Q: What makes Finnish teachers so special? Answer: It’s not brains
David Cameron argues we need to train the smartest to teach. But Finnish universities select only 10% of applicants – and not the cleverest
Teach For Finland? Why it won’t happen.
You’ve certainly heard of Teach For America but you may not know that its founder, Wendy Kopp, now runs a related organization called Teach For All which is a network of TFA-like school reform organizations in a few dozen countries around the world. One place there isn’t such an affiliate is in Finland. Why that is so is explained in the following post by Finnish educator and scholar Pasi Sahlberg, who is one of the world’s leading experts on school reform and educational practices. Sahlberg is the author of the best-selling “Finnish Lessons: What Can the World Learn About Educational Change in Finland?” — originally published in 2011 and just republished in an updated edition – which details how Finland created its world-class school system. The former director general of Finland’s Center for International Mobility and Cooperation, Sahlberg is now a visiting professor of practice at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. He has written a number of important posts for this blog, including “What if Finland’s great teachers taught in U.S. schools,” and “What the U.S. can’t learn from Finland about ed reform.” Here is a new piece that debunks some myths about teachers and teacher preparation. You can find more about him here on his website.
By Pasi Sahlberg
If you ask anyone why kids do better in school in Finland than other countries, you will probably hear one answer more often anything else: They have great teachers. It is true that Finnish teachers are well prepared, widely respected and commonly trusted professionals. But are education systems successful just because of great teachers? Many would emphatically say “yes.” I would say, however, “not so fast!”
Many of us are delighted that teachers are now recognized as key players in efforts to improve the quality of education systems. The International Summit on Teaching Profession, an annually organized gathering of education ministers and union leaders around the world, is just one of the new forums where teachers are at the center of attention. We now know more and understand better teachers’ lives and their work as a result of increased academic research and global surveys done by international organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and Education International (EI). However, the extent that teachers can make a difference in student learning in school remains a question with different answers.
In Finland, entry into teacher education is one of the most competitive among any field in higher education. Since all teachers must hold advanced academic degrees and they are therefore relatively well-paid and protected professionals, teaching is an attractive career choice among young Finns. And yes, teachers in Finland also have good working conditions in schools and a moderate teaching load by international standards. According to the recent Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) by the OECD, middle school teachers in Finland teach, on average, 21 hours and work 32 hours a week.
A frequently cited claim is that the best-performing education systems recruit their teachers from the pool of brightest graduates. Whatever that means, it’s a myth not supported by evidence. The logic is that the smarter the person entering the teaching profession, the better teacher she or he will become. Getting the best and the brightest into teaching has therefore become a policy mantra repeated in education policies and reforms around the world.
There are those who argue that fast-track teacher preparation models, like Teach For America and its sister organizations in many countries, are justified by referring to more successful education systems like Finland. They say that just as Finland selects its teacher candidates from the best available young people, these alternative teacher preparation programs recruit only the best to become teachers in demanding schools with a notable proportion of disadvantaged children.
Then there are those who go even further, claiming that there are many similarities between the Finnish and TFA conception of teaching. I would argue that these two could not be further apart from one another. Here are three reasons why.
Teacher education vs. short-course preparation. All teachers in Finland must hold a master’s degree either in education (primary school teachers) or in subjects that they teach (lower- and upper-secondary school teachers). Primary school teachers in Finland go through rigorous academic education that normally lasts five to six years and can only be done in one of the research universities that offer teacher education degrees. This advanced academic program includes modules on pedagogy, psychology, neuroscience, curriculum theories, assessment methods, research methods and clinical practical training in teacher training school attached to the university. Subject teachers complete advanced academic studies in their field and combine that with an additional year of an educational program. This approach differs dramatically from the one employed by TFA, requiring only five or six weeks of summer training for college graduates, with limited clinical training in the practice of teaching.
Life-time career vs. short-term experience. Teaching is a competitive career choice in Finland and therefore very popular among upper-secondary school graduates. According to a recent study on the teaching profession in Finland, four out of five teachers are satisfied with their work and just about 9 percent of teachers have left the teaching profession for some other job. In 2012, a Finnish teacher’s career lasted approximately 40 years, while a typical teacher has about 16 years of teaching experience. During their work in school, most teachers – in fact, over 95 percent – are members of the Trade Union of Education in Finland (OAJ), an association of all educators, which belongs to the Confederation of Unions for Academic Professionals in Finland (AKAVA). This is strikingly different from TFA corps members who only commit to teach for two years and normally have loose connections to professional communities of teachers. In 2012, a study on teachers in America shows, the typical teacher in the United States was someone in his or her fifth year. By contrast, 20 years ago, the typical teacher in the United States was in his or her sixteenth year.
