• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

East Asian countries top global league tables for education

yellowarse

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Mar 17, 2009
Messages
5,383
Points
63
East Asian countries top global league tables for educational performance

China's Shanghai region easily beats rest of world in maths, reading and science, according to OECD education rankings

Richard Adams, education editor


Chinese-schoolchildren-009.jpg

Shanghai’s lead was so clear that the results were the equivalent of its students
having had three additional years of schooling, the OECD estimates.
Photograph: Stringer Shanghai/REUTERS


Asia's rising economic success has helped China's hi-tech corridor to take a clear lead in the latest OECD international education rankings.
The results of the OECD's programme for international student assessment – a triennial exam for 15-year-olds known as Pisa – show that China's Shanghai region easily tops the rest of the world in maths, reading and science.

Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea made up the rest of the top five for maths, followed by the Chinese island of Macao.
Elsewhere, Pisa results were a further disappointment for the US, which saw its maths rank fall to 36th place overall, worse than its 2009 performance, which President Obama dubbed a "Sputnik moment" for American education. In reading, the US fell seven places, to 24th, and in science the country came in 28th, down five.

Australia saw a precipitous fall in its maths ranking, from 15th in 2009 to 19th in 2012, as it was overtaken by Poland and the new entrant, Vietnam, which appears in the OECD tables for the first time. Australia's reading score was little changed but its performance in science slipped from 10th to 16th, tied with Macao.

Finland was the highest placed European country, with a top-five performance in science, while Ireland was sixth-equal with Taiwan in reading. In maths, Liechtenstein, Switzerland and the Netherlands were the only European entrants in the top 10.

The UK's performance was virtually unchanged from its 2009 results, when its international rankings suffered with the addition of higher-placed new entrants such as Shanghai. It ranked 20th overall for science, 26th for maths and 23rd for reading – on a par with France and the US, and close to the OECD average for reading and maths.

Andreas Schleicher, the OECD's deputy director for education and skills and co-ordinator of the Pisa programme, said the success of education systems such as Shanghai's was the result of an emphasis on selecting teachers, as well as prioritising investment in teacher training and development.

Shanghai's lead was so clear that the results were the equivalent of its students having had three additional years of schooling, the OECD estimates.

Outside Asia, Brazil, Germany and Mexico have all shown consistent improvement, with Germany, Mexico and Turkey winning praise for improving the performance of their weakest performing students, many of whom were from disadvantaged backgrounds.

David Spieghalter, the Winton professor of the public understanding of risk at the University of Cambridge, said: "Pisa explores many factors associated with country performance but occasionally seem hasty in assigning reasons for change – we can't decide causality from this study, and we should be very cautious in the lessons to be learned."

Spieghalter added: "If Pisa measures anything, it is the ability to do Pisa tests. Aligning policy along a single performance indicator can be damaging. We need to look at the whole picture."

The OECD administered the standardised tests at the end of last year in 34 countries and a total of 64 regions, to 500,000 15-year-olds.
According to the findings, girls performed worse than boys in maths exams in 37 regions and countries, although in the majority of cases the gap was small. In most countries the gender gap favoured girls in reading, while in science there was little difference.

Schleicher said that the OECD found no evidence from its international analysis that competition between private, state or charter-style schools – free schools, in the UK – had any impact on raising standards.

"You would expect that systems with greater choice would come out better because you expect competition to raise performance of the high performers and lower performers, and put out of the market schools and systems that do not succeed. But in fact, you don't see a correlation," Schleicher said.

"Competition alone is not a predictor for better outcomes. And the UK is a good example: a highly competitive school system but still only an average performer."

Instead, Schleicher said parents had higher priorities in choosing schools than simply academic results, according to the OECD's surveys of parental opinion.

"The most important thing for parents is not the performance of the school but what they call a safe school environment. And that is true for privileged and disadvantaged parents," he said.



