From: underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe)
Subject: Re: Why are we different?
Organization: Miners for a Heart of Gold
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 05:53:02 GMT

In article <43268@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> ee52fbc@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (Maiko Covington)
writes:
>In article <1993Jan9.205244.17501@leland.Stanford.EDU>
>underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes:
>>Any statistics that you see about Chinese-cu students being top-notch should
>>be ignored as meaningless.  What those statistics (including the ones in 
>>Scientific American) say is that the _top_ _5%_ of Chinese-cu students is
>>better than the _average_ American student.
>>On the contrary, what statistics about Korean-cu students and Japanese-cu
>>students say is that the _average_ Korean-cu student and Japanese-cu student
>>is better at science and math than the _average_ American-cu student.  That's
>>a meaningful analysis, compared to the one in the above paragraph.
>Hmmm. Actually though, there is a similar misconception when they
>are comparing the school results of Japanese and American high
>school students. In Japan, high school isn't technically required
>education (although something like over 90% go I think). This means

90% is correct.  That's also the figure that President Bush targetted
for _American_ graduattion rates when he released his education plan about
2 years ago.

>that education from 10th grade on works rather like American
>universities - EVERY school has an entrance exam, and you pay for
>all of them. So, the public high schools are like US public
>universities - there is a set standard, and if you don't make it you
>will go to a private school with less standards (there are private
>schools with higher standards too).
>	As a result, the comparisons of "public high school
>students" are in effect comparing a select group of Japanese hand
>picked to meet a certain standard, against American students, where
>EVERYONE, including students with learning disabilites etc, are
>averaged in. 

Wait.  Maichan (Ms. Covington) jumps the gun on this one.

In the test results described in articles which I read, the sampled students
came from a representative spectrum of Japanese students.  There was no
attempt to select only the best or only those from public schools.

Furthermore, the vast majority of Japanese school children attend public
school.

Hence, the comparisons between Japanese (and Korean) students and American
students is valid, but the comparisons between Chinese students and American
students is meaningless.  Interestingly, the Japanese gov't decreed about
1 (or 2?) years ago that Japan would no longer participate in international
assessments of student competency.  At the same time that Japan dropped out
of these comparisons, Korea entered them.

Korea is now ranked close to where Japan was ranked--i.e. #1 or #2 in 
math and science.

>	However, comparisons with children up to 9th grade DO
>include all Japanese students. I agree that Japan tries to educate
>everyone, and IMHO they do a quite good job of it. 

Amazing.  Maichan and I agree.

>	I think Japan would be better off making high school
>required so that public high schools would not have the horrible
>entrance examinations. I think Korea has this system.
>
>	Maiko Covington
>
>P.S. As far as the "facts vs. critical thinking" debate goes, I

Maichan should note that I was careful to restrict my analysis to competency
in the sciences and mathematics.

I agree that in the area of critical reasoning, Japan is not #1.  When
Japanese school children are taught literature, they are taught a particular
interpretation of a story.  They are expected to reproduce that interpretation
for the assigned composition or the examination.

Japanese children are rarely, if ever, asked the following type of theme
question:  To what extent does the tragic hero in "The Grapes of Wrath"
represent the typical person in the American underclass during 1930?  Are we
obligated to help our fellow man/woman?  Is there a conflict between social
Darwinism and charity?  Why do you think that 1 is superior to the other?

>think we need some of both. What good is all the wonderful
>theorizing without basic factual knowledge of the world and its
>history to base it on?

Scientifically and mathematically, Japanese (and Korean students) beat the
Americans on both theorizing and factual knowledge.  Where the Japanese system
is most weak is basically what I described above.

------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
Jinsei no imi wa nan desu ka.                Sister, can you      |   \|  |`
Shitte itara oshiete kuremasen ka.           spare a coin?        |    | -+-
                                                                  |   /| / \
Copyright 1992, 1993    Disclaimer:  1 + 1 = 3                    |
------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american