School performance differences and policy variations in Finland, Norway and Sweden

1. School performance differences and policy variations in Finland, Norway and Sweden Kajsa Yang Hansen, Jan-Eric Gustafsson & Monica Rosén University of Gothenburg

2. Policy interest in differences in performance? • Focus on country differences in level of performance is common in international studies • Differences in level of performance between students, classrooms, schools, municipalities, regions and countries provides information about equity, but are less studied • Such differences may also provide interesting information about how different school systems work

3. Policy changes: Finland • Decentralization since 1993: • local authorities given more autonomy • a lump sum was allocated that local government could decide upon without central regulation • decentralization to schools of decisions on curricula, teaching methods and other pedagogical practices and profiles • free school choice (1998) within the municipality. Schools allowed to recruit students from outside the local catchment area only when there are places left after enrollment of the local students.  

4. Policy changes: Norway • Decentralization of the school system during the 1980s and 1990s: • local authorities and school leaders’ were given greater responsibility for allocating funds, providing education and assuring its quality. • increased autonomy of schools, including budgeting, recruitment, education management and competence development. • From 2003 easier to start independent schools and to receive financial support from the state. Enrollment to primary and lower secondary schools still largely follows the proximity principle. However, in the large cities of Norway, systems of school-choice have now been introduced,

5. Policy changes: Sweden • Decentralization and deregulation of the Swedish educational system 1989 – 1995: • Municipalities organize schooling and employ the school personnell • Schooling offered by independent (private) providers and municipalities • Free choice of schools, financed with a voucher system • Funding allocated as a lump sum, without central directives • Curricula which specified goals, but neither content, nor methods • A criterion-referenced grading system • Partial recentralisation 2007 – • More control and accountability (School inspections, grades from Grade 6; more national tests) • New curricula, specifying central content

6. Differencesbetweenschools and municipalities in grades in Sweden

7. Determinants of school variation • Trackingintoacademic and non-academicschools • Causes a largeamountofschoolvariability (upto 50 %) • During the 1960s and 1970s the Nordic countriesintroducedcomprehensiveschooling for at least 9 years. • Selection and self-selection • In systems withoutschool choice there is an indirectselectionmechanismcaused by segregation ofliving • Systems whichallowschool choice may cause selection on the basis of student performance, student SES, immigrant background, and other student characteristics • There is debateaboutwhether segregation ofliving or school choice is the maincontributortoschool segregation • Differences in instructionalquality • Differences in gradingpractices

8. Determinants of classroom differences • Qualityofinstruction, teacher-student relations • Abilitygrouping and other forms ofplacementof students Separatingschool and classroomvariance • School and classroomdifferencesareoftenconfoundedbutneedto be separated • Thiscan be donewiththree-levelanalysis, ifthere is morethanoneclassroomwithineachschool.

9. Research questions • What differences are there in the amount of school and classroom performance differences in Grade 4 and Grade 8 in Finland, Norway and Sweden? • What differences are there in the amount of school and classroom performance differences in urban and rural schools in Finland, Norway and Sweden? • To what extent are school and classroom performance differences related to students’ SES in Finland, Norway and Sweden.

10. Data: TIMSS & PIRLS 2011 • Finland, Norway and Sweden (Iceland did not participate; only one class per school in Denmark) • Grade 4: 12,305 students, 412 schools and 705 classes • Grade 8: 14,057 students, 432 schools and 694 classes • Grade 4: Mathematics, Science and Reading • Grade 8: Mathematics and Science • Urban/rural location of school • Number of books at home (SES, cultural capital)

11. Finland: No school differences, large classroom differences Norway: Intermediate school differences, small classroom differences Sweden: Large school differences, small/intermediate classroom differences

12. Finland: School level, no SES explanation; class level, some SES explanation Norway: School level, intermediate/high SES explanation; class level, no SES expl. Sweden: School level, high SES explanation; class level, some SES explanation

13. Finland: No differences Norway: Larger school differences in urban areas in Grade 8 Sweden: Larger school differences in urban areas

14. Finland: Classroom differences partially explained by SES, more so in urban schools Norway: School differences partially explained by SES, particularly in urban schools Sweden: School differences among urban schools to a large extent accounted for by SES .

15. Discussion: School differences • Patterns of school-level differences in performance: • In Finland, there are no school differences • In Sweden, school differences are quite substantial, and larger in Grade 4 than in Grade 8. Larger school differences among urban than rural schools. • Norway too has substantial school differences, which are quite equal across urban and rural schools. • The Swedish school differences are likely to be due to segregation of living, and particularly so in metropolitan areas, and to school choice. But why are school differences larger in Grade 4 than in Grade 8, particularly given that there is more school choice in upper grades than in lower grades? • School choice may counteract effects of segregation of living • Larger and more heterogeneous catchment areas in Grade 8 than in Grade 4.

16. Discussion: school differences, cont. • In Norway, school differences remained constant between Grade 4 and Grade 8, but SES accounted for a larger part of the school differences for Grade 8 than for Grade 4. This suggests a lower impact of segregation of living in Norway than in Sweden. In Norway, too, more opportunities of school choice are made available for Grade 8, which may cause the SES impact on school differences to increase.

17. Discussion, classroom differences • In Finland there is a very substantial amount of classroom variation, amounting to 12–13% for Grade 4 and at least twice as much for Grade 8. The estimates are similar across rural and urban schools. • A part of the between-class variance is due to SES, suggesting that some classroom variance may be due to sorting of students into different classrooms on the basis of level of performance. • Can the high degree of autonomy of the Finnish teachers account for some of the remaining classroom differences?

18. Conclusions • There are systematic but complex patterns of school and classroom differences among the three countries • Both segregation of living and school choice are important, but the mechanisms seem to differ between countries. This may reflect both demographic differences and differences in educational policies. • The large classroom differences in Finland was an unexpectred finding that requires further investigations.