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

Abstract

Since the 1980s, numerous education reforms have sought to dismantle centralised bureaucracies and replace them with devolved systems of schooling that emphasise parental choice and competition between increasingly diversified types of schools. Nevertheless, the Finnish variety of post-comprehensivism continues to emphasise municipal assignment of school places, in the form of the neighbourhood school principle; albeit, in its current form, with the possibility for locally controlled choice and competition, channelled especially through classes with a special emphasis. Based on nine in-depth thematic interviews with experts in provision, management or evaluation of local level compulsory education, this paper focuses on how the conceivable costs and benefits of school choice are recognised and controlled in urban Finnish municipalities. Two distinctive discourses were found to be embodied in the portrayals of the costs and benefits of choice: the legitimization of school choice; and promoting the comprehensive system. The legitimation of school choice discourse is built on the acceptable, but strictly limited reasons for choice, and necessity of school choice. In contrast, the discourse of fostering the comprehensive system is based on the ideology of equality of educational opportunities. It is constructed upon the traditional, universal, non-selective features of the comprehensive school. Against this background, possibilities for school choice can be, and must be, locally controlled -even restricted, if needed -in order to prevent a vicious circle of failing schools in deprived neighbourhoods.

Parental school satisfaction in the context of segregation of basic education in urban Finland

“…There are differences between municipalities in this regard. The different local contexts have produced different interpretations of school choice and competition, and municipal educational authorities do not offer choice to the same extent in all Finnish cities (Varjo & Kalalahti, 2015). 5.…”

“…At the same time, while children are obliged to attend a designated neighbourhood school defined by local educational authorities, parents are also able to choose between schools based on its particular character and curriculum. (Varjo & Kalalahti, 2015; see also Kosunen & Seppänen, 2015a;Varjo, Kalalahti, & Lundahl, 2015a. ) Thus, while the Finnish basic education system is non-selective, given that it does notofficiallyinvolve any ability-based grouping of students, there are, nevertheless, practices related to the school choice policy in basic education that lead to grouping students based on their school performance (Berisha & Seppänen, 2017, p. 241).…”

The governors of school markets? Local education authorities, school choice and equity in Finland and Sweden

“…The paper is intended to contribute to an understanding of the local education authorities' rationales and actions in such a policy context and, hence, lead to a better-informed political discussion of how striving for equality can be promoted by providers of education in the context of local school markets. We contrast earlier national-specific outcomes and interpretations (see Alexiadou et al, 2016;Dovemark and Holm, 2015;Kalalahti et al, 2015;Lundahl et al, 2013Lundahl et al, , 2014Varjo and Kalalahti, 2015 for instance) and re-organize and meta-analyse our data in a comparative setting.…”

“…Furthermore, unlike in Sweden, the social benefits of school choice are unquestionably expected to occur within the comprehensive system, without reference to school markets as such. Arguably, decentralization and a strong, shared ethos of the universal comprehensive school have jointly constructed local contexts that are extremely concerned to recognize and control the social costs of school choice, while simultaneously leaving the conceivable social benefits aside (Varjo and Kalalahti, 2015).…”

“…In the more strictly governed Finnish system, to maintain similar quality levels and evenly distributed options for a limited amount of choice in all local schools throughout the municipal area, conscious measures are taken. The 'policy of equalizing' (Varjo and Kalalahti, 2015) means the equal and principled allocation of resources within the municipal provision of comprehensive education in the formation of teaching groups. For example, if a school applies for a guaranteed attraction such as a music class, more 'demanding' or 'resource consuming' obligations might be imposed on the school, such as special education groups or preparatory instruction for immigrant pupils.…”