International Education Studies; Vol. 13, No.

1; 2020
ISSN 1913-9020 E-ISSN 1913-9039
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education

Not All Finns Think Alike: Varying Views of Assessment in Finland

Ashleigh Franco1
1
School of Education, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
Correspondence: Ashleigh Franco, Johns Hopkins University School of Education, 2800 N. Charles Street,
Baltimore, MD 21218, United States. E-mail: ashleigh.franco@jhu.edu

Received: August 26, 2019 Accepted: September 28, 2019 Online Published: December 17, 2019
doi:10.5539/ies.v13n1p1 URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v13n1p1

Abstract
Finnish students have been among the world’s strongest performers on standardized assessments throughout the
past decade. Consequently, educators and scholars are interested in how to explain such results. A common
explanation, as seen on social media, is that Finnish educators do not regularly assess their students. This study
explores educators’ views on assessment practices in Finnish education. First, the literature on assessment
practices in Finland is reviewed. Then, using narrative inquiry as a research method, Finnish educators’ views on
assessment practices are examined. The research participants were two professors, two novice teachers, and two
pre-service teachers, all connected to the same prominent university-based primary teacher education program in
Finland. The narratives of the six participants in connection with assessment in Finland’s education system
highlight the variance in opinions about international standardized assessments as well as assessment practices at
the classroom and school levels. Further, participants’ narratives reveal the influence students’ socioeconomic
status may have on teachers’ assessment practices.
Keywords: classroom assessment, international standardized assessments, narrative inquiry, novice teachers,
pre-service teachers
1. Introduction
1.1 The Problem
Despite some fluctuations in the past decade, Finnish students remain top performers on international standardized
assessments, such as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), the Progress in
International Reading Literacy (PIRLS), and the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA)
(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2013; OECD, 2016). Consequently, interest
in Finland’s educational system has increased. Educators around the globe want to understand what assessment in
Finland looks like and what role it plays in the country’s performance (Henrickson, 2012; Kasanen, Snellman, &
Räty, 2003; Kupiainen, Hautamaki, & Karjalainen, 2009).
1.2 Importance of the Problem
Media commenters have perpetuated certain stories about why Finnish education is successful, particularly in
regards to assessment (Faridi, 2014; Hancock, 2011; Pflueger, 2013; Strauss, 2012; Taylor, 2012). For example,
Taylor (2012) noted that Finnish students begin school at the age of seven, rarely have homework, are not
assessed during the first six years of their education, and take exams infrequently after that. Strauss (2012)
pointed out that the only standardized assessment Finnish students take is their college matriculation exam. Who
has not read an article or seen a meme on social media that attempts to explain that students in Finland are
performing well because they do not have standardized assessments? Absent research, of course, these are just
oversimplified hypotheses. This study explored the views of six Finnish educators (two professors, two pre-service
teachers, and two classroom teachers) regarding international standardized assessments and classroom assessment
practices. The research participants shared insights that shed new light on the Finnish educational system and,
specifically, how Finnish educators view student assessment.
1.3 Relevant Scholarship
As context for this study, literature on standardized international assessment practices is reviewed. The review
includes scholarship on perceived pros and cons of standardized assessments and why standardized assessments
tend to be a controversial subject. In the final section, the review includes literature specific to assessment practices