Social capital vs. human capital in the teaching profession. In Finland, teaching is regarded as a team sport built on teacher collaboration. Teachers are members of professional teams that share the same goals and purposes. Most schools in Finland have both physical space and time for teachers to work together within every school day. School improvement and professional development focus on enhancing personal work and organizational performance and they normally have strong emphasis on teamwork, collaboration with teachers and schools, and shared leadership. Enhancing social capital is as important as improving human capital in Finnish schools. This differs from the logic of the fast-track teacher preparation programs that build on human capital and often undermine the role of social capital, such as professional learning communities and teacher networks, as the critical element of high-quality teaching and learning in school.
It is true that only about 10 percent of those who send an application to primary school teacher education programs in Finnish research universities will be accepted each year. But that doesn’t mean that Finland recruits teacher candidates from the top 10 percent of upper-secondary school graduates. The admission system is designed in a way that it gives all students interested in becoming a teacher an equal starting point. The students that are recruited to academic teacher education programs each year at the University of Helsinki, for example, have surprisingly diverse academic profiles. The typical freshman teacher education student is one who had slightly above average grades as an upper-secondary student and slightly above average scores on the matriculation exam.
Finnish teacher educators don’t think that superior academic performance would necessarily correspond with being a great teacher. Selection to teacher education in Finland focuses on finding those individuals who have the right personality, advanced interpersonal skills, and the right moral purpose to become lifelong educators. TFA is for many a stepping-stone to prestigious careers in law, banking, business, and public policy while in Finland teaching is a lifetime commitment.
And because Finns think of teaching as a high-status profession akin to medicine, law, or engineering, there is no room for Teach For Finland, just as there’s no room for Cure for Finland or any other short cut to trusted professions.
What’s the difference between PBL and Design Thinking | Great Post by Ewan McIntosh
Bianca Hewes and some others were last night asking some good questions to seek out the difference between design thinking and project-based learning (PBL) as techniques for use in the classroom. These kinds of questions we explore through out workshops with educators around the world, and there’s an explanation developing in a book I hope to release soon. In the meantime, here’s a quick and dirty take on the question from me:
For much of the past three years my colleagues and I been working through a specific innovation process with educators on the one hand, and non-education organisations on the other: media groups, technology startups, fashion companies, the UN, political parties… The process is design thinking.
When we work with creative, government or political organisations, the approach is a logical extension of what they’re doing, a welcome structure through which to explore a wider scope of a given challenge.
When we work with schools, we’re taking the Design Thinking process and marrying it with what we know from research about what makes great learning. However, there’s a piece of vocabulary that often gets in the teachers’ way of seeing what design thinking might bring to the learning process: PBL, or project-based learning. “It’s just PBL”; “This is the same as CBL”: the understanding of a model which is close, but not quite the same to design thinking, makes it harder to spot the differences and additional elements that could help enrichen practice.
So what are the key differences between a PBL project and one where design thinking is mashed with what we know makes learning great? (N.B. Following some criticism on Twitter, I feel it is worth pointing out that these reflections are just that, reflections on practice I’ve either observed first hand or have researched online. Don’t get mad: comment and take part in the discussion).
0. Important point: there’s probably less of a #PBL vs Design Thinking distinction to make, but rather, how can design thinking add to existing well-kent pedagogies of PBL?
1. A PBL project tends to explore a relatively narrow subject area, with a narrow essential question
In many, if not most PBL, projects I’ve seen, the project is defined by the essential question(s), which often sound like curricular checkpoints, or which funnel learning down a particular pre-defined path. In many, the groupings of students and their activities are defined (the film crew, the researchers, the presentation-makers, the event organisers).
In Design Thinking, the goal is to explore the widest possible area(s) for longer, to offer a good half-dozen or more potential lines of enquiry that students might end up exploring. The essential question(s) come much later in the process (as much as half-way through, in the synthesis stage) and…
2. In Design Thinking, the students, not the teacher, write the essential question(s)
In PBL, the teacher does a lot of the learning for the student: taking a large potential area of study and narrowing it down into a manageable project question. The teacher often delivers a “brief” for learners through two or three essential questions, much in the same way as a client delivers a brief to a design firm.
