The Economist links falling PISA scores to Finland’s school model

The Economist has suggested that enthusiasm for Finland’s education system and PISA tests may have led school systems in Western countries in the wrong direction, Yle reports.

The British publication was examining why the performance of 15 year olds has fallen sharply since the 2000s in most developed OECD countries. It cited the coronavirus pandemic’s disruption to learning and the impact of smartphones on children’s concentration and reading as possible reasons.

It also identified the PISA tests themselves, and Finland’s early success in them, as a possible contributing factor. Finland performed exceptionally well when the first PISA tests were conducted in 2000, attracting international attention. Education policymakers from many countries travelled to Helsinki to find out what Finland had done right.

Many were surprised to hear that Finnish schools gave few tests and that education for young children was described as play based. Finland also emphasised that teachers should spend less time lecturing at the front of the classroom and more time helping pupils learn independently. According to The Economist, this was the message that other countries quickly took from Finland.

The publication noted, however, that few countries have seen their PISA results fall as sharply as Finland’s. Critics argue that Finland’s strong results in the early 2000s were more likely the result of a traditional school system that remained in place into the 1990s than of the progressive teaching methods for which the country became known.

If that interpretation is correct, The Economist wrote, the misunderstanding may have led dozens of school systems astray.

The publication contrasted Finland with England, where schools developed in a different direction during the 2000s. English schools placed greater emphasis on factual knowledge rather than more broadly defined skills, and examinations were strict. The Economist said England’s more traditional system appeared to produce clearly better results than Scotland’s. It added that the difference could not be explained by the pandemic or time spent looking at digital screens.