Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...or just skip it and write in Neil deGrasse Tyson. But being the Smartest Guy in the Room isn't necessarily what makes a good President.
Srsly, I'd like to know why Shanghai is always singled out for praise, and why the rest of China can't or won't implement their practices when the BBC obviously want the West to.
Because of their history.
China had a civil war which ended in 1950. At the end of the war, the Republic of China (the non-communists) had escaped to Taiwan, while the People's Republic of China (the communists) controlled the mainland (except for Hong Kong which was controlled by the British until 1997, when it became an autonomous region of China with a separate government). In 1949 the ROC "closed" mainland China, severely restricing movement in and out, including foreign trade. In the 80s and 90s they started gradually bit by bit opening areas back up to the rest of the world, with Shanghai being the "dragonhead", leading the process of joining the global market.
The reason why you only see testing for Shanghai is that the other more rural areas of China are basically still undergoing education reform to join the modern world. So yes, Shanghai's scores aren't representitive of the entire country, but they are representitive of where the country can get to when it puts its mind to it, and the example that the rest of the country is working to follow.
The reason why you only see testing for Shanghai is that the other more rural areas of China are basically still undergoing education reform to join the modern world. So yes, Shanghai's scores aren't representitive of the entire country, but they are representitive of where the country can get to when it puts its mind to it, and the example that the rest of the country is working to follow.
Well, when your education system is a Hunger Game, it's no wonder the winners are really smart. I'd like to know what happens to the students that go to vocational track.
Aggressive tracking will not work in the U.S. First, it would not be a good cultural fit. American parents would never put up with it.
Second, it may not even be constitutional because of that pesky 14th amendment. Go back and read Brown v. Board of Education. American schools are a public benefit that HAVE to provide equal opportunity. You can't separate people without an objectively fair reason. It's likely that China is not burdened with any kind of legal requirement like that. You cannot separate a group, say, the "vocational" group - and then expect less of them in policy OR IN PRACTICE. If a public school does that, it's violating the 14th amendment according to Brown.
If there was any whiff that the high stakes tests taken in year 9 (8th grade) had a subjective racial or gendered imbalance to them, there'd be lawsuits up the wazoo of school districts across the country. Public schools cannot track students in such a way that would lead to discrimination. You can't have a "stupid" group and a "smart" group where one gets good stuff and the other is treated like crap.
The only way tracking could be done is if we could change the culture - and convince people (and the law) that the "vocational" track is just as good as the academic one. This is the case in France where their vocational track also has high-prestige tracks within itself where you can go that route and get into their equivalent of MIT vs. the academic route that can get into their equivalent of Harvard. In fact a lot of French students prefer the vocational track.
Tl;dr: when you start segregating people in America you tread some dangerous waters.
Last edited by redguard57; 05-28-2016 at 02:01 PM..
OECD said the poorest 10% of pupils in Shanghai are as good as the most privileged 20% of teenagers in the UK and the United States. If money can't solve the problem, then it is much more difficult to solve.
I am surprised that Shanghai has "one of the most equal education systems" in the world. I thought our schools are most equal, oh well.
Why on earth would you think American schools are most equal? Don't you read newspaper articles about education?
We've known this for a long time, but politicians and people with stuff for sale always seem to persuade taxpayers to spend more money.
Still, I wonder if Shanghai's education system can simply be transferred intact to Western democracies.
And I wonder about the rest of China. We're always told how great Shanghai is. Why aren't the Shanghai Principles applied everywhere? Or are they? Have they failed, and why?
No. One thing we will NEVER do is hold the student responsible for learning. Our kids view school as something done to them. Something to be resisted. Parents openly diss teachers and the education system. We have a love hate relationships with education. We love to hate on it. We hate teachers. Without respect for teachers, valuing education and students being held accountable nothing is changing in our system any time soon.
I'm a former engineer turned teacher. I am just as capable today as I was 10 years ago when I was an engineer but I am treated quite differently by the public and my employer. Everyone and their grand father seems to think 1) I'm an idiot, 2) I'm lazy, 3) if they don't watch me like a hawk I'll try and get away with something. Politicians don't ask me before they make educational policies because they think I'm biased. No one would EVER make a policy on engineering without consulting engineers but they think nothing of it when it comes to education. Everyone and their grandfather thinks they know how to do my job better than I do.