In Design Thinking, the teacher avoids asking a question at all, and comes up with what we call a generative topic (from David Perkins‘ work), a curiosity-mongering statement that opens up an area of study, doesn’t narrow it down. The questions that come from this investigation are the ones that students will go on to look at in more detail, come with ideas around solving or presenting.
Design firms like IDEO and our own web designers at NoTosh often take a brief from a client and then through their research, they change it. However, in learning, the use of a generative topic from the start speeds up the process, and teaches this skill of “helpful disobedience” of the brief. There’s little difference, in fact, between a traditional project-based learning experience and a deep design thinking experience if the educator is giving a brief: design thinking merely adds some structure to PBL, a new vocabulary, and, it seems from every workshop I spot online, lots of LEGOs, pipe cleaners and post-its. There is more to Design Thinking for learning than this utilitarian service-improvement model that’s currently getting big airtime!
A large part of our work with educators is working on how to develop higher order questioning skills in students. So many Design Thinking projects we observe elsewhere at the moment are based around relatively lower order questions, or on just school/community improvement. Design Thinking can be so much more than this, but it takes the marriage between Design Thinking as a creative industries process and the best educational research we can find. It’s hard to find people teaching Shakespeare, religious studies or mathematics through the process, the very things we’re seeing educators through our work begin to achieve. Core to raising that ambition is raising the quality of questioning in both teachers and students, something that remains untouched in most schools.
3. The ideas of what students will produce in PBL are often set by the teacher.
In Design Thinking students make the choice about what their prototype will be. Prototype or product ideas for learning are often set in advance in a PBL project (“you will produce a film”, or “you will be able to use multimedia and text”).
In Design Thinking the decision about which medium to use to show an idea lies entirely with the students, and again comes later in the process, when they know more about the initial exploratory topic.
4. Design Thinking provides a set of vocabulary that increasingly makes sense to employers in the creative, financial and governmental and innovation sectors.
The biggest challenge with PBL is that it was invented for education by educators. Design Thinking was created 30 years ago by a product design outfit (IDEO) as a way of working and thinking, to help provide better solutions to clients. The process helped bring about the graphical interface and computer mouse. It’s now coming into the language of many large firms as they seek a more structured way to innovate.
The language PBL uses is, by contrast, inconsistent and not usable outside the classroom. So, using a process that encourage deeper, wider thinking AND helps develop a life skill provides great value to learners.
5. And what about Understanding by Design..?
When we first came across Understanding by Design, or UbD, it felt, in the words of those harnessing it, very similar to their first impressions of design thinking. However, there’s a key difference. UbD involves the educator deciding on a final view of success and working back from that, designing learning towards the final goal. Design Thinking does it the other way around.
UbD almost tries to give students the impression they have choice, responsibility for their learning, real things to create in order to learn, but in fact, it fails to respect the choices learners make, as tangents are a) less likely to appear (the immersion phease of research at the beginning is narrower by design) and b) less likely to be given time and resource by the teacher when they do appear (such tangents are off the goal that the teacher has already set in mind).
Although controversial to say, I feel that UbD and many project-based learning approaches do nothing but disempower the learner, or at least not empower them any more than traditional coursework and chalk-and-talk. It’s maybe less the approach that is wrong (since depth and higher order thinking is a staple of most guides to project-based learning) but the practice that ends up occurring as people find themselves pushed back into the status quo of assessment accountability and content coverage fear from their superiors. As a result, many design thinking projects we see are too narrowly designed around school or community improvement, something Emillio Reggio and Montessori schools have been doing (better?) for scores of years. Why are we not seeing PBL or Design Thinking taking place across whole school curricula, from Shakespeare to science, school canteens to Cantonese?
It’s time people look more seriously towards the amazing work done by educators in Europe and Australia, where design thinking is truly stretching the scope within which learners operate. There. I said it! 🙂 And I promise that over the next six months we’ll share even more of those amazing learning stories.
This is a brief outline of five key differences between the two approaches. As I wrote above, there is a new book coming out soon from me outlining the amazing work done by our Design Thinking Schools and creative clients around the world. This will provide the depth that some folk might want after this briefest of explanations. We also run intensive workshops for educators and creative firms, wherever you are in the world, that help enthuse staff and set them out on the journey towards more student-led learning. If you’re interested in one of those, just get in touch.
