Archives for category: International

This is a phenomenal article that explains why the writer decided to leave China, which he loved.

This was one important reason:

Apart from what I hope is a justifiable human desire to be part of a community and no longer be treated as an outsider, to run my own business in a regulated environment and not live in fear of it being taken away from me, and not to concern myself unduly that the air my family breathes and the food we eat is doing us physical harm, there is one overriding reason I must leave China. I want to give my children a decent education.

The domestic Chinese lower education system does not educate. It is a test centre. The curriculum is designed to teach children how to pass them. In rural China, where we have lived for seven years, it is also an elevation system. Success in exams offers a passport to a better life in the big city. Schools do not produce well-rounded, sociable, self-reliant young people with inquiring minds. They produce winners and losers. Winners go on to college or university to take “business studies.” Losers go back to the farm or the local factory their parents were hoping they could escape.

There is little if any sport or extracurricular activity. Sporty children are extracted and sent to special schools to learn how to win Olympic gold medals. Musically gifted children are rammed into the conservatories and have all enthusiasm and joy in their talent drilled out of them. (My wife was one of the latter.)

And then there is the propaganda. Our daughter’s very first day at school was spent watching a movie called, roughly, “How the Chinese people, under the firm and correct leadership of the Party and with the help of the heroic People’s Liberation Army, successfully defeated the Beichuan Earthquake.” Moral guidance is provided by mythical heroes from communist China’s recent past, such as Lei Feng, the selfless soldier who achieved more in his short lifetime than humanly possible, and managed to write it all down in a diary that was miraculously “discovered” on his death.

The pressure makes children sick. I speak from personal experience. To score under 95 per cent is considered failure. Bad performance is punished. Homework, which consists mostly of practice test papers, takes up at least one day of every weekend. Many children go to school to do it in the classroom. I have seen them trooping in at 6am on Sundays. In the holidays they attend special schools for extra tuition, and must do their own school’s homework for at least a couple of hours every day to complete it before term starts again. Many of my local friends abhor the system as much as I do, but they have no choice. I do. I am lucky.

A colleague in Korea wrote to exchange ideas about civic education. In the course of our exchange, my friend offered these astonishingly relevant quotes from the esteemed philosopher Alfred North Whitehead. Let me be frank and say that I did not resonate to his ideas when I first read them half a century ago. I do now. These thoughts apply with equal force not only to our typical standardized approach to public schools but also to the charter chain approach:

“And I may say in passing that no educational system is possible unless every question directly asked of a pupil at any examination is
either framed or modified by the actual teacher of that pupil in that subject.
The external assessor may report on the curriculum or on the performance of the pupils,
but never should be allowed to ask the pupil a question which has not been strictly supervised by the actual teacher,
or at least inspired by a long conference with him.” 
Alfred N. Whitehead, The Aims of Education and Other Essays (London: William and Norgate Limited, 1950), pp. 7-8.
 
“But the first requisite for educational reform is the school as a unit, with its approved curriculum based on its own needs, and evolved by its own staff.
If we fail to secure that, we simply fall from one formalism into another, from one dung-hill of inert idea into another. …
It will be equally fatal to education if we fall into the hands of a supervising department which is under impression that
it can divide all schools into two or three rigid categories, each type being forced to adopt a rigid curriculum.
When I say that the school is the educational unit, I mean exactly what I say, no larger, no smaller unit.
The classifying of schools for some purposes is necessary.
But no absolutely rigid curriculum, not modified by its own staff, should be permissible. …
When once considers in its length and in its breadth the importance of this question of the education of a nation’s young, the broken lives,
the defeated hopes, the national failures, which resulted from the frivolous inertia with which it is treated,
it is difficult to restrain within oneself a savage rage.
In conditions of modern life the rule is absolute, the race which does not value trained intelligence is doomed.” Ibid. pp. 21-22.
 
“This survey shows that the management of a university faculty has no analogy to that of a business organizations….
The modern university system in the great democratic countries will only be successful if the ultimate authorities exercise singular restraint,
so as to remember that universities cannot be dealt with according to the rules and policies which apply to the familiar business corporations.”  Ibid., pp. 149-150.

A new study published in London concludes that students perform better in school–both academically and in their behavior–when teachers focus on learning rather than on test scores, results, and competition.

