Now we are getting into the "flat world" concepts and Dr. Zhao brings in a number of useful statistics. Some of the net effects of globalization is the off-shoring of jobs to the cheapest markets and the global rise of super corporations like Starbucks and McDonald's which can drive out local business costing a community both jobs and identity. With such globalization of the workforce and markets, what consequences does this bring to education which is traditionally a local issue? One consequence Dr. Zhao observes is the rise of something he calls "global competence" which he defines as an ability to speak another language and have a deep understanding of cultures other than our won. These are things our schools were not designed to do and the results have been documented.
Technology is also a challenge identified in these chapters. Dr. Zhao discusses Second Life in detail and demonstrates how commerce has arisen in this virtual world. Prompted by this chapter, I spent some time in Second Life and had to really dedicate time to get my avatar out of the newbie island where you start your second life. I lost all my clothes at one point and even found that my hair is considered an article of clothing... yes, my character spent a couple days bald! Dr. Zhao warns us that we need to educate students to function in virtual worlds and likens the unreality of these spaces to most of us the way locales outside the village were unreal to his father. His point is that the virtual world is real, whether we can comprehend its value or not. And it influence on the "first life" will only become greater as time goes on.
So here are some questions to think about:
What would be the biggest change we could make in a system originally designed for preparing local citizens to now produce global citizens?
What would we need to teach for kids to be skilled in the virtual world that we don't teach now?
What do we teach now that translates well into a global society influenced by a virtual world?
Friday, November 20, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Chapter 4: Why China isn't a threat yet: the costs of high scores
This chapter really begins to dive into debunking the mythology around high test scores. Despite incredible growth in the Chinese economy over the past several decades, the growth has been in the labor and not the knowledge sector of the economy. What was striking to me, in this chapter, was the the way the Chinese Premier realized the lack of knowledge work happening in China, despite sky-high test scores, could be measured in patents. The data showed a sudden increase in patent applications from China after the Chinese Regime recognized this indicator and implemented programs to boost patent applications. But the number awarded was low and mostly the patents were design and appearance… not invention.
This is strikingly similar to something I read in the book “Wild Swans.” Banned in China to this day, author Jung Chang chronicles her family through the Cultural Revolution in the 20th Century. What connected for me was a description about how Mao discovered that western nations, like the United States, produced more steel than did China. Mao ordered the whole country to produce more steel which led to the people in the country-side setting up smelting fires and tending them rather than their crops. They deforested the land, neglected their crops and then suffered famine… all in the effort to produce the added steel Mao felt was important.
It seemed to me that the description of the sudden interest and subsequent rush for patents showed eerie similarity to the push for more steel production. By becoming sold on an indicator, the Chinese government caused the value of that indicator to decrease. Whereas before the rush for steel and patents, these indicators had value. But when the indicators became the goal, people worked the system and the indicator no longer represented what was happening in the economy.
Dr. Zhao proceeds to address the paradox of high test achievement, which we admire, and the small knowledge-work sector of the Chinese economy. He contrasts our own dichotomy of lagging test scores and yet continuing to lead the world in science, technology and engineering. He goes on to suggest that a test is just one of a number of considerations we should make in evaluating the quality of our schools… in China and in the US.
After reading this section of the book, I received an email with a link to this article from Business Week. Researchers from Rutgers and Georgetown have been studying the trends of engineering graduates for over ten years and they have discovered that a) there is not a shortage, but a GLUT of American engineers and that b) the highest performing graduates from engineering programs LEAVE THE FIELD of engineering. This research is precisely counter to the incessant cry that our education system is not producing enough quality STEM graduates. The article goes on to counter the research with heresay from Bill Gates, which I find amazing. Over a decade of scientific study was easily countered by the opinion of one corporate executive.
The chapter goes on to chronicle the high scores but low ability phenomenon, teen suicides and how the author would not have made it to the University if he had born one year later and had to face a math test. Lucky for us, he didn’t have to take that test…
This is strikingly similar to something I read in the book “Wild Swans.” Banned in China to this day, author Jung Chang chronicles her family through the Cultural Revolution in the 20th Century. What connected for me was a description about how Mao discovered that western nations, like the United States, produced more steel than did China. Mao ordered the whole country to produce more steel which led to the people in the country-side setting up smelting fires and tending them rather than their crops. They deforested the land, neglected their crops and then suffered famine… all in the effort to produce the added steel Mao felt was important.
It seemed to me that the description of the sudden interest and subsequent rush for patents showed eerie similarity to the push for more steel production. By becoming sold on an indicator, the Chinese government caused the value of that indicator to decrease. Whereas before the rush for steel and patents, these indicators had value. But when the indicators became the goal, people worked the system and the indicator no longer represented what was happening in the economy.
Dr. Zhao proceeds to address the paradox of high test achievement, which we admire, and the small knowledge-work sector of the Chinese economy. He contrasts our own dichotomy of lagging test scores and yet continuing to lead the world in science, technology and engineering. He goes on to suggest that a test is just one of a number of considerations we should make in evaluating the quality of our schools… in China and in the US.
After reading this section of the book, I received an email with a link to this article from Business Week. Researchers from Rutgers and Georgetown have been studying the trends of engineering graduates for over ten years and they have discovered that a) there is not a shortage, but a GLUT of American engineers and that b) the highest performing graduates from engineering programs LEAVE THE FIELD of engineering. This research is precisely counter to the incessant cry that our education system is not producing enough quality STEM graduates. The article goes on to counter the research with heresay from Bill Gates, which I find amazing. Over a decade of scientific study was easily countered by the opinion of one corporate executive.
The chapter goes on to chronicle the high scores but low ability phenomenon, teen suicides and how the author would not have made it to the University if he had born one year later and had to face a math test. Lucky for us, he didn’t have to take that test…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