August 16, 2012
“My results…” Care less about what everyone says
In England and Wales today, and in Scotland last week, youngsters have been receiving their examination results. All those months of hard work, well, work in any case, pay off in about the 10 seconds it takes to open an envelope and take a glance over the final scores. Some people even choose to do it in front of the TV cameras – you’d have never found me wanting to do that!
At that point in time, the effort, the learning that went on, and the lessons to carry on into later life all disappear into distant memory. It might as well not have happened.
But a tweet this morning from London’s friendliest entrepreneur Oli Barrett sent me seeking out the pre-envelope-opening tweets, all those people talking about “my results” on Twitter. The search string has been fascinating, particularly in the early morning.
Presentation at Alaska Society of Technology Education–Using Web 2.0 Tools to Meet the Needs of the 21st Century Learner
Presentation Details:
Title: Venturing into the Clouds: Using Web 2.0 Tools to Meet the Needs of the 21st Century Learner
Time: 8:30 AM AST
Duration: 00:58:53
Description: The Future of Cloud Computing: Innovation, Service, Sustainability, Performance and how it Affects Educational Outcomes for our Students. Economic uncertainty and competetive pressures are fundamentally raising performance demands n all aspects of education. From students and teachers to parents and administrators, the pressure to succeed has never been greater.
Success hinges on developing talent to focus on innovation and growth n the global economy. Businesses are now basing their trust and focus on cloud technologies because they offer freedom, reduced cost, and sustainability, whereas education has not. This keynote intends to show advantages of simplification and standardization to support utilizing the cloud to its fullest potential in an educational setting.
Presentation at the Australian Society of Digital Librarians
Jeff Piontek, Hawaii Technology Academy
Abstract: Today’s world is constantly on the move and changing at such a profound speed that it’s hard to believe that what the eyes see as reality is already history. This keynote will introduce and closely examine the significance of several global exponential trends and challenge your assumptions about the world we live in and its future. Current technology trends are affecting our personal and professional lives, our youth and elderly, our learning institutions, the nature of teaching and learning and our definition of intelligence itself. This keynote will be a compelling glimpse into the bold, exciting and dynamic future that awaits us all!
Jeff Piontek is an author, keynote speaker and teacher (most importantly). He has worked with many at-risk school districts nationally as a consultant on affecting educational change and reform. Jeff started out as a Science teacher in the South Bronx, NYC and worked his way up to the Director of Instructional and Informational Technology in NYC.
Jeff’s book; “Blogs Wikis and Podcasts, Oh My! Electronic Media in the Classroom” has been well received by the education community and is in its second printing.
He has received many accolades including the latest from Governor Linda Lingle for Innovation in the economy for his STEM education work nationally. Jeff sits on the National Governor’s Association STEM committee as well as the State of Hawaii Economic Development Workforce Committee, which he was appointed to by the Governor.
Jeff has embarked on a new venture at Hawaii Technology Academy and the school has performed at the top of the public schools in Hawaii in its first year and doubled to 500 students in its second year. The school now has 1,000 students and over 2,000 applicants this past year. The school was just designated as one of the 40 more innovative schools in the US in a recent study published by Innosight Institute (Michael Horn, author of Disrupting Class — innosightinstitute.org/blended_learning_models/
Jeff’s most recent presentations can be found on slideshare at slideshare.net/jeff.piontek
Over 100 Incredible Infographic Tools and Resources (Categorized)
The Best Blogs and Websites About Infographics
- Visual.ly – Awesome community for creating and sharing infographics.
- Information Aesthetics – The relationship between design and information.
- Visualizing.org – Making sense of complex issues through data and design.
- Visual Complexity – A resource for the visualization of complex networks.
- Daily Infographic – A new infographic every day.
- GOOD Infographics – GOOD Magazine’s excellent infographics section.
- Information Is Beautiful – Ideas, issues, knowledge, data – visualized.
- Infographic of the Day – Fast Company’s excellent and long running series.
- FlowingData – Exploring how designers, scientists visualize data.
- Infographics Archive – A visual library offering infographics.
- Visual Loop – There’s an infographic for it… even if it didn’t happen!
- Infographr – All about infographics.