 
Singapore doesn't have almost 100% chinese unlike the other countries so it's not fair to singapore Opps now this is offensive. :rolleyes:
 
Singapore doesn't have almost 100% chinese unlike the other countries so it's not fair to singapore Opps now this is offensive. :rolleyes:

It's true that the minorities here don't do so well in maths and science ... I think social and (for maths especially) genetic factors at play.
 
In Spore there are many International schools that locals cannot attend unless you have connections e.g. LKY's grand child


Why would expats chose to send their children to these schools instead of one of Spore's local schools:confused: I think Spore is ranked #3 & it's also cheap for foreigners to attend them instead of the expensive International schools. So you have to wonder about how good Spore schools are;)
 
It's true that the minorities here don't do so well in maths and science ... I think social and (for maths especially) genetic factors at play.


Not social but genetic cos the Chinese here live the same lives as the minorities but still do better.
 
Not social but genetic cos the Chinese here live the same lives as the minorities but still do better.

A larger proportion of Malays still form the underclass here with its attendant problems– broken homes, no private tuition, drugs, school drop-outs, incest, domestic violence, lack of male role models. There are poor Chinese and Indians as well, but in smaller proportions.

But I believe maths ability is largely genetic. The Chinese do better than the Jews on the maths-logic portion of IQ tests.
 
Not social but genetic cos the Chinese here live the same lives as the minorities but still do better.

Genetic and cultural because the Chinese, Japanese and Korean have a cultural tradition to excel at school, as well as more hardworking and determined.
 
Why would expats chose to send their children to these schools instead of one of Spore's local schools:confused:

Because the local school curriculum is bloody stressful and only caters to the top 10%, made worse in recent years by the MOE emphasis on school rankings and educators' KPI. If you're an average student, you'd be better off in an international school.

Singapore does well in these international studies because our best students are world-beaters (in those subjects). But it doesn't say a lot for the average student studying in a neighbourhood school, the kind of education they get.
 
Because the local school curriculum is bloody stressful and only caters to the top 10%, made worse in recent years by the MOE emphasis on school rankings and educators' KPI. If you're an average student, you'd be better off in an international school.

Singapore does well in these international studies because our best students are world-beaters (in those subjects). But it doesn't say a lot for the average student studying in a neighbourhood school, the kind of education they get.



You also have to question the purpose of education in Spore.
Been a while since I was in school but I get the impression that it's about cramming more facts into students then to encourage real thinking. For the majority of :lesser mortals" I'm sure the PAP would prefer a compliant work force.

Had a foreign colleague who was looking for a school for his child. Cost wasn't an issue since the company was paying for it. After looking around he went with an International School.
 
You also have to question the purpose of education in Spore.
Been a while since I was in school but I get the impression that it's about cramming more facts into students then to encourage real thinking. For the majority of :lesser mortals" I'm sure the PAP would prefer a compliant work force.

Instead of viewing education as a tool to help a child learn how to think, learn how to learn, and fulfill his innate potential and talent, the PAP has always seen schools as a means of churning out robots for the workforce, to keep the economy running and the GDP figures chugging along.

Hence the emphasis on cramming, rote-learning, exams and streaming with zero regard for lateral thinking, creativity, ethics, maximizing every child's potential, allowing a pupil to progress at his own pace, small class sizes.
 
According to some in the West, Asians need to excel in education so that they can produce better quality goods for the West.
 
According to some in the West, Asians need to excel in education so that they can produce better quality goods for the West.

No longer. All the governments of the major Western countries are essentially bankrupt and printing money. Soon they'll be producing goods for us.
 
If Ah Tiong land and Sinkieland students are so good, how come none of them has ever been awarded Nobel prizes in science?
 
If Ah Tiong land and Sinkieland students are so good, how come none of them has ever been awarded Nobel prizes in science?

Chinese students are good at the secondary school level because of their rigorous curriculum and intense competition for the top universities.

Nobel prize is different. It's usually awarded to doctoral researchers in the top research universities, mainly in America.