Children’s attitudes and behaviour improve – along with their results — when teachers and schools are more concerned about helping them learn than pushing them to gain particular exam scores, Watkins found. Such points have been recognised by Ofsted reports on successful schools, and also mirror the evidence on achievement in other fields such as sports and business.

Never-the-less, evidence suggests that the “goal climate” in classrooms becomes increasingly performance-oriented as children get older, and that this continues to disadvantage the groups of children who have always struggled to achieve in school.

Watkins says schools have two challenges:
• To recognise that passing tests is not the goal of education, but a by-product of effective learning.
• To recognise that even when we want pupils to do their best in tests, pressure and performance orientation will not achieve it.

He concludes “If there’s one new thing we need in our school system right now, it’s a well-developed focus on learning. And if the coalition government is serious about its wish to close the gap between high performers and low performers then a focus on learning will make a significant contribution. Learning is for life, not for league tables.”

A reader sent this article from the Wall Street Journal. It made me wonder how many college graduates in the U.S. are unemployed or underemployed. I have met recent college graduates who work in fast-food restaurants or who are waiting on tables or in other jobs that don’t require a college degree. How unusual is that? Anyone have anything other than anecdotes about friends and family?

  • Updated August 22, 2012, 10:59 a.m. ET

China’s Graduates Face Glut

Mismatch Between Their Skills, Job Market’s Needs Results in Underemploymen 

Xinhua/Zuma Press
More than 10,000 college graduates attended an Aug. 2 job fair in Haikou in south China’s Hainan province, where 8,000 vacancies were listed.

BEIJING—China’s labor market has so far proved resilient despite a slowing economy, but that means little to recent college graduate Wu Xiuyan.

“My classmates and I want to find jobs in banks or foreign-trade companies, but the reality is that we can’t find positions that match our education,” said Ms. Wu, 24 years old, who graduated in June from Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics. She has spent the time since then living at home and trawling recruitment websites.

“I just want a stable, maybe administrative, job,” she said, “but why is it so hard?”

Entry-level salaries for the majority of China’s college graduates are lower than those of migrant workers in factories. The WSJ’s Carlos Tejada says there is a gap between available jobs and the skills of new graduates.

China has shown little evidence of rising unemployment despite the slowest growth rate since the global financial crisis—and is nowhere near the jobless rates seen in some of the countries hardest hit by the euro-zone debt crisis. But slowing growth underscores a fundamental challenge to China’s economic development: the underemployment of huge numbers of graduates that Chinese colleges are churning out.

Experts say that many of the graduates lack skills such as critical thinking, foreign languages and basic office communications that businesses are looking for. Even small private enterprises that offer humble salaries find many graduates unsatisfactory. “Those small sales companies that desperately need people also reject us graduates,” said Ms. Wu. “They say we don’t have social resources or work experience that they need.”

At the same time, China has made only limited gains in remaking its economy so it relies more on services and innovation and less on construction and assembly-line manufacturing. That limits the markets for the lawyers, engineers and accountants that Chinese universities are producing.

As a result, many graduates find they can get only low-skill jobs that pay far less than they imagined they would make and see a future of limited prospects. A survey of more than 6,000 new graduates conducted last year by Tsinghua University in Beijing said that entry-level salaries of 69% of college graduates are lower than those of the migrant workers who come from the countryside to man Chinese factories, a figure that government statistics currently put at about 2,200 yuan ($345) a month. Graduates from lower-level universities make an average of only 1,903 yuan a month, it said.

Li Junjie graduated in June from Communication University of China, majoring in broadcast journalism. “It is getting even harder for us to get a job than the previous graduates of my major because fewer positions are left for me and my classmates,” said the 23-year-old native of southern Guangdong province, who is staying with friends in Beijing as he looks for work.

“Media outlets here look for professionals or native English speakers, not fresh Chinese graduates with only a diploma.”

While worker dissatisfaction hasn’t manifested itself politically, such as in public protests, it is bound to be a worry for China’s top leaders who regularly stress the need to avoid social instability, particularly ahead of this fall’s leadership change. Economically, China’s productivity gains could slow if it can’t better match the demand of its current job market and the skills of its graduates.

China’s universities have churned out more than 39 million graduates with undergraduate or specialized degrees over the past decade, according to the Ministry of Education. People with some college education now account for about 8.9% of China’s population, according to 2010 government data. While that’s a much smaller proportion than the 36.7% of the adult population in the U.S, it’s a sharp rise from China’s 3.6% in 2000.

