Top Chinese diplomat tells US to 'shut up' on arms spending

It's also in every other newspaper on the planet as well. That was just the first one that came up.

 

I don't read People's Daily. There was a wave of criticism of the plan and they are still going for it? What a stupid thing to do. The government has record deficit and they still want to waste taxpayers money on things like this.

Aren't you my fact checker and I yours? That's been the case for a while now.

 

As geeimsobored (gee, that's a hard moniker for me to type!) said, there's no standardized national curriculum in America. Each state sets their own guidelines for textbooks, and the latitude of local school districts varies from state to state. In Texas, there is a textbook committee that give the textbook publishers guidelines as to what they want covered in the different subjects and grade levels. How the different publishers present that material, and how much they present, and if they even present it is up to them, if they want the business. A local district might have as many as 8 different books to chose from to use for one subject in one grade level.

wnes, private schools decide which textbooks are used. The state has no control over that at all, to my knowledge. That is one of the reasons they exist... to give parents an alternative to what is taught in the public school system.

The federal government has no role in public schools in the United States. They certainly have federal programs to help education, and may have some minimum requirements if a district wants to get that extra money, but there is a clear line that keeps the federal government out of the public school systems of this country. Local control is the mantra. Local control of public schools. That is one reason their quality varies so much.

wnes, parents send their kids to private schools in this country to give their kids a better education than in a public school. Now, some parents might want a religious component taught that is not in public school, and that affects their choice, but the bottom line is that if that school doesn't prepare their kids for college, they won't get their business. And finding out if they do their job is not difficult. One merely has to look at how their kids (the kids from those schools) do on those standardized tests. If they don't do a good job preparing them for those tests, they won't get the business they need to... stay in business.


Also, I would take issue with this statement:

This simply isn't true. There are poor high schools, and poor districts... some are literally poor, in the sense that they don't have the money to give to their schools that a wealthier school district does, and there is a great deal of disparity, but overall, the majority of American high schools are good ones, with some being outstanding, and the really bad ones are the exception, not the rule. The funding disparity is being addressed in the courts here in Texas. As in other states, they are trying to give poorer schools funding equal to the wealthier districts. Needless to say, they have a ways to go, but your statement doesn't hold water. In my opinion.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

That's not necessary true. Chinese students do learn a lot in HS, but few prepare themm well for the real world, or encourage creative thinking. Chinese students learn(memorize) too much as far as I am concerned.

A much more accurate statement is that American high school kids don't learn much math in HS, except those in the honor programs. I have had a business school (most ironically finance) student ask me what does Square-root mean, nor did he saw that math expression before. True story.

 

I was speaking from my own experience. I could tell how poorly prepared my students were coming into college and even MBA programs, and I am talking about one ivy league university and one top 3 business school in the country. I can also tell it from how little my nephews studied in high schools, especially how little quantitative skills they accumlated through high school eduction. Oh no, they didn't go to some poorer schools if that is what you are thinking.

 

One system teachs too much and one teachs too little. Somewhere in the middle would be ideal.

A lot of finance students in college cannot do 50%*5% without using calculators and it'd take them forever to form a portfolio with a desired expected return or volatility. I am not surprised with your story above at all.

To me, not learning much math means not being prepared to study in science fields, such as math, physics, chemistry, economics, statistics, etc. That is a BIG problem of the education system here.

 

Sorry for the late response. Just got back from a weekend vacation.

The problem is that monopolization of education doesn't give any leeway on what to teach and how to teach. I'm fine with a national standardized test on various fields of knowledge, however, standardized test doesn't mean standardized textbooks shouldn't be forceful and mandatory for the establishment(like in getting a school license) of a private school. If language skills must be tested, do you think only the standardized textbooks can teach Chinese or English?

I think as long as the parents are fine with what is taught in a private school, a license can be grant. Participation in the standardized test should be optional to a school.