- Newsilike – An infographics blog from India.
- Video Infographics – Motion infographics that explain, educate or inform.
- Datavisualization.ch – A news and knowledge resource for data visualization.
- VisualJournalism – 80% of the news in infographics.
- Eagereyes – Reflections on the visual communication of data.
- Amazing Infographics – Cool information graphics.
- Submit Infographics – Share and rate infographics.
- The Infographics Showcase – Collecting infographics.
- I Love Charts – A Tumblr blog about charts.
- Well Formed Data – An infographics blog by a freelance data visualizer.
- Best Infographics – Pointing you toward great infographics.
- Infographic List – For those who love info graphics.
Data Visualization Tools and Software
- Piktochart – Transforms your information into memorable presentations.
- Infogr.am – Create interactive charts and infographics.
- Gephi – Like Photoshop for data. Graph visualization and manipulation software.
- Tableau Public – Free data visualization software.
- Free Vector Infographic Kit – Vector infographic elements from MediaLoot.
- Weave – Web-based analysis and visualization environment.
- iCharts – Charts made easy.
- ChartsBin – A web-based data visualization tool.
- GeoCommons – See your data on a map.
- VIDI – A suite of powerful Drupal visualization modules.
- Prefuse – Information visualization software.
- StatSilk – Desktop and online software for mapping and visualization.
- Gliffy – Online diagram and flowchart software.
- Hohli – Online charts builder.
- Many Eyes – Lets you upload data and create visualizations.
- Google Chart Wizard – Generate image charts.
Data Sources
- DataMarket – Find and understand data.
- WorldMap – Explore, visualize and publish geographic information.
- Influence Explorer – Provides overviews of political influence data for politicians.
- US Census Bureau – Measures America (people, places, economy).
- Freebase – An entity graph of people, places and things from Google.
- World Bank Data – The world at a glance (key development indicators).
- Data360 – Telling compelling and data-driven stories.
- Number Of – You ask, they count.
- Gallup – Public opinion polls.
- EveryBlock – Uncovers info on large cities contained in government databases.
- Daytum – Helps you collect, organize and communicate your everyday data.
- Google Public Data – Filter and animate data sets from around the world.
- Gapminder – Displays time series of development statistics for all countries.
- Munterbund – Graphical visualization of text similarities in essays.
Create Personal Infographics
- Biogrify – Create a fun visual snapshot of your life.
- Vizify TweetSheet – Your Twitter activity as an instant infographic.
- Photo Stats – App for creating iPhone infographics out of your photo data.
- Re.vu – A visual resume tool.
- Vizualize.me – Visualize your resume in one click.
- Kinzaa – Build your infographic resume.
JavaScript / Flash Infographic Tools
- KeyLines – A JavaScript toolkit for visualizing networks.
- d3.js – Free JavaScript library for manipulating documents based on data.
- InfoVis Toolkit – A JavaScript tool for creating interactive data visualizations.
- Flare – Makes it easy to create interactive data visualizations (ActionScript).
- JS Charts – Free JavaScript charts.
- FusionCharts – JavaScript (HTML5) and Flash charts.
- amCharts – JavaScript and HTML charts.
- Highcharts – Interactive JavaScript charts.
Great Infographic Studios and Designers
- Column Five – Creating visual content that brings people to your site.
- FFunction – Data visualization consulting.
- Interactive Things – A user experience and data visualization studio.
- Periscopic – An agency whose tagline is “do good with data”.
- Fathom – Helps clients understand and express complex data.
- JESS3 – Creative agency specializing in data visualization.
- Visual Evolution – London-based infographic design.
- Lemon.ly – Create understanding through visuals.
- Prime Infographics – Creates custom infographics for businesses.
Infographic Articles and Tutorials
- How to Create Outstanding Modern Infographics – Vectortuts+
- Infographic: Do-It-Yourself Guide to Infographics – Marketing Tech Blog
- A Few Rules for Making Homemade Infographics – The Atlantic Wire
- The Do’s and Don’ts of Infographic Design – Smashing Magazine
- How to Create a Great Infographics (Slideshow) – The Content Lab
- Design a Magazine Infographic – Digital Arts
- Create an Infographic Typography Animation – aetuts+
- How to Create Great Infographics – .net magazine
- The Anatomy of an Infographic – SpyreStudios
- How to Strike a Balance Between Data and Visualization – The Daily Egg
- 7 Steps to Make Your Infographic a Success – SEOmoz
Other / Miscellaneous / Overflow
- Wolfram CDF – Create “infoapps” using always-current data.