1
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

in Finland.
1.3.1 Standardized Assessments
Standardized assessments are one-time summative assessments that cannot be used to summarize a student’s
ability or a school’s functionality (Deretchin & Craig, 2007). Standardized assessments are not the optimal format
for assessing critical thinking or life skills because they may not capture the creativity, independent thought, and
other skills of students (Stewart, 2012). International standardized assessments assess specific subjects, such as
mathematics, literacy, and science, which represent only a narrow sphere of the overall curriculum. Further, by
placing a focus on these three subjects, international standardized assessments decrease teachers’ autonomy and
increase teachers’ stress (Mundy, 2008).
Some educators oppose the ranking of countries, which portrays an unethical list of winners and losers; they feel
that these lists do not provide beneficial information (Kennedy, 2010). According to Craig and Ross (2008),
“studies linking student achievement test scores to teacher behavior [create] the public perception that student test
scores monitor school and teacher success” (p. 284). Additionally, an assessment that compares 28 million students
from 65 countries, representing more than 80% of the world’s economy, can be viewed as an apples-to-oranges
comparison (OECD, 2013). Furthermore, since participation in these international student assessments is
voluntary and not all countries take part, it is impossible to determine a true ranking for any country.
Regardless of their limitations, international assessments are one of the only measures by which to compare the
academic performance of students around the world. Schleicher, one of the two founders of PISA, believes that
“without data, you are just another person with an opinion” (Ripley, 2013, p. 18). International student assessments
have begun to include “detailed layers of research” on topics ranging from student socioeconomic and ethnic/racial
statuses to school expenditures and the quality of teaching and learning (Mundy, 2008, p. 193).
Scores from international standardized assessments are driving public policy debates and widely influencing
educational policies (Mundy, 2008; Wilby, 2014). At the very least, such assessments “give educators and citizens
important tools for making evidenced-based claims for change” (Mundy, 2008, p. 211). In fact, both TIMSS and
PIRLS explain that their missions are to provide countries with the information they need to make informed
decisions (PIRLS-Overview, n.d.). Schleicher argued the value of data from international standardized
assessments for collaborating across borders, seeking long-term solutions, and adopting positive policies that other
countries have in place (Schleicher, 2014; Wilby, 2014).
1.3.2 International Standardized Assessment: PISA
Schleicher, the chief advisor on OECD’s PISA project, studied physics at the University of Hamburg. During the
course of his studies, he met Postlethwaite, an education professor who had begun to give a voice to the scientific
nature of education. Together, these two men from very diverse backgrounds became the masterminds behind the
notion that critical thinking can be measured through standardized assessment. Schleicher and Postlethwaite
worked together to create the world’s first standardized reading assessment, the PISA (Ripley, 2013).
Since its inaugural administration in 2000, the PISA has become the “world’s premier yardstick” when it comes to
international student assessment (OECD, 2013). Every three years, individual countries work with PISA to
strategically select fifteen-year-old students at the end of their secondary education to represent their participating
country’s population and undergo the literacy, mathematics, and science assessments (National Center for
Education Statistics, n.d.). The 2012 PISA included roughly 510,000 students who represented 28 million students
from 65 countries and more than 80% of the world’s economy (OECD, 2013). In Finland, the sample for the 2012
PISA consisted of approximately 9,000 randomly selected students from 311 schools (Opetus-ja
kulttuuriministeriö, 2013).
At each triennial assessment, one of the three subjects is the area of focus (National Center for Education Statistics,
n.d.). For example, literacy was the focus of the first assessment cycle in 2000 and also the 2009 cycle;
mathematics was the focus in 2003 and 2012; and science was the focus in 2006 and 2015. Each student has the
opportunity to take the PISA in his/her primary language of instruction (Kelly et al., 2013).
The aim of the PISA is not to capture student mastery of curriculum content but to determine how well students are
capable of thinking critically in order to solve real-world problems (Ripley, 2013; Stewart, 2012). Ripley (2013),
who took the assessment herself, became as acquainted as any other student with PISA. Ripley observed that PISA
differed from other standardized assessments she had taken, and she was quite surprised at how effectively it was
able to assess critical thinking skills. The unique assessment design, which includes both multiple-choice and
student-constructed open-ended responses, is what sets PISA apart from other standardized tests and ultimately
enables a comparison among various countries of student critical thinking skills (OECD, 2013).

