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

Community members: Holding parents and students accountable
As explained earlier, the local authorities are responsible for providing comprehensive education for all children 
of the age of compulsory education residing in their area. The Basic Education Act (628/1998) spells out 
responsibilities for the children and their parents as well. According to the Act, it is the duty of children 
permanently residing in Finland to attend compulsory schooling. Education provider are responsible for 
monitoring the absence of a pupil from basic education and to notify the pupil’s parent or guardian of 
unauthorised absence. The mechanisms for monitoring absences are defined in each school’s own Student 
Welfare Plan, which is prepared in collaboration between the staff of the school, the students and the parents 

---

9 
(Oppilas- ja opiskelijahuoltolaki, 2013). The Plan is also revised and approved regularly by the municipal council 
(FNBE, 2014). Schools may also prepare joint Student Welfare Plans. 
It is the duty of the parent or guardian, on the other hand, to ‘see to it that compulsory schooling is completed’ 
(§26, Amendment 477/2003). If parents do not fulfil their responsibility to ensure that their children attend 
school, they can be charged with a fine (Basic Education Act, §45). The police handle the collection of fines. Cases 
of breaching this responsibility are relatively rare. According to the FNBE, 99,7% of all Finnish children complete 
comprehensive education (FNBE, 2016). 
The Basic Education Act also dictates that other duties for students: they ‘shall complete his or her assignments 
diligently and behave correctly’ (§35). Neglecting to do the assigned homework can be punished by ordering 
assignments under supervision for a maximum of one hour at a time after school (Basic Education Act, §36). 
Teachers may assign such punishments without notification to the parent/guardian, but the parents or guardians 
must be notified and given an opportunity to be heard before any other disciplinary action is taken (Basic 
Education Act, §36a). 
Higher education: freedom of education and research 
The Finnish higher education system is a dual system consisting of two types of higher education institutions: a 
total of 14 universities and 24 universities of applied sciences. All but two foundation-based universities are 
public. Universities of applied sciences are limited companies, with operating licenses granted by the MoEC. Both 
universities and universities of applied sciences receive most of their funding from the MoEC, and their activities 
are steered by four-year performance agreements negotiated with the Ministry (FINEEC, 2016c). 
Like education providers at the pre-primary, primary and secondary levels, Finnish higher education institutions 
also enjoy extensive autonomy. Their operations are ‘built on the freedom of education and research. They 
organise their own administration, decide on student admissions and design the contents of degree programmes’ 
(MoEC, 2016b). While they have a lot of freedom, there are also responsibilities, which take shape in two types 
of accountability: MoEC steering and FINEEC’s external evaluations. 
The MoEC steers higher education institutions through legislation, performance-based funding and four-year 
performance agreements. There are separate funding models for universitities and universities of applied 
sciences. The funding models consist of quantitative indicators, such as the number of graduates, student 
feedback, number of employed graduates, publications, and international teaching and research personnel. The 
funding models also include an indicator for student satisfaction, determined by the results in the national 
student feedback survey. While it grants most of the funding, the MoEC does not monitor how HEIs use their 
resources - they are free to determine how they will spend theyr money. The statistics on most of the indicator 
data are publicly available on the national online database Vipunen which is maintained by the MoEC and FNBE 
(FINEEC, 2016c). 
 
The Universities Act (1997) and the Act on Polytechnic Studies (2003)
2
stipulate that HEIs must evaluate their 
own education, research and artistic provision and take part in external evaluations (Eurydice, 2016). FINEEC 
conducts three types of external evaluations in higher education: audits of quality systems, thematic evaluations 
and education programme evaluation in engineering. All Finnish higher education institutions have undergone 
one round of audits of their quality assurance systems (2005-2011) by one of FINEEC’s predecessors FINHEEC. 
The second round of quality system audits will be completed by FINEEC in 2018. As all of FINEEC’s evaluations, 
quality system audits also follow the principle of enhancement-led evaluation. The purpose of the audits is to 
2
Universities of Applied Sciences were previously known as Polytechnics. 

---

10 
support higher education institutions ‘in developing quality systems that correspond with the European 
principles of quality assurance and to demonstrate that functional and consistent quality assurance procedures 
are in place in Finland both in the institutions and at the national level’ (FINEEC, 2016c, p. 29). If the higher 
education institution fulfils the criteria described by FINEEC in its Audit Manual, it will receive a quality label, 
which is valid for six years. If the higher education institution fails to meet the criteria, it will undergo a re-audit 
within 2-3 years. However, a re-audit does not affect the funding by the MoEC or the degree granting powers. 
Higher education institutions can also appeal the decision, if they are not satisfied with the result of the audit. 
The appeals procedure of FINEEC, which is overseen by an external Expert Team, ensures equal treatment of 
higher education institutions and fair decisions (FINEEC, 2016c).
4.
 
Small case study: Enhancement-led evaluation - the Finnish approach 
to accountability 
While testing for accountability (Smith, 2014) is absent in Finland, the Finnish system relies on enhancement-led 
evaluation. Evaluation is a legal duty for education providers at all levels of education. The Acts on Children’s 
Day-care (36/1973), Basic Education (628/1998), General Upper Secondary Schools (629/1998), Vocational 
Education (630/1998), Vocational Adult Education (631/1998), Liberal Adult Education (632/1998), Basic 
Education in the Arts (633/1998), Universities (558/2009), and Universities of Applied Sciences (932/2014) all 
contain provisions on the external evaluation of the education provided in each sector of the education system.
3
The purpose of the evaluation of education is to assure that the Acts are carried out, and ‘to support educational 
development and to improve conditions for learning’ (Basic Education Act, 628/1998, §21). This idea permeates 
the evaluation of all levels of education. Instead of monitoring and controlling, evaluation focuses on developing 
and supporting schools (Välijärvi, 2013). Finland is an exception among most of its European peers in that it lacks 
‘central regulations on school evaluation’ (European Commission, 2015, p. 18). ‘The focus of national evaluations 
is on the education system, not on individual schools and there is no system for school inspection’ (European 
Commission, 2015, p. 157). 
FINEEC and the implementation of enhancement-led evaluation 
The actor responsible for national evaluations of education in Finland is the Finnish Education Evaluation Centre 
(FINEEC, Kansallinen koulutuksen arviointikeskus). FINEEC was established in 2014 in order to strengthen 
education evaluation activities and to create synergy between the evaluation of different sectors of education. 
The government merged the national evaluation activities formerly carried out by the Finnish Education 
Evaluation Council, the Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council (FINHEEC, Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvosto) 
and the Finnish National Board of Education (FNBE, Opetushallitus) into an independent expert organization, 
known as FINEEC. 
The funding of FINEEC comes from the MoEC, but its evaluation methods, organisation and results are 
independent from the influence of the MoEC or other parties. A 13-member Evaluation Council appointed by the 
Ministry of Education and Culture and consisting of representatives of education providers, educational 
institutions, students, and other stakeholders, monitors and develops the operations of FINEEC. The Higher 
Education Evaluation Committee, appointed by the MoEC on the basis of the Evaluation Council’s proposal, 
decides on the evaluation plans, compositions of evaluation teams, and outcomes of quality system audits in 
higher education. The MoEC approves the National Plan for Education Evaluation, which describes the 
3
All legislations are available online at 
http://finlex.fi/fi/
, some are also translated into English at 
http://finlex.fi/en/
 

---

11 
evaluations conducted by FINEEC’s in four-year terms (FINEEC, 2016b). The table below shows the roles and 
responsibilities of different stakeholders in FINEEC’s operations.