“Language is the key instrument that allows us to create the reality we live in and coordinate our actions with others” (LAHDENPERÄ, 2006: 69).
The language we need to build up our own life by interacting with others and its related education are at the same time alike and unlike in different countries. Whereas there are common features in languages and language education, distinctive linguistic and especially cultural conditions lead to variations in teaching mother tongue and literature.
The results of the international student assessment programme PISA, organised by the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (SARKOMAA, 2008: 2), have been widely discussed in Germany since the publication of its first cycle. The mass media and experts have labelled the achievements of the German pupils and consequently the German education system as weak. While Finnish students achieved an average scale of about 550 in the reading literacy assessment and consequently the second place in 2006, the German pupils scored with nearly 500 points, which meant the 18th rank of all countries and four positions above OECD-average (HARJUNEN and KARJALAINEN, 2008: 150). At the same time, the Finnish results meant a positive surprise for the Finnish society and were considered to be excellent (SARKOMAA, 2008: 3).
Finnish is a member of the Finno-Ugrian language family and therefore completely different from the Indo-European languages, such as German, which are spoken mostly in Europe (KULONEN, 1998: 1). One of its characteristics is a phonological writing system, which makes it easy to learn to read and to write (THE BLACKWELL ENCYCLOPEDIA OF WRITING SYSTEMS). This might be an advance of the Finnish students compared to the German students who have to acquire several orthography techniques and strategies in their first school years as there are a lot of morphological features in the German language influencing the spelling. However, this cannot be the secret behind the good assessment results of the Finnish students. They must originate from the education system itself.
Therefore, it is the aim of this essay to answer the following questions: What are the differences between the mother tongue and literature education in Finland and Germany? How is language taught similarly in both countries? What are the strengths and weaknesses of both systems? Which improvements can be proposed?
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 The content of the core curricula
3 Approaches to literature in and outside the school system
4 Immigrant education
5 Teacher education and the assignment of teachers
6 Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
The essay aims to conduct a comparative analysis of mother tongue and literature education in Finland and Germany, investigating key differences, teaching approaches, and educational strengths and weaknesses to propose potential improvements. The study specifically focuses on compulsory education from grade 1 to 9/10.
- Comparative analysis of core curriculum contents.
- Methodologies for fostering literary interest and reading motivation.
- Educational integration strategies for immigrant students.
- Structure and efficacy of teacher training programs.
- Impact of school-based support systems on student performance.
Excerpt from the Publication
3 Approaches to literature in and outside the school system
The encouragement of students to develop a life-long motivation to read is one of the most important tasks of the literature education in school. The choice of literature which meets the interest of the children represents a key to this challenge, although this is not transferred completely in the teaching practice in Germany as well as in Finland.
One can observe in German curricula, that the given contents on literature education concentrate on the pupils’ activities. Recommendations for teachers to stimulate the interests of their students to read are underrepresented (PLATH and RICHTER, 2007: 29f). According to a survey conducted in the federal state Thuringia, the main criterion for German primary school teachers for choosing fictional texts is the pedagogical value included in the text (PLATH and RICHTER, 2007: 74ff). The chosen literature, read in the grades 5 to 10 in Thuringia, is as well often more related to educational topics and does not take genres and gender differences into consideration (ANONYMOUS, 2005). Also in Finnish upper secondary level, the literary value and the extensive development of skills in literary literacy have replaced the interest to pupils as most important criterion in 2001 compared to the 1980s and 1990s. Among other reasons, RIKAMA appoints the reduction of compulsory teaching hours in native language by one fourth through a reform in 1994 (RIKAMA, 2004: 129f).
Nevertheless, one can also observe that motivated teachers try to bring their students into diverse contact with literature as best as they can within their means. For instance, the already cited Germany primary school teacher organises a ghost story night every year when the pupils stay overnight at school.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter outlines the motivation for the study, referencing PISA results and linguistic differences between Finnish and German, and defines the essay's scope and guiding questions.
2 The content of the core curricula: This section compares the structure and specificity of the Finnish and German curricula, highlighting the Finnish focus on general objectives versus the German emphasis on concrete learning outcomes.
3 Approaches to literature in and outside the school system: This chapter examines how schools in both countries promote reading motivation and the varying criteria used to select literary texts for students.
4 Immigrant education: This chapter analyzes the different approaches toward integrating immigrant students, highlighting the systemic advantages of the Finnish model over the German system.
5 Teacher education and the assignment of teachers: This section contrasts German and Finnish teacher training programs, focusing on curriculum content, practical training phases, and the presence of classroom support staff.
6 Conclusion: This final chapter synthesizes the findings and suggests policy reforms, particularly the centralization of the German education system and improved teacher training in didactics.
Keywords
Mother tongue education, Literature education, PISA study, Finland, Germany, Core curriculum, Teacher education, Reading motivation, Immigrant education, Comparative education, Didactics, Educational policy, Classroom support, Literacy assessment, School systems.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this study?
The study provides a comparative analysis of mother tongue and literature education in Finland and Germany, focusing on how these two systems differ and perform.
What are the central themes discussed in the paper?
Central themes include curriculum design, approaches to teaching literature, integration strategies for immigrant students, and the efficacy of teacher training programs.
What is the main objective of the research?
The goal is to identify the differences between the two systems, evaluate their respective strengths and weaknesses, and propose improvements for the German education system.
Which methodology does the author use?
The author utilizes a comparative approach, reviewing educational curricula and policy documents while incorporating insights from interviews with primary school teachers.
What does the main body cover?
The main body details the core curricula, strategies for literature instruction, support systems for immigrant education, and a comparison of university-level teacher training.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Relevant keywords include comparative education, curriculum design, teacher training, literacy, and educational policy.
Why does the author advocate for the centralization of the German education system?
The author argues that a federal system creates unnecessary barriers for teachers and pupils moving between states and prevents the efficient, unified publication of educational materials.
How does the Finnish approach to immigrant education differ from the German one?
Finland provides more extensive, structured support and remedial instruction for immigrant pupils, whereas such systems in Germany are often dependent on local municipal budgets and are less standardized.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Annegret Gelbrecht (Autor:in), 2009, A comparative analysis of the Finnish and the German mother tongue and literature education, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/178665