2
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

Sample PISA questions range from asking students to design their own coins—instead of counting coins—to
defending an opinion about an advertisement. Many of the scientific questions require students to apply concepts
to real-life scenarios, like what happens to muscles during exercise and what foods are high in particular vitamins
(Ripley, 2013). Further, students are provided with formulas to use during the mathematics portion of the
assessment, as challenging mathematical equations do not need to be memorized in real life. Schleicher admitted
the PISA does not measure everything and has room for improvement (Ripley, 2013). Yet, this assessment remains
a better predictor of students’ preparedness for life over schooling (Ripley, 2013).
While no one assessment is perfectly capable of predicting how well students will perform in school or life, the
PISA provides useful information about students’ critical thinking abilities. In the case of Finland, PISA data has
demonstrated that Finnish students are not innately more intellectually gifted than students from other countries,
but rather, they have honed their intellectual skills significantly. This highlights the fact that significant changes in
student achievement can take place even within one generation, as shown by the Finnish people (Ripley, 2013).
1.3.3 International Standardized Assessment: TIMSS and PIRLS
The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) is responsible for both TIMSS
and PIRLS. PIRLS assesses students across the globe on their literacy skills in the fourth grade, and TIMSS
assesses students globally on both mathematics and science in the fourth, eighth, and twelfth grades (Stewart,
2012). The International Study Center at Boston College oversees the administration of both TIMSS and PIRLS.
Although both tests assess subjects that PISA also assesses, TIMSS and PIRLS differ from PISA in that the former
assess mastery of the curriculum. Accordingly, the intended curriculum, implemented curriculum, and achieved
curriculum play a crucial role in the TIMSS design (Brown, 2010).
Groups of students have taken TIMSS every four years since 1995. The 2011 TIMSS cycle included the
participation of 55 countries’ educational systems in the fourth grade and 56 countries’ educational systems in the
eighth grade (TIMSS 2011 Results, n.d.). The precursors to TIMSS, between 1967 and 1984, were the First
International Mathematics Study (FIMS), the First International Science Study (FISS), the Second International
Mathematics Study (SIMS), and the Second International Science Study (SISS).
The PIRLS is an international student assessment of reading literacy among fourth graders around the world. The
IEA established PIRLS in 2006 and has conducted the assessment every five years since then. The 2011
administration included 325,000 students across participating countries and educational systems.
The PIRLS assessment requires students to read, comprehend, and interpret texts of up to 1,000 words
(PIRLS-Overview, n.d.). Three-quarters of all participating countries have student averages above the center
point, indicating that overall, students from all participating countries are performing well. Moreover, evidence
suggests that countries in which students were low performing in the fourth grade made “substantial gains in
reading achievement by the sixth grade” (PIRLS-Overview, n.d.).
1.3.4 Assessment in Finland
Finnish students take their first external standardized assessment upon the successful completion of upper
secondary level coursework (Niemi, Toom, & Kallioniemi, 2012; Sahlberg, 2011; Stewart, 2012). The University
of Helsinki established this National Matriculation Examination in 1852 as an entrance exam (Sahlberg, 2011).
Until 1852, students were not formally assessed and schools focused solely on teaching. As Sahlberg (2011)
explained, “since there are no standardized high-stakes tests in Finland prior to the matriculation examination at
the end of upper secondary education, [teachers] can focus on teaching and learning without the disturbance of
frequent tests to be passed” (p. 67). Henrickson (2012) explained in a literature review how this college
matriculation exam is high-stakes but is not the only determining factor in terms of university acceptance. Students
who graduate from vocational schools take certification exams and, based on the results, attend certain
universities. However, the percentage of students at universities who come from vocational schools compared to
upper secondary schools is much smaller (Sahlberg, 2011).
Since 1998, the Ministry of Education has monitored Finnish students’ academic performance from the second to
the ninth grades through sample-based national tests (Niemi et al., 2012; Stewart, 2012). These assessments “are
carried out using a sample-based methodology that includes about 10% of the age cohort (6th- and 9th-grade
students, for example) [and] measure students’ learning in reading, mathematics, science, and other subjects in 3-
or 4-year cycles” (Sahlberg, 2011, p. 67). Participation in such assessments is mandatory (Niemi et al., 2012).
Despite their widely acclaimed success, the Finns are not overly enthusiastic about their PISA results (Sahlberg,
2011). Educators in Finland tend to oppose standardized assessments for several reasons, including the belief that
curriculum, teaching, and learning should inform teacher practice, rather than testing (Sahlberg, 2011). Finnish

