Araştırma Makalesi    |    Açık Erişim
Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi 2026, Clt. 8(1) 166-178

Adopting Finnish Schooling Models İn Developing Countries: Opportunities, Challenges, And Contextual Adaptations

Barkat Bhayo

ss. 166 - 178   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2026.1415.10

Yayın Tarihi: Haziran 29, 2026  |   Görüntüleme Sayısı: 11/8   |   İndirilme Sayısı: 23/13


Özet

The Finnish schooling model is widely recognised for its emphasis on equity, teacher professionalism, decentralised governance, and learner-centred pedagogy. This paper examines how key Finnish schooling principles may inform educational reform in developing countries. Drawing on a qualitative synthesis of peer-reviewed sources cited in the manuscript, the study identifies the most relevant Finnish principles, analyses the main constraints affecting their adoption, and synthesises adaptation strategies supported by the literature. The findings indicate that the most relevant elements of the Finnish model are equity and inclusion, research-based teacher education, professional autonomy, trust-based governance, and flexible, inquiry-oriented pedagogy. However, the review also shows that these principles cannot be transferred as a complete institutional package because their effectiveness depends on broader social, economic, and governance conditions. Resource inequality, limited administrative capacity, rigid accountability structures, and sociocultural barriers significantly shape reform possibilities in many developing contexts. The paper concludes that Finnish schooling is most useful as a source of guiding principles rather than as a model for direct replication. Contextual adaptation, long-term capacity building, participatory curriculum reform, and school–university–government partnerships emerge as the most credible pathways for meaningful educational reform. The study contributes to comparative education research by advancing a systemic, context-sensitive framework for learning from internationally admired education systems. Methodologically, the study is designed as an integrative thematic literature review. This approach combines narrative interpretation with thematic synthesis to integrate conceptual, empirical, and policy-oriented sources and to identify recurring principles, constraints, and adaptation pathways across the literature.

Anahtar kelimeler: Finnish schooling, developing countries, contextual adaptation, teacher education, educational reform


Bu makaleye nasıl atıf yapılır

APA 7th edition
Bhayo, B. (2026). Adopting Finnish Schooling Models İn Developing Countries: Opportunities, Challenges, And Contextual Adaptations. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 8(1), 166-178. https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2026.1415.10

Harvard
Bhayo, B. (2026). Adopting Finnish Schooling Models İn Developing Countries: Opportunities, Challenges, And Contextual Adaptations. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 8(1), pp. 166-178.

Chicago 16th edition
Bhayo, Barkat (2026). "Adopting Finnish Schooling Models İn Developing Countries: Opportunities, Challenges, And Contextual Adaptations". Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi 8 (1):166-178. https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2026.1415.10

