Slashdot Mirror
Finland's Education System Supersedes "Subjects" With "Topics"
jones_supa writes Finland is about to embark on one of the most radical education reform programs ever undertaken by a nation state – scrapping traditional "teaching by subject" in favor of "teaching by topic". The motivation to do this is to prepare people better for working life. For instance, a teenager studying a vocational course might take "cafeteria services" lessons, which would include elements of maths, languages, writing skills and communication skills. More academic pupils would be taught cross-subject topics such as the European Union — which would merge elements of economics, history, languages and geography. There will also be a more collaborative teaching approach, with pupils working in smaller groups to solve problems while improving their communication skills.
I saw the article too, and consulted a friend in Finland who is an educator. It turns out the article is mostly B.S. In the sense that it isn't the 'revolution' the article paints it to be. i don't know that we can take much of anything we read on the web at face balue anymore. Sigh.
kind of both.
vocational schools(alternative to going to high school, basically, in finland) kind of already do this kind of stuff. that's where you would have "cafeteria" lessons anyways. in high schools, "chemistry" and "physics" are already topics as is mathematics, biology or whatever and the courses are laid under to cover different topics, like basic gene stuff in biology in one course that includes some chemistry and so on. and by already I mean 17 years ago.
furthermore, it's just a plan by few people at this stage anyways to do it(read the article). basically, the people pushing for it .. well. I don't know, kind of are using the independent to push their vision.
like, I haven't read any of this in Finnish media, which is odd.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
What they have in the USofA are not really unions. At most they are guild. In Belgium, you can join any of several unions. Basically there are three to choose from and those then have sub-divisions per industry.
Some smaller are limited to only one (large) company.
In no way will you be forced to join one and in no way will it affect your chance of employment.
It will also not affect your rights as an emplyee.
The main difference between joining and not are (unless you are a representative of the union and work, than you DO have different rights) is that you get your unemplyemnet benefits much easier when you are entitled to them and they can give you legal advice. Also if you want to join a strike, they will pay you for the loss in pay.
I pay about 8EUR per month. My employers NEVER asked me or even shown interest if I was in a Union or not. When I was in a position where I lead people and hire them I was NEVER interested if they were union or not.
The talks that happen between companies and unions are in general pretty lame. They talk about having a bigger space to have lunch. They talk about the temperature of the offices and how vacation should be more (or less) flexible.
Once in a while they will ask for more money and that is what you read in the papers.
Some people say they have to much power, but also re,member where we came from: a situartion where the rich exploited the poor. Working illegal long hours and not paying for overtime. Getting away with paying less than what was legaly allowed and what not.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
strong correlation between dismantling of unions and stagnant wages ? Workers get approximately 6 to 9 times as much work done as they did 40 years ago, but make less money. awesome.