[image]

The employment rate of China’s college graduates last year was 90%, according to a survey by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and MyCOS Research Institute, a Beijing-based education consulting firm. But only 47% of the 256,000 Chinese graduates surveyed said they feel satisfied in their current job.

“To solve the underemployment problem, you need to adjust the economy for the workforce that China has now,” said Chetan Ahya, an economist and managing director at Morgan Stanley. “A comprehensive approach is needed to create jobs with high value.”

“High-end jobs that should have been produced by industrialization, including research, marketing and accounting etc., have been left in the West,” said Chen Yuyu, associate professor at Peking University’s Guanghua School of Management. Referencing the trade name of Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., 2317.TW +0.23% the Taiwan-based company that makes gadgets for Apple Inc. AAPL +0.85% and others in Chinese factories, he said, “We only have assembly lines in Foxconns.”

Solving the problem is complex, involving a gradual overhaul of China’s education system as well as efforts to add more service-sector jobs. China’s Ministry of Education in 2010 unveiled new guidelines pressing universities to shift away from their traditional focus on increasing enrollment. It is also experimenting with giving faculty greater say over curriculum and school operations, though universities remain tightly controlled by the Communist Party.

A large population of college-educated workers with ambitions for better jobs could have long-term advantages, economists say. Educated labor could make China more appealing to both foreign and domestic companies hoping to add service-oriented jobs in China. The group so far also seems less likely to stir unrest than migrant workers, who in recent years have staged protests in some areas over low pay and other issues.

“The underemployment is more a short-term problem,” says Albert Park, professor of Economics at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. “The demand will be there for China’s graduates.”

—Lilian LinA version of this article appeared August 22, 2012, on page A12 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: China’s Graduates Face Glut.

I regularly read the posts from Phil Cullen in Australia, which he calls “The Treehorn Express.” Here is one of his best.

You  will notice that he includes a link to Valerie Strauss’s Answer Sheet, showing how ideas travel fast around the world.

NAPLAN is the Australian national assessment program of literacy and numeracy.

The Treehorn Express
 
 
Scores, Scores, Scores
The delusional, paranoiac obsession with scores and numbers in educational dialogue, and their use by educators who should know better, constantly diverts attention from the real issues. We have all been guilty of using statements like:- “Finland has the best system in the world, because it topped the PISA tests in 2009.” “USA has a poor system of schooling. It ran 27th on the PISA tests.”  “Australia and New Zealand are in the top ten of the best school systems in the world.” “Asia’s cram schools are raising the stakes.”  What is this system of ranking that has led us to the use of such inanities?
PISA is a Programme for International Student Assessment, operating under the auspices of OECD. It tests only 15 year-olds [considered to be school leavers] in a number of countries to see how well-equipped they might be to face the world at large. Although the PISA is only able to test the testables in reading, mathematics and problem solving, it has no link to any school curriculum and provides great fun for the measurement nerds at OECD, Paris. It is claimed to be “…a powerful tool to shape government’s policy making.”   Heaven knows why. Thus far, it has created chaos and panic amongst those in countries who don’t understand what it is.  It tested reading in 2000; mathematics in 2003; science in 2006; reading again in 2009. For 2012 some 15 year-olds are being randomly selected from about 30 countries to test mathematics and try an optional computer-based assessment of mathematics and reading. PISA carries more punch than it deserves. For curriculum use and for comparative standards, its punch would not explode a paper bag.
It is influential, however. Countries, states and authorities around the world have gone numbers-mad to copy its impetuous ardour:- giving tests invented by local non-school measurers, assigning numbers as scores to each participant, averaging the numbers to declare some ridiculously impossible assessments of teachers, principals, schools and systems; publishing results as if they carried some sort of evaluation of what was going on in regard to teacher competencies, school performance, principals’ curriculum leadership and systems’ organisation.
In Australia, these unreliable, comparative number-scores are used as the basis for serious but totally inaccurate descriptions of pupils, schools, of teachers, of principals; have given rise to an amazing array of gimmickry; enhanced the coffers of private schooling; and enriched the coffers of publishers. Nothing much else. They have been used to describe ‘best’ schools and ‘worst’ schools, ‘good’ teachers and ‘bad’ teachers. Some newspapers have been cruel, with commentators pontificating on standards of schooling. the needs for this and that, They have even been used to describe countries as providing outstanding educational services because of success in this test, that is unfamiliar to most commentators and has yet to be extensively examined as a reliable device for what it says it does.  The Australian Gratten Institute, founded in the same year as NAPLAN, established to advise governments on policy matters, contributes to the heresy by its reliance on numbers to make judgements. It’s report: “Catching Up: Learning from the Best School Systems in East Asia” where after-school tutoring to raise test scores is rife, bases it’s contents on numbers scored. [http://www.saveourschools.com.au ] “The report is seriously deficient and one-sided.” says Trevor Cobbald.   One hopes that policy-makers will consult with humanity-biased commentators and the education community before any serious decisions are taken as a consequence of this report.
And all this malarchy costs over $540million with more to come to prop-up the [officially] failed NAPLAN testing scheme!
The reliance and over-use of Arabic numerals for educational purposes is catastrophic. Measurers are people who dwell on the outskirts of educational activities and who  greatly exaggerate the power of number scores. They should get back in their box with their childish toys.  Number is number. When its hieroglyphics are used for descriptive purposes, scores and marks and numbers are inappropriate. Used for serious evaluation of education’s human effort as they are during the present testing pandemic, the use is satanic.
saynotonaplansaynotonaplansaynotonaplansaynotonaplansaynotonaplansaynotonaplansaynotonaplansaynotonaplansaynotonaplandaynotonaplansaynotonaplan
        [Kelvin Smythe’s criticism of a NZ Shadow Minister’s statement contains some brilliant summaries of the effects of ‘national standards. The Minister then responds.]IMPORTANT READING:     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/eight-problems-with-common-core-standards/2012/08/12/821b300a-e4e7-11e1-8f62-58260e3940_blog.html#pagebreak
                                          [Marion Brady comments: “Future historians…are going to shake their heads in disbelief. They’ll wonder how, in a single generation…democracy has dismantled its engine.”]

