1 / 30

Evaluation of General Education in Finland and in Helsinki

Evaluation of General Education in Finland and in Helsinki. Girona 1.12.2005 Pirjo Kännö. Contents of the presentations . 1. part (presentation) Brief facts about Finland and Helsinki and about education in Finland Framework for evaluation of general education in Finland

lolita
Télécharger la présentation

Evaluation of General Education in Finland and in Helsinki

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. Evaluation of General Education in Finland and in Helsinki Girona 1.12.2005 Pirjo Kännö Pirjo Kännö 2004

  2. Contents of the presentations 1. part (presentation) • Brief facts about Finland and Helsinki and about education in Finland • Framework for evaluation of general education in Finland • Helsinki: Local level example of the evaluation of general education (system view) – BSC;EFQM – school self-evaluation, school audits • Education application of the EFQM (example of processes) • Challenges of evaluation of education 2. part (workshop) • Brief facts about Etu-Töölö Upper Secondary School • Self-evaluation plan (EFQM) for school year 2005-2006 in Etu-Töölö Upper Secondary School Pirjo Kännö 2004

  3. Finland parliamentary republic (1917) member of the EU (1995) population ab. 5,3 million 2 official languages: Finnish and Swedish Education (age): pre-school, voluntary (6) comprehensive school (7-15)post-comprehensive (16-19)-general upper secondary- vocationalhigher educationadult education Main providers of education:municipalities Nokia, PISA Helsinki Capital of Finland (1812) Population 550 000(capital region 1,2 million) Finnish speaking 88%, Swedish speaking 6,5% 190 schools in Helsinkicomprehensives, upper secondaries for young and adults and 15 vocational institutions (165 maintained by the city) Helsinki City Education Department employs 5900 people (4200 teachers) Services for 70 000 students Brief facts Pirjo Kännö 2004

  4. EDUCATION COMMITTEE Swedish Division Finnish Division EDUCATION DEPARTMENT HEAD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT CENTRE Research and Development Manager GENERAL EDUCATION DIVISION Head of Division SWEDISH EDUCATION DIVISION Head of Division YOUTH AND ADULT EDUCATION DIVISION Head of Division · Vocational Institutions (3) · Finnish Upper Secondary Schools (14) · Upper Secondary Schools for Adults (3) · Young People’s Workshops (4) · Apprenticeship Training Bureau · Strategic Services · Financial Services · Personnel and Legal Services · Acquisition and Real Estate Services · IT Services · Media Centre · Finnish Comprehensive Schools (112) · Swedish Comprehensive Schools (23) · Upper Secondary Schools (4) · Upper Secondary Schools for Adults (1) 11.10.2005 Pirjo Kännö 2004 Organization of Helsinki City Education Section

  5. Framework for evaluation of general education in Finland • since 1999 a statutory obligation:each provider of education (including schools) must - evaluate the education it offers and its effectiveness - participate in external evaluation (criteria and objects determined by the Ministry of Education) • responsibility of the development of local (and school level) evaluation is on the provider of education (municipalities) • National Council for Educational Evaluation (2003) supports local evaluation • no inspection system in Finland • no regular testing system to all students in comprehensive level (quota based testing done by National Board of Education in core subjects) • matriculation examination: the first national test to all upper secondary students Pirjo Kännö 2004

  6. Evaluation of general education in Helsinki • Framework and principles gradually developed within 10 – 15 years • Evaluation strategy of general education 2000 -2004 • The evaluation guidelines of general education 2005-2007 • Development work going on constantly Pirjo Kännö 2004

  7. The Purpose of Evaluation is • to provide and analyse information in order • to support decision making • to improve preconditions of learning • to promote learning • to support development Pirjo Kännö 2004

  8. . Environment analysis TOOLS Mission, Values, Vision, Goals and Strategic Priorities BSC Objectives and Measures Follow up/Evaluation II CONTINUOUS EVALUATION EFQM Act Plan Check Do The Framework of Evaluation I STRATEGIC EVALUATION Pirjo Kännö 2004

  9. High quality education services and learning Social inclusion and participation Sustainable development Economic balance 2004 General Education Economy/finance/ resources VISION Learning, able/capable, civilized/educated and well-being Helsinki. High quality and internationally respected education services Effectiveness/ service capacity/ customers Processes Staff, learning and well-being Pirjo Kännö 2004

