3 ms·

The last paragraphs of the article directly refute your point: “While that’s important, for me the real significance of these results is that they refute the c

by ovi256 16y ago

The last paragraphs of the article directly refute your point: “While that’s important, for me the real significance of these results is that they refute the commonly held hypothesis that China just produces rote learning.” “Large fractions of these students demonstrate their ability to extrapolate from what they know and apply their knowledge very creatively in novel situations,” he said. The Chinese generation that will create their Google, Facebook or whatever is just growing up, it seems.

jerf 16y ago
I'd like someone to explain to me how doing well on an international standardized test somehow refutes the rote learning claim. I mean, yes, I am every bit as skeptical as I sound, but it is a serious question as well, if someone has a concrete answer. It's very easy to say that these test results prove that they are not just pulling things out of their memory banks, but that doesn't mean there's any actual logic or truth behind that claim, and I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to get from the results to the claim.
- tygorius 16y ago
  There are too many variables in the Shanghai equation to claim a refutation, but since lowering the reliance on rote memorization was specifically mentioned as an improvement that school administrators had made, presumably you and the local school officials see limited benefit in emphasizing rote memorization. As to how the evaluator got to his claim of creative reasoning in the students, the OECD test includes both multiple-choice and open-response questions. Presumably the latter was the basis for the evaluator's assessment.
jasonjei 16y ago
Mr. Schleicher says that while reviewing the test results. The LSATs, for instance, is a test that requires knowledge applied creatively, too, but it doesn't mean successful test-takers are able to produce Google or Facebook. In fact, successful test-taking implies conformity with the graded standard, and is intended to measure how students stack up against a defined standard. Would you say the US-equivalent of Advanced Placement exams be a good measure of creativity? It requires creativity in solutions too--but the real question is, can you TEST creativity? Can you test the ability for people to see problems? A test, by nature, has already presented a problem. It doesn't test if they can see a problem and devise a solution. With enough practice, you can answer every tested problem type on a "standardized" test. A Chinese student told me that when he was studying for the SATs he looked for every single problem type and that once he had considered every problem type, it was just a matter of applying the same strategy to the problem. The key is that since the test is "standardized," you can look for the standard types of problems. I'm questioning the culture, I suppose. Not the people. The culture in China hasn't really changed.[1] [1] An interesting tidbit: Mao observed the effects of Confucianism and how it stilted innovation in China and launched the "Cultural Revolution" as a means to deprecate Confucianism.
- tygorius 16y ago
  > _it doesn't mean successful test-takers are able to produce Google or Facebook._ Seriously, how many Googles or Facebooks does China need to create internally for its needs? Is there any reason to believe their internal markets are being significantly held back by too much derivative software? As to Mao and the stifling of innovation, my limited reading of history doesn't paint him as a big champion of diversity during the Great Leap Forward. How many millions died because of that bright idea of encouraging farmers to kill the evil sparrows that were eating the people's grain?

by ovi256 16y ago

jerf 16y ago

I'd like someone to explain to me how doing well on an international standardized test somehow refutes the rote learning claim. I mean, yes, I am every bit as skeptical as I sound, but it is a serious question as well, if someone has a concrete answer. It's very easy to say that these test results prove that they are not just pulling things out of their memory banks, but that doesn't mean there's any actual logic or truth behind that claim, and I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to get from the results to the claim.

tygorius 16y ago
There are too many variables in the Shanghai equation to claim a refutation, but since lowering the reliance on rote memorization was specifically mentioned as an improvement that school administrators had made, presumably you and the local school officials see limited benefit in emphasizing rote memorization. As to how the evaluator got to his claim of creative reasoning in the students, the OECD test includes both multiple-choice and open-response questions. Presumably the latter was the basis for the evaluator's assessment.

jasonjei 16y ago

Mr. Schleicher says that while reviewing the test results. The LSATs, for instance, is a test that requires knowledge applied creatively, too, but it doesn't mean successful test-takers are able to produce Google or Facebook. In fact, successful test-taking implies conformity with the graded standard, and is intended to measure how students stack up against a defined standard. Would you say the US-equivalent of Advanced Placement exams be a good measure of creativity? It requires creativity in solutions too--but the real question is, can you TEST creativity? Can you test the ability for people to see problems? A test, by nature, has already presented a problem. It doesn't test if they can see a problem and devise a solution. With enough practice, you can answer every tested problem type on a "standardized" test. A Chinese student told me that when he was studying for the SATs he looked for every single problem type and that once he had considered every problem type, it was just a matter of applying the same strategy to the problem. The key is that since the test is "standardized," you can look for the standard types of problems. I'm questioning the culture, I suppose. Not the people. The culture in China hasn't really changed.[1] [1] An interesting tidbit: Mao observed the effects of Confucianism and how it stilted innovation in China and launched the "Cultural Revolution" as a means to deprecate Confucianism.

tygorius 16y ago
> _it doesn't mean successful test-takers are able to produce Google or Facebook._ Seriously, how many Googles or Facebooks does China need to create internally for its needs? Is there any reason to believe their internal markets are being significantly held back by too much derivative software? As to Mao and the stifling of innovation, my limited reading of history doesn't paint him as a big champion of diversity during the Great Leap Forward. How many millions died because of that bright idea of encouraging farmers to kill the evil sparrows that were eating the people's grain?