Allan Allach of New Zealand has compiled a reading list, some drawn from U.S. sources (one from this blog). What is interesting is the commonality of concerns among so many of us worried about the standardization of education, corporate control of schooling, and the worship of data as the goal of education:

 

Weekend Readings
By Allan Alach
One common element of ‘deform’ across the world, is the use of PISA tests to justify the implementation of GERM.  As Phil Cullen observes in his latest Treehorn Express these tests are an offshoot of the OECD, an organisation of economists. Since when did economists have valid educational credentials? This begs the question- why do we take any notice of PISA? Anyone able to explain this to me?
I welcome suggested articles, so if you come across a gem, email it to me at allan.alach@ihug.co.nz.
This week’s homework!
Charter Schools and Corporate Ed Reform
As other countries rush down the charter school road, evidence to the contrary keeps coming out of USA. Naturally our GERM minded politicians take no notice – powerful string pullers behind the scenes? Thanks to Barbara Nelson for this link.
“The following is an excerpt from Charter Schools and the Corporate Makeover of Public Education: What’s at Stake? co-authored by Michelle Fine and Michael Fabricant. The book traces the evolution of the charter school movement from its origins in community- and educator-based efforts to promote progressive change to their role today as instruments of privatization and radical disinvestment in public education.”
New school year: doubling down on failed ed policy
Or ‘how we need to learn from our mistakes”
“This was written by Lisa Guisbond, a policy analyst for the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, known as FairTest, a Boston-based organization that aims to improve standardized testing practices and evaluations of students, teachers and schools.”
10 Ways School Reformers Get It Wrong
“When it comes to education reform, we’re not trying to reinvent the wheel anymore; instead, we’re building square ones.” Nothing else needs to be added. Thanks to Phil Cullen for this link.
Secret Teacher has had it with WALTS, WILFS and other education jargon.
The Guardian newspaper, UK, runs a regular feature where a different secret teacher each time writes about issues of concern. This one is written by an Academy School (aka charter school) teacher, and provides a warning of what is to come.
Yong Zhao on PISA
For the last 18 months or so, I’ve been raising questions about this PISA test programme that is being used by ‘deformers’ all over to justify their educational agenda. Why is a test developed by an economic organisation being used in this way? Why do we give it any credit at all?  Think about it – the PISA tests to determine any country’s educational achievement have exactly the same drawbacks as using tests to determine a child’s achievement. This blog by Diane Ravitch, referencing comments by Yong Zhao, covers this more authoritatively. Getting rid of PISA would be a major step forward.