3
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

educators also opine that teachers and schools—not third parties—should be the experts on their students’ growth:
Many teachers and school principals [in Finland] think that PISA measures only a narrow band of the
spectrum of school learning. There are also Finns who see that PISA is promoting the transmission of
educational policies and practices that are not transferrable. (Sahlberg, 2011, pp. 55-56)
In addition, many Finns believe that students should not be judged according to statistical indicators and that
standardized “testing would only cause harm and undue pressure on children as children need to build their
confidence during these early years” (Brueggeman, 2008, p. 4). In fact, Sahlberg (2011) advocated for the
inclusion of other skills on international assessments, such as learning-to-learn skills, social competencies,
self-awareness, and creativity. Given this, it is not surprising that he stated, “[The Finns] are not much interested in
PISA. It’s not what we are about” (Hancock, 2011, p. 3).
The skepticism of Finnish people regarding international student assessments is understandable, since these
assessments test only a narrow spectrum of the overall curriculum. However, this does not mean that Finns are
opposed to all testing. In fact, they are proponents of holistic assessments and assessments that can “develop
education at all levels of the system” (Niemi et al., 2012, p. 70). In general, assessments are connected to research
for the purpose of development, but not to teacher performance. Sahlberg explained, “Accountability is something
that is left when responsibility has been subtracted” (Partanen, 2011, para. 17). In other words, assessments are not
administered solely to hold teachers accountable for student achievement. Assessments are also used in a
formative sense to inform teachers of their students’ progress (Niemi et al., 2012). This perspective on assessments
promotes a relaxed learning environment that can, in turn, positively impact student performance (Sahlberg, 2011).
Finnish teachers are generally viewed as experts in their fields; therefore, they play a significant role in curriculum
development, instruction, and student assessment (Sahlberg, 2011). The most common types of assessments found
in Finnish classrooms are formative: teachers frequently design and implement their own assessments to monitor
their students’ progress (Kasanen et al., 2003; Niemi et al., 2012). These formative assessments are an integral
aspect of daily life in comprehensive schools (Kasanen et al., 2003; Niemi et al., 2012). Teachers introduce them
early and often throughout the school year (Kasanen et al., 2003). However, teachers avoid “presenting the
situations as tests” and “students see the test situations as learning experiences rather than summative assessments”
(Hendrickson, 2012, p. 36). While many of the assessments that teachers develop for students from primary to
upper secondary school assess students’ writing and critical thinking skills (Pöllänen, 2012), Finnish teachers
focus on teaching and not on getting their students to pass these assessments (Hendrickson, 2012; Kasanen et al.,
2003; Sahlberg, 2011).
Finnish educators conduct summative assessments less frequently. Typically, these assessments are used to gauge
how well students meet the objectives of the national curriculum and are administered at the end of each school
year (Niemi et al., 2012). Annual or semester-based report cards are the primary way Finnish educators formally
communicate with parents regarding academic and behavioral progress (Niemi et al., 2012; Sahlberg, 2011). In
upper secondary schools, teachers assess students at the end of each six- or seven-week period, accounting for a
total of five or six assessments annually (Sahlberg, 2011). Although discrepancies will undoubtedly occur in
teacher-created assessments, the Finns still believe this approach to be far more effective than standardized
assessments (Stewart, 2012).
In summary, educators use both formative and summative classroom assessments in Finland. The only
standardized assessment is the college matriculation examination. Finnish educators are concerned with how their
students perform on international standardized assessments. Although information about assessment in Finland
comes from reports (Kupiainen et al., 2009; Sahlberg, 2011) and previous research studies, such as Kasanen et al.
(2003) who utilized ethnography to examine what one suburban teacher did in her primary classroom, no
researchers have explored the insights of professors, pre-service teachers, and novice teachers regarding
assessment in a single study. There are also no narrative inquiries on this topic. Hence, the research question for
this study: What are Finnish educators’ views on student assessment?
2. Research Methods
This article focuses on one research question that was part of a larger dissertation study on teacher training in
Finland, which analyzed perceptions of research-based approaches, teacher quality, and moral matters. This study
utilized narrative inquiry as a means to better understand teacher training in Finland, and specifically for the focus
of this paper, views of teachers and teacher-trainees on assessment in education.
2.1 Research Design: Narrative Inquiry
The lives of individuals are comprised of experiences that they live, tell, relive, and retell (Clandinin & Connelly,

