Keywords
Abstract
This study looks at how teacher freedom affects the success of curriculum changes in Nordic high schools. Using ideas from organizational theory and research on frontline workers, we examine how different levels of teacher independence influence what happens in actual classrooms. We combine survey answers from 342 high school teachers across Finland, Sweden, and Norway with careful analysis of policy papers and 28 detailed interviews with school leaders. Statistical analysis shows that more teacher freedom strongly connects with better reform success (r=0.61, p<0.001), with Finnish teachers showing the best results at 82%, compared to 71% in Sweden and 68% in Norway. Interview findings show that teachers with more freedom better adapt new requirements to their local situation while still meeting policy goals. The study proves that when policies let teachers use professional judgment and make flexible decisions, both the implementation and learning results improve. We recommend creating different strategies that balance standard requirements with teacher independence.
References
[1] Chung, J. (2023). Informed teacher education, teacher autonomy and teacher agency: The example of Finland. London Review of Education, 21(1), 1–11.
[2] Da Silva, A. L. L. (2022). Comparing teacher autonomy in different models of educational governance. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 8(2), 103–118.
[3] Davidovitz, M., & Schechter, C. (2024). Agentic leaders: School principals as street-level managers. Management in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/08920206241269428
[4] Gloppen, S. K. (2023). Enacting teacher evaluation in Norwegian compulsory education: Teachers’ perceptions of possibilities and constraints. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 35(3), 387–417.
[5] Hall, M., & Hampden-Thompson, G. (2022). The teacher as street-level bureaucrat: Science teacher’s discretionary decision-making in a time of reform. International Journal of Science Education, 44(6), 980–999.
[6] Hansen, P., & Jóhannesson, I. Á. (2024). Contrasting Nordic education policymakers’ reflections on the future across time and space. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 68(4), 677–688.
[7] Heikkilä, M. (2021). Finnish teachers’ participation in local curriculum development: A study of processes in five school contexts. Policy Futures in Education, 19(7), 752–769.
[8] Lee, G., & Cole, M. (2024). Teachers as street-level bureaucrats: Navigating language ideologies and restrictive language environments. Bilingual Research Journal, 47(3), 326–340.
[9] Silva, L. C., Macedo, I. M., & Thompson, M. (2024). Revisiting the debate on institutions, the state and institutional change: The relevance of institutional theory to public administration teaching. Teaching Public Administration, 42(1), 73–94.
[10] Steiner-Khamsi, G., Jóhannesdóttir, K., & Magnúsdóttir, B. R. (2024). The school-autonomy-with-accountability reform in Iceland: Looking back and making sense. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 10(3), 180–198.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Nina Jian, Nawal Mustafa