<p>Actually, the point I'm trying to make is what do you mean by "better"?</p>
<br>
[QUOTE=""]
<blockquote>
<p>in a diverse country</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>By what stretch of the imagination can we call Taiwan a diverse country when it is half the size of South Carolina and 98% of the population is from a single ethnic group?</p>
<p>Also, note that Taiwan has a much more extreme system of "tracking" than the US system, with an examination after junior high school that divides the student population into college prep, vocational high school, or a vocational junior college track. There is no question that imposition of a similar system in the United States making a single exam the gating event would produce better "test takers". However, as much as some would argue in favor of rigid exam-based gating, that kind of approach would be viewed as "un-American". Our national policy, right or wrong, is that every US child should have the opportunity to receive a college degree.</p>
<p>After reading tokenadult's posts about a certain as-yet-undisclosed country, I can't help but suspect I come from the country he speaks of...</p>
<p>Not sure whether we're thinking of the same countries - but in my country, there are four main ethnic groups (and all very different), and children receive an education no matter how poor/rich they are. We have a pretty good education system that's very rigorous and challenging, and the government constantly examines and reviews the education system in order to keep improving it over the years, tailoring it to suit the kind of global society they envision in the future. It's an Asian country, but (in my opinion anyway) it doesn't impose a mind-deadening, stereotypical "Asian" kind of education upon its kids (i.e. the "Asian" stereotypical education being one that involves lots of memorization, and heavy on the math and sciences, etc). Yes, we learnt algebra in 5th or 6th grade, but we also read stuff like Orwell and Saki then, too. I loved the way we were exposed to a lot of subjects in the humanities when we were young. I remember lots of really, really fun school projects on things like tesseracts (we were reading "A Wrinkle in Time" for one of our 5th grade literature books), the history of our country, Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, the Chinese Cultural Revolution, World War II, stuff like that. Heh, we learnt about colloids during our first science experiment in 4th grade, and it was so much fun. I was in a government-implemented accelerated learning program in a regular public government school, and the kids that were selected for that program were from a wide variety of different backgrounds. Some had poorly-educated parents, and others were from more well-to-do families. I suspect that the fact that much of the education system in my country is government-run, and made affordable for all the citizens and permanent residents, had something to do with that. (sorry about the bad syntax there.) My brother is in one of the top high schools and my family pays about USD$15 a month for him to be there. (And if a family is too poor to even pay that amount of money, there are financial aid schemes in place to help them.)
As for why US universities are so highly-esteemed - I think I might second what tokenadult said about US universities attracting "foreign" talent. Not that there aren't talented American professors at US universities; there are! Just that I think other countries may be experiencing "brain drain" in various degrees, such that some of their citizens take what they can get from their primary and secondary education, and use that education to establish themselves at US universities (or Western universities, for that matter). Also, these citizens of the countries providing good primary and secondary education may not want to work in the world of academia; they may be more interested in getting more "practical" jobs (e.g. business, commerce, medicine, etc.) - an interest that may have something to do with their country's situation (e.g. developing countries, or newly-developed countries, may be more focused in "practical" jobs that enable them to achieve more economic/political stability in more concrete ways). It takes time for universities to become established, I think.<br>
I might post more if/when tokenadult reveals the, er, mystery country... just to see whether my country is the one he speaks of.</p>
<p>Sangria's post is a response to the comments I haven't even made yet, but I'll make them anyway. How much math a kid learns, and how many languages a kid knows, are quantifiable and thus can possibly be compared country to country. But knowing more math and languages does not mean one is better educated in general; it just means one knows more math and languages. Learning to read critically is at least of equal importance as is learning--or continuing--to be curious about the world one lives in. But things like that are not as easily measured.</p>
