Reflective Journal 5: Reflect on education. You may choose reflect on the necessary priorities of education, how far the ideals and realities of education converge, how the problems discussed about education in US and China can be resolved. You should explicitly explain how class discussion on education in US and China have influenced/shaped your views.
Three weeks of stimulating discussion about education has certainly opened up my mind on the broad topic of education. It has brought me to realise the vastly different education systems of China and USA, with their merits and demerits. While neither education system is perfect, both have their intrinsic characteristics which make them unique.
We discussed the skills for success in the global arena, which encompass creativity, flexibility and critical thinking. I have always believed that innovation is crucial for success. As the world is continually changing, we need creativity to adapt accordingly.
Both education systems prioritise preparing the young for the workforce by nurturing students to become globally competitive, though by different means. China, influenced by traditional Chinese values and Confucian ideologies, places much emphasis on tests and regurgitation, while focusing less on individual talents. It emphasises hard work and persistence, while focusing primarily on academics and knowledge. The system churns out skilled workers and degree holders to meet the demands of the economy, in order for China to sustain its economic boom, as it diversifies its economy away from manufacturing to a more knowledge-based economy.
However, as discussed, the rigid test-based system is a major problem, as it stems out creativity, promoting rote-memorization and regurgitation instead. Students are known to lose their inquisitiveness and imagination, burning themselves out studying for tests and examinations. Such a test-structured curriculum certainly stifles creativity, neglecting innovation, which is undeniably critical for success in the 21st century. This has enforced my viewpoint that China’s education system is indeed too rigid. It may produce talented and knowledgeable individuals, but they would not stand out in the international arena without innovation and ingenuity.
On the other hand, while retaining the primary priority of preparing students for the workforce, seeking out talents in various aspects unrestricted to academics and cultivating youth’s special talents or interests in a particular aspect, are the trademarks of America’s education system. Its liberal system stands out, as it aims to cultivate creative and innovative individuals, while developing individual talents and interests.
However, the system has fallen short of equipping its students with skills necessary to succeed in the global arena. The discussion of the No Child Left Behind Act in class has since changed my views that America’s education system is ideal due to its liberal nature. For one thing, America has adopted standardized testing. Nonetheless, it was supported at the time of implementation. The NCLB act aimed to improve math and reading skills across the board. However, the results have yet to show its success. This “one size fits all” system has promoted the unhealthy “teaching for the test” mindset, with school funding now determined by test scores.
Also, it was discussed in class that the simple lack of education culture in the states can be detrimental to the system as a whole. Classmates have brought up the point that US youths are not as hardworking as their Chinese counterparts, preferring to devote more time to recreation than to academics, while enjoying longer holidays. As a result, they are losing their competitive edge in the global arena. While I feel that having less academic time allows for other activities, which helps nurture individuals to become more all-rounded, I think that a balance has to be struck between the recreation and academics.
More surprisingly, the USA fared poorly in the PISA test, which assessed critical thinking. While I have always thought otherwise, the tests results show that the US education system is unable to inculcate its students with critical thinking skills, which I feel is caused by the introduction of standardised testing. As critical thinking is a vital skill in the globalised world, with increasing amounts of information readily available, the lack of critical thinking disadvantages students on the global arena.
The inherent flaws of both education systems have to be resolved in order its students to strive in the globalised world. For a start, the Chinese could cut their obsessions with test scores and adopt a broader mindset on education. They should come to realise that a more holistic education system is required for the country to cultivate innovators and all-rounded individuals for success the future world.
On the other hand, America should continue to encourage and nurture creativity in its students to produce a new generation of innovators. However, aspects such as cultivating critical thinking cannot be neglected, as such skills are vital for success in the 21st century. Also, America needs to focus on developing knowledge core subjects, such as Math and Science, as the world economy becomes more knowledge-based. I believe that there exists a need for standardised testing, as it promotes diligence and self-discipline among students, in order to start an education culture. Hence, the NCBA could be reassessed and modified accordingly to meet these aims.