- KISSmetrics Infographics – Useful infographics by KISSmetrics.
- Better World Flux – A beautiful interactive visualization of what matters in life.
- Data Wrangler – Interactive tool for data cleaning and transformation.
- Lyza – Analyze, socialize, decide.
- A World of Tweets – Twitter visualization.
- We Feel Fine – An exploration of human emotion.
- Visual Economics – Unraveling complexities in financial data.
- ComponentArt DV – Present, navigate and visualize your data like never before.
- DOMO – Business intelligence platform.
- Infochimps – Big data infrastructure made clear.
- Evaluat3 – The best way to know your professional strengths (graphs).
- Webpages As Graphics – An HTML DOM visualizer app.
- Creately – Draw diagrams online using a collaborative approach.
- Wordle – Create beautiful word clouds.
- Tagxedo – Word clouds with style.
When my niece was finishing school in Finland, more than anything else she wanted to become a primary teacher. Despite her genuine interest in teaching she failed to get into a teacher education programme at the University of Helsinki. She was smart and bright, yet she was not deemed qualified.
This is not unusual. Finnish universities regularly turn away applicants such as my niece to try again or to study something else. In fact, Finnish primary school teacher education programmes that lead to an advanced, research-based degree are so popular among young Finns that only one in 10 applicants is accepted each year. Those lucky students then have to study for five to six years before they are allowed to teach a class of their own.
There are those who think that the tough race to become a teacher in Finland is the key to good teaching and thereby to improving student achievement. Because only 10% of applicants pass the rigorous admission system, the story goes, the secret is to recruit new teachers from the top decile of available candidates. This has led many governments and organisations to find new ways to get the best and the brightest young talents into the teaching profession. Various fast-track teacher preparation initiatives that lure smart young university graduates to teach for a few years have mushroomed. Smarter people make better teachers … or do they?
Who exactly are those who were chosen to become primary teachers in Finland ahead of my niece? Let’s take closer look at the academic profile of the first-year cohort selected at the University of Helsinki. The entrance test has two phases. All students must first take a national written test. The best performers in this are invited on to the second phase, to take the university’s specific aptitude test. At the University of Helsinki, 60% of the accepted 120 students were selected on a combination of their score on the entrance test and their points on the subject exams they took to complete their upper-secondary education; 40% of students were awarded a study place based on their score on the entrance test alone.
Last spring, 1,650 students took the national written test to compete for those 120 places at the University of Helsinki. Applicants received between one and 100 points for the subject exams taken to earn upper-secondary school leaving diplomas. A quarter of the accepted students came from the top 20% in academic ability and another quarter came from the bottom half. This means that half of the first-year students came from the 51- to 80-point range of measured academic ability. You could call them academically average. The idea that Finland recruits the academically “best and brightest” to become teachers is a myth. In fact, the student cohort represents a diverse range of academic success, and deliberately so.
If Finnish teacher educators thought that teacher quality correlates with academic ability, they would have admitted my niece and many of her peers with superior school performance. Indeed, the University of Helsinki could easily pick the best and the brightest of the huge pool of applicants each year, and have all of their new trainee teachers with admirable grades.
But they don’t do this because they know that teaching potential is hidden more evenly across the range of different people. Young athletes, musicians and youth leaders, for example, often have the emerging characteristics of great teachers without having the best academic record. What Finland shows is that rather than get “best and the brightest” into teaching, it is better to design initial teacher education in a way that will get the best from young people who have natural passion to teach for life.
The teaching profession has become a fashionable topic among education reformers around the world. In England, policy-makers from David Cameron down have argued that the way to improve education is to attract smarter people to be teachers. International organisations such as the OECD and McKinsey & Company, Sir Michael Barber for Pearson, and in the US, Joel Klein, former New York education chancellor now working for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, have all claimed that the quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers. These are myths and should be kept away from evidence-informed education policies and reforms.
A good step forward would be to admit that the academically best students are not necessarily the best teachers. Successful education systems are more concerned about finding the right people to become career-long teachers. Oh, and what happened to my niece? She applied again and succeeded. She graduated recently and will be a teacher for life, like most of her university classmates.