4
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

2000; Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Through narrative inquiry, researchers seek to understand and make sense of
these experiences. By telling and retelling their stories, individuals shape their own lives and create and reconstruct
personal meaning (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Narrative researchers enter this meaning-making process and
collaborate with participants over time (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). Narrative researchers focus on participants’
personal experiences, with the goal of viewing the world from the participants’ perspectives (Clandinin &
Connelly, 2000). Consequently, there are no predetermined outcomes in narrative inquiry (Syrjälä & Estola,
2013).
This study’s framework is based largely on Dewey’s beliefs about situation, continuity, and interaction, which
Connelly and Clandinin (2000) referred to as place, temporality, and sociality, respectively. Anchored by these
beliefs, narrative researchers enter a metaphorical three-dimensional space to “[bind] the phenomenon, shape what
passes for evidence, and determine what makes defensible research texts” (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000, p. 49).
Narrative researchers move inward and outward, backward and forward, within this metaphorical
three-dimensional space. In the specific case of this study, the place is the selected university and its neighboring
urban area. The temporality involves the past, present, and future of the participants’ lives and the university’s
department of teacher education. Participants’ internal conditions and relationships among participants and the
researcher form the sociality.
2.2 Participants and Sampling Procedures
In order to identify participants who were familiar with assessment in the Finnish educational system, the
researcher used both purposive and convenience sampling. After the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved
the study in May 2014, the head of the teacher education department at one of Finland’s eight universities provided
the researcher with names of colleagues and students who she thought might be interested in participating in this
study. She also agreed to participate herself.
A small, purposive sample was appropriate for this study because the researcher sought in-depth narratives from a
variety of viewpoints: professors, first year teachers, and pre-service teachers. Two individuals from each role
participated. All participants were Caucasian and Finnish citizens. Five participants were female and one was
male, a female to male ratio (83%) that mirrored that of teachers in primary schools in Finland (79%) in 2015 (The
World Bank, 2018). To preserve confidentiality, pseudonyms were used: Kerttu and Aino for the professors; Milla
and Minea for the novice teachers; and Arttu and Aada for the pre-service teachers.
2.3 Data Collection
The researcher gathered the participants’ stories of their experience, following the guidelines of narrative inquiry
(Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Between the fall of 2014 and the spring of 2015, participants and the researcher
engaged in one-on-one email exchanges. During a 2.5-week trip to Finland in February 2015, the researcher
conducted focus group and one-on-one interviews with participants, and shadowed participants for a minimum of
a half-day each. Individual interviews generally took place after each shadowing experience and lasted between
30-60 minutes. Overall, the researcher spent five days in local Finnish schools and four days on campus at the
university.
For all questions to participants, whether through email, during observations, or during the one-on-one and focus
group interviews, the researcher followed a list of guiding questions. The questions focused on the university’s
primary teacher education program, and participants’ views on assessment, research-based approaches, and
teacher quality. All communication between researcher and participants was in English, although the majority of
instruction the researcher observed at both the primary and university levels was in Finnish. Each participant, and
others in the classroom at the time of each observation, offered to translate.
2.4 Data Analysis
Upon returning from Finland, the researcher transcribed the individual and focus group interviews and drafted
participants’ narratives. Each participant completed a member check by reviewing the part of the narrative that
concerned him or her. Participants either confirmed the narrative accurately portrayed what they intended to
convey or suggested changes. A couple of participants did suggest changes, but they were minor (e.g., despite
using the expression in person, Aada was concerned the phrase that she lived “so close to the Russian border that
she could walk there” was misleading).
Once member checks were completed, the researcher identified themes across the six narratives. The narratives
shared certain commonalities: for example, each participant grew up in Finland, was a product of Finnish schools,
and studied or worked at the same university. However, each narrative was also naturally unique. One way to
visualize this web of connections among narratives is with a story constellation. When these stories are

5
ies.ccsenet.org Internationnal Education Stuudies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

“juxtaposeed with one anoother, they opeen up the inquirry spaces in huuman experience studies and lead to the creation
of robust sstory constellattions that captture unique commbinations of narratives liveed and told at pparticular junc
ctures
in time” (C
Craig, 2007, p. 177). In the stoory constellatioon shown in Fiigure 1, each circle representts a communityy, and
each star rrepresents an individual
i eduucator and his oor her narrativve. The commoonalities becam me the threadss that
held the sstory constellaation togetherr, while the ddifferences bettween narrativves provided unique angles for
understandding educationn in Finland.

Figure 1. T
The story consstellation of thiis narrative inqquiry

3. Results
Through thheir narrativess over time, thhe participantss in this study revealed insigghts that compplicate the story of
student asssessment in Fiinland—both sstandardized asssessment and classroom-based assessmennt. During the focus f
group withh all six particiipants, particippants paused awwkwardly wheen asked about standardized aassessments. Minea
M
respondedd, “I don’t follow [internatioonal assessmennts] but I know w and have reead about PISAA and I’m nott that
concernedd about it in myy daily job.” Later in the visiit, however, it bbecame clear tthat some Finnnish educators were
keenly aware of their intternational stannding. Kerttu ppointed out, foor example, thaat her English ccomes in handdy for
the many international visitors the unniversity receiives. While innternational staandardized asssessments may y not
impact thee daily lives off the Finnish teaachers in this sstudy, the assessments do havve some impacct on the daily lives
of the proffessors at the university,
u as thhey often havee visitors from around the woorld.

