In Finland and globally, the well-being of the entire school community is a central priority of education policy, with an increasing emphasis on enhancing well-being within the school environment. However, the term well-being remains unclear, and the goals for improving well-being appear fragmented and vary by school or municipality (Graham 2017). There is limited knowledge in Finland regarding how well-being objectives are established in schools and the types of policy discourses associated in the policy document with the concept of well-being.

Well-being has been defined in many ways in the literature, which makes it difficult to examine the concept theoretically (Amerijckx 2014). Wyn (2007) argues that "learning to become somebody well" is a key educational goal for well-being, especially important during times of rapid social change and uncertainty. Gilman (2016) uses the concept of positive school when he talks about school activities and planning activities in relation to well-being. Positive schools value students' subjective well-being for academic success, and consequently such  schools systematically assess well-being, including community members' emotions and satisfaction in school . In Gilman’s view, supporting students' well-being and constructive interaction within the entire school community helps prevent behavioral problems and boosts student engagement. Diverse students and staff members should also be valued in school communities. Previous studies have found that plans and goals increase the well-being of students and teachers for almost all goals set for increasing well-being (Laine 2016, Kaplan 1999). In their study, Uusitalo-Malmivaara and Vuorinen (2016) considered the Finnish curriculum does not fully take into account the principles of schools aiming at well-being in their objectives.

In Finland, the national curriculum and legislation guide the creation of schools’ operating culture related to well-being. The Finnish core curriculum for basic education mentions well-being as a key objective almost 200 times. The curriculum also obliges schools to take well-being into account in their operations. The curriculum and the Basic Education Act guide the planning of school-level operations with the aim   that would make the members of the school community feel included. Further, these policy documents suggest that individuals in the community  should together build the well-being of the entire community (EDUfi 2016). That is, the curriculum provides multiple requirements and prerequisites for well-being. Yet, the wellbeing goals seem often fragmented, and the practical implementation of them falls on the shoulders of local education organisers (i.e., municipalities) and schools (Uusitalo-Malmivaara 2016). In the Finnish context, municipalities and schools have a high degree of autonomy in influencing various ways of implementing the objectives set out in the curriculum (Saarivirta 2016).  In the Finnish education context, the municipalities responsible for organizing education are autonomous actors, and that affects the degree of school autonomy, which varies between municipalities and in some cases between schools within the same municipality (Lahtero 2019). The legislation requires that goals for school actions are written in school-level policy documents; school year plans, student welfare plans and equality and non-discrimination plans setting the grounds for well-being at schools (Andersson 2020; Soutter 2013). 

This study presents key findings related to the well-being goals of Finnish schools.  The activities of the schools were studied through documents guiding the activities of the schools.

This paper introduces a study that aims to gain a better understanding of the well-being goals in Finnish comprehensive schools set for their work on well-being.. Based on prior literature, the following research question was set:

How are discourses of wellbeing structured in the policies that frame wellbeing in schools? 

The study aims to identify the most important discourses for wellbeing in schools presented in written policies. 

The data consist of school year plans (N=250), student welfare plans (N=26) and equality and non-discrimination plans (N = 75). The material included guiding documents from various schools.Policies guiding school operations were collected from municipalities in spring 2024. The participants included 20 municipalities from different parts of Finland. The municipalities were of different sizes. Municipalities were asked to provide the documents in the data collection process to examine the objectives set in the guiding documents for the well-being of school communities. The documents were collected from comprehensive schools (grades 1-9). The participation of municipal schools in the study was voluntary. The municipalities differed in size, and the sizes of the participating schools varied significantly, ranging from schools with fewer than 50 pupils to schools with more than 1,000 pupils. The study included 251 schools from the participating municipalities. The analysis of the data is based on the model of three-dimensional discourse analysis presented by Fairclough (2007). The premise of the model is that each discourse has three different dimensions: 1. Spoken or written text 2. Discourse practice (producing and distributing text) 3. Social practices Fairclough's three-dimensional model of discourse analysis is a comprehensive framework used to analyse how language functions in social contexts. Spoken or written text focuses on the actual content of the discourse. It involves analysing the language, structure, and meaning of the text itself. This includes looking at vocabulary, grammar, cohesion, and overall organization. The dimension of discourse practice examines how the text is produced, distributed, and consumed. It involves understanding the processes and practices involved in creating and sharing the text. This includes looking at the roles of different participants, the context in which the text is produced, and how it is disseminated and interpreted by different audiences. The dimension of social practices considers the broader social and cultural context in which the discourse occurs. It involves analysing how the text and discourse practices are influenced by and contribute to social structures, power relations, and cultural norms. This includes looking at how discourse shapes and is shaped by social identities, institutions, and ideologies. By analysing these three dimensions the aim is to gain a deeper understanding of how language functions in school policies and how it influences and is influenced by school practices and structures.

