Yat-chiu Yeung Civic Exchange Research Paper 6/24/2002
Educational Systems of China and the United States By: Yeung Yat-chiu Northfield Mount Hermon School, Grade 11
Introduction Education is a perpetual work- in-progress throughout the world. While Asia maintains a consistency of local school quality when compared with its United States counterparts, American boarding schools provide a more finely tuned education. Indeed, both systems produce well-educated students. However, there are failings to seemingly perfect situations. Increasing international trade and the emerging prominence of China as one of the primary trade partnerships with the United States has led to comparisons regarding the internal structures and national politics of each of these two countries. Because of the call for school reform in the United States and the introduction of new types of schools into the educational arena, a comparison between the educational systems of these two countries underscores the influence that Western ideals have had on education in China. Comparing China and US The development of viable educational systems in the United States and China has been the result of a history of focus on the importance of public education and the belief that public education not only serves to improve the conditions for individ ual families and create a better workforce but also to address some of the substantive social issues common in industrialized nations. It is interesting to note that even in the midst of substantial economic and political change over the course of the last two decades; the educational system in China has changed very little. Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist Party was considered by many to be central in defining the structure of Chinese culture in the 1920s and 1930s. Essentially, theorists have recognized that Shanghai and other examples of central Chinese cultures had been initially influenced by Japanese imperialism, and that the Communist Party was able to secure a foothold in the first half of the 20th century that resulted in the decision for actions by the Nationalist Party. Shanghai was represented as one of the central identifying cultural elements influencing the spread of Communism throughout China as Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist Party control in the late 1920s had definable impacts, including improvements to the system of public education through the development and spread of Communism. 1 The progression of the Communist ideals and the importance of the Nationalist movement played their roles in the early progression of social models in China, and led to the development of public education over many decades. It is not surprising, then, that this process of change has been compared to the initiation of public education systems and the spread of public schools in the United States during the 19th century. Nationalism, it has been argued, became the means of implementing and maintaining support for 1
Wakeman, Frederick, Jr. Policing Shanghai 1927-1937. (University of California Press, 1996), p. 260.
Yat-chiu Yeung Civic Exchange Research Paper 6/24/2002 public education. Case of Hong Kong Hong Kong has experienced a rather different approach to education because of its British colonial past. Lik e Britain, Hong Kong’s education system still performs relatively poorly by most international comparisons. Kai-Ming Cheng, professor of education at the University of Hong Kong, has shown that in 1999, 23,000 candidates (18% of the total) sitting the majo r public examination at the end of secondary education in the former colony obtained no pass grades. They were “not fit for further studies and they are not employable.”2 From the very first day of school, children who attend local schools in Hong Kong are “groomed for their ultimate vocational aspirations,” which is at the forefront of the learning curricula even at the preschool and elementary levels. Because household children often subsidize the family income, they must learn a tangible trade at an early age. Indeed, the very backbone of this society is its economic development, which starts with the children. Local schools are literally training grounds for future business opportunities, in that they give children the chance to make a better go of it than their parents before them. Modern Hong Kong students supposedly represent the key to prosperity for both themselves and their families, yet that achievement does not always come without a price. In order to make the grade and supply their parents with the fruits of their educational labor, students have to focus one hundred percent of their attention upon their studies to the preclusion of everything else in their lives. This often results to a decline of mental health for many students (high-school students especially) due to such an enormous amount of pressure they hold. (SCMP) Such deficiency in both Britain’s and Hong Kong’s education system were disguised by the fact that most of the people were employed in the low-skill, mass manufacturing sector that predominated in both countries. People just didn’t seem to need much education. However, in actuality, Hong Kong and Britain have lost more jobs in manufacturing than anywhere else (apart from South Africa) for the past 20 years. “Not only is Ho ng Kong way behind most of its direct competitors in Asia, such as Singapore, but, more significantly, three decades after the Cultural Revolution smashed China's education system, the Chinese are catching up. In Beijing and Shanghai, more than 50% of those aged 18 to 30 enroll in higher education. In Hong Kong the figure is only about 30%.”3 Education reform In September 2000, the Hong Kong Government published its reform proposals for the education system. The emphasis is placed very much on a “lifelo ng learning society”, in order to enable everyone to acquire new skills even after leaving school. Hong Kong is aiming to get away from its old system of learning by routine, in which pupils were endlessly drilled for a few very academic exams. The emphasis now is on encouraging pupils to think for themselves, and to develop flexible learning skills that will enable 60% of 18-30 year olds to be in tertiary education by 2010.
2 3
The Economist. Try Spelling Imperial Legacy. (February 7, 2002). The Economist. Try Spelling Imperial Legacy. (February 7, 2002).
