The main objective of the paper is to examine how educational transitions from upper secondary education to higher education (HE) are constructed within the frames of three policy reforms in Finland: the HE admission reform, reform of vocational education and training (VET reform), and the reform of general upper secondary education (Ministry of Education and Culture [MINEDU] 2018a; 2019; 2018b).

Upper secondary education in Finland is divided into general secondary education, and vocational education and training. Both qualifications, respectively, make students eligible to apply and study in HE institutions. Tertiary education is free of charge, unlike in many other European countries e.g. France, Netherlands, or Germany (Tikkanen, Bledowski & Felzak. 2015). Until 2020 admission to HE institutions has mainly been through scored entrance examinations or joint scores from both entrance examinations and final certificate. From 2020, Universities consider increasingly the final certificate from general upper secondary education (matriculation examination), while universities of applied sciences consider final certificate both from VET and the general upper secondary education. Nevertheless, entrance examinations to universities are still available for students with poor academic success or VET degrees. (MINEDU 2020.)

Ministry of education and culture stated in 2012 that equality of opportunity is achieved in education and training when everyone has the opportunity to apply for education, and when background (e.g. socio-economical or educational background) does not predict a person’s participation in education or their learning outcomes (MINEDU 2012). Equality of education, one of the cornerstones of the Finnish educational system, may suffer if educational policy generates hierarchies between applicants when pursuing an academic degree. Previous research established that educational differences (e.g. upper secondary education background) have an impact on access to HE (e.g. Kosunen, Haltia&Jokila 2015). Nevertheless, the selection for HE in Finland is one of the most selective in OECD countries (OECD 2019): for example in 2019, 81 percent of the general upper secondary graduates applied to HE. However, only 30 percent were accepted (Official Statistics Finland 2020). These educational reforms have been conducted to promote educational transitions to HE and from there to working life and increase the amount of population taking part in the HE (MINEDU 2016).

The reforms under discussion are still ongoing and there is hardly any research available on the topic. Haltia, Isopahkala-Bouret&Jauhiainen (2019) analyzed the HE admission reform and its impact on adults’ possibilities in HE, and Isopahkala-Bouret, Haltia&Peura (2020) analyzed power mechanism and justice in the HE admission reform. I am broadening the scope of the discussion by combining analysis of the three reforms, and how the politics of educational transitions are constructed in them. The precise research question is as follows: How the national ‘politics of transition’ are formed in the education policy concerning the three educational reforms and what is the impact estimated for possibilities and equality of opportunities for applicants with different backgrounds?

The HE admission reform was gradually implemented from 2016 until spring 2020. Implementation of the VET reform legislation began in January 2018, and the reform of general upper secondary education legislation in August 2018 (MINEDU, 2018a, 2018b, 2019). To construct a corpus of material for the policy document analysis (sub-study 1), I intend to examine documentation from 2014-2020 concerning the HE admission reform. In addition, I intend to study documentation from 2014-2019 concerning VET reform and 2016-2019 concerning the reform of general upper secondary education. On the latter two, the scope is on the documentation that concerns or that can be related to the educational transition to HE. By analysis of the documentation (e.g. government proposals, a government program, governmental statements, request for opinion for legal acts, and legislative motions), the aim is to describe how the politics of transition is formed. The documentation is retrieved from the public project and legislation sources of MINEDU. Politics of transition is viewed as a construct of official policy documentation of the reforms. For the analysis of power relations in the frame of politics of transition, I intend to apply the post-structural ‘What’s the problem represented to be’–approach (WPR) (Bacchi 2009). The idea of WPR is to identify what is constituted as a problem by the policy. In the post-structural tradition, power is seen as a productive force, and in policies, it shapes the normalization of people and what is possible for people to become (Bacchi&Goodwind 2016). WPR is used as an analytical tool that assists in making politics visible. The idea is to identify what is constituted as problems by the policy and how it shapes and produces relations for an educational transition and how this transition is framed in these policy discourses (Bacchi 2009, Bacchi&Goodwind 2016, Ball 2015).

The premise is that the possibilities and the equality of opportunities in educational paths to HE are formed by the politics of transition. It is assumed that as a result of these reforms, students from vocational secondary education are positioned differently what comes to educational transition from secondary education to HE, compared to their peers from general secondary education. This is challenging the idea of equality in education in Finland.

Bacchi, C. 2009. Analysing policy: What’s the problem represented to be? French Forest, NSW: Pearson. Bacchi, C. & Goodwin, S. 2016. Post structural policy analysis: A guide to practice. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Ball, S. 2015. What is policy? 21 years later: reflections on the possibilities of policy research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Innocence, Privilege and Responsibility Politics of Education, 36(3), pp. 306–313. DOI:10.1080/01596306.2015.1015279 Haltia, N., Isopahkala-Bouret , U., & Jauhiainen, A. 2019. Korkeakoulujen opiskelijavalintauudistus ja aikuisopiskelijan opiskelumahdollisuudet. Aikuiskasvatus, 39(4), 276-289. https://doi.org/10.33336/aik.88081 Isopahkala, U., Haltia, N. & Peura, M. 2020. (in press). Valintamekanismit, oikeudenmukaisuus ja korkeakoulujen autonomia. Analyysi toimijoiden välisistä merkityskamppailuista opiskelijavalintauudistuksessa. [Selection mechanisms, fairness and autonomy of higher education institutions. [Analysis on meanings between subjects on HE admission reform] in Kasvatussosiologian vuosikirja III. Jyväskylä: Finnish Educational Research Association FERA. Ministry of Education and Culture, (2019). FAQs about the higher education institution’s student admission reform. Online: https://minedu.fi/usein-kysyttya-korkeakouluvalinnat [cited 11.8.2020] Ministry of Education and Culture, (2018a). Reform of vocational upper secondary education: Online: https://minedu.fi/usein-kysyttya-amisreformi [cited 14.8.2020] Ministry of Education and Culture, (2018b) Reform of general upper secondary education: Online: https://minedu.fi/en/reform-of-general-upper-secondary-education [cited 1.9.2020] Ministry of Education and Culture, (2012). Ehdotus valtioneuvoston strategiaksi koulutuksellisen tasa-arvon edistämiseksi. OKM 2012:28 https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/handle/10024/75345 Kosunen, S., Haltia, N. and Jokila, S. (2015). Valmennuskurssit ja mahdollisuuksien tasa-arvoyliopistokoulutukseen hakeutumisessa [Prepatory courses and equity in university admission], The Finnish Journal of Education 46(4): 334–348 Tikkanen, J., Bledowski, P., & Felczak, J. (2015). Education systems as transition spaces. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 28(3), 297-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2014.987853