Descriptive results

In the following section the mean values for the Nordic countries for the above- mentioned variables will be presented by line-diagrams (profiles) for each country, supplemented with international means (0), maxima and minima. In these diagrams the lines themselves have no meaning. The direction and steepness of the lines have no substantial meaning by themselves. Their function is to provide a visual framework so that the main characteristics can be identified at a glance.

1 ”Aggregating to school level” in this case implies that school averages are computed and analysed.

9.3.1 Students’ views

Figure 9.2 The mean scores for the Nordic countries (coloured lines) and international (“Int.”) extremes (black lines) on the four school-related constructs

Figure 9.2 gives a summary of the four constructs from the student questionnaire. The figure shows that in the Nordic countries the students report to a larger degree than in other OECD countries that their teachers are supportive. They also perceive their classrooms as less disciplined learning environments than their OECD counterparts. However, there are surprisingly large differences between the Nordic countries for the constructs ‘Teacher-student relation’ and ‘Pressure to achieve’. The Norwegian profile is the lowest of the Nordic profiles. The typical student in Norway reports that there is a relatively low pressure to achieve combined with a worse than average teacher-student relationship, and that the classroom is not particularly quiet. The Danish profile is very much the opposite of the Norwegian. In Denmark, students report a relatively high pressure to achieve and good teacher-student relationships, and the teacher is perceived to be supportive. The most dominant feature in the Swedish profile is the fact that the students perceive their teachers to be quite supportive. In Iceland the students report that there is a relatively high pressure to achieve. For Finland the most pronounced feature is that the profile is quite close to the OECD mean for all the constructs.

9.3.2 Principles’ views

Figures 9.3 and 9.4 give similar profiles for some of the individual questions in the school questionnaire answered by the principal or another school-leader.

Figure 9.3 presents the student-related factors and figure 9.4 presents the teacher-related factors. For all variables, high values mean that the principals identify this as a problem for learning. The questions reported in these figures all began with “In your school, is the learning of 15-year old students hindered by:…”. A four-point scale was used (‘not at all’=1, ‘very little’=2, ‘to some extend’=3, ‘a lot’=4). The scale used in figures 9.3 and 9.4 has not been standardised. The absolute mean of the scale, the point halfway between 1 and 4, is 2,5.

Figure 9.3 Nordic and international mean values for teacher-related factors in the school-questionnaire. Factors are sorted by increasing mean value in the OECD countries . High values indicate problems for learning.

One main characteristic of the factors associated with teacher behaviour (figure 9.3) is that the OECD mean is well below the absolute mean for all the questions. In other words, within the principals’ own understanding of the scale, they do in general not perceive any major problems related to teacher factors. For the Nordic countries this feature is even stronger. Mostly the means are close to or below the international mean. As was the case with the data from the students’ report (figure 9.2), the Danish and Norwegian profiles are the lowest and highest respectively of the Nordic profiles; however, this time in the opposite direction since the scales are reversed. The Danish profile is exceptional in the sense that from an international perspective their

headmasters think very highly of their teachers. Iceland has the same tendency, although not as pronounced.

Figure 9.4 Nordic means for student-related factors in the school questionnaire, sorted by increasing OECD mean. High values indicate problems for learning

The picture painted by the school-leaders is somewhat less positive for the factors associated with student behaviour (figure 9.4) compared to their assessment of teacher factors (figure 9.3). Even though the international mean is still below the absolute mean for the scale used, the overall profile is shifted upwards towards higher values, meaning that school-leaders identify these factors as causing more problems for the learning environment in their schools.

This shift is even more pronounced for the overall Nordic profile. The Danish profile is still well below the other Nordic countries’ profiles, and in Danish schools no particular learning problem is associated with student behaviour. In Finland the principals identify several of the student-related factors as being problematic. It is worth noticing that, compared to their Nordic counterparts, the Finnish principals report that students skipping classes or being absent from school is a substantial hindrance to learning in their schools. The principals in Sweden, Iceland and Norway all identify disruption as the single most important factor hindering learning in their schools.

As always with data given by self-report, one should keep in mind that the differences between countries may partly reflect the fact that, even if the phenomena addressed by the items were of equal kind and size in all countries, principals and students in different countries may have culturally conditioned

differences in their perceptions of the phenomena. Also, the variation in the ratings for the variables between countries may indicate that there are cultural features in the different countries that result in different perceptions of the scale used. Of course, this is impossible to control or correct for. However, it is reasonable to assume that comparisons between the Nordic countries are comparisons between more or less identical cultures.