The problems in China's education system is that they dictate how a person should think. Memorization is not a problem IMO. The problem is the students are memorizing bullcrap. Aside from objective knowledge such as science, bullcrap are abundant. When the Chinese teacher teach an article in a textbook, he/she first tell the students the standard version of each paragraph's meaning, then the standard summary of the theme on the whole article. Students are expected to memorize these things. Different interpretation or critical thinking is not encouraged, which spells lack of critical and creative thinking. Such useless memorization is seen in other subjects like History, which is filled with communistic propaganda, ideological interpretation and bias. Subjects like the Chinese Language and History in China's education is never objective, one read and memorize the communist "heros" stories in the Chinese Language textbook while they can use that time to memorize the real classics, which are neglected.

Pressure on kids are great and many hates study and are depressed by it. Grades are everything and teachers neglect or even disrespect those who of poor grades, since how well they teach are decided by grades, and how much they make and how high they are evaluated are decided by grades.The private school that was shut down by the Shanghai education bureau is a school that tries to provide an alternative to the kids who are depressed by the public education. No standadized textbooks, no exams, they spent time to study the real classics from Shakespear to the Analects. They try to teach courtesy, integrity and character to the students which are neglected by the education machines that's designed to mass produce test machines.

 

I agree with you to some extend, but I still think you are being a bit too harsh, for the following reasons:

1) Math (including Algebra and Geometry), physics, chemistry, biology, science, and maybe another couple of subjects, are no bullcrap, and they represent a HUGE portion of the high school education in China.

2) You may say history class in China is propaganda, while that critics apply to history class in US as well. The difference is american kids are allowed to intepret the material more freely but the material dictate how free you can be. You may say Chinese class in China is bullcrap, well plenty of kids in US cannot read nor write that well. I've seen too many college kids who cannot write complete sentences. I don't know who is doing a better job on the bullcrap. But in any case, such "bullcrap" subjects are not as many as hard cold science subjects, in China.

3) Things are changing. I don't know about you, but I got to know some Chinese kids who came to US in recent years. The trend I see is that there are more personalities in these kids than in chinese students who came 10 years ago. A lot of these young kids are not like bookworms you have in mind. Some of them are still like that, but overall the trend is encouraging.

We are all going off topic at this point in the thread.

 

I said specifically that science classes were not bullcrap, so we have no disagreement on that. The problem of the science classes in China is they teach too much, which is a waste of time, because graduates will forget most of what they learned in a few years. And the teaching is dull and boring, submerging students in a world of problems doesn't encourage interests in science, but rather stifle it. What science classes should teach is not knowledge that's not useful in daily life, but the spirit of objective observation and thinking. I find it rather lacking as they are used to make conclusions upon their assumptions.

I know many students have depression or anxiety disorder, some of them can't take the pressure anymore and jump off buildings. I'd rather my children not be able to write complete sentences in exchange for their mental health.

Don't underestimate what they teach you in the Chinese Language, History, Politics, English etc... those things shape one's way of thinking and belief, once those are establish, learning science does little to change it. If learning science teaches independant thinking, the Chinese government would've water it down.

On propaganda, it's like the media between China and America, propaganda exist but on different levels. In China it's one version, one interpretation and different voices are often self censored, in the USA one's opinion is subject to the media coverage, but there's room for critical thinking and voices.

I agree with you on that. They have more personality but less sense of responsiblity imo - lots of high schoolers from rich families wasted money in the USA's college. They can be fun to hang out with, but when it comes down to business like hardcore debate, world views, political views etc... they are nerdy in a way in that they can only copy and repeat views set in stone in their textbooks.

Yeah it's going off topic right now. I have no problem to take a rest after this reply.

 

Panda, I have to agree with most of your points. The education system in China is deeply flawed. On the one hand, from pure politial crap in CR, to only focusing on grades, the traditional "teaching knowledge and educating people" motor, has yielded to the whole key school systems. On the other hand, the new motor "money talks" is presented everywhere, if not more so in the already flawed education system.