<p>I'm late coming to this conversation. A couple of comments.</p>
<p>The French educational system is designed to fail a large number of students. My niece went to a private school because her public high school had a failure rate at the bac of 70%. So, if one looks at the curriculum, it is pretty good, and it is certainly more rigorous than most American high school curricula. But it does not do a good job getting every student educated.</p>
<p>One point that Tokenadult did not make but is worth bringing up: It is actually harder to get into some East Asian universities than it is to get into HYP. Indeed, I know some people who came to study in the US because entrance into Hong Kong University in the 1960s was so hard. Coming to the US for higher education, therefore, may not be a repudiation of higher education in one's own home country.</p>
<p>The level of preparation of American university students varies enormously, especially when compared with the more uniform level of preparation of students in other countries. Just last Sunday, my H had a long conversation with a friend who teaches computer science at a state college. The previous week, a student in his computer class had asked: "What is input?" I suspect such a student would have flunked the bac in France or equivalent exams in other countries.</p>
<p>It is interesting to note that on the Pisa Report tables of mean scores Canada and Australia score much higher than the U.S. Both countries have a mix of urban and rural populations and both, particularly Canada, are open-door immigrant societies. Perhaps they have more uniform standards. It would be linteresting to conjecture what might account for the differences in performance in all areas studied in the Pisa Report.</p>
<p>The press release consistently confuses "standards" and "performance". How one performs may have no relationship with standards whatsoever.</p>
<p>In the U.S., performance (in public schools) closely follows family income in the area surrounding the school. The TIMSS-R found that. The SAT people found that. The ARC folks found that. I don't know of a single report that contradicts that finding. School funding correlates relatively closely to family incomes, and secondarily to race. (That was the entire basis for the successful Williams v. California lawsuit, and the current court orders in New York State.</p>
<p>Over time, high standards do NOT raise performance. Money - lots of it - applied consistently, does.</p>
<p>In my experience, very little is demanded of our kids in the elementary years. With just a tiny bit of standards and expectation many kids could easily master much more demanding material, particularly in math.</p>
<p>There is a series of books called "The Core Knowledge Series" by E.D. Hirsch that I used with my oldest child. Among its other features,Hirsch presents a math curriculum that is closer to what elementary students in other countries are learning.</p>
<p>I went through this whole series with my child (who wanted to by the way; I didn't force it), who was as a result 1-2 grade levels ahead in math throughout school and completed BC calculus in 10th grade.</p>
<p>It seems like instead of academics many US elementary kids are encouraged primarily in extracurriculars. Instead of working hard on schoolwork, many kids are pushed more in dance, sports, etc. </p>
<p>Who knows, maybe this is better for them in the long run. It sometimes has seemed to me in my path through the business world that people with great social skills, personal charisma and good golf games do better than people who are really really good at integral calculus.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is no question that imposition of a similar system in the United States making a single exam the gating event would produce better "test takers". However, as much as some would argue in favor of rigid exam-based gating, that kind of approach would be viewed as "un-American".>></p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>The introduction of NCLB into an educational landscape characerized by the lack of a single national curriculum has produced a situation in which kids get tested on mulitple tests at practically every grade level (Stanford-9, NAEP, MCAS in MA, SAT, AP) and the country as a whole sinks huge amount of money into developing and scoring tests that are applicable to only small subgroups of the population. By any standard, even the more rigorous school-leaving tests, such as Massachusetts' MCAS are a joke, testing knowledge that perhaps an 8th grader should have, but by no means a 12th grader. These tests also consume an inordinate amount of time.
