The Finnish educational system is composed of basic education, secondary education and higher education. Basic education is given in ESs. Secondary education is provided in high schools as well as vocational schools. Higher education occurs in universities and UASs, which are also called polytechnics. (Ministry of Education and Culture, Finnish National Board of Education & CIMO, 2012, 3.) In this study, the term educational institution refers to ESs, high schools, vocational schools, universities and UASs.
The local authority has the responsibility to arrange basic education (Basic Educational Act 628/1998, Chapter 2, section 4). General upper secondary educational schools, in other words high schools, are arranged by local authorities, municipal consortiums, registered associations and foundations (General upper secondary schools Act 629/1998, Chapter 2, section 3). Vocational schools are arranged by local authorities, municipal consortiums, registered associations and foundations and state-owned enterprises (Vocational Education and Training Act 630/1998, Chapter 2, section 8).
UASs are corporations (Polytechnics Act 932/2014, Chapter 1, section 5). Universities (Universities Act 558/2009, Chapter 1, section 1) are either corporations or foundation universities. The Ministry of Education (Opetusministeriö 2008, 11–12) states that municipalities maintain almost all ESs and high schools. Municipalities or municipal consortiums maintain approximately half of the vocational schools. The above-mentioned ESs and high schools are directed by municipal educational administration departments (Vantaa 2015). The head teacher, typically referred to as the rector, is responsible for the operations in each ES, high school and vocational school (Basic Educational Act 628/1998 Chapter 8, section 37; General Upper Secondary Schools Act
629/1998, Chapter 6, section 30; Vocational Education and Training Act 630/1998, Chapter 6, section 40).
According to the Constitution of Finland (731/1999) everybody has the right to security.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act (738/2002) states that employers shall take care of the safety and health of their employees. A safe and secure learning environment is a right for pupils and students according to the Finnish legislation – such as the Basic Educational Act (628/1998), General Upper Secondary Schools Act (629/1998), Vocational Education and Training Act (630/1998), Polytechnics Act (932/2014) and Universities Act (558/2009). The administration of municipalities is to comply with the Local Government Act (365/1995, Chapter 8, section 69), requiring that municipalities report annually on their operations. Risk management in particular is mentioned in the act. However, the requirement concerning the reporting of risk management is new, and it was included in the annual report of fiscal year 2014. The importance of safety and security is emphasized by the Rectors’ Conference of Finnish Universities of Applied Sciences (Arene) which influences the development of the Finnish higher education system and promotes closer cooperation between the UASs. One of Arene’s (2015a, 2015b) working groups is composed of safety and security network members, which are the UASs. The task of this active network is to develop the safety and security of the UASs. Furthermore, some UASs, such as Laurea UAS and Metropolia UAS (Metropolia UAS 2015), have hired a security manager to take care of safety and security matters. In turn, head teachers and rectors in ESs, secondary schools and vocational schools usually complete a degree in educational administration to show that a person has sufficient knowledge of educational administration. A degree in educational administration concentrates on the principles of public law such as the Administrative Procedure Act (434/2003) as well as the administration of civil service, teaching, personnel and financial matters (Opetushallitus 2015) but comprehensive, risk based SSM is not emphasized.
Multiple institutions and operators have developed the safety and security of educational institutions by way of several different projects over the past decade.
Examples of these projects are improving the construction/technical safety of school buildings (Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriö 2015), establishing the KiVa anti-bullying program (Oppilaitosten Turvallisuus – Tilanneraportti 2014; University of Turku 2012) and carrying out a project called “Security and Safety in Universities (Kreus et al. 2010) as well as preparing school safety and security handbooks (Sisäasiainministeriö 2009).
In Lanne’s study (2002), the development needs of safety and security operations in universities were studied. However, in Universities of Applied Sciences (UASs) and Elementary schools (ESs), the performance level, strengths and weaknesses of the safety and security management (SSM) were not known.
A rector is responsible for the operation of the educational institution and, consequently, also for safety and security (Basic Educational Act 628/1998; General Upper Secondary Schools Act 629/1998; Vocational Education and Training Act 630/1998; Polytechnics Act 932/2014; Universities Act 558/2009). There are requirements for the safety and security of the learning environment in the quality criteria for the basic education, too.
Education providers and schools are to develop the safety and security by improving the work and methods of operation and, furthermore, safety and security shall be evaluated in practice. (Opetusministeriö 2009, 7–8, 49–50.) The management of an educational institution is to identify, assess and analyze occupational safety and health risks in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act (738/2002). Dunlap (2013, 415) points out that to be able to take care of students and pupils, teachers, administrators and other personnel as well as school associates, visitors and guests cannot be forgotten.
According to the Safer Tomorrow program (Ministry of the Interior 2012a, 31), a safe and secure learning environment makes it possible for pupils and students to enjoy studying, to prepare for growing up and to achieve a good academic performance. At educational institutions, safety and security have been improved over recent years. Still, the Ministry of the Interior (2012a, 31) states that school bullying and threats of violence take place at educational institutions even today. From a preparedness point of
view, each educational institution is to have an updated emergency and evacuation plan.
Safety drills shall regularly be held, as it has been proven that they can save lives.
According to the Commission of the European Communities (2002, 3, 6–8, 12; 2007, 2, 4), the changes that have been identified in society include, among other things, an increased feminized society and an aging active population as well as changes in the forms of employment such as part-time work and outsourcing. Moreover, there are changes in the nature of risks such as flexible ways of organizing working time and individually managed human resources as well as an increase in psycho-social problems and illnesses.
According to Maslow’s (1943, 371, 374; 1987, 15, 18, 20–22) theory of human motivation, human needs are settled in a hierarchical order of pre-potency. The appearance of one need relies on a more pre-potent need. Safety and security needs are in the top priority for human beings, just after physiological needs. According to Maslow, the most important needs are physiological needs as well as safety and security needs. These are followed by belongingness and love needs, esteem needs and self-actualization needs. However, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs has been criticized. For example Trigg (2004, 394, 397) as well as Gambrel and Cianci (2003, 158–159) argue that Maslow’s theory focuses on personal growth and does not take into account either the cultural environment or social interactions.
The main objective of this research is the development of comprehensive, risk based SSM in educational institutions by means of the Asteri consultative auditing process and the TUTOR model. The TUTOR model was chosen because the Finnish rescue authority, Keski-Uusimaa Department for Rescue Services, had recently developed a new, rewarded model for inspection or auditing and, moreover offered it for the use of the two researchers. In this study, UASs and ESs were chosen as the target group. UASs were chosen because the author of this study works as a senior lecturer in Laurea UAS the campuses of which were the first audited organizations. Additionally, the researchers desired to include another level of educational institutions in this study. ESs
located mainly in the Central Uusimaa region were chosen because the TUTOR model was created by the authority operating in that region, and the model will be used in the future in these ESs. Moreover, there were many auditable ESs in this region.