  10. Enablers Results Leadership People Processes People results Key Performance Results Policy & Strategy Customer results Partnerships & Resources Society results Innovation and learning The EFQM (European Foundation for Quality Management) Excellence Model Pirjo Kännö 2004

  11. Evaluation of the present state -approach-deployment Assessment and review * strengths*weaknesses(points for action) (Self-)evaluation of the success of the development measures Self-evaluation Mission, vision, values Focusing on the most importantpoints for action Evaluation of the progress process Action plan for the development measures to be taken Pirjo Kännö 2004

  12. Customer Mission Vision Finance Processes Staff I Strategic Evaluation Pirjo Kännö 2004

  13. II Continuous Evaluation and Development Pirjo Kännö 2004

  14. Self-evaluation of Schools Schools: • are expected to use the EFQM model as a tool • send a summary of self-evaluation results to the education department once in four years (not in action yet) Education Department: • supports schools by providing quality training • prepares a technical device to facilitate self-evaluation City Administration: • supports quality development in all sectors:- the Mayor’s Quality Award- training Pirjo Kännö 2004

  15. SCHOOL AUDITS 1- increasing networking and learningbetween schools- increasing information flow between education department and schools • HCED SCHOOL SCHOOL Pirjo Kännö 2004

  16. School audits 2 • continuous development, not inspection • a forum for professional network • learning through mutual reflection • sharing of good practices and experiences • to give feedback to other schools and to education department • carried out by a trained pair or a group of peer auditors (head teacher&teacher) • prepared audit plan and ”check lists” on agreed targets • auditors write a report • a summary of the reports is written Pirjo Kännö 2004

  17. Schools are expected to partricipate in audits regularly (target: each school has been audited at least once by 2007) Administration supports schools by planning and preparing the focus of school audits every year choosing the schools and auditors if needed training the auditors having a summary report made of the individual audit reports informing about the results steers the work of schools makes use of the results School audits 3 Pirjo Kännö 2004

  18. Targets of school audits in 1997-2004 Pirjo Kännö 2004

  19. Incentive Group Compensation • Strategy based tool for management • The Balanced Scorecard model in use • Managed and coordinated by the city administration Schools: • 10-14 schools involved (2004-2005) • staff commit themselves to agreed development initiatives (based on the strategic priorities/BSC) • staff are entitled to extra payment (max 5% of the salary costs) • realization of development initiatives evaluated against agreed criteria • evaluation carried out by peer auditors Administration • All units of the education department are involved Pirjo Kännö 2004

  20. Plan for the evaluation of action and development in schools 1 The plan is required as part of the school based curriculum: • the same city level principles used in all schools • separate school level part Pirjo Kännö 2004

  21. Plan for the evaluation of action and development in schools 2 City level principles: • School level evaluation is part of the local evaluation and part of the every day work in school • The purpose of evaluation is to support learning, support the work of the school staff and to provide and analyse information in order to support decision making and development • Starting points for the annual planning of action and finance in schools are the curriculum, the strategic priorities and functional and financial targets of general education and the annual report of the previous school year. The school also makes use of the available external evaluation results in its planning. • In their self evaluation schools are expected to pay regard to the common evaluation practices of the city and their results • Schools are expected to take part in national and local research/surveys, make use of the provided information in developing their work • Schools are allowed to use their own evaluation methods and choose their own targets of evaluation in addition to the common evaluation practices of the city • The head teacher and teachers of the school are responsible for the evaluation at school level Pirjo Kännö 2004

  22. Plan for the evaluation of action and development in schools 3 Instruction for the school level part The school decribes its evaluation processes: the annual planning and evaluation of action and finance and continuous evaluation and development using the following grouping: • Strategic evaluation (the annual action plan (school plan)/financial plan/annual report –process)- description of the preparing process: who is involved and how- how the results and conclusions of evaluation are made use of in the annual planning process and development • Continuous evaluation and developmentThe school describes in the curriculum how the common evaluation practices and its own practices are taken into consideration in self-evaluation and how and when the common evaluation practices are carried out Pirjo Kännö 2004