6
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

Some educators in Finland oppose standardized assessments in the belief that the curriculum, teaching, and
learning—not testing—should inform teacher practice. Minea exemplified this, as she emphasized that she could
learn nothing from testing students that she could not learn from observing her students in the classroom. She
shared:
I don’t think there isn’t anything that I could have learned in another way from the kids like how they are
reading. I have to just listen to them read or how they are learning mathematics after I watch them do
mathematics. I don’t see why I should have to test them.
While she did not regularly assess her students, Minea did point out that she did pursue assessment of those
students who struggled to keep up with the curriculum. These assessments were formative in nature and often
completed by a special education teacher. Minea expressed the opinion that how often teachers assess might be
linked to confidence in their own teaching abilities.
On the other hand, some teachers in Finland—including Milla and the teachers Aino’s older son had in primary
school—saw the advantages of assessing students. The parents of Milla’s students—located in an upper
middle-class neighborhood of Espoo—have noticed she is a younger teacher and like to see evidence of how their
children are performing. Milla assessed her students on a monthly basis not only to appease parents, but also to
inform her instruction.
I see every day that this [student] is doing poorly. He can’t do these things but the parents don’t believe
you. They need to see every single paper—especially because I’m a younger teacher. I look younger
than I am so they are always questioning my ability to teach so I have to have that pile of papers that
show if students don’t try, or if they are doing well or not so well.
A friend and colleague of Milla’s, who taught foreign languages, admitted during a break in the teacher’s lounge
that she felt pressure to teach to the test. She explained that this pressure was not about getting her students to pass
a test. Rather, she grappled with the concept of whether or not it was fair to assess students on something they have
not been taught. During the same break at Milla’s school, Milla had asked her principal on the researcher’s behalf
if he knew how many students were reading at or above grade level at the moment. He was unable to give a number
or percentage, but did explain that only the students who were not doing well were assessed. Students in Espoo are
tested on reading in second and fourth grade, and tested on mathematics and English in sixth grade, indicating that
some forms of standardized assessment are part of the Finnish system. However, only the students who did not
perform well on those assessments received additional monitoring.
Despite opposing testing in the primary grades, Aino used assessment in her university classroom. It was apparent
during observation that university students were eager to check their assessment grades, which Aino had posted on
the wall. Aino insisted that, because she used students’ university identification numbers, they would not be able to
tell who received what grade. She also shared that this practice allowed the pre-service teachers to see their
performance in relation to their peers.
When asked what she hoped for Finnish education in coming years, Kerttu stated her wish that Finland continued
not to have standardized assessments. She shared, “That’s something that is kind of pushing to us and we are trying
to reject it.” When asked how Finland’s increasing immigrant population would affect international assessment
results, she was reluctant to answer and explained she could not predict that.
Among the many reasons why Finns are resistant to standardized testing, the one the study’s participants expressed
most prominently was that testing does more harm than good, especially for the primary students. Aada shared
during the focus group that, “Well it’s more important that children are feeling good and are healthy. Besides, [the
PISA] just tests a piece of what the children are.” Minea watched how her students performed in class to assess
how they were developing. Her students also had a lot of freedom to be themselves in their classroom. Students
could talk and move about as they wished; they often chose activities to their liking; and only at-risk students were
assessed. Milla, for another example, vocalized her beliefs about the importance of teaching a wide variety of
subjects in order to create well-rounded children. And, unfortunately, Aino experienced firsthand how testing
caused undue harm to her older son.
Notably, participants’ perceptions of international assessments did not correlate with their opinions about
classroom assessments. Minea was vocal about the fact that she does not assess students; she knew how students
were progressing based upon their work within the class. However, she did later admit that her school does use
assessments, particularly for students not progressing as well as they are expected to. Milla’s counter narrative is
critical here, too, as it is the opposite of what educators around the world expect because of how media have
portrayed assessment in Finland.