Technocratic Expansion of Education Data Systems Stirs Privacy Concerns

This is an extremely important article by Anthony Cody.  The online student database system he describes here is also being developed in New Zealand, ready for implementation in 2014. Are similar systems being developed in Australia, UK and elsewhere? This is big brother, people. No exaggeration.  The only thing Orwell got wrong was that he anticipated a far left state, not a right wing corporate based state with fascist overtones. Just to back this up, there’s also another link from a homeschooling website.
Eight problems with Common Core Standards
Another great article by Marion Brady. New Zealand readers might ‘enjoy’ reading this, substituting ‘national’ for ‘common core.’ Aren’t coincidences wonderful?
Thank God for standardized test scores
With the coming publication of ‘achievement data’ for New Zealand schools, as the government rushes in a ‘me too’ fashion’ to join the bandwagon, this satirical article by Joe Bower is timely.

A reader from the U.K., who has engaged in the discussion about the role of parents, comments on the relative infrequency of home-schooling in the U.K.:

Home-schooling is legal in the UK but it isn’t common. Most parents in the UK that have the time to homeschool either lack the required level of education/intelligence to do so successfully or have enough money to send their children to private school.

Most parents send their children to a local state school. The way the system works means that it is difficult to get children into schools unless you live near the school. This raises the prices of properties near outstanding schools. Affluent, educated people tend to be better at picking out good schools and gaming the system (buying a house next to a good school, using a family members address rather than their own, pretending to be of a certain faith to get their kids into a faith school etc). This means that those that might want to home school can generally get their kids into a “good” school and so do not need to.

The exceptions to this are those who cannot get their children into a faith school that matches their beliefs. This is rare as there are catholic schools, church of england schools, jewish schools and islamic schools in growing numbers. Some Jehovah’s witnesses homeschool for example…

In the UK the worst schools sadly tend to be in the poorest areas. The parents in these areas are either working 2-3 jobs to make ends meet and so cannot home school or are not capable of home schooling for reasons of language, education, intelliegence, motivation or a combination thereof. That doesn’t stop some of them from trying but it is rarely a success. More often than not we have to rectify the situation in a short space of time so these pupils have a shot at exam success.

Often home schooling is a necessity rather than a choice here. When a child gets permanently excluded from a school they can have problems finding a new school place. This is especially true when they were excluded for violence, sex offending or drug related incidents. The special schools for excluded pupils (called Pupil referral units) are full to brimming and very difficult to get pupils into. It is equally difficult to get pupils places in special schools for those with behavioural, emotional or social difficulties.

i suspect that home schooling may become more prevalent in areas where there is significant demand for school places. This is because there are not enough new schools being built. Central government think that local government should pay for them. Local government are faced with swinging cuts and simply cannot afford to do so. They think that if they wait for the situation to get bad enough central government will be forced to pay for it. In the meantime the pupils, parents and teachers suffer.

Unfortunately the government is more concerned with making education cheaper rather than better.

Last year, for reasons not altogether clear to me, the British government issued a white paper saying that non-teaching institutions would soon have the power to award degrees. Now, as was anticipated, the Pearson corporation says that it plans to award degrees to complete its role as the ultimate education organization of our era. Of course, Pearson could just buy a struggling college or university and change its name, but it doesn’t plan to do that. It has already opened “Pearson College.”

This is all very puzzling. Businesses awarding degrees in business, technology, or maybe even in liberal arts, perhaps online. 

I am not enough of a visionary to understand why it is a good idea for a university education to be redefined to mean that you can pick up a degree over the counter or online without ever meeting a scholar. And I am no fan of for-profit universities in principle.

Is it about handing out degrees? Is it about dumbing down higher education? Is it a business plan to make money?

Or is it something else?

A reader in England writes this.

The blog has readers around the world, literally on every continent. Most readers, of course, are in the U.S., but followed by readers in Canada, the U.K., New Zealand, Australia, Korea, Japan, Russia, Israel, and dozens of other nations in South America, Africa, Latin America, Europe, and Asia, and on and on, even some small islands.

Isn’t the Internet wonderful? Hats off to social media!

We are everywhere!