In the studied data, there is a huge diversity of goals related to well-being. The objectives related to well-being in the material and the objectives of basic education related to the curriculum of Finnish schools partly correspond to each other. Four discourses emerged from the guiding documents.Guiding documents describe influencing the actions and thinking of an individual belonging to the school community in a direction where well-being increases. A discourse that aims to increase individual well-being is highlighted when examining the guiding policies that frame well-being in Finnish schools. The competence discourse deals with the accumulation of knowledge and skills included in basic education and what kind of activities or areas of activity are related to the construction, planning, evaluation or implementation of competence. The discourse of cooperation is formed through the achievement of well-being goals. Depending on the situation, in addition to the employee, the cooperation situations involve the student, the student's family, the closest colleague or colleagues belonging to the same occupational group, or alternatively the entire work community and student welfare actors. Discourse related to development is related to the goals, attitudes and ideals defined for teaching. In connection with the development, the material will give rise to, for example, ideas on sustainable development themes, increasing teachers' competence, and developing work related to equality and non-discrimination. The findings from this study generated knowledge about wellbeing in schools. The policy analysis identified the need for whole school approaches to wellbeing. Research shows that plans speak of being heard and seen in the community, a sense of appreciation, positive experiences and learning through interaction as the basis for well-being. Practical systematic action on a concrete level, but also on a symbolic level, is seen as important in plans to promote the well-being of the entire school community.

Amerijckx, G. & Humblet, P. (2014). Child well-being: What does it mean? Children & Society, 28, 404-415. Anderson, K. T., & Holloway, J. (2020). Discourse analysis as theory, method, and epistemology in studies of education policy. Journal of Education Policy, 35(2), 188-221. Gilman, R., Hall, R., Huebner, E. S. & Reschly, A L. (2012). Positive Schools. Teoksessa Lopez. J, Shane. & C R, Snyder. The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology 2. edition. 565-566. Graham, A., Powell, M. A., Thomas, N., & Anderson, D. (2017). Reframing ‘well-being’in schools: The potential of recognition. Cambridge Journal of Education, 47(4), 439-455. Fairclough, N. (2007). Discourse and contemporary social change (Vol. 54). Peter Lang. Lahtero, T. J., Ahtiainen, R., & Lång, N. (2019). Finnish principals: Leadership training and views on distributed leadership. Educational Research and Reviews, 14(10), 340-348. Laine, S., Saaranen, T., Pertel, T., Hansen, S., Lepp, K., & Tossavainen, K. (2016). Significance of action plans in the development of occupational well-being in the schools of Finland and Estonia. Evaluation and Program Planning, 54, 74-81. EDUfi, Finnish National Agency for Education. The national core curriculum for basic education (2014). (2016). Next Print Oy: Helsinki. Saarivirta, T., & Kumpulainen, K. (2016). School autonomy, leadership and student achievement: Reflections from Finland. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(7), 1268-1278. Soutter, A. K., O’Steen, B., & Gilmore, A. (2013). The student well-being model: a conceptual framework for the development of student well-being indicators. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 19(4), 496–520. Pietikäinen, S., Mäntynen, A. (2020). Uusi kurssi kohti diskurssia. Tampere: Vastapaino. Uusitalo-Malmivaara, L. & Vuorinen, K. (2016). Huomaa hyvä! : näin ohjaat lasta ja nuorta löytämään luonteenvahvuutensa. Jyväskylä: PS-kustannus. Wyn, J. (2007). Learning to ‘become somebody well’: Challenges for educational policy. The Australian Educational Researcher, 34(3), 35-52.