7
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

Finally, the participants shared the considerable autonomy they had when it came to assessment in their
classrooms. While the national core curriculum provided general guidelines, teachers freely choose their teaching
and assessment methods. Minea, Milla, and Aada exemplified this during observation periods in their respective
classrooms, where they delivered content in unique, in-depth ways. For example, Minea used a mix of whole
group, small group, and one-on-one teaching strategies. Students in her class, as well as in Milla’s and Aada’s,
were never rushed to finish their work. Students in all three classrooms had on-going projects they worked on a
little each day at their own pace. The autonomy these teachers had over curriculum and assessment illuminated and
reflected their views on classroom assessment.
4. Discussion
In this study, the narratives of professors, novice teachers, and pre-service teachers who experienced Finland’s
educational system firsthand, as both students and educators, were examined. The participants shared insights that
shed light on the Finnish educational system and, specifically, how Finnish educators perceive assessment. A
common thread among participants’ narratives was that international standardized assessments did not impact
educators’ daily lives. This is consistent with the literature that underscores how Finns are not overly enthusiastic
about their PISA results (Sahlberg, 2011). However, while international standardized assessments may not have
impacted how teachers or professors taught, university professors were keenly aware of their country’s standing on
such assessments. Because students’ standings on these assessments drew international attention, some professors
even had to give university tours to visitors from around the world.
Views about classroom assessments varied. Some participants utilized assessments at the classroom and school
levels and some educators utilized assessments much more frequently than others. First year teachers Milla and
Minea’s narratives were perhaps the most indicative of this. Milla assessed her students regularly and kept the
assessment data on hand for when parents asked questions. She explained that parents wanted to see how their
children were doing because she was a young teacher and did not have the parents’ trust. Minea was very vocal
about not assessing students. She said she was able to grasp how all students were performing by watching their
performance every day in the classroom. Minea and Aino both supported, in their comments, Brueggeman’s
(2008) view, that standardized “testing would only cause harm and undue pressure on children as children need to
build their confidence during these early years” (p. 4).
Interestingly, Minea believed how much teachers assess is related to their confidence as a teacher. Individual
contexts—including parental involvement—may also help explain the differences between Milla and Minea’s
varying views on assessment. Milla taught in a wealthier suburban neighborhood while Minea taught in a
low-income, urban setting. Milla’s students were predominantly white and native Finnish, while approximately
30% of Minea’s students were minority. Participants’ narratives highlight a potentially serious social and
democratic issue, namely, that teachers’ or schools’ assessment practices may be tied to students’ socioeconomic
status.
Participants’ narratives can also be considered from the perspective of quality teaching. According to Finnish
researchers Parpala and Lindblom-Ylänne (2007), an alignment between teaching methods and assessment is an
aspect of quality teaching. If an alignment between teaching and assessment is an aspect of quality teaching, then it
is noteworthy that no participant in this study made any direct connections to such an alignment.
From this study, a range of different perspectives on assessment in Finland emerges. Although the sample size for
this study was comparatively small, the participants’ experiences and opinions varied significantly. Some of the
ideas found on social media regarding assessment in Finland are accurate, such as the Finnish educators’
indifference toward international standardized assessments and their idea that testing causes undue harm to
children. Yet the ideas that Finnish educators do not assess their students and standardized assessments are
non-existent are less than accurate.
Connected to the fact that Finnish educators have varying opinions and assessment practices is the role of the
educators’ school and personal contexts. Could the real reason Milla frequently assessed her students be connected
to a lack of confidence, perhaps connected to her disability? During interviews and observations, she came across
as a confident young woman. Is it possible her lack of confidence is connected to her students’ parents constantly
questioning her ability to teach? This is more plausible and also somewhat alarming, given the variance in the
socioeconomic statuses of her school and Minea’s school. At least when it comes to Milla’s and Minea’s students,
the students from a higher socioeconomic area experienced more frequent testing.
This research is one step in the fertilization of ideas across international borders. While no educational system
should be grafted onto another due to the complex cultural minutia, primary educators and university professors
may want to consider adopting some of the practices shared by educators in this study. The findings also point to