Kaynakça
  1. Alderman, H., Behrman, J. R., Ross, D. R., & Sabot, R. (1996). Decomposing the gender gap in cognitive skills in a poor rural economy. Journal of Human Resources, 31(1), 229–254. https://doi.org/10.2307/146142 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  2. Aspfors, J., & Eklund, G. (2017). Explicit and implicit perspectives on research-based teacher education: Newly qualified teachers’ experiences in Finland. Journal of Education for Teaching, 43(4), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2017.1297042 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Bachri, B. S., Tegeh, M., & Jayanta, I. N. L. (2023). Impact of phenomenon-based learning model assisted by virtual book-based digital comics on elementary-school students’ agile innovation and independence in science learning. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 12(3), 493–503. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v12i3.46881 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Chen, W.-H., & Liu, M. (2021). A Finnish school’s phenomenal-based learning curriculum integration design and students’ learning performance. Bulletin of Educational Research, 67(1), 107–156. https://doi.org/10.3966/102887082021036701004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  5. Chen, W.-H., & Liu, M.-H. (2022). The phenomenon-based learning in a middle school in Finland. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 30(1), 39–84. https://doi.org/10.6151/CERQ.202203_30(1).0002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  6. Chung, J. (2016). The (mis)use of the Finnish teacher education model: Policy-based evidence-making? Educational Research, 58(2), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2016.1167485 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Chung, J. (2023). Research-informed teacher education, teacher autonomy and teacher agency: The example of Finland. London Review of Education, 21(1), Article 13. https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.21.1.13 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  8. Fiskum, T. A., Jegstad, K. M., Aspfors, J., & Eklund, G. (2025). The goal of research-based learning in teacher education: Norwegian and Finnish teacher educators’ perspectives. Cogent Education, 12(1), Article 2465918. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2465918 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  9. Haapaniemi, J., Venäläinen, S., Malin, A., & Palojoki, P. (2021). Teacher autonomy and collaboration as part of integrative teaching: Reflections on the curriculum approach in Finland. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53(4), 546–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2020.1759145 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  10. Halinen, I., & Järvinen, R. (2008). Towards inclusive education: The case of Finland. Prospects, 38(1), 77–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-008-9061-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Halász, G., & Thant Sin, K. K. (2023). Using school–university partnerships as a development tool in low-income countries: The case of Myanmar. Journal of International Development, 35(6), 1389–1406. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3732 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  12. Hardman, F., Hardman, J., Dachi, H., Elliott, L., Ihebuzor, N., Ntekim, M., & Tibuhinda, A. (2015). Implementing school-based teacher development in Tanzania. Professional Development in Education, 41(4), 602–623. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2015.1026453 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  13. Hidayat, R., & Suoranta, J. (2022). The past, present and future of the comprehensive school reform in Finland: From planning to marketization? Foro de Educación, 20(2), 255–274. https://doi.org/10.14516/fde.807 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  14. Hossain, M. (2023). The linkage between school autonomy and inequality in achievement in 69 countries: Does development level matter? Journal of Development Studies, 59(10), 1491–1507. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2023.2232916 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  15. Ismail, S. (2015). Equity and education. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 7, pp. 918–923). Elsevier. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kim, T., & Yun, J. T. (2019). Logics of accountability: Cross-national patterns in school-level controls. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27, Article 119. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.4597 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Lavonen, J. (2016). Educating professional teachers through the master’s level teacher education programme in Finland. Bordón, 68(2), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.13042/Bordon.2016.68204 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  18. Lavonen, J., & Villalba-Condori, K. O. (2019). Collaborative design and implementation of digital tools in education as part of national-level programmes in a decentralised education system. Education in the Knowledge Society, 20, Article 23. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks2019_20_a23 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Maphalala, M. C., Kutame, A. P., Khumalo, P. N., Mhlongo, H. R., & Govender, S. (2023). Reflections on rural education and rural realities. In R. S. Mphahlele & M. C. Maphalala (Eds.), Contextualising rural education in South African schools (pp. 34–49). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004547025_003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Mikkilä-Erdmann, M., Heikkilä, M., Iiskala, T., & Warinowski, A. (2024). Research-based teacher education: A Finnish perspective. In V. Symeonidis (Ed.), Enhancing the value of teacher education research: Implications for policy and practice (pp. 42–61). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004689992_003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Mitchell, D. (2014). What really works in special and inclusive education: Using evidence-based teaching strategies (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203105313 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Mäkiharju, A., & Smeds-Nylund, A.-S. (2023). Finland: A structure of trust. In A. E. Gunnulfsen, H. Ärlestig, & M. Storgaard (Eds.), Education and democracy in the Nordic countries: Making sense of school leadership, policy, and practice (pp. 29–44). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33195-4_3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Nguyen, D., Dinh, H.-V. T., & Nguyen, N.-P. (2023). School–university partnerships in Vietnam: Insights, reflections, and recommendations. In D. Acquaro & O. J. Bradbury (Eds.), International perspectives on school-university partnerships: Research, policy and practice (pp. 69–83). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-0807-3_6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  24. Niemi, H. (2011). Educating student teachers to become high quality professionals: A Finnish case. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 1(1), 43–66. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.440 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Niemi, H. (2014). The Finnish educational ecosystem: Working for equity and high learning outcomes. In H. Niemi, J. Multisilta, L. Lipponen, & M. Vivitsou (Eds.), Finnish innovations and technologies in schools: A guide towards new ecosystems of learning (pp. 3–19). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-749-0_1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  26. Niemi, H., & Isopahkala-Bouret, U. (2015). Persistent work for equity and lifelong learning in the Finnish educational system. The New Educator, 11(2), 130–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/1547688X.2015.1026784 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  27. Niemi, H., Lavonen, J., Kallioniemi, A., & Toom, A. (2018). The role of teachers in the Finnish educational system: High professional autonomy and responsibility. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, A. Kallioniemi, & J. Lavonen (Eds.), The teacher’s role in the changing globalizing world: Resources and challenges related to the professional work of teaching (pp. 47–61). Brill Sense. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004372573_004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  28. OECD. (2025). Education at a glance 2025: Finland. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/education-at-a-glance-2025_1a3543e2-en/finland_d8f44a5b-en.html [Google Scholar]
  29. Risku, M., & Tian, M. (2020). Finland: Changing operational environment changing Finnish educational governance. In H. Ärlestig & O. Johansson (Eds.), Educational authorities and the schools: Organisation and impact in 20 states (pp. 37–54). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38759-4_3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  30. Robinson-Pant, A. (2004). Education for women: Whose values count? Gender and Education, 16(4), 473–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250042000300385 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising student learning: The Finnish approach. Journal of Education Policy, 22(2), 147–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930601158919 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  32. Sassi, M. J., & Moberg, S. J. (1990). Special education in Finland. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 37(2), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/0156655900370202 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Soini, T., Pietarinen, J., & Pyhältö, K. (2018). Shared sense-making strategies in curriculum reform: District-level perspective. Improving Schools, 21(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480217744290 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  34. Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2014). Cross-national policy borrowing: Understanding reception and translation. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 34(2), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2013.875649 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  35. Vainikainen, M.-P., Thuneberg, H., Marjanen, J., Hautamäki, J., Kupiainen, S., & Hotulainen, R. (2017). How do Finns know? Educational monitoring without inspection and standard setting. In S. Blömeke & J.-E. Gustafsson (Eds.), Standard setting in education: The Nordic countries in an international perspective (pp. 243–259). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50856-6_14 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]