In an illuminating new study, researchers Chen and Lin delve into the intricate relationship between support structures in education and student achievement. Their exploration, titled “Paradoxical associations between support structures and achievement: a cross-national exploratory analysis of Taiwan and Finland using PISA 2022,” sheds light on the nuanced dynamics at play in two distinct educational environments. By utilizing the latest data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022, the authors aim to unravel the complexities surrounding student support systems and their impact on performance outcomes.
The research comes at a pivotal time. As educational paradigms shift in response to rapid technological advancements and evolving societal expectations, understanding the roles of support mechanisms can inform policy and practice. Taiwan and Finland, which have taken different approaches to educational support, provide a compelling contrast that enhances the analysis. Taiwan is known for its rigorous educational framework supported by a strong tutoring culture, while Finland is lauded for its equitable educational system that prioritizes student well-being and autonomy.
Chen and Lin meticulously detail how Taiwan’s educational system employs a multi-faceted support structure that includes familial involvement, peer tutoring, and extensive after-school programs. In contrast, Finland’s approach emphasizes fewer standardized tests, reduced classroom sizes, and a more relaxed administrative oversight. This foundational difference in educational philosophy presents an opportunity to investigate how each system influences student outcomes, particularly in high-stakes assessments like PISA.
In their findings, the researchers demonstrate a paradox: despite Taiwan’s robust support structures, students often exhibit higher levels of stress and anxiety, correlating with lower achievement on international assessments. This suggests that while support may be abundant, the nature and type of support can greatly affect student performance. The pressures associated with Taiwan’s competitive academic environment become evident, shedding light on a critical aspect of educational success—mental health.
On the other hand, Finnish students, who benefit from a congenial academic atmosphere that favors relaxation and creativity, often outperform their Taiwanese counterparts in global assessments. This raises questions about the weight placed on traditional support systems versus emotional and psychological support in facilitating learning. The researchers argue that the Finnish experience illustrates that less can indeed be more when it comes to educational support and achievement.
The study further highlights the importance of cultural context in interpreting educational outcomes. In societies where academic success is viewed as paramount, like Taiwan, the implications of excessive pressure can undermine the very goals that educational support aims to achieve. Conversely, in Finland, the educational philosophy aligns with longer-term development strategies, fostering not only academic achievement but also life skills such as problem-solving and critical thinking.
Chen and Lin’s examination extends to the role of teachers within these support structures. In Taiwan, the teaching profession is often perceived through a lens of prestige, leading to a competitive climate among educators. Conversely, Finnish educators enjoy a high degree of autonomy in the classroom, allowing them to tailor their teaching strategies to meet individual student needs. The disparity in teaching methodologies accentuates another important finding—teacher-student relationships significantly impact student achievement.
The discussion also accounts for the feedback mechanisms embedded in each educational system. In Taiwan, the focus on performance metrics often leads to a cycle of continuous assessment and feedback, which can be beneficial but can also contribute to an overarching atmosphere of desperation among students. Meanwhile, Finnish education encourages self-evaluation and peer feedback, fostering a culture of mutual respect and collaborative learning.
With the implications of these findings in mind, Chen and Lin advocate for a re-evaluation of what constitutes effective support in educational systems worldwide. Systemic changes that anchor educational philosophy in the well-being of students could yield better outcomes, they argue. Incorporating elements of both frameworks—Taiwan’s comprehensive support structures alongside Finland’s emphasis on emotional intelligence—might pave the way for a more balanced and effective educational approach.
As educational leaders and policymakers assess their frameworks in light of these findings, the authors underline the urgency of integrating mental wellness into academic performance discussions. The necessity for cultivating supportive environments where students can thrive both academically and emotionally is critical in a world that increasingly values mental health alongside educational outcomes.
In a broader context, this research fosters a dialogue around global educational policies, urging nations to learn from one another’s experiences. It prompts nations grappling with educational reform to consider diverse approaches to support structures that transcend traditional metrics of academic success.
Consequently, as the global educational landscape continues to evolve, Chen and Lin’s analysis may serve as a pivotal resource for educators, policymakers, and theorists alike. Their exploration not only adds depth to our understanding of educational support systems but also champions a holistic view of student achievement—one that prioritizes both the mind and the heart.
The most significant takeaway from this in-depth analysis is that success in education cannot simply be defined by grades or assessment scores. Instead, the balance of social support, mental health, and personal growth plays an indispensable role in shaping the future of educational systems around the world. As nations grapple with the complexities of educational reform, the insights provided by Chen and Lin’s work will undoubtedly influence strategies that address not just academic excellence, but the overall enrichment of student lives.
In conclusion, the study invites a shift in perspective—one that challenges conventional wisdom about education and success. By recognizing and addressing the intricate interplay of support structures and student achievement, we can aspire to create educational environments that not only measure success by numbers but also nurture the diverse potentials of all students.
Subject of Research: Educational support structures and their relationship with student achievement in Taiwan and Finland.
Article Title: Paradoxical associations between support structures and achievement: a cross-national exploratory analysis of Taiwan and Finland using PISA 2022.
Article References:
Chen, Y., Lin, SW. Paradoxical associations between support structures and achievement: a cross-national exploratory analysis of Taiwan and Finland using PISA 2022.
Discov Educ 4, 530 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00957-x
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00957-x
Keywords: PISA 2022, Taiwan, Finland, student achievement, educational support structures, mental health, educational reform.
