Fooling the Emperor: how is creativity misapplied in China?

This was written by Yong Zhao who is the author writes and speaks about education reform. He blogs here and tweets here. This post was found here.

This was originally published in China-US Focus on October 23, 2014. Adapted from my book Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Dragon: Why China has the Best (and Worst) Education System in the World.

by Yong Zhao

China’s capacity for innovation has become a hot topic for China, the U.S., and the rest of the world today. There is no question that China must innovate its way out of the “middle income trap.” But whether the country – which over the last thirty years has proven to be able to make everything – can create anything new remains questionable.

The question is not about whether the Chinese people are creative. Creativity is human nature. Genetically speaking, creativity should not have any ethnic bias or favor any one nation. If creativity is evenly distributed, China should have its equal share of the same genetic stock of creativity as any other nation. Given that its population size is more than three times of that in the United States, China should possess three times the number of great creative geniuses such as Steve Jobs. It also claims to be the only ancient civilization that has a non-stop history of over five thousand years and the most powerful empire in the world, which should have given it more time to accumulate creativity and innovation.

But China has produced very few inventions in science and technology that matter much in the modern world, at least not enough protect the nation from Western aggressions backed by scientific and technological innovations. Even today, despite its stunning growth in patent applications and scientific publications, the country has yet convinced many of its ability to innovate and invent.

China apparently has failed to turn its creative potential into significant innovations and inventions. What happened to all the creativity China had? How does creativity get lost in China?

Speculations abound. No single reason can be used to answer such complex questions. But a major culprit is the authoritarian spirit that advocates complete obedience to authority and results in policies that rewards compliance and punishes defiance. While many people believe obedience results in less creativity, it actually can boost creativity, making people more creative. But the creativity is not productive, in fact counterproductive because it is applied to simply demonstrate obedience, without actual compliance, resulting in token compliance – a form of cheating.

For example, to show compliance to the government’s anti-corruption wishes, which include measures such as prohibiting government officials to enjoy expensive alcohol and elaborate banquets in luxurious restaurants, Chinese government officials have been found to be extremely creative: they put ultra-expensive alcohol such as Moutai in Coke bottles or ordinary drinking bottles; they move elaborate banquets to farm houses; they bring chefs from five-star hotels to cook their “working meals” in their local cafeterias. To comply with environmental regulations, local officials in more than one place creatively ordered mountainsides painted in green. In more than one provinces, local officials rushed to cover paved roads with soil and plant vegetables and soybeans to show the inspectors their compliance with government regulations about conserving farmland.

Shangyou Zhengce, Xiaoyou Duice, literally “the higher authorities have policies, the lower have countermeasures,” has become a common phrase to describe the phenomenon of “emperor-fooling.” This is why in China, the authority seems to always have their demands met and wishes granted by its people, albeit at great cost with wasted resources and creativity.

China’s recent campaign for innovation has met the same fate. To stimulate innovation, the government has employed all sorts of carrots and sticks. The Chinese people have again applied their creativity to realize the government’s wish.

Last month, a number of convicts received a reduction of prison term as a reward for their patented inventions. Former police chief of Chongqing Wang Lijun, now serving a prison term of 15 years for abuse of power was granted 254 patents, 211 of which were filed in one year. His counterpart Wu Changshun in Tianjin has 35 patents granted. Most of their patents were related to police equipment and accessories. They were commercialized but mostly purchased by their own departments, and earned them both royalties and fame.

About 10 years ago, Chinese governments showered money and glory upon Chen Jin, who claimed to have invented a sophisticated computer chip Hanxin #1 (or China Heart/Chip #1), which turned out to be a chip he bought from Motorola. However, he creatively hired some migrant workers to remove the Motorola label and managed to pass the inspection of Chinese officials and experts. A professor at Jinggangshan University found a creative way to have over 40 papers published in international journals, which earned him hundreds of thousands of RMB. But these papers were later retracted, together with about 30 from the same university, for fabricated and falsified data.

There are many more forms of creative and entrepreneurial token compliance. Fabricating research papers and faking journal publications for sale have become a multimillion-dollar enterprise in China, so has the creation and sailing of junk patents. Less courageous professors, medical doctors, nurses, engineers, and professional researchers resort to other forms of creative compliance: publishing the same paper in multiple places, splitting a paper into multiple publications, creatively modifying existing publications, or plagiarizing. As a result, China now receives more patent applications than the U.S. and publishes millions of scientific papers. But the majority of them are of low quality.

By nature, Chinese are no less creative than other people; nor are they less inclined to take risks, or more predisposed to cheating. The authoritarian spirit of absolute obedience to authority seems to direct creativity to risky cheating in order to realize the wishes of the high authority, which may or may not be shared by the people. In other words, while the emperor’s wishes cannot be denied, but people can creatively fool him.

China’s future rests on its ability to turn creativity into constructive innovations and inventions. But whether it can do so depends on how quickly it can change the authoritarian mindset.

The Pitfall of PISA Envy

Whether it be business, education or life in general, it often makes sense to figure out what you want to do and what you do not want to do. It's also a good idea to figure out how you are going to assess your success.

This is good, but I would like to add one more step.

I think it's also important to decide how you will not assess what you've done. I think Maya Angelou provided us with a wonderful example of this when she said:

Life is not measured by the number of breaths you take but by the moments that take your breath away.

In one sentence, Angelou helps us to see what we should be doing (living), while simultaneously showing us how we should and should not measure the quality of our lives.

