Tag: critical thinking

Finnish Education Thrives While Sri Lanka’s Struggles: Why?

The Finnish education system consists of early childhood education and care, pre-primary education, primary and lower secondary education (basic education), general upper secondary education, vocational education, higher education, and adult education. In Sri Lanka, we have Primary Education, Middle Education, Secondary Education, Vocational Education, and Tertiary Education.

Why Finnish Education is the best?

One of the most distinctive features of the Finnish education system is its strong dedication to equality. In Finland, standardised tests are not used until puberty. This contrasts with Sri Lanka because children are required to face exams in their early school years.

Their emphasis is on guaranteeing that every student, irrespective of their financial status, has a top-notch education. International results demonstrate this philosophy: Finland has long been among the top nations in the PISA report (Programme for International Student Assessment), particularly in reading comprehension. Finland is ranked sixth in the world among participating nations for reading comprehension, according to the most recent report (2022).

The National Human Resources Development Council (NHRDC) of Sri Lanka’s 2023 Statistical Bulletin reveals that the number of students dropping out of school after the G.C.E. Ordinary Level (O/L) exam has been gradually rising because 76,390 students dropped out of school after passing the O/L exam in the 2022–2023 school year alone, underscoring an increasing difficulty in keeping students in the educational system.

Unlike in Sri Lanka, In Finland, a more inclusive society has resulted from educational equality. According to OECD data, Finland has one of the lowest rates of child poverty in Europe with less than 5% of children living in extreme poverty. This means that the Finnish system fosters social cohesiveness as well as intellectual achievement, lowering any disparities among its participants.

Additionally, compared to Sri Lanka, where children begin preschool at the age of three, formal education in Finland starts at age seven. However, Finnish students’ performance has not suffered as a result of this delayed method to teaching reading and writing. Finland actually has one of the highest reading competence rates in the world. According to the 2018 PISA report, 90% of Finnish 15-year-olds attained a minimal level of reading competency, which is significantly higher than the OECD average of 67%.

With one of the highest rates of postsecondary education in the OECD (44% of Finns aged 25 to 34), Finland has one of the most educated populations in the world.

Sri Lanka is often praised for its high literacy rate of 92% but at what cost has this success been attained? Behind these impressive statistics, children still face often-overlooked realities such as poverty, financial hardships, unequal access to educational opportunities and intense academic pressure. These statistics do not fully capture the challenges and inequalities because these systemic barriers continue to affect students where they have to stay silent and suppressed in order to continue their educational journey.

Another feature that set the Finnish educational system apart is its emphasis on a balance between class and playtime. Finland has shorter school days than countries like Sri Lanka, South Korea or Japan. Compared to the customary 30–40 hours in such countries, Finnish students attend classes for an average of 20 hours per week. The child’s general development is aided by the extra time spent on play and extracurricular activities. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), these activities improve young people’s social and creative abilities as well as their physical and mental health.

Finland’s highly trained teachers are another key pillar in the country’s educational achievements. Only individuals with the highest secondary school marks are eligible to pursue a profession in teaching due to the stringent screening process. Furthermore, a master’s degree in pedagogy is held by 60% of Finnish educators, guaranteeing a high degree of preparation. Finland has one of the highest percentages of highly qualified instructors, according to an OECD survey. This emphasis on ongoing professional development and teacher autonomy has enabled each teacher to modify their instructions to meet unique requirements of their students, which has been shown to improve academic results.

Sri Lanka’s situation with teachers has been tragic for years for many reasons. While the system boasts pedagogically competent teachers, there are also teachers with minimal qualifications and in terms of affordability, many private institutions hire teachers at lower salaries rather than hiring high-performing teachers. Teachers who are knowledgeable about what they teach are also trapped in a traditional system with a heavy syllabus that has to be covered within a strict timeframe, making it difficult for them to adopt creative or unconventional methods of teaching students.

These two systems illustrate two contrasting approaches: the Finnish model emphasises equity, creativity, and critical thinking to improve children’s learning journeys while the Sri Lankan model prioritises exam performance, syllabus completion, and university entrance at the expense of students’ well-being, creativity and critical thinking.

Thus, there is still hope for Sri Lanka to prioritize students’ well-being by adopting Finland’s fundamental values of equality and autonomy because although the two countries differ in their cultural, social and economic contexts, embracing these principles could help create a more inclusive and student-centred education system in Sri Lanka.

