<p>I would say owning a DVD player (or gaming system that plays DVD’s) is so common in the US that it’s a useless measure for US poverty. </p>
<p>If you don’t take into account cultural differences (including who exactly is getting tested in this countries), you could reach results that don’t match reality, such as China having a superior educational system compared to Finland.</p>
<p>This is an interesting opinion piece by Jiang Xueqin, deputy principal of Tsinghua University High School in Beijing.</p>
<p>Linear Algebra and multivariable calculus is considered 2nd year college courses for STEM majors, with states only requiring Algebra2 as a graduation requirement (and for many States this is a new requirement). Kids who do normally well in math are in Precalculus in the 12th grade (not a requirement) and in many districts that’s when they take trigonometry. Kids who do well and are lucky enough to be in a district that offers the class can take Calculus AB and/or Calculus BC. Calculus BC is quite advanced compared to the math curriculum in many European countries, much more advanced than TS sp</p>
The items that are most common tend to lead to the best correlation with poverty estimates. For example, according to 2010 US census estimates, the ~10% of households that did not have a DVD player were twice as likely to be below the poverty line as the general population, showing an obvious correlation with poverty. Each income quintile had a larger percentage of DVD player ownership than the quintile below it. The gap was particularly large between the lowest quintile and 2nd lowest. The only consumer durables that had significantly greater than 2x odds of being below the poverty line were owning a television, stove, and refrigerator. However, of these measures, DVD players had by far the largest sample size, so it would produce more reliable score averages. As previously stated, DVD players was an arbitrary example to show all measures correlated with lower wealth have a similar order.</p>
<p>I’m interested in this idea as well. Are “disadvantaged” students given the same opportunities as non disadvantaged students and, most importantly IMO, are they also given the tools to take advantage of those opportunities? Also, are the disadvantaged consistently exposed to the newest teachers who are still in the developmental stages? What is the average length of experience of administrators in poor urban districts? How long do teachers and administrators stay in these districts! Are their campuses safe and inviting?</p>
<p>Similar comparison can be made inside US. Asian are majority in some of the best California high schools. For example, San Marino High School near LA and Lynbrook High School near San Jose.</p>
<p>Many people here seem to believe that the mediocre performance of the US on PISA is to be blamed on the poor and racial minorities. But the data show that even our best students compare very poorly in these tests.</p>
<p>Ranking of 95th percentile Math scores:
1. Shanghai-China 765
2. Chinese Taipei 738
3. Singapore 737
4. Korea 710
5. Hong Kong-China 709
6. Japan 686
7. Macao-China 685
8. Switzerland 681
9. Liechtenstein 680
10. Belgium 677
11. Poland 669
12. Germany 667
13. Netherlands 665
13. New Zealand 665
15. Canada 663
15. Australia 663
17. Finland 657
17. Estonia 657
35. United States 634
OECD average 645
<p>That is of far greater concern. What fraction of the population really needs strong math skills? Most people don’t need any math beyond simple algebra, perhaps basic geometry, in their lives–if even that much. We should be worrying more about how we are educating the kids who are actually going to use this knowledge. Our schools are not as supportive as they could or should be to these kids.</p>
<p>Which isn’t awful but isn’t great either. The most comparable country would be Canada which it appears we beat there. Though this is just one metric.</p>
<p>I think the wrong math is taught. For instance, I’ve never once had occasion to use Geometry/Trigonometry outside of school. I can’t think of a single instance in daily life or of hardly any jobs where either can be used. However I’ve seen combinatorics apply all over the place. The only combinatorics we had was like a week in high school algebra (and many high schools don’t have that even).</p>
For that matter, what fraction of the population really needs STRONG English, science, social studies, and language skills? Does an air conditioning repairman really need to know how to analyze Hamlet? </p>
<p>Should we end public education earlier? Not all developed countries offer public secondary education to the equivalent of grade 12. </p>
<p>Or maybe the U.S. should cut its losses for non college-stream students, and focus on vocational training, because it’s clear the U.S. isn’t getting value for money in trying to teach geom/trig.</p>
<p>chashaobao, I don’t think those charts really make your point. If the USA starts off with a low overall average, looking at the 75th or 95th percentile should still show the US in the same relative (low) spot. The sampling size is large enough that you shouldn’t expect “clumping” at the two ends of the curve, but a more normal distribution.</p>
<p>"About the physics in 8th grade article: I am European, and I am just wondering why it is unusual to have physics in 8th grade? "</p>
<p>Ohhhh … my pain. </p>
<p>In California, kids may get Physics, Chemistry, or Biology in 11th grade, the earliest! Also, they can choose which subject they take (Physics, Chemistry, or Biology). In other words, many kids can graduate HS without taking a class in Physics, at all. </p>
<p>Before 11th grade - we have a strange subject called “science”, which is a strange soup from Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Health Science, Nutrition, Earth Science, Geology, Drug Prevention, and whatever else. This class has neither logic, nor sequence. It’s like a collection of National Geographic movies, taken at random.</p>
<p>"All this metric does is measure degree of urbaness, not income. People who live in big cities don’t own cars. "</p>
<p>Ok, lets compare US and Chinese urban populations. Do you think this comparison would be in favor of US?</p>
<p>I can’t believe that people try to convince each other that the majority of Chinese kids are wealthier than American kids. Can’t you just look at income data for Chinese families and compare it to a typical US family? Minimal salary in China? Social benefits? </p>
<p>There are plenty of really poor kids in China. Kids that have little to eat. American “underprivileged” teenagers with iPhones would be considered superrich by Chinese standards. </p>
<p>How often Chinese kids own a cellphone? (any model). How often poor urban minority US kids own smartphones? …</p>
<p>I am certain that significantly higher percentage of underprivileged kids own smartphones in USA than in China. I think Chinese kids have less wealth than American kids, even if you compare underprivileged subpopulations.</p>
<p>I don’t think that the usual excuse that “urban minority kids don’t have enough money” plays well , when you compare international populations. Clearly, a student that is considered poor in USA, will be considered rich in many parts of the world.</p>
<p>@californiaaa - You seem intent on making blanket statements that are speculative based on your limited experience. It took me about 5 minutes of searing to find a school in California for which this rule apparently doesn’t apply - Mira Loma - they can take Honors Chem in 9th and Physics in 10th. I’m sure there are others.</p>
<p>"That is of far greater concern. What fraction of the population really needs strong math skills? Most people don’t need any math beyond simple algebra, perhaps basic geometry, in their lives–if even that much. "</p>
<p>Let’s not make “one math fits all”. Without advanced math, students can’t understand most STEM classes, Computer Science, economics, etc. </p>
<p>On the other hand, not every kid wants to learn Advanced English or History in HS. </p>
<p>Why can’t they make different tracks for kids? Math, science, humanities, arts, athletics, trade … specialize HS, make more magnet schools, it would be easy for everyone. Instead, they design Common Core …</p>