8
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

areas for inquiry in future research. Two significant issues that came to light through this study include: (a) the
connection between how much teachers assess and their confidence in their own teaching abilities; and (b) to what
degree do individual contexts—including parental involvement and racial and socioeconomic issues—help
explain the differences in teachers’ perceptions about assessment. Research with larger sample sizes would be
helpful in exploring these issues more in depth. Finally, this study does not specifically explore the link between
student assessment in Finland and the country’s high performance on international standardized assessment, which
would be a fruitful area for further study.
References
Brown, K. D. (2010). Comparative studies research. In C. A. Kridel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of curriculum studies
(pp. 129-131). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Brueggeman, M. A. (2008). An outsider’s view of beginning literacy in Finland: Assumptions, lessons learned,
and sisu. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070701749371
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher,
19(5), 2-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176100
Craig, C. (2007). Story constellations: A narrative approach to contextualizing teachers’ knowledge of school
reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(2), 173-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.014
Craig, C., & Ross, V. (2008). Cultivating the image of teachers as curriculum makers. In F. M. Connelly (Ed.), The
SAGE handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 282-305). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976572.n14
Deretchin, L. F., & Craig, C. J. (2007). International research on the impact of accountability systems. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Faridi, S. (2014, June 24). Happy teaching, happy learning: 13 secrets to Finland’s success. Education Week
Teacher. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2014/06/24/ctq_faridi_finland.html
Hancock, L. (2011, September). Why are Finland’s schools successful? Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved from
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/why-are-finlands-schools-successful-49859555/?no-ist
Henrickson, K. (2012). Assessment in Finland: A scholarly reflection on one country’s use of formative,
summative, and evaluative practices. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 25(1/2), 33-43. Retrieved
from https://www.mwera.org
Kasanen, K., Snellman, L., & Räty, H. (2003). Learning the class test. European Journal of Psychology of
Education, 18(1), 43-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173603
Kelly, D., Xie, H., Nord, C. W., Jenkins, F., Ying Chan, J., & Kastberg, D. (2013). Performance of U.S.
15-year-old students in mathematics, science, and reading literacy in an international context: First
look at PISA 2012 (pp. 1-23). Washington, DC: NCES, IES, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014024rev.pdf
Kennedy, K. J. (2010). Transnational research. In C. A. Kridel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of curriculum studies (pp.
899-902). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Kupiainen, S., Hautamaki, J., & Karjalainen, T. (2009). The Finnish education system and PISA. Finland:
Ministry of Education Publications.
Mundy, K. E. (2008). Comparative and international education: Issues for teachers. Toronto, Canada: Canadian
Scholars’ Press.
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.) Program for International Student Assessment (PISA)–Frequently
asked questions. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/faq.asp#4
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). Retrieved
from https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2015/pisa2015highlights_2.asp
Niemi, H., Toom, A., & Kallioniemi, A. (2012). Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching
and learning in Finnish schools. Rotterdam, NL: Sense. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-811-7
Opetus-ja kulttuuriministeriö. (2013, February 12). PISA 2012: Proficiency of Finnish youth declining. Retrieved
from https://minedu.fi/en/article/-/asset_publisher/pisa-2012-finlandska-ungas-kunskapsniva-har-sjunkit

9
ies.ccsenet.org International Education Studies Vol. 13, No. 1; 2020

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2013). PISA 2012 results in focus.
Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2016). PISA 2015 results in focus.
Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf
Parpala, A., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2007). University teachers’ conceptions of good teaching in the units of
high-quality education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 33(3-4), 355-370.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2007.07.009
Partanen, A. (2017, February 17). What Americans keep ignoring about Finland's school success. The Atlantic.
Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-keep-ignoring-
about-finlands-school-success/250564/
Pflueger, H. (2013, March 9). Facts and interesting stuff. Retrieved from
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/450782243922254422/
Pöllänen, I. (2012). Finland: Perhaps the world’s best education system. Skipping Stones, 24(4), 20.
Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS)-Overview. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pirls/
Ripley, A. (2013). The smartest kids in the world: And how they got that way. New York, NY: Simon &
Schuster.
Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New York,
NY: Teachers College Press.
Schleicher, A. (2014, May 8). PISA programme not about short-term fixes. The Guardian. Retrieved from
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/08/pisa-programme-short-term-fixes
Stewart, V. (2012). A world-class education: Learning from international models of excellence and innovation.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Strauss, V. (2012, May 24). Ravitch: What is NCTQ? (and why you should know). The Washington Post.
Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/ravitch-what-is-nctq-and-
why-you-should-know/2012/05/23/gJQAg7CrlU_blog.html?utm_term=.f1b3bc62de30
Syrjälä, L., & Estola, E. (2013). Narrative research: From the margins to being heard. In C. J. Craig, P. C. Meijer,
& J. Broeckmans (Eds.), From teacher thinking to teachers and teaching: The evolution of a research
community: Vol. 19. Advances in research on teaching (pp. 157-174). Bingley, UK: Emerald Books.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-3687(2013)0000019011
Taylor, A. (2012, November 27). Why Finland’s unorthodox education system is the best in the world. Business
Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/finlands-education-system-best-in-world-2012
-11?op=1
The World Bank. (2018). Primary education, teachers (% female). Retrieved from
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.PRM.TCHR.FE.ZS?locations=FI
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) - TIMSS 2011 Results. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/timss/results11.asp
Wilby, P. (2014, May 6). Academics warn international school league tables are killing “joy of learning”.
Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/06/academics-international-school-
league-tables-killing-joy-of-learning

Copyrights
Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

10