Today’s News and Scientists Claim Gen Z is “Less Intelligent” but is That the Whole Story?

A recent scientific claim suggests that Generation Z (typically defined as those born between 1997 and 2010) may be less intelligent than Millennials and earlier generations has ignited intense debate across social media, academic circles and newsrooms worldwide because of the long-held assumption that intelligence steadily increases over time and raises uncomfortable questions about the modern world now Gen Z is growing up in.

According to the neuroscientist, Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, academical performance, intelligence test scores, problem-solving, reasoning, and concentration appear to be declining among younger generations. This apparently contradicts the so-called Flynn Effect, a phenomenon that showed IQ scores rising consistently throughout the 20th century. For the first time in decades, the data suggests that progress may be moving backward.

“They’re the first generation in modern history to score lower on standardized academic tests than the one before it,” Dr. Horvath said, pointing to over-reliance on technology as a key contributing factor.

“More than half of the time a teenager is awake, half of it is spent staring at a screen,” he said. “Humans are biologically programmed to learn from other humans and from deep study, not flipping through screens for bullet point summaries.”

Unlike Millennials, Gen Z has grown up entirely immersed in smartphones, social media, and short-form content. While critics often blame Gen Z for overly relying on technology, there is an important question that is frequently overlooked: Did Gen Z truly have the opportunity to grow up in a healthy and balanced environment or were they simply born into rapid technological change without meaningful guidance?

When the technology was new to Gen Z, it was widely promoted by scientists, developers and educators, preaching how it improved access to information and new ways of learning. Today, when technology is becoming extremely overwhelming, those who have been using it get heavily criticized over weakened attention spans, deep reading habits, and critical thinking skills.

While it is true that Gen Z has experienced the “side effects” of prolonged digital exposure, it is also important to acknowledge the broader context. Many young people have been pushed further into digital spaces partly because real-world environments have become increasingly stressful and demanding. For some, technology became a coping mechanism rather than a choice.

With digital overexposure at the center of the debate, Horvath also shared that Gen Zs are “overconfident about how smart they are” and that “the smarter the people think they are, the dumber they actually are.”

The scientists who support this claim express that they themselevs performed at higher cognitive levels when they were at Gen Z’s age. They have been blunt about how sad it is to have such lower IQ scores. This perspective invites a critical reflection: where was this concern when earlier generations upheld beliefs rooted in superstition, discrimination, sexism, misogyny, extremism, and systemic injustice? It is safe to say that many of those harmful ideologies continue to shape lives today.

It is evident that through technology or not, the younger generations started the trend of embracing scientific reasoning, empathy, and social awareness. While Gen Z is frequently labeled as “less intelligent or dumb” it is also the generation that has challenged injustice, questioned harmful norms, and stood together despite widespread backlash.

Technology has undoubtedly affected young people, often negatively, especially with the rapid rise of AI. However, rather than accusing the youth, should responsibility not lie with those had the authority, resources ad foresight to guide its use more effectively in the first place? If cognitive abilities and intelligence among older generations were indeed superior, why was there so little intervention when children were the first to being immersed in digital environments? Early guidance and mindful restrictions could have mitigated many of these challenges.

Labeling an entire generation as “less intelligent or dumb” is not only misleading but harmful. While older generations grappled with socio-cultural issues that they themselves invented, younger generations are fighting socio-economic inequality, pandemic-related disruptions, mental health challenges, and educational gaps; the debris of what cognitively capable generations had to offer.

What’s clear is that this debate goes far beyond test scores. It is true that these claims though being controversial do encourage society to confront how technology, education based on technology and lifestyle choices are influencing human intelligence and how progress should be measured differently in the 21st century.

But what is also true is, these claims should not diminish the progress younger generations have made in terms of humanity, empathy, emotional intelligence and social awareness. Harmful ideologies such as sexism and abusive behavior are heavily challenged by young people today rather than normalized. Even when such behaviors do appear, they are often learned patterns passed down across generations.

So, instead of asking whether Gen Z is less intelligent, perhaps the more important question is this: Did Gen Z create the system they are now being judged by and should intelligence be measured solely through standardized tests and IQ scores?

Rather than assigning blame, the focus should be on preparing young people to think deeply, critically and independently in a world deliberately designed to distract them.

Sources: Gen Z less intelligent than millennials, other generations – Scientist reveals

Also Read:

Learn English Fast and Efficiently Without Expensive Classes