This aspect in particular:
This is the sort of transformation that is necessary for improving the top-end of education in the long run (i.e., the universities).
News on China's scientific and technological development.
- Thread starter Quickie
- Start date
This aspect in particular:
This is the sort of transformation that is necessary for improving the top-end of education in the long run (i.e., the universities).
Kinda hard to do that without a Shanghai hukou, don't you think?
Realize that these students are in middle school. Hukou means you stay in your own province until at least high school graduation.
Having said that, I do think that their sampling of China's education system was not representative of the whole country. Perhaps they should take a sample from each region of China and average them. ie. samples should be collected from Shanghai, Beijing, Shenyang, Wuhan, Guangzhou, and average them.
I agree with Solarz's comment on how a solid foundation is built in Chinese students before university. However, after high school, the university courses are rather slack. A best combination, in my opinion, is to graduate from high school in China and then go overseas for university.
solarz
Brigadier
What is this "educating a small elite" crap? Education has always been inclusive in Shanghai.
As for reducing emphasis on rote learning, that's only a small part of the problem of Chinese education. The bigger issues are a lack of fostering creativity, too much focus on results rather than process from a very young age, and the tendency of both parents and the education system to encourage students to obey teachers without questioning.
This last part is especially damaging when you consider how many crappy teachers are out there. I remember listening to my little cousin (who was in high school) excitedly proclaim that Chinese needed to save less and spend more in order to save the economy (this was during the financial crisis of 2008) because her economics teacher said so.
Of course, no one mentioned to her that the financial crisis was caused by people across the Pacific who spent too much and didn't save enough. Nor the fact that Chinese *have* to save because the social security net is almost non-existent and a major illness could wipe out a family's lifetime savings.
I really hate the oversimplified emphasis on, "Creativity", which is almost always interpreted as, "Question everything" for the sake of questioning, and gives rise to ridiculous lines of thought such as treating "Intelligent Design" as some kind of scientific theory.
One can criticize the Chinese focusing so much on merely regurgitating information as having an underdeveloped method of education, but it's important to remember that very emphasis on fundamentals is exactly what's giving the Chinese a strong foundation to build and innovate upon.
I never understood how one is expected to innovate when they literally do not know anything about the fields they're supposedly going to be being, "Creative" in.
Basically, I see there being two extremes. On one end, the Chinese system of total rote learning being deficient in creativity, and on the other, the American style of emphasizing creativity yet allowing students to somehow make it to college while being completely incapable of doing simple Algebra.
Whatever the Chinese do to encourage original thought, I only hope they avoid going overboard.
One can criticize the Chinese focusing so much on merely regurgitating information as having an underdeveloped method of education, but it's important to remember that very emphasis on fundamentals is exactly what's giving the Chinese a strong foundation to build and innovate upon.
I never understood how one is expected to innovate when they literally do not know anything about the fields they're supposedly going to be being, "Creative" in.
Basically, I see there being two extremes. On one end, the Chinese system of total rote learning being deficient in creativity, and on the other, the American style of emphasizing creativity yet allowing students to somehow make it to college while being completely incapable of doing simple Algebra.
Whatever the Chinese do to encourage original thought, I only hope they avoid going overboard.
solarz
Brigadier
What are you talking about? Creativity isn't about "questioning everything for the sake of questioning". Creativity is about the ability to think outside the box, to be able to see paths to a goal that others can't.
Now, don't get me wrong, no way am I saying that Chinese aren't creative: on the contrary, the Chinese are VERY creative (especially at money-making these days). However, one tends to notice that those who are the most creative tends to be those who usually do not do well in the traditional education system.
Do we have to sacrifice a strong foundation in order to foster creativity? Not at all! One major failing of educational systems, whether Chinese or American, is the "one-size-fits-all" approach. A strong foundation in Math and Literacy is important, but one also has to recognize that not all children are able to learn the same subjects at the same pace.
Some children might take much longer than others at grasping math concepts, while others maybe completely unsuited at writing flowery poetry. Fostering creativity is about allowing children to explore as many options as possible. That is something the educational system in China, with its obsessive focus on good test scores, fails at. (And don't get me started on the mandatory English scores!)
On a tangent, the American system is almost an opposite: it tries to be as inclusive as possible, and ends up de-motivating many bright students who have few options or support for learning faster than their classmates.
What am I talking about? Basically what you just said, but I was mentioning in addition to it, my hope, that in finding the ideal compromise between the two ends of the spectrum, that the Chinese don't ever find themselves in a debate similar to the American controversy on whether or not something like Intelligent Design (ID) can be taught in a science class as a viable alternative to the theory of evolution merely for the sake of "Thinking outside the box."
The debate itself is ridiculous because ID doesn't qualify as a scientific theory to begin with, but I've heard proponents of teaching ID say they support it because it's, "Letting the students think about it decide for themselves", which in some twisted way is their take on encouraging original thinking.
I feel such a fight is exactly the kind of dead-end debate that arises when "being creative" is interpreted the wrong way, and I was just voicing my hope that the Chinese, or any other country in the middle of tweaking their education system to encourage more innovation avoids it. I'm just using the ID vs Evolution debate as an example.
Last edited:
Quickie
Colonel
Those tests got a mention in our morning paper, and weve bumped ourselves up a few places, coming in at 5th position in Science and Reading. WE got around from ever having to mention. China by comparing ourselves with the rest of the OECD countries. (Actually China was never mentioned at all)
I note that theres a footnote in the countries placings with the various tests in
Martins post @491. where it states that China was represented by Shanghai, and the administrative regions of HK and Macao. In which case wouldn't you add up the three scores and average them out?