New York Times columnist Tom Friedman had a column a few days ago saying that PISA would soon make it possible for everyone to compare the scores of their school to schools all over the world. No one will be average anymore! Just being able to take tests and compare scores will drive us all to the top!

After I read this with a sinking sensation, thinking of the whole world competing to get better test scores (why?), I asked the eminent scholar Yong Zhao to react to this column.

He sent the following as he was traveling in Australia:

“Imagine, in a few years, you could sign onto a Web site and see this is how my school compares with a similar school anywhere in the world,” says Schleicher. “And then you take this information to your local superintendent and ask: ‘Why are we not doing as well as schools in China or Finland?’ ”

Sounds like a commercial for a global standardized testing service? Well, it is. And it is from one of the most influential media outlets The New York Times and endorsed by one of the most popular voices about globalization Thomas Friedman in an op-ed piece last week http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/opinion/friedman-average-is-over-part-ii-.html.

 

The product is OECD’s PISA, the international assessment program that claims to test reading, math, and science skills of 15 year olds. PISA should a great case study of marketing strategy in business schools. In about 10 years, it has been successfully marketed to governments and educational authorities in over 70 countries.

 

PISA has convinced many that it is the gold standard of education quality. Although there are other international assessment programs, which has had a long history, but more countries participate in PISA, which by itself is a great marketing slogan, just like “More Doctors Smoke Camel” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI.

 

 

Up until now, PISA has remained at the system level, reporting averages of groups of students, which has already generated a “PISA Score Race” across the world. With this new round of PISA and the system OECD is developing, it is coming to a school near you and your house. But before you log on and “march to your local superintendent and ask ‘Why are we not doing as well as schools in China or Finland,’ it would be good if you ask the PISA advocates the following questions:

 

  1. Why didn’t the Chinese have a big party celebrating its stunning PISA performance? When the last round of PISA results were released in 2010, China’s Shanghai scored #1 in all three areas, but China, a country eager to celebrate any international achievement, did not even have much national media coverage. In fact, whenever PISA was discussed inside China, it is often associated with “so what?” (Read my blog posts: The Real Reason Behind Chinese Students Top PISA Performance http://zhaolearning.com/2010/12/10/a-true-wake-up-call-for-arne-duncan-the-real-reason-behind-chinese-students-top-pisa-performance/ and The Grass is Greener: http://zhaolearning.com/2011/09/18/the-grass-is-greener-learning-from-other-countries/)
  2. Why the Chinese, who supposedly enjoy the best education according to PISA, spend their life’s savings to send their children to U.S. schools, which supposedly offer a much inferior education? Those who cannot afford to send their children overseas work hard to send their children American schools inside China. If they cannot even do that, they send their children to after school programs modeled after American schools. One of the programs that spread like wildfire in China claims to offer “authentic American K-12 education.” “Attend American Schools in China” is its marketing line.

 

The reason is perhaps best illustrated by OECD itself. A report (http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/46581016.pdf)  about lessons to learn from high PISA performers produced by OECD says:

 

Compared with other societies, young people in Shanghai may be much more immersed in learning in the broadest sense of the term. The logical conclusion is that they learn more, even though what they learn and how they learn are subjects of constant debate. Critics see young people as being “fed” learning because they are seldom left on their own to learn in a way of their choice. They have little direct encounters with nature, for example, and little experience with society either. While they have learned a lot, they may not have learned how to learn. The Shanghai government is developing new policy interventions to reduce student workload and to refocus the quality of student learning experiences over quantity. (p. 103)

 

Essentially, the issues (and questions we must ask) are:

 

  1. Is what the PISA measures truly valuable? Ultimately, we all want a great education for our children, but does PISA scores really measure the quality of education our children will need?
  2. What is sacrificed to achieve such high scores? Are the sacrifices worth the scores?
  3. If China has such a great education, why don’t we just outsource it to China?

 

Read my op-ed in Education Week: Doublethink http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/07/18/36zhao_ep.h31.html)

 

In a nutshell, American education is far from perfect, but China is not a model for emulation. For more about China, PISA, and American education, read my latest book World Class Learners: Educating Creative and Entrepreneurial Students http://zhaolearning.com/world-class-learners-my-new-book/or Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization http://www.amazon.com/Catching-Leading-Way-Education-Globalization/dp/1416608737/ref=pd_sim_b_1