Families, School Choice, and Democratic Iterations on the Right to Education and Freedom of Education in Finnish Municipalities

Abstract

This article analyzes the ways in which the right to education and freedom of education are expressed in local school choice policies in Finland. We aim to discover the elements that form democratic iterations on the right to education and freedom of education by contrasting their manifestations in three local institutional spaces for parental school choice. We focus on different levels of structures and agents including national legislation, local spaces for school choice, municipal demographics, and the impact of socioeconomic status and institutional space for school choice on parental attitudes.

Dynamics in Education Politics

“…The notion of a neighbourhood school means that children are obliged to attend a designated school defined in terms of proximity and local conditions. Thus, municipalities are empowered to develop distinctive policies and practices in order to allocate children to their neighbourhood schools in an equitable manner (Seppänen, 2006;Varjo & Kalalahti, 2011;Varjo, Kalalahti & Silvennoinen, 2014).…”

“…However, within a given framework they are allowed to specialise in certain areas, in other words to develop and express a distinctive character to meet the varying demands of parents and cope with the varying aptitudes of pupils. These sub-national constructions have been characterised as "local institutional spaces for parental school choice" (Varjo & Kalalahti, 2011;Varjo, Kalalahti & Silvennoinen, 2014).…”

The conceivable benefits of being comprehensive – Finnish Local Education Authorities on recognising and controlling the social costs of school choice

“…Nevertheless, despite their opposition to increased choice, they actually form the group that exercises the most parental choice, as more than half (52%) the pupils in classes with a special emphasis come from upper-or upper middle-class families (Kalalahti and Varjo, manu-script; see also Silvennoinen et al, 2015), Furthermore, it is also interesting to consider the particular local circumstances under which the (relatively weak) emphasis on freedom of education opens up the institutional space for school choice. According to Varjo et al (2014; see also Kalalahti et al, in press), a considerable number of high-income, highly educated parents active in the public sphere also supported the moderate right and were employed in the private sector, which seems to form a dynamic that promotes school choice, but only if the emphasis towards the universal features of comprehensive schools is weaker. The emergence of new cleavages within the middle class has been considered elsewhere an indicator of its fearful retreat from or eroding commitment to the public sphere (Reay et al, 2008: 239).…”

“…Increased heritability of education and socio-spatial segregation are the most obvious negative externalities of choice in education. Individuals are not equally capable of exploring selective education policies; affluent families are the most active and determined in availing themselves of greater school choice (Varjo et al, 2014). The opening of space for school choice increases competition and diversification between schools and it is intertwined with residential segregation.…”

Tomar de empréstimo o sucesso finlandês no PISA? Algumas reflexões críticas, da perspectiva de quem faz este empréstimo

“…After the introduction of school choice based on 'teaching with special emphasis', there is a growing diversification in practices of choice in major cities in terms of the socioeconomic background of families (BERNELIUS, 2013, KOSUNEN, 2012POIKOLAINEN, 2012;SEPPÄNEN et al, 2012). In urban areas specifically, parents are actively exercising school choice (VARJO et al, 2014;KOSUNEN, 2014). What is peculiar to the Finnish urban school markets though, is that, because neither public league tables revealing school performance nor inspectorate reports exist, parents' conceptualisations regarding a 'good' or 'bad' school are based on their perceptions and superficial observations regarding school reputation.…”