The relationship between centrally stated educational aims and those really in use at the classroom level is addressed. A critical review is presented of what has been achieved in this area, especially in Finland, both within legislation and by recent researchers. According to the authors, the lists of educational aims produced by policy-makers as well as those constructed by researchers evidently do not render any purposive whole. The role of stated aims, especially the behavioral ones, has been exaggerated and selection of teaching methods have not been considered by either policy-makers or investigators. The fact that stated aims have no significant impact on the teacher's planning activity has, when operating with lists of stated aims, been given almost no consideration. The differences in the teachers' general basic views and pedagogical outlooks have been given minor consideration. A prerequisite for arranging more purposive instruction is that the teacher is able and has the right to modify the stated aims, and also to set individual aims on the basis of personal beliefs and convictions. Corresponding arrangements regarding both teacher education and school administration are needed. (Author/JD)