Last year, in the space of two months, my S took SAT (March), MCAS (April), AP (May) class finals (May and June) SATII (June). </p>
<p>Making better test-takers? All the teachers in our school have been put in charge of a remedial MCAS class, meaning that there are fewer of them available for teaching regular classes. As well, every single class my S has been taking this term involves SAT prep, that includes Latin and Sapnish. His only respite from SAT prep are the classes he takes at Harvard. I'm hoping for the sake of the seniors that the SAT prep mania will abate after Dec. 31, but my S is a junior, and we know that juniors take the SAT in the spring. Sigh....</p>
<p>"Simply segment out American public schools by the income of families surrounding the school (TIMSS did just this) and, guess what? An aggregate of schools (almost all virtually segregated) lying in areas with incomes above the median finish in the top 3 in the world. Consistently. And those below the median? Don't finish in the top 50. The U.S. does NOT finish 28th. It finishes 2nd or 3rd, and 95th or so."</p>
<p>I agree that the recent trend towards testing in the US schools (including AP testing) will probably have a negative impact on teaching. However, it will, over time, produce students who are successful on the MCAS test (for what that's worth).</p>
<p>That was my point about countries with a rigid gating exam. When one test determines whether you will go to college or to auto mechanic vocational school, you can be sure that the entire educational system will be geared towards that test. </p>
<p>To the extent that some public policy research outfit tests similar aptitude, those countries will "score" better.</p>
<p>Intellectually, I think Taiwan and India have it right. Use a gating exam, send the winners on, and to [heck] with the dummies. But, that philosophy is unlikely to fly in the United States where we have a public policy that even the dumbest kid is entitled to a four-year college education. That policy, combined with the shear size and diversity of the US population, makes it impossible to achieve the highest average test scores in the world. However, we must be doing something right as the US still seems to be the destination of choice for people around the world. I don't think too many Americans are seeking to emigrate to Taiwan in search of a better future for their families.</p>
<p>Yes, but I'm sure that the same could be said of other countries. There just isn't any comparison between the schools in Beijing and those in Yunnan or Kangsu. And in France, Neuilly has better schools than Bobigny, with its high concentration of poor North African immigrants. Both are suburbs of Paris, but they are like night and day in terms of SES</p>
<p>I <em>strongly</em> agree with MonyDad's sentiments. Kids in kindergarten+ have minds like sponges - they could learn so much more than the typical school teaches them. For example, I truly think the vast majority of kindergarteners could be literate by the time they leave kindergarten, IF parents helped by reading to them at home. </p>
<p>Some parents have truly mystifying views about education - I've attended PTA meetings in which parents objected to kids being given homework on weekends, on the grounds that 'schooling ought to stay where it belongs, in the schools'.</p>
<p>"I <em>strongly</em> agree with MonyDad's sentiments. Kids in kindergarten+ have minds like sponges - they could learn so much more than the typical school teaches them. For example, I truly think the vast majority of kindergarteners could be literate by the time they leave kindergarten, IF parents helped by reading to them at home."</p>
<p>Could do it, too, if the parents didn't feel bad about their own reading capacities, or are coping with 80-hour work weeks. Could change, too. Money would change it. Wouldn't take long either. Just three generations.</p>
<p>You'd be surprised at the reverse brain drain going on in many countries of Asia. Back in the early 1990s, I visited a top-of-the line hospital that had succeeded in attracting US-trained doctors with promises of cutting-edge technology. One MD had worked for 25 years in Princeton; another at New Haven, and so forth. English is the new lingua franca and the US is still, compared to other countries, more able to accommodate newcomers. But don't think that Taiwan is mired in the 1960s. The Indian technology,too, boom is in part fueled by returned students. </p>
<p>What I do not like about the French system is that if a student flunks one subject--and all are tested, including PE--, the student has to repeat the entire year. I see nothing wrong, however, in making a student repeat a subject s/he has not mastered. The tests are meaningful. Stanford-9, NAEP are not meaningful for students, at least not where I live. They are useful for those who like to compare schools, but have no impact on what happens in the classroom. In fact, MCAS are not useful either, since results come well after the school year has begun, so they cannot affect a student's placement. Nor are MCAS, administered in 10th grade, useful for colleges, although they are required for graduation, at least from Mass public high schools.</p>
<p>In many countries, students who do not excel leave school officially after 9th grade. In the US students just drop out. It would be interesting to compare the populations of school leavers and school drop outs.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Indian technology,too, boom is in part fueled by returned students. </p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>That is the way it is supposed to work. The American university system becomes one of many ways that the United States contributes to the advancement of countries around the world. If 5% of the graduates of US colleges return home each year, taking a little piece of American principles of freedom and opportunity, the world become a different place.</p>
