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…