No, we cannot transfer Shanghai's system to the US. We will never hold students accountable, value education or respect teachers and they do all three.
Well, when your education system is a Hunger Game, it's no wonder the winners are really smart. I'd like to know what happens to the students that go to vocational track.
Aggressive tracking will not work in the U.S. First, it would not be a good cultural fit. American parents would never put up with it.
Second, it may not even be constitutional because of that pesky 14th amendment. Go back and read Brown v. Board of Education. American schools are a public benefit that HAVE to provide equal opportunity. You can't separate people without an objectively fair reason. It's likely that China is not burdened with any kind of legal requirement like that. You cannot separate a group, say, the "vocational" group - and then expect less of them in policy OR IN PRACTICE. If a public school does that, it's violating the 14th amendment according to Brown.
If there was any whiff that the high stakes tests taken in year 9 (8th grade) had a subjective racial or gendered imbalance to them, there'd be lawsuits up the wazoo of school districts across the country. Public schools cannot track students in such a way that would lead to discrimination. You can't have a "stupid" group and a "smart" group where one gets good stuff and the other is treated like crap.
The only way tracking could be done is if we could change the culture - and convince people (and the law) that the "vocational" track is just as good as the academic one. This is the case in France where their vocational track also has high-prestige tracks within itself where you can go that route and get into their equivalent of MIT vs. the academic route that can get into their equivalent of Harvard. In fact a lot of French students prefer the vocational track.
Tl;dr: when you start segregating people in America you tread some dangerous waters.
I would like to see some documentation of that. Something tells me their "MIT" isn't quite the same as ours. I know Carnegie-Mellon University, formerly Carnegie Institute of Technology, actually started out as "The Carnegie Technical Schools" and then later became a degree granting institution. "Carnegie's vision was to open a vocational training school for the sons and daughters of working-class Pittsburghers (many of whom worked in his mills). Carnegie was inspired for the design of his school by the Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, New York founded by industrialist Charles Pratt in 1887. In 1912 the institution changed its name to Carnegie Institute of Technology (CIT) and began offering four-year degrees." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carneg...lon_University
Caltech also started out with a big emphasis on vocational training, though it was always a university.
"Initially named Throop University, the school changed its name to Throop Polytechnic Institute in 1893. In its first fifteen years, Throop served the local community, teaching a great variety of subjects, from arts and crafts to zoology, with considerable emphasis on vocational training." History of Caltech
I seriously wonder if what you're referring to is something similar. I say this because there seems to be a constant "Grass is always greener" in education, that is, everything is always better in some other country, be it Japan from 25 years ago, or Finland, or Shanghai or France or wherever.
The fact is, the "vocations" or "trades" or whatever you want to call them, do not pay as well and have higher unemployment rates than careers that require degrees. I bookmarked this link b/c it comes up so much here. Earnings and unemployment rates by educational attainment
The fact is, the "vocations" or "trades" or whatever you want to call them, do not pay as well and have higher unemployment rates than careers that require degrees. I bookmarked this link b/c it comes up so much here. [url=http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm
Earnings and unemployment rates by educational attainment[/url]
We may have a different idea of what trades are. I don't know any tool and die, carpenters, or plumbers out of work and they all make 6 figures.
"Students are assigned to universities based on their scores. The scores also play a role in determining what they’re allowed to study. In Ms. Wang’s case, while her score wasn’t high enough for the most elite schools, she managed to win entrance to Yangzhou University. Her first choice of a major was nursing. Instead, the school assigned her to study cooking."
I would like to raise this question to Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump. Whoever get the correct answer first will get my vote.
Trump would have a good tank, a great tank, the best tank the other tanks have ever seen, he guarantees you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one would EVER make a policy on engineering without consulting engineers but they think nothing of it when it comes to education. Everyone and their grandfather thinks they know how to do my job better than I do. 