For the last decade, Finland has been the model nation for education systems around the world. Finland should be applauded for resisting the urge to invest in the Global Education Reform Movement (GERM) and instead pursuing alternative policies. Perhaps most notably, standardized tests are almost completely absent from Finnish schools.

And yet, world attention has been focused on Finland mostly because of their high scores on PISA's standardized tests. 

See the contradiction?

PISA's 2012 rankings show Finland has been replaced at the top with a handful of Asian countries (and a city). By idolizing the rankings, people might drop Finland like a hot-potato to chase after Asian countries who achieve their high scores with very different priorities and questionable means.

Recognizing people or nations for doing the right thing for the wrong reasons can be misleading and ultimately unsustainable. PISA's rankings on their own are useless. The real lessons from PISA are found from researching how each nation achieved their results and then assessing their methods via ethical criteria that is independent of their results. (Things go very wrong when we allow education policy to be driven by circular logic: define effective nations as those who raise test scores, then use test score gains to determine effective nations.)

We need to recognize Finland for doing the right things with their schools for the right reasons, but that means we need to move beyond reducing learning to standardized test scores and PISA rankings. Until then, we run the risk of chasing high performing nations that score well and rank high with methods that are less than enviable.

Assessing the quality of education by how many questions we answer correctly is kind of like judging a life by the number of breaths we take -- both are clear, simple and wrong.

Reading the PISA Tea Leaves: Who is responsible for Finland's Decline and the Asian Magic

This was written by Yong Zhao who is Presidential Chair, Associate Dean Global and Online Education, College of Education at the University of Oregon. He is the author of Catching Up or Leading the Way and World Class Learners. He blogs here and tweets here. This post first appeared here.

by Yong Zhao

“Finland Fell from the Tip of PISA,” says the headline of a story in the largest subscription newspaperHelsingin Sanomat in Finland, according to Google Translate (I think it should be
Finland Falls from the Top of PISA). I don’t know Finnish but thanks to Google Translate, I was able to understand most of the story. The gist is that Finland has fallen from the top in the current round of PISA.

This is big news, with significant implications not only for the Finns but also for the rest of the world that has been looking at Finland as the model education system since 2001 when Finland was number one in the first round of PISA. Although results of the 2012 PISA won’t be officially unveiled until 10am GMT, December 3rd.the leaked story, published on November 30th, has already sent the Finns and others to speculate the causes of Finland’s decline. “The reasons are seen in the teachers’ continuing education in poor and outdated teaching methods and technology,” writes the Helsingin Sanomat story (courtesy of Google Translate).

While the Finns are right to be concerned about their education, it would be a huge mistake to believe that their education has gotten worse. Finland’s slip in the PISA ranking has little to do with what Finland has or has not done. It has been pushed down by others. In other words, Finland’s education quality as measured by the PISA may have not changed at all and remains strong, but the introduction of other education systems that are even better at taking tests has made Finland appear worse than it really is. In 2000 and 2003 when Finland was number one, only two East Asian education systems were included: Korea and Japan. In 2009, there were seven from Eastern Asia: Shanghai, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, and Macao. Six out of the seven ranked top 10 in math, five in science and five in reading and Shanghai took number away from Finland. I have not seen the 2012 results yet and will miss the big moment on my way back to the U.S. from Hong Kong, but I can guess, as the Helsingin Sanomat already suggested, the East Asian education systems did very well again, squeezing further Finland down the league table.

An even bigger mistake is to assume that the Asian systems have made significant improvement and surpassed Finland. The Asian systems have always done extremely well in international tests, especially in math. The top scoring education systems in another major international assessment, the TIMSS, have always been Eastern Asian since 1995: Singapore, S. Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, and Taiwan. Mainland China has yet to participate in TIMSS.

The 2009 PISA results have already begun to shift the world’s attention away from Finland to Shanghai. I fear that the 2012 PISA will complete that shift and make Shanghai and other East Asian education systems THE model of education because the magic potion that East Asian success in international tests is very poisonous.

The recipe for the East Asian success is actually not that magical. It includes all the elements that have been identified as the symptoms of the GERM (Global Education Reform Movement) by the great Finnish education scholar Pasi Sahlberg: Competition, Standardization, Frequent Testing, and Privatization. In East Asian high PISA performing systems, these ingredients are more effectively combined and carried out to an extreme to result in entire societies devoted to ensure that their youngsters become excellent test takers.

While the East Asian systems may enjoy being at the top of international tests, they are not happy at all with the outcomes of their education. They have recognized the damages of their education for a long time and have taken actions to reform their systems. Recently, the Chinese government again issued orders to lesson student academic burden by reducing standardized tests and written homework in primary schools. The Singaporeans have been working reforming its curriculum and examination systems. The Koreans are working on implementing a “free semester” for the secondary students. Eastern Asian parents are willing and working hard to spend their life’s savings finding spots outside these “best” education systems. Thus international schools, schools that follow the less successful Western education model, have been in high demand and continue to grow in East Asia. Tens of thousands of Chinese and Korean parents send their children to study in Australia, the U.K., Canada, and the U.S. It is no exaggeration to say that that the majority of the parents in China would send their children to an American school instead of keeping them in the “best performing” Chinese system, if they had the choice.

The East Asian education systems may have a lot to offer to those who want a compliant and homogenous test takers. For those who are looking for true high quality education, Finland would still be a better place. But for an education that can truly cultivate creative, entrepreneurial and globally competent citizens needed in the 21st century, you will have to invent it. Global benchmarking can only give you the best of the past. For the best of the future, you will have do the invention yourself.

