Finland country case study; Country case study prepared for the 2017/8 Global education monitoring report, Accountability in education: meeting our commitments; 2017

---

 
 
H i l l a A u r é n 2 0 1 7
Finland Country Case Study 
 
This paper was commissioned by the Global Education Monitoring Report as background information 
to assist in drafting the 2017/8 GEM Report, Accountability in education: Meeting our commitments. 
It has not been edited by the team. The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the 
author(s) and should not be attributed to the Global Education Monitoring Report or to UNESCO. The 
papers can be cited with the following reference: “Paper commissioned for the 2017/8 Global 
Education Monitoring Report, Accountability in education: Meeting our commitments”. For further 
information, please contact [e-mail]. 
ED/GEMR/MRT/2017/C1/16 
Country case study prepared for the 2017/8 Global Education Monitoring Report 
 
Accountability in education: Meeting our commitments 

---

2 
1.
 
Defining accountability in Finnish 
The literal translation of the term ‘accountability’ in Finnish (tilivelvollisuus) combines two words: ‘account’ and 
‘obligation’ or ‘duty.’ Thus, the Finnish term could be translated word-for-word as ‘obligation to account.’ 
However, the more commonly used term to refer to accountability both for individual citizens and public 
administration is responsibility. The term accountability is rarely used in Finnish educational discourse or even 
Finnish literature on the evaluation of education (Räkköläinen, 2011; Sahlberg, 2010). The connotation for 
accountability is quite negative in Finnish. While responsibility in Finnish society is associated with honour and 
virtue, and considered a desirable character to possess, accountability is mostly used when someone is held 
liable for neglecting their responsibilities. The term accountability appears most often in legal and financial 
contexts, while responsibility is used not only in legislation but also in the everyday spoken language. 
In terms of accountability in education, the legislators, policy-makers and education providers are not the only 
ones held responsible - responsibility also extends to the parents and students. The Basic Education Act 
(628/1998, Chapter 7, §25) defines the concept oppivelvollisuus, which translates literally as the ‘responsibility 
to learn,’ known in the English-speaking world as compulsory education. It is noteworthy that in Finnish the 
concept of compulsory education is linked to responsibility, instead of compulsion. The mechanisms of 
accountability for ensuring the fulfilment of this responsibility are explained in section 3.5 of this report. 
Another significant factor shaping the understanding of accountability in the Finnish context is that the concept 
of responsibility in Finland is strongly connected to mutual trust – trust in the fact that others will be honest and 
carry their responsibilities. As Sahlberg (2010, p. 56) notes, ‘Finnish students, teachers and principals experience 
great degrees of autonomy and choice, but they also understand related responsibilities and expectations.’ 
According to the literature, mutual trust in Finland throughout the education system is high, and therefore 
accountability measures do not rely on testing, but on quality assurance where the subject of evaluation is closely 
involved in the process of evaluation and self-evaluation plays a central role (Räkköläinen, 2011; Sahlberg, 2010, 
2014). Trust between the different actors is not just a coincidence or an inherent feature of the Finnish system, 
but a product of intentional public policies by the education administration (Sahlberg, 2010; Välijärvi, 2013).
2.