Catching Up or Leading the Way

[Hannah Bell]

Yong Zhao occupies a unique position from which to reflect upon the current national direction of American education in his recent--and very readable--book, Catching Up or Leading the Way. Mr. Zahoa, a University Distinguished Professor in the College of Education at Michigan State, is also a product of the inquiry-suppressing, conformity-inducing, national-standardized-test-driven system that constitutes Chinese education. These two seemingly antipodal perspectives alone offer more than ample reason to listen to Mr. Zhao's voice, all the more so when he argues that both systems are moving, each in their own way, toward becoming more alike.

The crux of Professor Zhao's analysis appears in his preface. "...What China wants is what America is eager throw away--an education that respects individual talents, supports divergent thinking, tolerates deviation, and encourages creativity; a system in which government does not dictate what students learn or how teachers teach; and culture that does not rank or judge the success of a school, a teacher, or a child based on only test scores in a few subjects determined by the government...An innovation-driven society is driven by innovative people. Innovative people cannot come from schools that force students to memorize correct answers on standardized tests or reward students who excel at regurgitating dictated spoon-fed knowledge...why does America want to adopt practices that China and many other countries have been so eager to give up?"

Professor Zhao begins by attacking the myth of the broken American education system and the ostensible government reforms that have sought to address the problem. He argues that the historical strength of America's education system can be found in its promotion of talent diversity and the value of the individual, explaining in clear terms the distinction between "contest mobility" and "sponsored mobility" systems. In the latter, as typified by China and Great Britain, students "are subject to path-defining examinations and tests early in their life and are sorted accordingly toward the forms of schooling and training that are deemed 'appropriate' to their perceived talents...." He follows this discussion with a chapter entitled, "Why China Isn't a Threat Yet," one of whose subheads, "High Scores but Low Ability" captures perfectly everything I have personally seen and heard about the products of the Chinese education system (including an abysmally low level of post-school personal reading or interest in new learning, unless it can be turned directly into increased income -- knowledge for knowledge's sake is a concept largely inconceivable among Chinese mainland adults).

Professor Zhao is highly critical of NCLB and the damage to American education he perceives ensuing from it. He does not pull his punches in this arena, most amusingly so when he cites President Bush's January 8, 2002 signing of the NCLB enabling legislation at Hamilton High School in Ohio. Two years later, Hamilton was branded a failing school under the provisions of the same law.

http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2010/01/book-review-catching-up-or-leading-way_10.html

[snot]

1. K&R'd

I believe 'cons targeted these 3 areas, because they understand they're key to controlling everything else:

1. Election integrity.
2. Media independence.
3. Public education that equips citizens to think critically.

There are other issues I also consider urgent; but unless we defend/recover ground re- these three, I fear we're fighting a losing battle.

[Starry Messenger]

2. k & r