Archives for category: International

As you may know by now, Pasi Sahlberg of Finland described the Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) in his book Finnish Lessons. GERM is testing, accountability and choice. It is a nasty virus that destroys creativity. Finland opposes GERM and its schools and students are thriving.

Here is another nation that rejects GERM: Scotland.

Melissa Benn, a prominent supporter of the public sector in Britain., praises Scotland for its wise policies.

“Scotland publishes no official league tables, although individual schoolsobviously release their results. (Even Wales now publishes the results of secondary schools grouped into one of five bands.) The Scottish government is moving towards greater school self-evaluation and has, over the past decade, slowly rolled out a progressive “curriculum for excellence”, in stark contrast to our own government’s speedily devised, overly prescriptive and increasingly contested programmes for learning.”

While England is plunging headlong into GERM madness, even going so far as to say that teachers need no particular training to teach–just subject matter knowledge–Scotland believes in “rigorous teacher training” and plans to require all teachers to have a masters’ degree, as Finland does.

If you are interested in GERM in the UK, you should read Melissa Benn’s book School Wars: The Battle for Britain’s Education.

I have heard that Melissa Benn is my counterpart in London. We corresponded a few months ago, and I recommend her work to you.

I wish I could say that things here in South Africa were different, but as I read your blog, I felt as though I was reading about my own country. We have schools that have no text books, no libraries, no educational equipment, no computer facilities, no sport facilities – they are basically a shell and when these schools do not perform the government immediately blames the teachers and principals. Never mind that the children have had to walk up to 15km to get there, or that they have come to school with no food in their tummies…these schools lack basic support from the government and yet they are held accountable for non-performance. Every year when the Matric results are released I wait for the onslaught from government…it makes my blood boil.

A reader comments on an earlier post by a Chicago teacher who explained why he was striking:

I was a high school teacher in New York City, and I agree 100% with Kevin. Before teaching in NY I was a public school teacher in Hong Kong. What struck me the most about teaching in the US is that teachers here are expected to be “supermen” and “superwomen” who should be able to turn classrooms of kids, no matter how difficult and how little support they receive from parents and politically-driven administrators, into high-achieving academic-minded students.

The worst schools in Hong Kong have their own school campus (buildings and playgrounds). In NYC, 5 schools share one building, and the students are shut in the classrooms the whole day with only one lunch break. Their gym class takes place in a parking lot.

The American culture, more than any I have know, places supreme importance on glamour, fame, money, beautiful bodies; modeling and entertainment industries are highly esteemed and looked up to. Teenage sex is not eschewed upon in the name of freedom; public school teachers are mandated to hand out condoms to students who ask for them.

Teachers, day-in and day-out, have to fight this up-hill battle against the overwhelming larger culture, to tell students not to take short cuts or the easy way out, that having boyfriends to show off and thinness are not as important as hard work, kindness, and discipline.

“No,” the administrators say, “If you class is interesting enough, students will be engaged and they will do better in their grades.” And so if anything goes wrong with the children, if they are not learning, it is the teacher’s responsibility!

There are irresponsible and horrible, lazy teachers in the profession, just like in any other profession, but the system and the treatment of teachers–which largely comes from being ignorant of what the teaching job entails–make it extremely difficult if not impossible for the ones who have the heart to teach to do it.

Being Asian, I’m shocked and appalled at how little respect the teaching profession receives in this country, as reflected in the political dialogue, from both Republicans and Democrats, and in the salaries teachers receive compared to other professions. Get this, on the salary chart that I received when I first started teaching, the maximum salary that a teacher could ear was a little over $80,000K, that is, if the teacher possesses a PhD degree and has taught 25 years.

Henry Levin, the distinguished economist at Teachers College, has written an important new article in which he explains that test scores are only one dimension of student and national success. The link is only available for four weeks. It is only about 20 pages, so be sure to read it now or soon.

He shows, with extensive documentation, that non-cognitive qualities– like motivation, persistence, the ability to get along with others–are no less important than cognitive qualities and are undervalued in the present climate.

The international race to get higher and higher test scores ignores the non-cognitive dimension. It is a race that will narrow what children learn, what teachers may teach. It is not good for children or societies. It is a race that no one will win.

Here is the abstract:

Ó UNESCO IBE 2012

Abstract Around the world we hear considerable talk about creating world-class schools. Usually the term refers to schools whose students get very high scores on the international comparisons of student achievement such as PISA or TIMSS. The practice of restricting the meaning of exemplary schools to the narrow criterion of achievement scores is usually premised on the view that test scores are closely linked to the provision of a capable labour force and competitive economy. In fact, the measured relationships between test scores and earnings or productivity are modest and explain a relatively small share of the larger link between educational attainment and economic outcomes. What has been omitted from such narrow assessments are the effects that education has on the development of interpersonal and intrapersonal skills and capabilities that affect the quality and productivity of the labour force. This article provides evidence on some of these relationships, on the degree to which the non-cognitive effects of schooling contribute to adult performance, and on the evidence that deliberate school interventions can influence non-cognitive outcomes. It concludes with the view that the quest for world-class schools must encompass a range of human development characteristics that extend considerably beyond test scores. 

A reader in the U.K. sent this editorial about business leaders’ complaints about poorly educated workers. He thought it was interesting to note that the same laments are heard on both sides of the Atlantic ocean. I have noticed that such laments are often concurrent with a big push to outsource jobs to countries that pay a small fraction of what local workers expect to be paid.

Yet, as I read the editorial, I remembered reading a few years ago that Sir Michael Barber, late of McKinsey, now at Pearson, was supposed to have successfully reformed the British education system. Barber is a big believer in targets and testing, accountability and school closing. His ideas have been influential in supporting the NCLB regime, giving it a patina of legitimacy, based in part on his reputation for having reformed British education.

Barber calls his philosophy of  education “deliverology.”

Apparently, “deliverology” saved British education, and now it needs to be saved again.

Schools have this nasty habit of getting unreformed not long after they were reformed. Arne Duncan reformed Chicago, but now it has to be reformed again. Paul Vallas reformed Philadelphia (and Chicago, too) but now it has to be reformed again.

Reforms have this odd life cycle: first comes the press release, then the sustained publicity campaign, and then the reforms quietly dissolve. And the cycle begins again. The Houston Independent School District is on the Broad Foundation’s list of possible winners of its annual prize. Houston was the first district to win the prize some years ago. Then it had to be reformed all over again. New York City has been reformed for the past decade, and chances are that the next mayor will want to reform the reforms.

The only question that remains is not whether the reforms will be reformed, but whether they will be replaced by something different (which would involve admitting that mistakes were made), or whether reformers will do more of the same, with greater intensity.

And so it goes.

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.”]