<p>I also believe that URM students who benefit from affirmative action have an obligation to, in some way, use their educations for the betterment of their communities.</p>
<p>If there is a failing of the American university system, it is a failure to effectively instill a sense of greater reponsibility in return for the opportunity of an elite education.</p>
<p>I agree with you about the beneficial aspects of welcoming foreign students to the US. But I was chiefly responding to your comment: "I don't think too many Americans are seeking to emigrate to Taiwan in search of a better future for their families." That has little to do with the standards of living and education available in Taiwan, and everything to do with Americans' deplorable lack of foreign language abilities.</p>
<p>IMHO, foreign language abilities are usually nurtured by the opportunity to practice on a regular basis. In comparison with the US, European countries are small enough to easily travel to a different lingual culture and to come into regular contact with people speaking languages other than one's home country. The majority of North America speaks English with Spanish being a close second. I took many years of French and several semesters of German. I did well in my classes but never had an opportunity to utilize them. Result--I have forgotten much of what I've learned. I do not encounter and converse with Spanish speakers on any regular basis although I sometimes observe they are present and overhear some Spanish in passing. Most of us don't live in multicultural settings that actively encourage the need to learn other languages. I'm not saying that being multi-lingual is undesirable--just hard to maintain without a way to utilize it.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>That has little to do with the standards of living and education available in Taiwan, and everything to do with Americans' deplorable lack of foreign language abilities.</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>I don't believe that for a New York minute.</p>
<p>I've not been to Taiwan, but I've seen enough of Japan, Hong Kong, and Korea to know that two of them are lovely places to visit, one of them would be a wonderful place to live for a finite period of time (on somebody else's dime), but none of them offer an overall quality of life that is even remotely in the same ballpark as the United States. And no, I'm not talking about simplistic measures like per capita income.</p>
<p>Of those three, the one that would provide the most allure is the one that is friendly to tourists and business visitors, but culturally adamant against accepting permanent aliens into their incredibly homogenous society.</p>
<p>The patterns of permanent immigration between the United States and Asia have nothing to do with "deplorable" language skills. Is there economic opportunity? Yes. But, I don't think you'll see too many US citizens apply for citizenship in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Thailand, or China anytime soon.</p>
<p>Ah, but we're straying from the topic, which is education. I would not want to live in Hong Kong or Taiwan or Japan because they are crowded and polluted. During my brief visit to Taipei, I did not see the blue sky once except when I visited a national park and realized the sky in Taipei was grey not because of weather but pollution. Nor would I want to live in Singapore with its constant campaign against this or that. BUT that has little to do with the educational achievements of their populations. Look up the spread of Singapore Math in the US. Read Liping Ma's comparison of the math knowledge of 3rd grade American and Chinese teachers.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>because they are crowded and polluted</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Bingo! But, my point is that the pollution is directly tied to the priorities of the society, which in turn are reflected in the totality of the education system. So for example, Hong Kong schools may do a fine job of prioritizing math achievement test scores, but an utterly miserable job of prioritizing quality of life issues such as controlling pollution. </p>
<p>One reason that there is so much economic growth in Asia right now is that much of Asia is in a similar phase of economic development as Europe and the US was during the industrial revolution. Basically, unfettered capitalism without restraint or regard to poisoning the environment or worker's benefits. </p>
<p>These, in many ways, are nose-to-the-grindstone sweat shop economies and nose-to-the-grindstone sweat shop educational systems that punish a lack of "production". This does a wonderful job of increasing widget production and math test scores; perhaps not so wonderful in producing leadership for a society that has moved past the industrial revolution stage.</p>
<p>Japan is the only Asian country that has moved past the sweatshop stage and become a mature economy where quality of life issues counterbalance the desire for growth. Of course, Japan (like much of the US and Europe) is no longer viable as a low-cost manufacturing economy and now must focus on high-end value-added commercial enterprise. Like the US, Japan has been exporting its low wage dirty-work to Southeast Asia for several decades. Like any economy in a period of change, Japan is facing huge societal changes as the population increasingly refuses to accept the old "sweat-shop" ways.</p>