Contrasting Choice Policies and Parental Choices in Two Finnish Case Cities Vantaa and Turku
Author(s):
Sari Silmäri-Salo (presenting / submitting) Jaana Poikolainen (presenting)
Conference:
ECER 2012
Format:
Paper

Session Information

23 SES 04 D, Local Education Policy

Parallel Paper Session

Time:
2012-09-19
09:00-10:30
Room:
FFL - Aula 35
Chair:
Terri Seddon

Contribution

The Finnish education policy is defined by global, especially European trends and steering mechanisms.  Politicians follow the directions of OECD according which they, actors, define national lines of education policy according to the interest of different institutions. (see Grek et al. 2009.) Families and schools are governed with different conventions and techniques. The modern convention of government is based on the idea that individuals assume they think as free autonomous choosers. According to the liberal mode of government parents have legal and moral competence to choose the school and education. (Baez & Talburt 2008.) Education and the segmented supply of it is one prospect to govern citizens whom are needed for divergent assignments in the society (see Popkewitz 2007).

Current choice society teases individuals to choose in order to be free citizens. Choices narrate of values and goals of individuals. (Rose 1999.) From the parents` views the school choice is one tool reproduce habitus or try to achieve better places in the societal playfield. (Bourdieu 1984). The playing space is socially defined and part of social practices. The space also defines different mindsets and generates social practices. We use here also the concepts of spatial capital and sociospatial space, which are constructed in different levels. Firstly, societal space, a state of mind which enables or/and prevents certain action on the schooling society. It puts borderlines to action through legislations and other guidelines. Secondly, physical space which refers to residential areas, location of residence and schools as well as transportation opportunities. These two spaces are intertwined to psychic landscape, psychic space, which enables but also installs borders for choices. Depending on the local urban spaces families have dissimilar options to participate on school markets. Parents` education strategies are related to sociospatial schooling practices. (Barthon & Monfroy 2010.)

In Finland the local school authorities determine choice policy that is carried out in municipality. The con-sequence is that choice policy differs between the cities. In this research we compare and contrast how the 6th graders` parents act in the assumed school markets of two case cities, which use different choice policies. The focus is on parents` subject positions, discourses and educational values (see e.g. Irwin & Elley 2011; Raveaud & van Zanten 2007) which are intertwined to school choice strategies. The aim is to develop a model, which describes parents choosing strategies. Here will be answered to following research questions in the contrasting way:
a. what kind of choosers subject positions the parents use
b. what kind of educational values and discourses are used
c. are there differences between the choosing strategies of the parents
d. what is the meaning of different spaces to parents` school choices.

This research is part of research project “Parents and School Choice. Family Strategies, Segregation and School Policies in Chilean and Finnish Basic Schooling” (PASC).

Method

Comparisons and contrasting are necessary here to get better understanding of the mechanisms of choice from policy level to individual one. The semi-structured interview data of 6th graders parents of the comprehensive school was gathered in a city of Vantaa (n=76) and Turku (n=98) and will be analyzed utilizing critical discoursive approach. Discourses not only provide information about issues, phenomena and social relationships, but they also have a nature that is constructive and creative (Fairclough 2004; Foucault 1991). The aim is to capture and describe the relationships between discourses and society. Individuals describe their choosing possibilities, obligations and duties from a certain positions (Vincent, Braun & Ball 2010) using various discourses. Parents` are thinking of choices and acting from particular subject positions (Poikolainen forthcoming; Wilkins 2010). We assume the differently positioned parents experience the assumed school markets in different ways. Spatial capital affects to parents thinking and action, also on what kind of chooser`s identity, position, is constructed and how (Barthon & Monfroy 2010, 179).

Expected Outcomes

So far the analysis has revealed that if the actor`s subject position is traditional, the discourse of civic duty is rather strong. Parentocracy discourse is most often in relation to contemplating actors` position and parents from determined actors position use mostly consumer discourse. When contrasting the case cities it seems the choosing strategies are bound to local context guided by different possibilities and norms. Local normative frames direct parents` choices and depending on the class reference group certain choices are more likely and legitimized. The qualitative hypotheses are: i) parents living in the city which uses expressive policy lean on the impersonal values and are not especially keen to choose ii) when the used policy is expressive and instrumental, parents prefer more personal instrumental and reflexive values and act actively in the assumed school markets. iii) Parents` education strategies are related to sociospatial schooling practices in many ways, the psychic space for choosing is very different in the case cities. Also depending on the social and urban space parents have access to certain schools (see also Barthon & Monfroy 2010). Physical space sets more challenges for the parents than was assumed beforehand.

References

Ball, S. J. & Maroy, C. (2009) School´s Logics of Action as Mediation and Compromise between Internal Dynamics and External Constraints and Pressures. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39(1), 99–112. Barthon C. & Monfroy B. (2010). Sociospatial schooling practices: a spatial capital approach. Educational Research and Evaluation 16(2), 177-196. Fairclough, N. (1992/2004) Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press. Foucault M. (1977/1991). Discipline and punish. The birth of the prison. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Penguin Books. Irwin S. & Elley S. (2011). Concerted Cultivation? Parenting Values, Education and Class Diversity. Sociology 45(3) 480–495. Grek Sotiria, Lawn Martin, Lingard Bob, Ozga Jenny, Rinne Risto, Segerholm Christina & Simola Hannu (2009). National Policy Brokering and the Construction of the European Education Space in England, Swe-den, Finland and Scotland. Comparative Education, 45(1), 5–21. Poikolainen Jaana (forthcoming). A Case Study of Parents’ School Choice Strategies in a Finnish Urban Context. European Educational Research Journal 11 (1). Popkewitz, T.S. (2007). Alcemies and Governing: Or, questions about the questions we ask. Educational Philosophy and Theory 39(1), 64-83. Raveaud, M. & van Zanten, A. (2007) Choosing the Local School: middle class parents` values and social and ethnic mix in London and Paris. Journal of Education Policy, 22(1), 107–124. Rose, N. (1999.) Powers of Freedom. Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vincent, C., Braun, A. & Ball, S. (2010) Local links, local knowledge: choosing care settings and schools. Brit-ish Educational Research Journal, 36(2), 279–298. Wilkins, A. (2010) Citizens and/or Consumers: mutations in the construction of concepts and practices of school choice. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2), 171–189.

Author Information

Sari Silmäri-Salo (presenting / submitting)
University of Turku
Department of Education
Turku
Jaana Poikolainen (presenting)
University of Helsinki, Palmenia
Palmenia Centre for Continuing Education
Lahti

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.