For China to win more Nobel prizes, they have to improve the funding and staffing of their top universities at the post-grad level, and attract top researchers from around the world. Still a long way to go.




[TABLE="class: wikitable sortable jquery-tablesorter, width: 1"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TH="class: headerSort, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, colspan: 3, align: center"]Name[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, align: center"]Year of birth[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, align: center"]Place of birth[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, align: center"]Residence or Affiliation at the time of the award[SUP][2][/SUP][/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, align: center"]Field[/TH]
[TH="class: headerSort, bgcolor: #F2F2F2, align: center"]Year[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Tsung-Dao Lee[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]李政道[/TD]
[TD]1926[/TD]
[TD]Shanghai, China[/TD]
[TD]Columbia University,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States[/TD]
[TD]Physics[/TD]
[TD]1957[SUP][3][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Chen Ning Yang[/TD]
[TD]楊振寧[/TD]
[TD]杨振宁[/TD]
[TD]1922[/TD]
[TD]Hofei, Anhwei, China†[/TD]
[TD]Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States[/TD]
[TD]Physics[/TD]
[TD]1957[SUP][3][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Samuel C. C. Ting[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]丁肇中[/TD]
[TD]1936[/TD]
[TD]Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States[/TD]
[TD]Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States[/TD]
[TD]Physics[/TD]
[TD]1976[SUP][4][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Yuan T. Lee[/TD]
[TD]李遠哲[/TD]
[TD]李远哲[/TD]
[TD]1936[/TD]
[TD]Hsinchu, Taiwan, Empire of Japan[/TD]
[TD]University of California, Berkeley,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States[/TD]
[TD]Chemistry[/TD]
[TD]1986[SUP][5][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Steven Chu[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]朱棣文[/TD]
[TD]1948[/TD]
[TD]St. Louis, Missouri, United States[/TD]
[TD]Stanford University,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States[/TD]
[TD]Physics[/TD]
[TD]1997[SUP][6][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Daniel C. Tsui[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]崔琦[/TD]
[TD]1939[/TD]
[TD]Pingdingshan, Henan, China[/TD]
[TD]Princeton University,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States[/TD]
[TD]Physics[/TD]
[TD]1998[SUP][7][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gao Xingjian[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]高行健[/TD]
[TD]1940[/TD]
[TD]Ganzhou, Jiangxi, China[/TD]
[TD]
23px-Flag_of_France.svg.png
France[/TD]
[TD]Literature[/TD]
[TD]2000[SUP][8][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Roger Y. Tsien[/TD]
[TD]錢永健[/TD]
[TD]钱永健[/TD]
[TD]1952[/TD]
[TD]New York City, New York, United States[/TD]
[TD]University of California, San Diego,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States
Howard Hughes Medical Institute,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States[/TD]
[TD]Chemistry[/TD]
[TD]2008[SUP][9][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Charles K. Kao[/TD]
[TD]高錕[/TD]
[TD]高锟[/TD]
[TD]1933[/TD]
[TD]Shanghai, China[/TD]
[TD]Standard Telecommunication Laboratories,
23px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png
United Kingdom
Chinese University of Hong Kong,
23px-Flag_of_Hong_Kong.svg.png
Hong Kong[/TD]
[TD]Physics[/TD]
[TD]2009[SUP][10][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Liu Xiaobo[/TD]
[TD]劉曉波[/TD]
[TD]刘晓波[/TD]
[TD]1955[/TD]
[TD]Changchun, Jilin, China[/TD]
[TD]
23px-Flag_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China.svg.png
People's Republic of China[/TD]
[TD]Peace[/TD]
[TD]2010[SUP][11][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Mo Yan[/TD]
[TD="colspan: 2"]莫言[/TD]
[TD]1955[/TD]
[TD]Gaomi, Shandong, China[/TD]
[TD]
23px-Flag_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China.svg.png
People's Republic of China[/TD]
[TD]Literature[/TD]
[TD]2012[SUP][12][/SUP][/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
 
Back
Top