20 years ago, you had to have great grades to beat all your competitions to get into those key junior highs, and key high schools, in order to get into those top universities later on. But now, students are still focusing on grades; however, if you are a rich kid, you can still get in by "donating". Poor students with great grades, can't afford the high fee. Teachers are no better. Professors, especially those "famous" ones led 20 Ph.D. students and another 30 graduate students. Professors use that to apply for grants, but there is no away they can give any student any advice. They don't even know them. Students in China were great at details, but lack of big picture of the things they learned. When you were taught and even rewarded to pay attention to fine details instead of principles, you will ask why less and less; therefore, you ability for critical thinking will gradually decrease.

The current spoiled generation do have a lot more individulism comparing to previous generations, but they certainly lack of any responsibility, for family, people around them, not to mention the whole society. They are just not used to. Everything has been taken care of for them, by 2 parents and 4 grandparents, whose only focus is him/her. Ironically, with much more information available, some of them seem to be more narrow-minded and irrational. 20 years ago, students were hungry for information, alternative views and opinions, they secretly listen to "Voice of America", and they tried so hard to read between the lines about everything. Therefore, those students, once they went abroad in 80's and early 90's, they were absorbing all kinds of information like crazy, from Hong Kong, Taiwan, US, Europe, and any other sources. I think they were also rewarded for being informed by all kinds of propaganda, because once you put everything together, you are very close to the real picture.

 

Panda, canoner, real_egal, y'all made good points. There are a few of things I want to add.

The problem with China's current education system shall not be viewed in isolation. It's a product of PRC's hybrid political and economic systems. Since its inception, PRC has undertaken many drastic make overs, often resulting in heavy casualties, humanly or otherwise. Given the size of PRC and the scale of its youth population, I am in favor of gradual and subtle transitions over radical changes. I think you would all agree the widely complained (short of disasterous) health care reform in recent years is a painful example of things go awry in China at a grand scale.

It's a good thing the experimental school in Shanghai teaches Shakespeare and Analects. We the previous generations certainly missed the opportunities to be exposed to these goodies. But let's not overdo it. Studying classic foreign literature and philosophy by itself won't solve China's vast problems. Moreover, I'd even raise a few eyebrows if these studies were only meant to deliberately counter the influences of the China's own rich heritage of literature and philosophy. Teaching critical thinking is essential. But does it really need to have a strike-out experimental school to do that? Why can't such teaching principles be introduced in "regular" school?

CCP was founded to model after the communist parties in the west, especially that in the Soviet Union. Now that PRC has nobody to look for and is the last standing communist regime that's capable of shaping the world, many of its current and/or future undertakings are going to be unprecedented. One of the most pressing problems PRC government has to deal with is how to ease up the massive unemployment threat faced by millions of Chinese college graduates in the coming years. Shakespeare is cool and all that, but Chinese kids foremost need to survive in their society.

 

Maybe they should try and meditate on why that is, hmm?

 

It's pretty funny actually. I've been wondering for some years how in the world PRC is still able to teach Chinese students with the same kind materials we used decades ago in our morality, politics, and economics classes. Unbeknownst to me apparently, their textbooks have undergone quite significant changes, more or less reflecting the rapid transitions of PRC's economy and society as a whole, and to lesser degree, their political environment. But heck, it doesn't matter how much PRC has changed, we in the West still call them commie because the name in CCP. So it's really interesting to me how the West is going to "figure out" PRC if it keeps making progresses and the country sticks with CCP. Already I've seen many observers in the West are becoming increasingly perplexed and frustrated by the seemingly paradoxical phenomenon, that a commie/authoritarian regime the size of PRC can do well economically despite of the fact that its political system and ideology are at odds with the West. Well, nobody can say for sure who will have the last laugh. But it is definitely interesting and fascinating to witness the struggles on both sides.

 

IMO, westeners call chinese commie because in their mind they need an opponent, someone evil and fearful. There is really not much commie left with china. One of the trademark of communism, planned economy, has been replaced by market economy of capitalism. Another trademark, state ownership of everything, has been largely replaced by privated ownership. One may point to the fact that there is only one major party in China, although it is not a must for communism. I would like to point out that countries like Saudi don't have two competing parties either but we don't call them commie. And countries like Japan and UK have got to a point that the major party in either country seems to be beyond challenge. Finally, the lack of civil rights, you may say. Again, it is not unique for communism. Are there more civil rights in those arabian nations, or under feudalism system in the past?