800 words
Hey Yu Chong,
ReplyDeleteYour argument flows logically and you talked about how the class discussions were effective in changing your perception of education which is commendable. However, I think you could have included more personal experiences in your journal to fully show how you had changed as a person after that fruitful three weeks.
Though you stated about how China and America could improve their education systems, it would have probably been better if you could elaborate more on what measures can be taken instead of generalizing. I also feel your suggestion for China is quite impractical. China is a nation 1.4 billion strong and competition is fierce. Under these circumstances, standardized testing is the fairest and most efficient way to assess the ability of uncountable students. Thus it is unlikely that the general population of China would move towards holistic education even towards the next century.
The improvements that could be made to America could have also been elaborated upon. You talk the need for standardized testing but not how it would be different from the failure of the NCLB act. I feel that perhaps the government should start from a young age such as grade 1 and take a firm stand throughout. This stand means that dropping out from school is not allowed and weak students have to stay for remedial lessons. Budget allocation should also be standardized for all public schools. In this way, a good education culture would be created which will further motivate later generations of students to work hard.
Hello YuChong!
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your reflective piece, I am placed in a position of higher understanding of the term 'education', and now am encouraged to reflect on my part, think both critically, divergently and express my own point of view from a justified stance, in the process fulfilling the notions of what I feel is a successful education system.
Hence, I have to say that I fully agree with you stance that education institutions should promote interactive discussions which encompass critical and divergent thinking, since "the lack of critical thinking disadvantages students on the global arena". In the course of my education in Singapore (especially my 4 years in Hwa Chong), I have developed vastly my meta-cognition skills, also known as thinking about thinking. This is thoroughly stressed in many education systems today, but as you mentioned, the US does fall short on this aspect as reflected from the PISA standings.
While I do agree with your view that a balance has to be struck between recreation and academics to an extent, I feel that this may be overly ideological in reality. In our Level Assembly today, we learnt from our Dean Mr Ng Seaw Choon that 50% "Have to" and 50% "Want to" means a student's well-being is achieved. I agree, we do have to seek a balance in our work and play, but in such a competitive and tedious education system, is it possible for the students to always have a balanced life? Instead, I feel that what you should emphasize is how academics always remain a priority, YET your social life should not be neglected in the process. Here, we have to be flexible in our schedule, to be able to both make space for games, and drop games for serious work and tests.
Which brings me to my next point of flexibility in our education system. As you rightly point out, China's education method of rote memorization and regurgitation of textbook facts and answers will definitely stifle the student's ability to think and access situations flexibly, creatively. Instead, they are trained in such a way that they can only produce what is proven right, and not what they believe is right. On the other hand, the American education system does stand out on this aspect, since it advocates flexible and creative learning. This is one reason why America has produced most of the world's brightest innovators and inventors of the century as opposed to China.
The main point of education, clearly, is to produce learned individuals who will succeed in the global arena. You have clearly identified in your journal the elements that aid the aim. With that, I wish you the best in your learning journey, and may we all enjoy our time and reap the benefits of education in Hwa Chong.
Thank You!
Hi Yuchong, your reflective journal flows smoothly and logically. However, I feel that you could have included in more of your own personal experiences and thoughts into the journal.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your evaluation towards both American and China education system. While America has been more flexible in its system, it seems rather impossible for it to adopt standardised testing and expect the system to change overnight. Despite the fact that standardised testing is necessary, it must be planned meted out properly such that it does not affect the students' development in creativity. Furthermore, the American government needs to solve the issue of funding if they are expected to make substantial changes to the system to ensure holistic development of their students.
On the other hand, flexibility is needed China's system. However, to remove its mindset and focus on the exams and tests scores would be difficult as it would mean a revolutionary change of the system entirely and might result in the removal of the gaokao system. In the end, it might backfire and china students would be at an advantage.