(May append later. Gotta run to the airport)

China Enters "Testing-free" Zone: The New Ten Commandments of Education Reform

This was written by Yong Zhao who is Presidential Chair, Associate Dean Global and Online Education, College of Education at the University of Oregon. He is the author of Catching Up or Leading the Way and World Class Learners. He blogs here and tweets here. This post first appeared here.

by Yong Zhao

No standardized tests, no written homework, no tracking. These are some of the new actions China is taking to lessen student academic burden. The Chinese Ministry of Education released Ten Regulations to Lessen Academic Burden for Primary School Students this week for public commentary. The Ten Regulations are introduced as one more significant measure to reform China’s education, in addition to further reduction of academic content, lowering the academic rigor of textbooks, expanding criteria for education quality, and improving teacher capacity.

The regulations included in the published draft are:

1. Transparent admissions. Admission to a school cannot take into account any achievement certificates or examination results. Schools must admit all students based on their residency without considering any other factors.
2. Balanced Grouping. Schools must place students into classes and assign teachers randomly. Schools are strictly forbidden to use any excuse to establish “fast-track” and “slow-track” classes.
3. “Zero-starting point” Teaching. All teaching should assume all first graders students begin at zero proficiency. Schools should not artificially impose higher academic expectations and expedite the pace of teaching.
4. No Homework. No written homework is allowed in primary schools. Schools can however assign appropriate experiential homework by working with parents and community resources to arrange field trips, library visits, and craft activities.
5. Reducing Testing. No standardized testing is allowed for grades 1 through 3; For 4th grade and up, standardized testing is only allowed once per semester for Chinese language, math, and foreign language. Other types of tests cannot be given more than twice per semester.
6. Categorical Evaluation. Schools can only assess students using the categories of “Exceptional, Excellent, Adequate, and Inadequate,” replacing the traditional 100-point system.
7. Minimizing Supplemental Materials. Schools can use at most one type of materials to supplement the textbook, with parental consent. Schools and teachers are forbidden to recommend, suggest, or promote any supplemental materials to students.
8. Strictly Forbidding Extra Class. Schools and teachers cannot organize or offer extra instruction after regular schools hours, during winter and summer breaks and other holidays. Public schools and their teachers cannot organize or participate in extra instructional activities.
9. Minimum of One Hour of Physical Exercise. Schools are to guarantee the offering of physical education classes in accordance with the national curriculum, physical activities and eye exercise during recess.
10. Strengthening Enforcement. Education authorities at all levels of government shall conduct regular inspection and monitoring of actions to lessen student academic burden and publish findings. Individuals responsible for academic burden reduction are held accountable by the government.

Green Evaluation: China's latest Reform to Deemphasize Testing

This was written by Yong Zhao who is an internationally known scholar, author, and speaker He is the author of Catching up or Leading the Way and World Class Learners. Zhao blogs here and tweets here. This post was first found here.

by Yong Zhao

Last week the Chinese Ministry of Education launched another major reform effort to reduce the importance of testing in education. In a document sent to all provincial education authorities on June 19th, the Ministry of Education unveiled guidelines and a new framework for evaluating schools.

China has engaged in numerous systemic reforms over the last few decades, with the goal to minimize the impact of testing on teaching and learning. “However, due to internal and external factors, the tendency to evaluate education quality based simply on student test scores and school admissions rate has not been fundamentally changed,” says the document. “These problems [of evaluation] severely hamper student development as a whole person, stunt their healthy growth, and limit opportunities to cultivate social responsibilities, creative spirit, and practical abilities in students.” To solve these problems, the Ministry of Education realizes that more serious reforms are needed to change how schools are evaluated.

Dubbed “green evaluation,” the new evaluation framework attempt to end the use of test scores and success rates of sending students to higher-level schools as the only measure of education quality. Instead, it drastically broadens the scope of indicators. The framework includes five areas:

• Moral Development indicated by Behaviors and Habits, Citizenship, Personality and Character, and Ambition and Beliefs.
• Academic Development indicated by Knowledge and Skills, Discipline Thinking, Application Abilities, and Creativity.
• Psychological and Physical Health indicated by Physical Fitness, Healthy Living Habits, Artistic and Aesthetic Taste, Emotional Health and Self-regulation, and Interpersonal Communication (social skills).
• Development of Interest and Unique Talents indicated by Curiosity, Unique Talent and Skills, and Discovery and Development of Potentials.
• Academic Burdens indicated by Amount of Study Time (e.g. class time, homework time, and time for sleep etc.), Quality of Instruction, Difficult Level of Classes, and Academic Pressure.

The overall idea is to reduce the importance of test scores and academic burden. It is quite interesting to see that schools are to be evaluated based on how much academic burden they put on students. By the way, it is just the opposite of what the U.S. and some other Western countries are trying to do—the more burden (long school days, too much homework time, etc.) the school puts on students, the worse the school will be judged. Student engagement, boredom, anxiety, and happiness will also be used as measures of education quality.

Is this what we want for our children?

Here are thousands of Chinese kids getting pumped for exames at a massive pep rally.



There is a big difference between a culture of testing and a culture of learning.

What if America enlisted as much creativity in rethinking standardized testing as Mitt Romney has placed in paying his taxes?

Essentially, here is what Nikhil Goyal asked Mitt Romney:

Given that standardized testing in America has increased to historic levels and has had negative effects such as stripping billions of dollars from classroom budgets, increases in teaching to the test, and decreases in creativity, how would you as President change this trend?

