Hooey about U.S. vs. foreign school systems

Education commentator Gerald Bracey often deconstructs the ubiquitous claims about the supposed superiority of other nations' educational systems, using that annoying method of actually checking facts. He has just written a Huffington Post commentary on that new initiative funded with $60 million of Broad and Gates money, ED in '08.

"Why is it that education 'reformers' feel obligated to idealize education elsewhere and demonize it here?" Bracey asks. "Why is it that organizations like Center for American Progress and ED in '08 feel they can write sloppy reports — as long as they put American schools in a bad light — and that it doesn't matter?"

I'll pull out a couple of Bracey's points.

A statement in ED in '08 makes this claim:

"China provides 30% more education than America..."

Bracey asks:

What on earth does this mean? Thirty percent longer year? Thirty percent more curriculum coverage? Thirty percent more years in school? Thirty percent higher test scores (China has never taken part in an international comparison for reasons that will be obvious momentarily)? A 30% longer day? I think this last might be true, but it is also true that most Chinese students get about two hours a day to go home and eat lunch. There is very little difference in how much time American and Chinese kids spend learning.

And he makes some points:

• Only 40% of students in China go beyond 9th grade (which is termed "upper secondary school").
• China's "long-term goals include: a world-class education for the top 5% to 10% of high school students [and] ... universal 12-year education by 2020."
• All schools in China charge tuition.
• A large class of Chinese citizens are called "immigrant," a term for those who have left poor rural regions and moved to cities, "often illegally." Most children in those families don't attend school at all.
• Well-known journalist James Fallows, a former editor of U.S. News & World Report and the Atlantic Monthly, currently lives in Shanghai, and calls the schools "awful."
• Noted educator Deborah Meier recently toured China to consult with educators there. Bracey quotes her: "The idea that they have a superior education system is beyond absurd. ... In many rural areas there are virtually no teachers — even if there are schools." Even successful schools in Shanghai, she adds, "had 50 kids in a class and a relatively ordinary pedagogy."
• And my own note is that as an involved parent in an urban school district that is plurality Chinese-American, I'm well aware that there are many "parachute kids" in my kids' schools whose parents have sent them from China to stay with relatives or friends specifically for the U.S. education. Why would they trouble if China's schools are so wonderful?

In other words, the facts don't bear out the notion that China's school system is superior to ours. Au contraire.

The ED in '08 comments also emphasize that a number of nations have longer school years than the U.S. mandates. Of course, adding days to ours would just require more money, and I'm not faulting anyone for saying that U.S. schools need more money.

However, Bracey points out that the number of days in the school year doesn't correlate with higher scores in the study that ED in 08 cites, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). There are 13 countries for which enough data is available to break this out.

• The country with the highest TIMSS score, Singapore, has the same number of days in the school year as U.S. schools.
• The two entities with fewer days in the school year, Hong Kong and Belgium, also scored higher than the U.S.
• The three nations with the most hours dedicated to teaching math — the Philippines, Indonesia and Chile — were among the lowest performers in the TIMSS.

Bracey has previously debunked similar claims in an article for Stanford Magazine, "Believing the Worst," July/August 2006. It's actually part of a pro-con debate vs. Hoover Institution public-school opponent Terry Moe. (It was reading Moe's writings that got me started as a public-education advocate refuting the assertions of the charter/voucher/privatization "education reform" crowd.)

— Caroline