  23. Education application of the EFQM model • Will shortly (2005) be published by the Council of Educational Evaluation in Finland as a recommended tool for self-evaluation • Contents:1. EFQM-model as an evaluation method2. Why self-evaluation and quality management in education?3. The fundamental concepts of excellence and the good quality in a school (3.1-3.8)4. The structure of the EFQM-model5. The criteria and the sub-criteria (5.1-5.9)6. Alternative ways to do self-evaluation6.1. ”Quick-evaluation” – the questionnaire approach6.2. Evaluation based on the description document of the present state of school in all criteria6.3. The combination of 6.1. and 6.27. Writing out descriptions7.1. General discriptions7.2. Discription of the enablers and the results criteria8. How to do evaluation: RADAR –logic in practicemore info: www.koulutuksenarviointineuvosto.fi; anu.raisanen@eval.jyu.fi, harri.ronnholm@eval.jyu.fi Pirjo Kännö 2004

  24. C U S T O M E R W H O H A S R E C E I V E D T H E S E R V I C E Provider of education School Staff • Planning processes • Allocating resources • School network and provision • Common principles (e.g. curriculum guidelines, annual-/work planning) • Preparation for decision making • Planning processes • Curriculum planning • Annual-/work-/development planning • Planning for teaching- and guiding arrangements • Planning for pastoral care/other support services C U S T O M E R S • Functioning of the work community, groups and individuals • Execution processes • Teaching and guiding • Student intake • Pastoral care/support • Student assessment • Morning and afternoon care of pupils • Interaction relations • Involving students • Functioning processes • Cooperation, communication, interaction • Development and support processes • Evaluation • Development initiatives • Learning- and work environment • Administration and finance processes • Teaching material and information services • Information technology services • Supplier services • School transport services • Restaurant services • Cleaning services • Real estate services Examples of key and support processes to customers in education Pirjo Kännö 2004

  25. Challenges of Evaluation • Building an Evaluation Culture as Normal Part of the Everyday Work • Making Systematic Use of the Gathered Information • Finding Ways to Facilitate Evaluation • Building of Working Management Information Systems • Better resources needed Pirjo Kännö 2004

  26. Etu-Töölö Upper Secondary School • Medium sized non-gradedupper secondary school in the centre of Helsinki • Ab. 430 students aged 16-19 • 33 teachers • Mission: To offer our students a wide general education with goodcommunication skills as well as skills in studying and acquiring knowledgeand a solid foundation for further studies. We emphasize the active role of the student as a learner and as a builder of his/her own conciousness in the changing world.more info: www.tyly.edu.hel.fi Pirjo Kännö 2004

  27. Action and development plan of schools Contents: • Mission of school/approval of the plan (by School Board) • Conclusions from previous year’s action plan • Functioning of the school in 2005-2006:general arrangements, courses offered, advisory services, pastoral care, special needs services, teaching of students with different language and cultural backgrounds, religious occasions, activities outside of school, collaboration with other institutions, international contacts, school clubs, school/parent relations, involving students (student council) • Development planThree year planDevelopment targets in 2005-2006 (one of them:self-evaluation of school culture and action by using the EFQM model as a tool)In-service training plan of teachers • Calculation of the teaching resources for the school year Pirjo Kännö 2004

  28. EFQM self-evaluation plan 1/2 Aims • to do EFQM self-evaluation using the questionnaire/”quick evaluation” approach • to prioritize improvement areas on the basis of the self-evaluation results and to make concrete development plans Tasks and schedules • with the help of the principal (in this case) to make the ”Senior Management Team” familiar with the EFQM model (education application) and the questionnaire approach in SMT meetings Oct 2005 – Mar 2006 • to have an evaluation session of 3 hours with the whole staffof 25-30 teachers in Apr 2006 a. orientation to evaluation and deviding into 4-5 groups led by the members of the SMTb. each group self-evaluates 1-2 areas (criteria) documenting major strengths and improvement needs and concrete development suggestions (maybe simple sub-criteria scoring on 1-5 scale) Pirjo Kännö 2004

  29. EFQM self-evaluation plan 2/2 Tasks and schedules continues • SMT meeting in April: going through the results of the evaluation, prioritizing the development targets and scheduling them • Staff meeting in May: approving the SMT’s proposal for the development targets for the following two school years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 Future plans • After 2008 (or 2007) new self-evaluation, this time using the evaluation based on the description document of the present state of school in all criteria (enablers and results), maybe also more rigorous scoring Pirjo Kännö 2004

  30. Thank you for your attention! Pirjo Kännö Principal Etu-Töölö Upper Secondary School Arkadiankatu 26 00100 Helsinki Finland pirjo.kanno@edu.hel.fi www.tyly.edu.hel.fi Pirjo Kännö 2004

More Related