Last week, I concluded my article by calling for a redefinition of the Western education model—the urban, middle-class model that has dominated many countries and cities for over 50 years, and in some cases, a century. Prior to this period, education was largely reserved for the few, again rooted in urban, middle-upper-class values. Children from working-class areas in both industrial and bourgeoisie regions attended the same compulsory ‘folkeskole’, as it was called in Scandinavia. This school typically lasted for seven years, from the age of seven until fourteen, culminating in ‘confirmation’ preparatory classes and a test or hearing conducted by the parish priest in the state church. Occasionally, if a child was deemed ‘slow,’ they would repeat the final school year, a decision ultimately made by the priest, who oversaw education. There were tales of boys growing beards before finally passing, as marriage was not permitted until they had successfully completed the confirmation hearing in front of the congregation. These stories may have been exaggerated to discourage children who were less inclined towards academic studies.

In Europe, free primary education for all children has existed for several hundred years, often as far back as five hundred years, and it has also been compulsory. Many argue that in Pakistan, free universal basic education should likewise be made compulsory, obligating the government to allocate resources and ensuring all parents send their children to school. Today, reports indicate that as many as 26 million poor children are out of school. This is both unworthy and inexplicable, given that literacy and basic education benefit the child, the family, and society at large. Moreover, education need not be provided in today’s expensive forms, as I have discussed in previous articles.

A Norwegian friend, an elderly sociologist and former top education politician, Ingrid Eide, recently suggested that it might be interesting, and perhaps useful, for Pakistani readers if I wrote an article or two about the history of the Norwegian education system. Today, I will share some insights, noting that comparative education often illuminates issues in both richer and poorer countries.

It is noteworthy that until as late as 1959, Norway had two education laws: one for the ‘folkeskole’ in cities and towns, and one for rural areas. Although the exams were the same, rural areas had fewer contact hours and school days. It was common for children in rural areas to attend school for three full days a week, with each day consisting of five hours. Kindergarten was virtually non-existent, as mothers were expected to stay at home and manage the children’s pre-school years, perhaps with the help of neighbours. As a result, when children began primary school at the age of seven, they had not attended any formal schooling, and few knew how to read before starting first grade.

By the end of the first autumn term, or at least early in the spring term, all children were expected to have learned to read and write. Some needed more time. The teacher for the early years was always a woman—competent, firm, kind, and respected—commonly referred to by the honorary title of ‘Frøken’, or Miss. This term became popular because teaching was one of the few respectable vocations available to gifted young women, and being a trained teacher provided economic independence, allowing many women to remain unmarried. However, those who did marry still retained the title, which is sometimes used even today.

In earlier times, gender inequality influenced teaching roles, with female teachers typically instructing the lower primary grades, while male teachers handled the upper primary years, especially since it was believed that male teachers could better manage older boys. Although corporal punishment was outlawed in Norway in 1936, it took decades to fully implement the law. Male teachers sometimes used force or threats to discipline unruly boys who neglected their homework, disrupted lessons, or bullied others. Wrestling and demonstrating strength were seen as acceptable, but only within controlled limits. School subjects were generally the same for boys and girls, though girls were not expected to excel in science subjects. The curriculum was manageable for all children, with carpentry reserved for boys and dressmaking for girls.

One of the primary reasons for the three-day school week in rural areas was that children were expected to assist their parents with work on the remaining days—farming, fishing, and household chores. Families were often large, with four or five children being common, and sometimes as many as seven or eight. Household appliances were unaffordable for most families, and refrigerators and freezers were rare. Toilets were outdoors, and not all homes had running water. Additionally, elderly and sick family members were cared for at home, a responsibility that fell to the women and daughters. Consequently, children had to contribute to household duties and sometimes help neighbours or relatives without children.

It is also worth mentioning that some homes were run without a male presence, as Norway was one of the world’s largest shipping nations, and many men were sailors who left their wives and children to manage on their own, often with some agricultural land to cultivate. As industrialisation progressed, many men took periodic or long-term factory jobs.

Interestingly, rural students often performed better in exams than their urban counterparts and exhibited stronger work habits and a greater sense of responsibility. However, few rural children could pursue further education due to the scarcity of secondary schools and the prohibitive costs of sending them away. Despite some positive aspects of the old ‘folkeskole’ in rural areas, the system was segregated, prioritising urban areas for secondary and higher education.

The seven-year primary school system was gradually phased out in the 1960s, first with the addition of an eighth year and then a ninth year, making it a nine-year compulsory primary and lower secondary school for all children nationwide. Today, compulsory education in Norway spans ten years, beginning at age six, with most children having attended kindergarten earlier, as it is now common for both parents to work outside the home. Additionally, there are after-school facilities to care for children until their parents’ workday ends. It should also be noted that many children grow up in single-parent households, usually with their mother. While the primary school system in Norway remains strong, both lower and upper secondary education have become overly academic, frustrating many students and making life difficult for teachers who wish to see all students thrive.

Atle Hetland
The writer is a senior Norwegian social scientist with experience from university, diplomacy and development aid. He can be reached at atlehetland@yahoo.com