Welcome new readers! I’ve been told that the link to my previous blog about the recent Race to Nowhere screening was shared on a local high school listserv….
Yesterday morning’s New York Times greeted the nation with a stark rebuke to the message of Race to Nowhere. The headline reads, “In PISA Test, Top Test Shanghai Scores Stun Educators.”
With China’s debut in international standardized testing, students in Shanghai have surprised experts by outscoring their counterparts in dozens of other countries, in reading as well as in math and science, according to the results of a respected exam…..
…“Wow, I’m kind of stunned, I’m thinking Sputnik,” said Chester E. Finn Jr., who served in President Ronald Reagan’s Department of Education, referring to the groundbreaking Soviet satellite launching. Mr. Finn, who has visited schools all across China, said, “I’ve seen how relentless the Chinese are at accomplishing goals, and if they can do this in Shanghai in 2009, they can do it in 10 cities in 2019, and in 50 cities by 2029.”
This isn’t really news. Back in 2007, the film 2 Million Minutes hit the screen. (I checked my archives, and sure enough I had blogged about it. Seems like an eternity ago.) Here’s the trailer:
But should we really be worried? Last week the New York Times’ Room for Debate hosted a discussion on college education in China. The piece, “High Test Scores, Low Ability” argued,
Keju is dead now but its spirit is very alive in China today, in the form of gaokao, or the College Entrance Exam. It’s the only exam that matters since it determines whether students can attend college and what kind of colleges they can attend. Because of its life-determining nature, gaokao has become the “baton” that conducts the whole education orchestra. Students, parents, teachers, school leaders and even local government officials all work together to get good scores. From a very young age, children are relieved of any other burden or deprived of opportunity to do anything else so they can focus on getting good scores.
The result is that Chinese college graduates often have high scores but low ability. Those who are good at taking tests go to college, which also emphasizes book knowledge. But when they graduate, they find out that employers actually want much more than test scores….
Sounds kind of like where we’re headed with AP…
For years, Americans have been able to dismiss Chinese education for the reasons noted above. “They’re machines,” we scoffed. “They lack the creativity of Americans. We care about the ‘whole person’.” But now it seems that the Chinese are harnessing their famously killer work ethic to meaningful educational reforms, such as improving teacher salaries and freedom to experiment in the classroom. Couple that with the fact that “Chinese students spend less time than American students on athletics, music and other activities not geared toward success on exams in core subjects” and one can see that the prognosis for U.S. competitiveness is not looking so good.
So where does this leave us? Throwing every kid into AP classes is not the answer. I say, for starters, let loose our brightest kids. Reward and don’t shy away from excellence. Confront the forces of anti-intellectualism and feel-good self esteem that are often found in the teaching profession itself. And let’s take another look at the role of sports in school. Seriously, the amount of energy and resources and recognition that goes into sports is insane. School should be primarily about… school. Schools should be trying to do fewer things really really well. For example, algebra–and none of this MCPS “everyone take it in middle school but a C demonstrates mastery.” Make sure every kids is rock solid with algebra, whether they take it “early” or “late.” Writing–real, substantive writing. By middle school kids should be writing 5 paragraph essays in their sleep. A semester for health? A full year of some bogus tech class? In my world, they’d be gone.
I like this diagram that I found on blog Headrush:
I have proposed a national public high school for U.S. students who are especially brilliant in mathematics and the physical sciences. I call my proposed school “NASA Academy of the Physical Sciences” (NAPS), and I describe it at: http://nasa-academy-of-the-physical-sciences.blogspot.com/
I have recently posted very long comments about NAPS at:
Article:
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/11/26/reclaiming-choice-federalism-and-results-in-education/
My Comment:
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/11/26/reclaiming-choice-federalism-and-results-in-education/#comment-243427
Article:
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/06/state-education-chiefs-students-should-be-our-focus/
My Comment:
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/12/06/state-education-chiefs-students-should-be-our-focus/#comment-243673
Please read my linked comments. You will find that those comments link to many of my other writings about NAPS, and to an online forum that I participated in regarding NAPS.
My NAPS proposal describes a doable solution that would certainly change things in gifted education in America if it were put into operation. I welcome any and all constructive criticisms, but I raise three cautions.
First, I ask that you read my proposal before questioning it. Too often, people ask questions that are very plainly answered in the proposal. My proposal is very thorough, and I have found that those people who actually read it from start to finish have no questions at all about what I am actually proposing. Generally, the questions from those who have actually read the proposal are philosophical questions. However, I have had careful thorough readers bring things to my attention that I had previously overlooked, so please share your thoughts and ask your questions whatever they might be.
Second, I discovered in my forum participation that there is a certain parent type that I rile terribly by just being alive. I will not apologize for being a man who writes directly and forcefully. My intention is not to intimidate or to in any way glory in myself, it is only to state my proposal and my arguments in a serious straightforward manner. If you knew my background, this manner of mine would not surprise you in the least. Just consider it enthusiasm on my part, and smile about it if you can. I do not bite.
Third, I also discovered in my forum participation that some parents who are homeschooling their own gifted children are very protective of their notion that homeschooling is the best and only solution for educating all gifted children, and that any attempts to rival what is possible in homeschooling through something that might be possible in public education should be discouraged. My comment to that is simply this: Do the best that you can for your children, and let other parents do the best that they can for their children, and God be praised if you and others can share in those best efforts in any way.
My NAPS proposal is a shared effort on a scale that has never been tried before. My hope is that God will smile on it, and that NAPS will happen in my lifetime.
Steven A. Sylwester
This posting is not on-topic. It is a general email to the author of the blog. Apologies.
Hello again,
We corresponded early in the fall. I am writing to ask- nay beg- you to go back to posting more often. I have a highly verbally gifted son who is being homeschooled this year (6th. grade.) Your experiences resonate deeply with me and I am in need of some motherly camaraderie. You know what it’s like, I cannot discuss my real hopes and fears with my dearest friends. Mind you my dearest friends have very bright- possibly gifted children- but their children do not buck against the system like mine do.
Please continue to share on this blog. Parents of children with special needs can openly and freely talk about the ways their children are being helped to achieve their potential- we need more voices for the sake of our children.
And if you think you would rather not post because people will criticize your parenting style- think of Amy Chua and all she is enduring for having told the honest truth about her life as a mother (alright, so she is getting paid hansomely for the trouble- but people are accusing her of actual child abuse- and though I do not subscribe to making my children excel in a discipline the way she did- abuse is a strong word.)
Warm regards,
Natasha Evans-Beauchamp
Tasha, interesting comment. I agree that SwitchedOn should post more. SOM, waiting to hear your take on The Tiger Mom.
Speaking of which, and not to get off topic too, but that book’s been on my mind a lot. While aspects of Amy Chua’s parenting might be called compelling (we don’t have a tv and didn’t buy video games for our daughter either, but Amy and I part company in many of the other ways), I’m willing to call much of her parenting, well yes, abusive. Just because it’s dressed up as “high achieving” and “superior” and “excellence” driven and highly educated, doesn’t make it less so.
But glad you wrote. I have a PG kid too
.