Upon doing so I found that China would have scored 527 for Science placing it in 8th place: 524 for reading placing it in 4th place and 560 for maths placing it in 2nd place.
Do I feel better now? nope ..... wasted time actually
Macao with its half a million population actually fairs quite good. Without Macao in the mix, China and HK still comes out top of the table. Of course, school education is only part of the story.
Last edited:
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Wikileaked Cables from Beijing Reveal China's Pursuit of Fusion Power, Teleportation By Clay Dillow
The University of Science and Technology of China Minbali via Wikimedia
It’s no secret that China is beating up on America and the West in everything from infrastructure to technology investment, but news of exactly what the People’s Republic is up to is often scarce. So while the diplomatic establishment continues to reel from the stink of its own dirty laundry in last week’s Wikileaks document dump, cables coming from the American Embassy in Beijing are also shedding light on the strides Chinese scientists are making in far-out fields like nuclear fission, biometrics, and even quantum teleportation.
One confidential diplomatic cable sent from the Beijing Embassy to Washington in February suggests China is doing big things at the small scale. For one, China is aggressively expanding its nuclear energy resources, with plans to open at least 70 nuclear plants in the next decade. More interestingly, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) is pouring research funding into its Institute of Plasma Physics (IPP) to conduct ongoing research into nuclear fusion.
Apparently China has been hard at work on its Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) reactor, which is designed to sustain a controlled fusion reaction that can go on indefinitely at high temperatures. In 2009, researchers apparently sustained a 18-million-degree reaction for 400 seconds, and a 180-million-degree reaction for 60 seconds. Their goal for 2010 was to sustain a 180-million-degree reaction for more than 400 seconds, though it’s unclear if they achieved that. Moreover, IPP is apparently conducting research on hybrid fission-fusion reactors, though details are slim.
Perhaps most interesting: China doubled the IPP budget in 2009 over 2008, and the diplomatic chatter suggests 2010’s budget saw a significant boost as well. Amid choppy economic waters, such funding bumps indicate a real commitment on China’s part to figure out the fusion energy puzzle.
China’s sci-tech ambitions don’t stop there. While the evidence is anecdotal, the embassy seems to think the Chinese are pulling ahead in fields like quantum communications and even teleportation. To quote one diplomat’s description of a trip to the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) in Hefei: “A cursory walk through their labs seemed to indicate they had already succeeded in single-particle quantum teleportation and are now trying to conduct dual-particle quantum teleportation.”
Then there’s the Big Brother tech that we’ve come to expect from China. The same cable says the CAS’s Institute of Intelligent Machines (IIM) in Hefei has created a biometric system that identifies individuals through their pace and gait. “The device measure weight and two-dimensional sheer forces applied by a person’s foot during walking to create a uniquely identifiable biometrics profile,” the cable says, and can be installed covertly in a floor to surreptitiously collect biometric data.
The University of Science and Technology of China Minbali via Wikimedia
It’s no secret that China is beating up on America and the West in everything from infrastructure to technology investment, but news of exactly what the People’s Republic is up to is often scarce. So while the diplomatic establishment continues to reel from the stink of its own dirty laundry in last week’s Wikileaks document dump, cables coming from the American Embassy in Beijing are also shedding light on the strides Chinese scientists are making in far-out fields like nuclear fission, biometrics, and even quantum teleportation.
One confidential diplomatic cable sent from the Beijing Embassy to Washington in February suggests China is doing big things at the small scale. For one, China is aggressively expanding its nuclear energy resources, with plans to open at least 70 nuclear plants in the next decade. More interestingly, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) is pouring research funding into its Institute of Plasma Physics (IPP) to conduct ongoing research into nuclear fusion.
Apparently China has been hard at work on its Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak (EAST) reactor, which is designed to sustain a controlled fusion reaction that can go on indefinitely at high temperatures. In 2009, researchers apparently sustained a 18-million-degree reaction for 400 seconds, and a 180-million-degree reaction for 60 seconds. Their goal for 2010 was to sustain a 180-million-degree reaction for more than 400 seconds, though it’s unclear if they achieved that. Moreover, IPP is apparently conducting research on hybrid fission-fusion reactors, though details are slim.
Perhaps most interesting: China doubled the IPP budget in 2009 over 2008, and the diplomatic chatter suggests 2010’s budget saw a significant boost as well. Amid choppy economic waters, such funding bumps indicate a real commitment on China’s part to figure out the fusion energy puzzle.
China’s sci-tech ambitions don’t stop there. While the evidence is anecdotal, the embassy seems to think the Chinese are pulling ahead in fields like quantum communications and even teleportation. To quote one diplomat’s description of a trip to the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) in Hefei: “A cursory walk through their labs seemed to indicate they had already succeeded in single-particle quantum teleportation and are now trying to conduct dual-particle quantum teleportation.”
Then there’s the Big Brother tech that we’ve come to expect from China. The same cable says the CAS’s Institute of Intelligent Machines (IIM) in Hefei has created a biometric system that identifies individuals through their pace and gait. “The device measure weight and two-dimensional sheer forces applied by a person’s foot during walking to create a uniquely identifiable biometrics profile,” the cable says, and can be installed covertly in a floor to surreptitiously collect biometric data.
Schumacher
Senior Member
Don't be too hard on your little cousin, you don't know how many even so-called economics 'experts' out there who write for or appear on major media outlets still blindly dish out this save less, spend more cr*p.
Of course, there's always the chance they give such advice to China precisely because they know it's rubbish.