Here's a summary of Romney's 3 minute response:

Because I know no other way, I'm not going to change anything about standardized testing, so you better just get used to it. In fact, I plan on intensifying standardized testing to rank and sort not only students but teachers, too. 

Let's examine this video of Mitt Romney and his take on education and testing more closely.

ROMNEY: First of all, you will find through out your life that there are tests.

There is a big difference between preparing kids for a life of tests and preparing them for the tests of life. Defenders of standardized, fill-in-the-bubble, forced-choice examinations have the audacity to cite a 'real world' need for such examinations, and yet standardized testing is what constitutes an amazingly contrived and unrealistic form of assessment.

ROMNEY: I don't know a way to evaluate the progress of students other than by evaluating it through testing of some kind or another.

At this point, I'm prepared to give Romney full credit for admitting his ignorance and incompetence around education and testing. At least he's being honest. It is very likely that Romney actually knows no other way than standardized testing -- but this is not an argument for testing, it's an indictment of his limited understanding and exposure to more authentic forms of assessment such as project-based learning, performance assessments and portfolios. Unlike policymakers and politicians who see education from 30,000 feet up, progressive educators engage in this kind of assessment everyday. Nothing is more dangerous than an idea when it's the only one you have. If the only tool you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail; If the only tool you have is a standardized test, every child looks like a number 2 pencil. If Romney truly wanted to broaden his understanding for how to assess learning, maybe he should talk to a teacher.

ROMNEY: If there are tests that are ineffective or that measure things that are not really relevant, obviously you try and improve the test, but you'll still have an SAT when you graduate from high school.

Too many people assume that standardized tests measure the quality of education. This assumption gets us into a lot of trouble because standardized tests were never intended to serve this purpose. Standardized tests are a tool for ranking individual students not rating whole classrooms, schools or nations. There's also strong evidence to suggest that standardized tests are really measuring out-of-school factors such as affluence and poverty (Here's an American example and a Canadian example). A little known fact is that the SAT actually stands for nothing. Clinging on to these blunt instruments and merely tinkering and refining them is the equivalent to re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It's also important to note that real learning is not found in teacher grades or student tests. The best way to know if a child is learning is to watch them learn. There is no substitute. Testsandgrades merely offer a crutch to those who wish to judge schools without ever spending time in schools. It's important to note that any intelligent conversation about standardized tests would have to include understanding Campbell's Law and the MacNamara Fallacy, both of which Romney appears to have no clue.

ROMNEY: You'll find that through out your life that there are going to be tests. We always complain about them. I complain about them when I was a student, and we don't like tests but there is really no other way we've found out to determine whether a student is succeeding or not succeeding, or frankly whether the teacher is succeeding or not succeeding. So I don't have a better model.

The costs of standardized testing and victims of standardized testing are prevalent. Shrugging or snickering at them as if they are like the weather is not a responsible or professional position to take. Martin Luther King Jr once said, "The day we see truth and do not speak is the day we begin to die." Apathy is runs rampant enough in our society, we certainly don't need our leaders to be also. Some people see standardized testing like death and taxes where resistance is futile. But I wish Romney would see standardized testing more like his taxes. What if America enlisted as much creativity in rethinking standardized testing as Romney has placed in paying his taxes?

ROMNEY: If teaching to the test means learning how to read and write and learning how to do basic math skills then there's nothing terribly wrong with that. 

Testing is not teaching. Writing a test is not learning. Tests can only measure a sample of what we would ever want our children to learn and become. What is on the test might not be as important as what is not on the test. As a parent and an educator I want my children to grow up and live a happy and meaningful life that is full of creativity, empathy, family, courage, integrity, honesty, curiosity, motivation, responsibility, citizenry, leadership, innovation, ingenuity and love. This is but a small list of very important things that standardized tests ignore which is why encouraging teaching to the test needlessly narrows the educational opportunities that we want and need for our children. Proponents of teaching to the test are either irresponsibly ignorant or dangerously deceptive -- either way, they have no business being our leaders.

ROMNEY: What I was concerned about before we had these kinds of tests is that you might have faculty members go off in a completely different tangent from the basic math, english and science skills our kids need to succeed.

Well, you've heard it from Romney himself. He sees standardized tests as a way of managing and disciplining teachers. Even if you are a teacher-hater and see no problem with this kind of adversarial relationship between politicians and teachers, you can't ignore the fact that standardized tests were never created to serve this function.

ROMNEY: I'm not going to replace testing. I'd love to improve it.

This tells you everything you need to know about where Romney wants to take American education. Heck, even the Chinese are moving away from their love affair with testing. This also goes to show that the standardized test and punish brand of accountability is not a daring departure from the status quo -- in fact, it is the status quo that has been sucking the life out of classrooms for decades. Romney is a brilliant example of what I call the American education contradiction: Use standardized test scores to show that public education in the United States is failing but then implement market-based reforms that are almost entirely contradictory to the reforms and policies found in high achieving countries.

ROMNEY: I'd love to have the students grade the teachers at the end of the year, as opposed to just the other way around so that teachers get feedback.

Testsandgrades are a primitive form of feedback. Assigning people a score or a grade does nothing to inform them of what they are doing well, or what they can improve -- all they can do is rank and sort. Testsandgrades are not about feedback or learning, they are about manipulation. Romney likes testing because he can use testing to manipulate and control the public in a way that undermines public education and teachers' unions.

ROMNEY: I hope students are very involved in the political process and in the process in the quality of your education.