Yat-chiu Yeung Civic Exchange Research Paper 6/24/2002 Hong Kong is in transition between trying to reform the archaic educational system and actually reforming it. Its survival is at stake. If Hong Kong wants to maintain its status as a major economic powerhouse in Asia, it must first fix its educational defects. Contrasting China and the US Systems In the modern era, both China and the United States embrace the notion that early education is important, and provide systems of compulsory participation in free public education. While the United States educational system is based on a mandate for school participation until through grade 12, China only requires participation in the educational system until grade 9, at which point children can enter the workforce or vocational training centers, or can choose to take an entrance examination for the popular regional high schools in preparation for college. At the same time, both China and the United States have recognized the importance of high school as a means of preparing students for college. In some respects, the transition in the selection process in China and the need to make decisio ns regarding future career paths by 9th grade is not contradictory to the conflicts that have arisen in the United States over divisions in the educational setting based on ability and career focus. In both cases, the public school system has been based on a society-centered curriculum design revolving around existing societal expectations and the call for meeting the needs of the society in terms of the educational experience, learning and educational guidance provided for the body of learners. The United States has pulled away from a purely society-centered curriculum towards a child-centered approach to curriculum design, created in response to a sense that the society-centered curriculum provides little benefit for the individual learner. The underpinnings of a child-centered curriculum were created in response to the more standard view of a society-centered curriculum, which mandates certain content and skill development for all citizens, regardless of any proclivities they may have towards a particular talent. 4 “A child-centered curriculum, in contrast, attempts to identify specific strengths, talents, and gifts of students; it then individualizes instruction to maximize the development of these attributes. Such a curriculum is rooted in two beliefs: (1)
Individuals will eventually gravitate toward self- fulfillment, and so will focus on aspects of the curriculum they value, and forget things they don't, and
(2)
Society is strengthened most by the diverse contributions of people whose gifts are most fully defined.�5
Some say this approach to improving school curriculum design is the best option, while others contend that it cannot have viable outcomes in standard public education forums, and similar arguments have maintained the society- focused curric ulum in countries like China. 4 5
Burron, Arnold. "Heed community values if you value reform." Educational Leadership, (1995): October, p. 93. Smith, Peter. "Privatization of schools in Ch ina." Independent School, (2000).
Yat-chiu Yeung Civic Exchange Research Paper 6/24/2002 Private education East Coast boarding schools, for instance, are established in such a way to wholly separate them from the public system. Ask just about any parent that provides a better education for their children, and the majority of them will say the public school system does not have anything over the academically superior grooming factors of East Coast boarding schools. There are a number of reasons both parents and educators believe that these schools offer a significantly more credible academic opportunity, not the least of which is the fact that there is a decidedly more stringent dedication to teaching. There is a noticeable difference between educators when comparing between public and private schools, with one of the most notable being the level of burnout. Private schools put a lid on the number of students they will accept, creating an environment much more conducive for effective learning. "Almost anywhere your child enrolls, he or she can expect to find fewer teachers". Additionally, private boarding schools have demonstrated a much higher ratio of parent involvement, which is one of paramount reasons students are encouraged to succeed scholastically. Part of the reason this exists more readily in private schools is because of the smaller class load, but also because of the fact that the parents took the initiative to place their children there in the first place. The additional financial obligation of private schooling is a most reinforcing incentive that connects parents to their children's academic performance. Typically, there exists a significant lack of time, interest and/or ability among a large percentage of parents whose children attend public schools. Everybody needs to buy into that component. It becomes more of an expectation that everyone is working together. Another element of comparison that is sorely lacking within the public school system is the issue of homogeneity. Indeed, racial prejudice is not an issue one likes to see as a reason why public schools are inferior to private boarding schools, but the fact of the matter is that those schools where the student body is racially and culturally homogenous have a much more closer-knit relationship with each other and their instructors. The role of schools in the socialization of students cannot be overlooked or considered insignificant when evaluating the benefits and failures of East Coast boarding schools. While it can be argued that homogeneity is not necessarily part of the formula fo r closer-knit schools, it has proven to be a substantially fundamental component in the equation. Gender division is also another consideration between private and public schools, with some parents believing that the removal of opposite sex distractions actually help to improve their children's scholastic achievements. One of the biggest failures of this type of educational system is that many claim stunts the student's psychosocial development by ignoring the all- important need for gender interaction. Public education In recent years, significant changes have been the focus on public education in post-Communist countries such as China raising questions regarding the process of education design and the need to shape a better ideology in support of continued educational effectiveness. Similarly, in the United States, the proposal for charter schools and differentiated educational
Yat-chiu Yeung Civic Exchange Research Paper 6/24/2002 options has also been at the heart of school reform efforts. The cynical view of public education has been central to the call for restructuring and educational improvements in both countries. Though charter schools were not initially developed to attend to the needs of at-risk populations, the perception of the need for significant changes in the way in which at-risk learners are addressed in the public system has come into view as a component of charter school directives in the United States. In 1998, estimates suggested that over 250,000 students would attend more than 800 charter schools in some 31 states. The sudden transformation of the business of public education has occurred as a result of parental and societal dissatisfaction with the general performance of public education and the call for widespread improvements and alternatives to standard formats. Many of these programs focus on discipline-based curriculum because of the necessity for greater applicability and accountability in the educational setting, though it can also be argued that the improvements in general education settings, including standard educational environments, have tended to focus more particularly on the creation of child-centered protocols, especially in light of the greater level of individuality in the educational process. China’s one-child policy and its impact on education In China, where the "one family, one child" law has reshaped the view of the child and their importance in the family structure, the focus on the privatization of the educational system has been a direct response to the call for better outcomes and a cost-effective response to the process of public education. The call for privatization in the public schools in both China and the United States has resulted from the decline in the centralization of government (centralization that essentially created the educational systems) and the need for better funding options to maintain the quality of education. In both the United States and China, the development of privatization plans has occurred as a part of the economic and social change and the apparent attractiveness of economic responsibility in the public area. In both countries, the value of public education have not changed, but the view of funding and greater responsibility in educational design has become an inherent part of the modern era.
Yat-chiu Yeung Civic Exchange Research Paper 6/24/2002 Works Cited Burron, Arnold. "Heed community values if you value reform." Educational Leadership , (1995). Smith, Peter. "Privatization of schools in China." Independent School, (2000). Goodman & Segal. “China without Deng.” Editions Tom Thompson, (1995). Moise, Edwin E. “Modern C hina (A history).” Longman Group UK (1994). Whitehead, Kate. “Mental health on decline in HK schools.” Education, South China Morning Post, (Saturday, June 4, 2002). P.1 The Economist. Try Spelling Imperial Legacy. (February 7, 2002). Fairbanks, John K ing & Goldman, Merle. “China, A New History.” The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, USA. (1999).