Follow-up evaluation of programmes taught through a foreign language at Finnish

institutions of higher education

Riitta Pyykkö

University of Turku, FINHEEC

Teaching Through a Foreign Language

From Tool to Empowering Mediator

FINHEEC 1999

< teaching through a foreign language grew

> quality of programmes?

added value for students, employers and institutions?

A follow-up in 2005

• should not only examine how the recommendations have been fulfilled

< the changing role and context of international programmes

General remarks I

• from exchange studies to degree studies

• integration in Finnish society more important (< demography)

• proportion of foreign students still low

• balance (outgoing-incoming) quite good

General remarks II

• exchange Europe centred

• most degree students come from China, Russia, Sweden, Estonia

• internationalisation at home

• programmes vs. research system & competitiveness of Finland

The follow-up in 2005

• in 1999: 15 institutions were evaluated

• in 2005: 11 of them answered

• both universities and polytechnics

• questionnaire of 27 questions

8 for the central administration +

19 to the programmes themselves

Preliminary conclusions I

• teaching & information material, tutoring all in English

• tutoring of newcomers quite good

• language skills of teachers better than in 1999

Preliminary conclusions II

• programmes in English an integral part of teaching strategy

> not the same courses in Finnish and in English (esp. in universities)

• degree & non-degree programmes both still needed

Preliminary conclusions II

• the meaning of the language of teaching?

(only some and superficial answers)

• teacher training (language & pedagogical) better organised in polytechnics

• teacher exchange must be encouraged

• only English?

Preliminary conclusions III

• contact hours vs. independent work

more contact hours in polytechnics

• Finnish language and culture

> integration to Finnish society

Preliminary conclusions IV

• the role of foreign visiting teachers & representatives of working life in planning process

• almost no use of national networks

Preliminary conclusions V

• students recruitment more systematic in polytechnics

• for university students the main channel CIMO, Study in Finland

The final report will be ready in October

National seminar

Helsinki

October 24th