Ultimately, I find it sadly ironic that Romney can look 17 year old Nikhil Goyal in the eye and say that he hopes students get involved more in shaping their education system, but then spend 3 minutes lecturing him on how, as President of the United States, he would merely ignore and intensify the ills of standardized testing -- and that Nikhil, and other kids like him, should just get used to it.

Under what circumstances would this be deemed exemplary leadership?

Chinese students learn on IV drips

Some people claim that school's primary function is to prepare children for the real world. Those same people tend to say that the real world is very competitive and that we must prepare kids for that competitive world.

Is this what that looks like?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Ridiculously difficult or just ridiculous?

Questions about a talking pineapple on a standardized test in New York has attracted criticism.

The passage is a parody on the famous  Aesop fable about the tortoise and the hare, but in this version a talking pineapple challenges a rabbit to a race. Because the pineapple can't move, the rabbit wins easily, so the other animals who bet on the winner eat the pineapple. 

Students were required to answer some baffling questions about why the animals ate the pineapple, and which animal was the wisest.

You can see the passage and the questions here. 

In response to the public outcry to this nonsensical passage and questions, the New York Department of Education announced that the questions would not be counted against students.

Governments have a vested interest in ensuring that these tests never see the light of day in the public. Oh sure, the government will tell you secrecy is needed for security reasons but this is at best a partial truth. Governments need standardized tests to remain a secret so that the public can't see how utterly ridiculous they really are.

In his article Confusing Harder with Better, Alfie Kohn explains:

How many of us need to know this stuff--not just on the basis of job requirements but as a reflection of what it means to be well-educated? Do these facts and skills reflect what we honor, what matters to us about schooling and human life? Often, the standards being rammed into our children's classrooms are not merely unreasonable but irrelevant. It is the kinds of things students are being forced to learn, and the approach to learning itself, that don't ring true. The tests that result--for students and sometimes for teachers--are not just ridiculously difficult but simply ridiculous. 

"It is not enough to be busy," Henry David Thoreau once remarked. "The question is, what are we busy about?" If our students are memorizing more forgettable facts than ever before, if they are spending their hours being drilled on what will help them ace a standardized test, then we may indeed have raised the bar--and more's the pity. In that case, school may be harder, but it sure as hell isn't any better.

Standardized testing is a relic from our primitive schooling past, and our race to nowhere via testing flies in the face of an old Chinese Proverb:

Do not confine your children to your own learning, for they were born in another time.

Enough of tiger moms and wolf dads

Amy Chua gained some serious attention when The Wall Street Journal ran her story Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior.Yong Zhao wrote a brilliant critique of Chua's take on Chinese parenting, and now so has Berlin Fang. This was written by Berlin Fang and appeared on ChinaDaily.com here:

By Berlin Fang

Thomas Friedman wrote in his column, "How about better parents?" (The New York Times, Nov19), that parent involvement is key to student success.

Fed up with the status quo of American education, and desperate for an alternative model,some readers peppered the word "Asian" throughout the comments section for Friedman'sarticle. One reader wrote: " the question among the coaches was the usual, why were so many of our top students are Asian. I asked when was the last time they had an Asian parentcomplain about too much homework."

This statement, however, proves nothing except the theory of relativity in human opinions.Asian parents in the United States rarely complain about children's homework because it is apicnic compared to what we had to go through in our younger days in our home country. But inAsian countries, like any other, complaints abound. In China, I constantly hear parentscomplain that their children cannot go to bed till 11 pm because they have too manyassignments.

Active involvement of Chinese parents is at best a myth, and the myth is running wild in themedia. After discussions on the "Tiger Mom" (Yale Professor Amy Chua, author of Battle Hymnsof the Tiger Mom), the Chinese media recently brought to light a certain "wolf dad", Hong Kong-based businessman Xiao Baiyou, who used chicken feather dusters to spank three of hischildren into Peking University, one of China's top institutions of higher learning.

First tigers and now wolves, I suppose we'll get the entire animal kingdom covered pretty soon.Such reports of Spartan parenting instill fear among Western parents and complacency amongtheir Chinese counterparts, none of which is healthy or justifiable.

Generally speaking, Chinese parents lag far behind their American peers in participating in theeducation of their children. In the Chinese countryside, many parents leave home to earn aliving as migrant workers. Their children thus live with grandparents, who often have little or noeducation. Pre-school is either unavailable or expensive. Many such children, often called "left-behind children", grow up without either proper parenting or school education.

Though children in middle class families live with parents, real involvement is far from desirable.Many Chinese families in towns and cities are dual-income families, some by necessity, othersby choice. Some American moms quit their jobs after childbirth to take care of their children.Chinese moms often quit their children to take care of their jobs. While parents are busy withtheir jobs or careers, many children are brought up to a large extent by grandparents, or"outsourced" to private tutors or even nannies.

In either situation, a predominantly materialistic worldview drives parents to spend their timeand energy making money to "guarantee" their children's future. Most spend money generouslyon children's education, buying them good things and sending them to private classes. Moneycan buy some relief from the guilt of staying on the margins of their children's development, butchildren do not get what they really need from parents: their time, for instance.

Friedman quotes a report by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) thatparent-child reading time correlates to student achievement in PISA tests. When was the lasttime you saw a Chinese parent returning with bags of entertainment reading from libraries orbookstores as American parents do? How often does a Chinese parent actually read a booktogether with his/her child?

Many parents even forbid their children from reading "useless" books such as novels, fairytales or poems for fear that such reading will distract students from preparing for exams.

