The Nordic countries’ economies are performing well, and a part of the reason is that they are gradually reforming their “social model,” adapting it to new realities in ways that respond to people’s demands. But there is nothing uniquely “Nordic” about this change. On the contrary, it is one that others can emulate.
Such a policy obviously requires significant investment in research and development. Sweden, for example, invests more than any other European country in this area — well above the EU target of 3 percent of GDP. Many countries invest less, and even Sweden’s 4 percent of GDP might not be enough, given higher spending on research and development in China, India and the US.
Moreover, large investments in research and development may be of limited use if knowledge can’t be transformed into successful businesses. That requires adopting policies that cover everything from kindergarten training to collaboration between universities and companies, as well as an overall business climate in which success is rewarded and failure is not treated as a human catastrophe. The US’ success is to a great extent based on this kind of thinking.
Unfortunately, most European educational systems are based on outdated practices and theories. Although educational possibilities and structures have gradually been diversified, the major shortcoming of most European educational systems remains: Students have too few choices, and teachers, if they want to remain in their profession, must adhere to a severely compartmentalized pedagogy.
As with corporate monopolies, the consumers (students) are often seen as a homogeneous mass, where all students can be educated according to the same pedagogical approach. But schools must be able to meet the needs and abilities of individual children in a way that makes learning a stimulating adventure.
Other countries might find Sweden’s system worth studying. Its schools are financed by local communities and work within the framework of a national curriculum designed by the parliament and government. But while everyone must follow these rules, individual schools are run in a competitive manner. Anyone — parents, teachers or even companies — can apply for a license to operate a school. The National School Board is, in principle, instructed to approve an application if the proposed school is likely to fulfill the national goals and has a solid financial base.
Moreover, private schools are not seen as mere supplements to public schools, but as full-fledged alternatives, so they need not offer something different. A community where a private school offers its services must support it with the same amount of money, or vouchers, per student that it provides to public schools. The amount of financing per student is the same, and schools that receive vouchers cannot charge additional fees.
After this system was adopted in the 1990s, many non-public schools were established. The pioneers were often parents’ or teachers’ cooperatives, usually with a special pedagogical philosophy. Companies operating chains of schools later came to play an important role as well.
As a result, the variety of schools has increased throughout Sweden. The voucher system means that all students, irrespective of family income, can attend the school of their choice. Even in rural areas, there is now a wide choice of schools, and it seems that competition has improved the overall quality of Swedish schools, as the non-public schools’ very existence has created a demand for reform of public schools. If there is any difference, it seems that non-public schools are often better than public schools in dealing with children with learning problems.
There are, of course, many alternatives to what Sweden has done to revitalize education. But three features of Sweden’s reform seem particularly important. It was based on a combination of public and market systems; it was general in form without demanding that non-public schools be special in order to be licensed; and it covered all students.
Sweden’s voucher educational system is probably the most ambitions of its kind in the world. This is all the more remarkable insofar as the principle of competition on which it relies has taken root in a country where competition within the area of public services has not generally been accepted.
Per Unckel is a former Swedish minister of education and science.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE/EUROPE’S WORLD
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS