<p>Wheat from Chaff:</p>
<p>Once you separate Wheat from Chaff, kids what to be with the wheat. In the end, you’ll get pretty little chaff. </p>
<p>In you separate chaff and put all your effort into it (currently in California a student in Los Angeles school district get twice higher funding from state than a student in Palo Alto), there is no incentive for students (and parents) to be grouped with wheat. </p>
<p>A bit more back on topic, but I am beginning to see many topics under the heading of crazy re education.</p>
<p>Value is like beauty; it is in the eye of the beholder. Because I see no value in certain things, does not mean they do not hold much value and are useful to someone else. I saw no need to say that because I thought it implicit to the meaning of value.</p>
<p>Posters have stated the value they see in the time taking tests and other things re NMF scholarships and APs allowing advance placement with earlier graduation from college and subsequent lower out-of-pocket costs overall. All salient points, they are.</p>
<p>However, we were not interested in NMF, placing out of courses, graduating early or anything like that, so my kids gained nothing doing activities that provided them such possibilities. But, if that is something others see as valuable and a good investment, then great, they should pursue those avenues. </p>
<p>But caveat emptor, as what looks good in high school might actually short a student in the long run of college, as the following conversation my son had last week at an admit day illustrates.</p>
<p>My son just had a very interesting conversation with professor at a major elite school about APs. It was the professor who in passing brought up APs. This is a rather tough program, and my son was asked which courses he would plan on starting with, and my son answered, “From the beginning.” The professor responded (paraphrased), “That is great because the students who opt of the beginning and know less than they think.” </p>
<p>The prof explained that simply because a student knows something does not mean they know how we want them to fundamentally use said info throughout the curriculum, and the strongest students end up being the ones who invariably do not place out of the foundational courses. I have been saying this to my son since 9th grade, but to have a major prof at such a school say it was like winning the lottery of parental advice affirmed by a person my son viewed as a demi-god in his field.</p>
<p>This is very similar in context to my first race car driving class. The instructor asked everyone if they know how to use the brakes to stop the car. Everyone laughed, well of course all we knew. Instructor then said, “If you think brakes stop the car, then you are already dead because brakes do not stop the car. Brakes dissipate energy and allow you to safely redirect the direction of the vehicle. Brakes are your main method of energy control. It is the friction of the tire on the road that stops the car, nothing to do with brakes!”</p>
<p>This is what the prof was talking about. Having knowledge of what something does and how it works does not mean one knows how to properly use it in high-order situations. In this context, I do believe APs hurt students, and students miss out on much of the basics required to fully take advantage of college. Some students are hurt much less than others (depending on major), but the vast amount of students are being shorted, but they do not know it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A large part of that was a combination of a long period of peace after several decades of colonialism, factional wars, Japanese invasion, and a civil war along with a great simplification of the written language.</p>
<p>That several decades of wars and colonialism tended to be very disruptive to setting up viable educational systems…though they did a damned fine job considering all that. In short, they were starting from an extreme floor. </p>
<p>As for the second part, much easier to learn a few hundred characters of simplified Chinese characters to work at high school level of literacy rather than a minimum of 20,000 one needed with traditional characters as used in the Mainland before the early '50s and still used in the ROC(Taiwan) and other areas with large Chinese populations.<br>
Especially when the regime does it to facilitate the widespread dissemination and assimilation of Maoist political ideology among its younger citizens…</p>
<p>As for universities and middle/high schools…they mostly continued the system of examinations and tracking until the Chinese Cultural Revolution when that was all abolished as “too elitist”. </p>
<p>Due to the effects of admitting academically substandard students during the Cultural Revolution…including the effective shutdown of educational and research institutions, the post Maoist authorities re-instituted those “elitist” exams with a vengeance and many employers I know of refuse to recognize educational credentials issued in the PRC during that period for employment. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The PRC had a period where they practiced a form of “holistic admissions”…the Cultural Revolution where one’s class background and political bona-fides were paramount over academic qualifications. Turned out to be an unmitigated disaster and resulted in that period being known as the “lost generation” among Chinese who were of school age back then. </p>
<p>Hence, the reinstitution of the “elitist” examination system with a vengeance once Hu Yaobang and Deng Xiaoping took over in the late '70s/early '80s. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s a bit more complicated than that. While there are parents who send their kids to the US for college because they reject the Gaokao culture which makes US elite college admissions look like a leisurely walk in the park, there are other camps:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>A changing mindset where sending academically strong kids to elite US colleges for undergrad is more acceptable. Even so, if someone gets admitted to Tsinghua, Beida, or another top-tier Mainland college…most such kids wouldn’t be turning them down to attend US colleges as they have the topflight brandname great for networking…and they’re cheaper to boot. For these kids…they’ll come to the US to pursue graduate degrees as that’s where the US brandname tends to shine the most for mainland Chinese employers…both public and private sectors. </p></li>
<li><p>A marked increase in well-off parents who send academically weaker/marginal students to US colleges because they were rejected from top-choice elite colleges or shut up altogther so the US colleges are the last chance option for them to get higher ed. This group tends to be dominant…especially those attending US colleges below the top 50 or so. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>californiaaa, Read your history…many those advances came under Mao’s Cultural Revolution, which abolished traditional entrance exams and focused on education of the proletariate rather than the elites. Those advances came with a great deal of negative social consequences and mixed results at best at the top of the food chain…but the increase in literacy was not the result of a system designed only to serve the needs of a select intellectual elite, the opposite really. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“Advances” under Mao’s Cultural Revolution? </p>
<p>Kudos for taking the road much less travelled. It would be hard to find even the most die-hard Communist talking about advances during the Cultural Revolution. “Tragedy” is the word that is seen more often. </p>
<p>EDIT: See Cobrat’s concise and accurate history a few posts up</p>
<p>@EllieMom, I am sorry but you’ve gotten the history wrong in your “Culture Revolution Era Education” post. It’s an extremely sad peroid of time in China. Nothing, absolutely nothing positive came out of those ten years. And the most devastating blow was to the education system, because it was non existent.</p>
<p>^^
Fenway…I reread and rewrote or at least tried to until the edit feature shut me down. I agree, Cobrat’s analysis is succinct and explanatory. My point was intended to be that China’s increase in literacy was not the result of strict entrance exams and a focus on the elite…it was not intended to be supportive of the tragedy that was the Cultural Revolution. </p>
<p>Uh, river view, read her post again. She wasn’t praising the Cultural Revolution. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How patronizing. Some might say “elitist”</p>
<p>cobra “much easier to learn a few hundred characters of simplified Chinese characters to work at high school level of literacy rather than a minimum of 20,000 one needed with traditional characters” </p>
<p>Duh. . . only trouble is that one need about 3000-4000 characters to have high school literacy. Rural populations might get by with 1500. </p>
<p>Simplified means you drop a few strokes, not that the number of characters needed drops.</p>
<p>I’ll admit…I’m getting testy. </p>
<p>@PG, okay I see the edit now. Very emotional topic in our family, a dark time I wish I could one day wake up and forget. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The PRC still had entrance exams for middle/high school and university for the first decade and half of its existence. It was only abolished at the start of the Cultural Revolution…and the results are such it factors in why many Chinese from that generation are strongly supportive of those “elitist exams” and skeptical of “holistic admissions” as they feel it’s too easily gamed politically by those with less academic capabilities from what they’ve seen and now know about that period. </p>
<p>I think we leave the Chinese commentary to cobrat, with his vaster perspective.
And the wheat from the chaff chatter is - what word can I safely use here? Not the American tradition or the basis of what we consider equitable. Not saying it is done perfectly. But, this isn’t colonial England or old caste India. If one prefers, say, Chinese forms, there are universities there one could explore. By all means, look into Russian or Polish or whatever universities.</p>
<p>Fenway, we have had a fill of misinfo from a certain poster, who does need to bone up on some topics, traditions and more. </p>
<p>@awcdntb, yes, it’s true that some APs really aren’t the equivalent of an intro course at a top college. I think most people know that. However I have to disagree with " the strongest students end up being the ones who invariably do not place out of the foundational courses." None of the really strong STEM students I’ve known needed to sit through calculus in college again. It may be more true in a humanities or social science major where I think the requirements of AP in many schools fall way short of a comparable course in a top college.</p>
<p>Although many Chinese in the big cities suffered under the Cultural Revolution, some country people had a different experience. For a more positive view of the Cultural Revolution, I recommend <em>The Gao Village</em></p>
<p><a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Gao-Village-Rural-Modern-China/dp/0824831926/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1397778588&sr=1-1&keywords=the+gao+village”>http://www.amazon.com/Gao-Village-Rural-Modern-China/dp/0824831926/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1397778588&sr=1-1&keywords=the+gao+village</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Colonial England’s policy of selecting students for “public school”, university, or plum public or private sector positions wasn’t separating wheat from the chaff…unless you feel merit is solely determined by one’s aristocratic/political connections and financial wealth. </p>
<p>Merit…why the very idea of merit was considered “disgustingly middle class” by the elite of that period. A mentality which continued well into the late 19th century. </p>
<p>Same with “Old Caste India” where one’s caste determined what positions one held…not much pretense of merit there. </p>
<p>Considering all of that, separating the “wheat from the chaff” is much closer to the American tradition. </p>
<p>For instance, West Point has been doing that since its founding in 1802 and had no issues doing so among admitted cadets. For instance, Jefferson Davis’ entering class had around 93 cadets in 1824. He graduated 23 out of the 34 who were left when they graduated in 1828. </p>
<p>There was much controversy in the 19th century about West Point being “too elitist” because of its academic standards for entry and expelling students for academic and/or military disciplinary issues. </p>
<p>Re: China and elite schools</p>
<p>I think that 2 different subjects are confused here. China (let’s not discuss Mao) build a new elite - from the working class proletariat. </p>
<p>If I understand it correctly (I am not Chinese) they educated all kids. However, from these kids, they selected a “new elite” - smart and hardworking - and helped them with social promotion.</p>
<p>Think about gymnastics school in China. In the beginning all kids can train for free. However, coaches select kids that look “promising” based on their potential and work ethic. At the next level, coaches select kids at competitions and enter them into national programs (free of charge, merit based only, nothing holistic). Kids are not looking for coaches or money. They just train. They know, if they win competitions, they will be promoted. (OK, in gymnastics it’s pretty brutal, I agree). </p>
<p>My point is: Teaching all kids, but promoting the best. Kids try their best, because they want to be promoted. If your best teachers (money, resources) are dedicated to failing kids, you send the wrong message. </p>
<p>“By all means, look into Russian or Polish or whatever universities.”</p>
<p>College entrance exams in the former Soviet Union (and I assume, Poland as well). No GPA, no SAT. Written exams in several subjects (for example, math, Russian, Chemistry, Biology, Physics). Points were summed and kids with most points were admitted. No affirmative action. No legacy. Nothing holistic.</p>
<p>Yes, it was affirmative action in the Soviet Union (Moscow State University, for example). Approximately 5-10% on the places were reserved. There was a special (separate) admission for AA candidates. Special remedial classes. In addition, another 1-5% were admitted “holistically”, mainly former army vets. Over 85% of the class was merit based! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The irony is plenty of the “old elite” are in that “new elite” if one gets to know such “new elite” students/professionals to the point of inquiring into their family histories. </p>
<p>Thankfully, a decade-plus of oppressing and Harrison Bergeroning them failed miserably. </p>