The wrong focus on exams frees parents from participating in their children's education. Apartfrom not reading, parents don't work with children on school projects, because much ofhomework is exam-related which children are supposed to work on individually.

Parents' role is thus reduced to that of an alarm clock - to prompt children to do this or that atcertain hours of the day. No wonder, nannies can do substitute parenting. Fortunately, even analarm clock has its virtues. Chinese parents do a fairly good job of ensuring their childrenspend adequate time studying. Such increased time on educational tasks partially explains whythey excel in international benchmarking tests.

That being said, involvement can be deeper and richer in a child's path of growth. Chineseparents should spend more time with their children, rather than keeping time for them like aclock. Parents should work with children as a developing person, not just a test-taker. Parentsought to meet the kinetic, artistic, mental, social, psychological and spiritual needs of theirchildren.

Remember that children are human beings in stages of development. So why not forget abouttiger moms and wolf dads, and focus on being human parents instead?

The author is a US-based instructional designer, literary translator and columnist writing oncross-cultural issues.

---------------------

You can read more about more here:

And you thought the Tiger Mother was Tough

A Memoir Of A Tiger Mother's Quest for Perfection

I have written a number of posts on rethinking discipline that act as sharp critiques of the Tiger Moms and Wolf Dads in this world.

I also suggest you read Alfie Kohn's book Unconditional Parenting.

The future economic impact of test score obsession

Here is a guest post written by Lindsey Wright.

by Lindsey Wright

In a scorching op-ed written to the Wall Street Journal, Chinese educator Jiang Xueqin excoriated his country's obsession with standardized testing. "Both multinationals and Chinese companies have the same complaints about China’s university graduates: they cannot work independently, lack the social skills to work in a team and are too arrogant to learn new skills. In 2005, the consulting firm McKinsey released a report saying that China’s current education system will hinder its economic development." Yet here's the most interesting part: According to standardized test scores, China's students are number one in the world in math, language and science.

Despite the warnings from China, the U.S seems to be going down the same path. The public school and library system of the United States were once models for the rest of the world. Due to the fact that education was available to nearly everyone, a larger portion of the population had an opportunity to achieve success instead of an elite few. As such, public education and America's economic power rose together, and they remain inseparable from one another. However, an increased focus on standardized testing is threatening both.

According to the College of Saint Benedict, testing in the U.S. public education system has been around since the first colonial one-room schoolhouse opened its doors in the early 1600s. As a way of measuring a student's progress in reading, writing and arithmetic, it was unbeatable. Two centuries later, standardized testing was instituted with the Iowa Basic Skills Test (IBST). Every kid old enough to chew an eraser was given the test, the results of which were still mostly used only by teachers to measure student performance.

By 1965, standardized testing was growing at a rate of 20 percent per year, and began to be used as a metric for allocation of funding from state and national budgets. The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) began to hold enormous influence over college entry and even future employment of graduating high school students.

In 2002, George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act into law, and standardized testing became a major criteria for funding, even to the point of measuring a teacher's performance and determining their salaries. Yet, it seemed that the more emphasis was placed on passing standardized tests, the less children were actually learning, no matter if they attended a traditional brick-and-mortar school or an online school. How could that be?

For one thing, the amount of time teachers spent preparing students to take standardized tests dramatically increased, with many teachers reporting that prep began on day one of the school year. Valuable time, once spent in interaction, mentoring, participating in the arts, developing social skills and even play were now spent learning how to take tests and get higher scores.

Despite the hundreds of millions of dollars poured by each state into standardized testing and analyzing the results, the U.S. continued to slip in the global rankings of education quality. As of 2009 out of 34 countries, the U.S. ranked 14th in reading, 17th in science and 25th in math.

Part of the problem lies not just in our obsession with standardized tests, but also in the tests themselves. A standardized test is a series of multiple choice questions, each one of which has only one correct answer. They are scored by machines, which is the only objective part of the process. Likewise the test measures only superficial knowledge, the ability to pick the right answer from a group. It does not measure critical thinking ability, how students learn or their ability to create. Therefore, America's massive testing infrastructure is not set up to measure the only thing that matters in education: a student's ability to think. In fact, all it can do is measure a student's ability to remember isolated answers.

Similarly the laserlike focus on test scores, upon which school funding is based, has caused terrible but logical results. Schools are cutting back on subjects like music, art, social studies and sciences that are not included on the tests. Even the length of recess has been shortened in the name of test preparation. Teachers who work with difficult students but are held accountable for low test scores are being forced out of positions where they are most needed.

Turning out graduates that can take a test but can't think, create or innovate is not just America's problem, but also the world's. With the global economy shifting away from manufacturing toward knowledge-based industries, it is becoming more and more important that students develop conceptual and creative skills. As Jiang Xueqin concluded, "According to research on education, using tests to structure schooling is a mistake. Students lose their innate inquisitiveness and imagination, and become insecure and amoral in the pursuit of high scores."

China is now rolling out a new 10-year plan for its education goals that reduces emphasis on standardized test scores. In America, the Obama Administration has announced key changes to the No Child Left Behind that will reduce punishment for struggling schools and include evaluation of more subjects than the core of math and reading. At least it's a start.

Yong & Joe

I had a blast listening to Yong Zhao today. He provides us with such a powerful message. His site is here at http://zhaolearning.com

There is a real paradox revolving around this whole China story. Canada and the United States are looking across the Pacific Ocean, and are envious of China's centralization and standardization. We aspire to be more like the Chinese - we want more standardization and more accountability through high-stakes testing. 

And yet the Chinese are looking across the Pacific and wish they were more like us. They are envious of our creativity, ingenuity and individualism. There is a real 'grass is greener over there' scenario going on here. 

The scary realization we need to make here is that they are right - we have it right, but we are squandering more and more of it every time we longingly look east.

Here are my posts involving Yong Zhao's work:

People's Republic of Standardization

Accountability and George W. Bush

Yong Zhao: We need to listen to this guy!

Yong Zhao: data are not god

Input vs Output: Rethink Accountability

Yong Zhao: 11 minute video

Education Hell

High Test Scores, Low Ability

High Test Scores, Low Ability

This article appeared in the New York Times Opinion Pages.

Yong Zhao is the University Distinguished Professor in the College of Education at Michigan State University. The author of "Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization," he often blogs about education issues.

Teachers sorting college entrance
exams in Chengdu, Sichuan Province,
in June 2009 (AP)

There's a frustrating paradox in Chinese education. On the one hand, millions of college graduates cannot find a job -- at least a desirable job that pays substantially more than what a migrant worker makes. On the other hand, businesses that want to pay a lot more can't seem to find qualified employees.

Multinational companies in China are having a difficult time finding qualified candidates for their positions. According to a recent survey of U.S.-owned enterprises conducted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai, 37 percent of the companies that responded said that finding talent was their biggest operational problem. A separate study by McKinsey Quarterly found that 44 percent of the executives in Chinese companies reported that insufficient talent was the biggest barrier to their global ambitions.

The explanation: a test-oriented educational environment.

China invented the keju system, which used tests to select government officials. It was a great invention because it enabled talents from across the society to join the ruling class regardless of their family backgrounds. Hence, a great meritocracy could be created. But it evolved into a nightmare for China as the system gradually changed into one that tested memorization of Confucian classics.

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. That is why another study by McKinsey found that fewer than 10 percent of Chinese college graduates would be suitable for work in foreign companies.

Chinese educators are well aware of the problems with the gaokao system and have been trying to move away from the excessive focus on testing. But seeking other valid indicators of strong academic records will take time, especially in a country of 1.3 billion people.

Education Hell

The other day, I had an awesome conversation with a South Korean hair dresser. While she cut my hair, I peppered her with questions about how school was different in South Korea compared to here in Canada.

Here's roughly how I remember the conversation:

Joe: "What was school like in South Korea?"

Kelly: "It was very different. I was at school from 7:30 to 10:00 pm. There was no free time. No physical activity. Just school. 7:30 am to 3:00 pm is school, and then the evening is academy. Elementary kids go to academy until 8:00 pm and high school kids goes until 10:00 pm."

Joe: "Did you like school?"

Kelly: (Laughing) "No not at all. I hated school. No one likes school. Did you?"

Joe: "Well, there were parts I liked about school, and some parts that I definitely did not like, but remember I had lots of free time during my school career. Even though I went to school, I did lots of other things."

Kelly: "Oh, but you also had parts of school you didn't like?"

Joe: "Oh sure. There were parts of school I hated."

Kelly: "Well, focus on what you hated, and that's like me."

Joe: "Do you know anyone who liked school?"

Kelly: (laughing) "No! No one likes school. I knew no one who liked it. There is so much pressure from teachers and parents to be competitive. It's not like that here in Canada. That's I why I love it here. There's so much more freedom and it's relaxed."

Joe: "What did you do in class most the time?"

Kelly: "The teacher talked a lot. You know, lectures with the chalkboard. I was very quiet. I never talked out. I only talked when I was called on by the teacher. If you misbehave, you get hit."

Joe: "Hit? By the teacher? With their hands?"

Kelly: "Oh no. Not with the hand, but with the stick. Hitting with the hand is bad. Hitting with the stick is good. If you misbehave you also might be made to stick with both arms straight up in the air, and you have to hold them up for 15 minutes in front of everyone."

Joe: "What if a parent objected to this treatment of their child?"

Kelly: "What?"

Joe: "What if a parent complained about their child being hit?"

Kelly: "Why would a parent complain? This is a part of how we do things in our culture."

Joe: "Did you have tests?"

Kelly: "Big tests. Lots of pressure. Very competitive. The test to get into college is very important. If you fail, you have to wait until next year to write it again. In the mean time, you go back to academy."

I thanked Kelly for the wonderful haircut and the conversation, and I was on my way.

As I reflected on this story, I thought of a post by Yong Zhao where he shared a news story that is making headlines in China titled A Helpless Mother Complains about Extra Classes Online, Students Say They Have Become Stupid Before Graduation:

Since my daughter began 7th grade (first year of middle school), she has had extra evening classes. At that time, the class ends at 18:50 and I accepted it. But ever since she entered 9th grade, the evening class has lengthened to 20:40. For the graduating class, the students have to take classes from 7:30 to 20:00 on Saturdays. There are also five weeks of classes during the winter and summer school vacation. All day long, the students don’t have any self-study time, or physical education classes…

This kind of practice has seriously damaged students’ health. They have completely lost motivation and interest in studying. My child’s health gets worse day by day. So is her mental spirit. She has begun to lose her.

Two thoughts come to mind when I hear these heartbreaking stories:

Firstly, I found William Chamberlain's comment on Yong Zhao's post very profound:

I would prefer my students to be little “dumber” but a whole lot happier.

And secondly, in the late 1950s, Erich Fromm wrote:

Few parents have the courage and independence to care more for their children's happiness than for their 'success'.

There are lessons to be learned from education hell, but I would hope they are realities to be avoided rather than replicated.

Yong Zhao

http://newlearninginstitute.org/21stcenturyeducation/

If you haven't read Yong Zhao's book Catching Up or Leading the Way, you should.

Yong Zhao: We need to listen to this guy!

I was first introduced to Yong Zhao's ideas when a friend of mine loaned me his book Catching Up or Leading the Way. I devoured the book in short-order.

I am fascinated by Yong Zhao's Chinese-American perspective; he is unique in that he has a very informed take on both educational systems.

His perspective is incredibly important right now because Zhao can act like our educational magic eight-ball. Give him a shake and Zhao says: the US wants want China wants to throw away.

I have written about the Finnish Paradoxes, but now we need to look at the China-US education reform paradox. These two power-house countries each have an interesting take on moving forward.Yong Zhao summarizes very nicely in his book Catching Up or Leading the Way that in the end, it makes very little sense for developed countries like the US and Canada to fret over 'catching up' to developing nations like China. We got where we are by leading the way, and for some reason we are now turning around to follow those who are trying to catch ujp with us.

Yong Zhao's message is a big deal. Take some time and follow these links to make yourself informed.

Peoples' Republic of Standardization

Yong Zhao's recently released book Catching Up or Leading the Way is a must read for educators and policy makers who want to see where our current high stakes testing regimes will take us. Zhao does a masterful job of showing how China has long had an obsession with standardized testing. As far back as AD 605, the Sui Dynasty instituted a Civil Exam called the keju. It was a high stakes gateway to the ruling class that, during its 1,300 year history, proved to be one of the only ways of gaining social promotion. The keju’s importance has risen to astronomical heights – so much so that many have come to see it as China’s fifth grand invention after the compass, gun powder, paper and movable type. Yong Zhao shows the obsessive importance of the keju in his book Catching Up or Leading the Way:

Passing the exams was considered one of the most important accomplishments in a person’s life. Indeed, the two happiest moments for an individual in China were said to be the wedding night and seeing one’s name on the list of people who passed the keju. It was the pursuit of a lifetime for many. With no age limit or limit on how many times one could try, historical records show that some persisted in taking the tests into their 70s. The most famous case took place in 1699, when an individual took the test at the age of 102. Chinese literature has many stories – romantic, sad, happy, and bizarre – about individuals who studied for the keju or about their long journey’s to the sites where the keju was held.

Zhao goes on to explain that even though the keju was never an education system, but a political one, it has infected the Chinese classrooms with its obsessive preparation and narrow focus. For 1300 years, teaching and learning in China has been hijacked by standardized testing.

Because the Confucian classics were the core content of the keju, rote memorization became the most popular kind of learning. Most test questions involved reading an excerpt from the original classics and identifying the missing phrases.

Zhao does a remarkable job of giving a short history lesson that illuminates the long term effects of this kind of education. China began using the movable type printing technique 400 years before Guttenberg. They used the magnetic compass perhaps as much as a century before the rest of the world. And of course, the Chinese were the inventors of gun powder. At one time, China showed some very strong initiative and creativity, but that was centruies ago. Something seemed to happen around the 15th century - China ceased to be cutting edge.

There are probably many answers to why China has suffered from this lack of innovation, but Zhao makes a compelling argument that the keju is certainly a prime suspect. Because the keju placed so much emphasis on such a narrow list of skills, a kind of 'talent cleansing' occurred. People with an alternate skill-set were discriminated and discouraged from pursuing their interests in science and technology - those individuals and China as a whole have suffered the long-term consequences.

Traditional China's keju can be found in its modern day reincarnation the gaokao. The gaokao is like the American's Standard Aptitude Test (SAT) on steroids and ecstasy. College admissions in China are solely and entireley dependent on performing well on the gaokao.

Together the keju and gaokao have contributed to a widely recognized problem in Chinese education: gaofen dineng which literally means high scores but low ability. The sheer number of stories and examples of how wide spread gaofen dineng has become in China has lead many Chinese to actually associate gaofen dineng with their entire education system.

In Canada and the United States, most recognize the term valedictorian as a title 'earned' by those top performers in their graduating class. In ancient times, China bestowed the top performer of the keju with the title of zhuangyuan. Today, zhuangyuans, those who achieve the highest scores on the gaokao, become instant celebrities. They have their '15 minutes in the spotlight'. The problem is that the research is showing that their importance and success isn't lasting much longer than that 15 minutes. Zhuangyuans who become distinguished leaders, accomplished engineers or creative entrepeneurs are the exception and not the rule. For the most part, these zhuangyuans excel on the tests and disapear into obscurity - leading many to question why the tests were so important in the first place.

There is a real paradox revolving around this whole China story. Canada and the United States are looking across the Pacific Ocean, and we are envious. We aspire to be more like the Chinese - we want more standardization and more accountability through high-stakes testing. And yet the Chinese are looking across the Pacific and wish they were more like us. They are envious of our creativity, ingenuity and individualism. There is a real 'grass is greener over there' scenario going on here. The scary realization we need to make here is that they are right - we have it right, but we are squandering more and more of it every time we longingly look east.

Yong Zhao summarizes very nicely in his book Catching Up or Leading the Way that in the end, it makes very little sense for developed countries like the US and Canada to fret over 'catching up' to developing nations like China. We got where we are by leading the way, and for some reason we are now turning around to follow those who are trying to catch ujp with us.