiting.  But another thing they did is the kids had to create a plan for themselves for what they were going to do - I think it might have been daily but I don't remember the details.  So, something like, I'll first play in the pretend store, then I will do some exercised, the I will read a book.  And then they had to follow their plan.

It was more complex obviously, but most of the kids after two years in the program no longer needed special services. (Or at least, they no longer qualified as they were close enough to the regular kids in performance.)

This is the High/Scope model, if you want a term to google. It's used extensively by Head Start and developmental pre-K classes, and also is often used by really, really good child care programs on the opposite end of the spectrum. The planning time is essential, and works on a lot of skills. It's a ton of work for the teacher, though.

[scholastica]

3 hours ago, SKL said:

Of course I realize there are demographic differences between parochial school kids and public school kids - though not as vast as some people seem to think.  (In my kids' class, there are multiple kids whose parents are currently or recently in prison for example ... many from broken or single-parent homes, including some being raised by grandparents ... a number with learning disabilities or ADHD ... but yes, also some gifted kids and kids with professional parents who want their kids to have an education like they had as kids.)  Not to say there aren't gifted kids or materially well-off kids in public schools - of course there are, and they have more money spend on them than the kids in parochial schools too.  My only point is that the performance of a given school is not clearly related to the amount of $ spent on the school.

So let's focus just on the public schools in different districts across the state.  In my state, the amount of $ spent on a given public school is inversely related to the performance at that school.  Surely the incidence of special needs is spread across districts.  You don't get Down syndrome, autism, or congenital blindness by being born in a low-income community.  (Let's say it's confirmed that lead in the water is not the issue either.)  Those of us who have worked with at-risk children in low-income communities can attest to how brilliant many of them are.  And also the fact that their parents - at least those who are not high all the time - really care that they get educated.

The fact is that public schools have the financial means to give kids a good education, but that isn't happening in some communities.  Why?  Focusing on money is preventing a real inquiry into what can and should be done differently with the money and time that they do have.

PS as for funding, the money does come partly from property taxes in my state (also from state income taxes), but it gets redistributed from the wealthy neighborhoods to the poor ones.

Just to point out that lead is usually not found in the water. It usually comes from the paint in old structures that are not well maintained. Also, learning issues are much more prevalent in low income areas for a host of reasons. Poor prenatal care and/or womb environment, poor healthcare and poor nutrition among them. So, there probably is more need for services there.

[Frances]

5 minutes ago, scholastica said:

Just to point out that lead is usually not found in the water. It usually comes from the paint in old structures that are not well maintained. Also, learning issues are much more prevalent in low income areas for a host of reasons. Poor prenatal care and/or womb environment, poor healthcare and poor nutrition among them. So, there probably is more need for services there.

Also, behavorial issues can be more prevalent. Brain research is showing the profound effects that early trauma can have on developing brains. That’s why I don’t think that just because a school is getting more funding due to a predominantly low income population, it means that it has enough funding to truly meet the needs of its student population.

One big thing I know is an issue here is that unless a school has a really great principal, teacher turnover can be really high in the lower income schools, and they have a much larger percentage of new, inexperinced teachers. While my friends in more affluent areas of the city say that a bad elementary school teacher will simply not be tolerated by the parents. When I volunteered for a few years in a local low income kindergarten, it was a pretty sad experience. The young teacher frequently seemed overwhelmed and used lots of punitive discipline, and I don’t think I ever heard the aide say a single positive word to a child during my time there. Fortunately, the class had several retirees who regularly volunteered and were warm, loving, and positive toward the children. 

Another issue here is class size. We have some of the largest in the nation. While it is probably never ideal, it is likely a far larger problem  when the students have more learning and behavorial issues. One of our neighbors teaches third grade in a low income school. According to him, his largest issues are class size, the high number of students with behavorial and/or learning issues, and home life. He says he’s had years where not a single student in a class of 35 was from an intact two parent family. He said some years just dealing with communicating  with all of the different adults in the lives of some of his students can get really overwhelming, especially when they don’t agree with each other. Also, low income schools tend to have a much less stable student population with lots of churn during the year. Gentrification, high housing prices, and increasing homelessness are causing this to be an ever increasing problem in some areas of my state.