Bottomline is, China is no longer a communism country but people don't want to or simply don't know how to change their opinon.

 

Panda and Real-egal, I'd like to know what you think China can do to make schools and kids pay less attention to scores, when maybe only 10% of around 20 million high school graduates every year can go on the receive college education, when exam is the only practical way of admitting students since interviewing 20 million students is not an option, when for many many kids not being able to go to colleges mean low-income work for whole life.

 

Hmm...

35 billion x 3 = 105 billion.

419 billion is STILL 4 times bigger than 105 billion.

Besides, who's to say that the US Defense spending ISN'T two to thee times the publicly announced figure?

 

China's education has flaws more than over emphasizing grades. Grades should exist and are important, but it shouldn't become the be-all end-all criteria on judging the worth of a student. Inner qualities like being courteous, reasonable, responsible, articulate and objective are more important IMO.

To encourage less emphasis on grades there's some ways to go about it. Students can be interviewed by a group of entrepreneurs, and the scores are a part of their final grades for college entrance. Sort of like the Apprentice. Being an entrepreneur in China require them to be good talent finders, which I think is the same everywhere. This approach forces education to invest more on improving the inner qualities I mentioned above.

It's also apparent establishing more colleges, and encourage long distance learning will alleviate the level of academic competition. The central government needs to grant licenses to more private colleges and universities, and has favorable policies to encourage corporations or investors to found them, such as tax deductions. However, the education bureau isn't gonna be happy about facing the challenge private education. State monopolized industries, once deregulated, odten get beaten by privately owned competitors, with a few exceptions.

 

Canoner, one thing I like about Western education is, it encourages you to do your own research and planning. Even for little kids, they get assignments to research on some topic, prepare materials, and present in front of group of other kids. Research, organizing, communication, and presentation, those are some of the skills lots of Chinese students lacking throughout the whole school period. It would be much better if the school system can evaluate and appreciate those "soft skills" of students, it can prepare those students better for the society.

I agree with Panda that grades are important, but there needs to be a balance. I was surprised to see kids of my cousins finish multiplying learning in grade one at home. Every kid in the class does that. I am wondering what are they going to do at school? Repeating everything agian? Kids need to play more and socialize more. They need to be encouraged to have some hobbies.

Meanwhile, I think the government should support more secondary education, things like night school, part time college, and online courses. They should definitely encourage more professional trainings. Youth has to have the choice to go to work first and get higher education later. Professionalism, working related knowledge and skills need to be emphasized more.

One more thing, what I like about the German education system is, that it's very easy to get into the university, but very difficult to get out. Fail rate of some of the key subjects like "theroy of electronic-magnetic field" is as high as 70-80%. Once you fail, you have to take the exam with students in next semester. But if you fail twice and the oral exam, you will have to quit or change major. There is no limitation in the whole term, you can stay at school for 10 years without graduation. But you only graduate, when you show enough quality. So, students are given more than enough opportunities to figure themselves out, and make decisions based on the whole situation.

In conclusion, I think if the emphasis switches from grades of standard material only to overall learning/thinking ability, students will be better prepared in career and life. Those repetitive knowledge is not important, because you will forget them once you don't repeat, but the capability to learn on your own, and to think on your own, will benefit you forever.

 

Good points, real_egal, I've learnt one or two things from your post.

 

Interviewing 20 million high school graduates is simply not an option any time soon. It won't be an option until you raise the admission rate to 50% or even higher, not until you have an army of trustworthy interviewers. Until then, such attempt will only result in massive bribery because eager parents will do anything to send their kids to college.

Establishing more colleges is must in the long run. But given most chinese cannot afford private college education yet, you have to count on more public schools. And since there is not a decent credit system yet, it means the government has to subsdize heavily to help poor kids to get in colleges. Government subsidy is something chinese government needs to reduce, not increase, gradually.

At the end of the day, money talks. Without money, you cannot get it done. Indians have the same problems. It is mostly about $.