- 在線時間
- 741 小時
- 最後登錄
- 20-9-29
- 國民生產力
- 8
- 附加生產力
- 3924
- 貢獻生產力
- 0
- 註冊時間
- 11-8-13
- 閱讀權限
- 10
- 帖子
- 1684
- 主題
- 20
- 精華
- 0
- 積分
- 5616
- UID
- 788348
 
|
本帖最後由 jolalee 於 14-12-2 01:05 編輯
I came across this interesting article on the examination of the US & China education systems:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/ ... nese-super-schools/
Although the bulk of the introduction was about the American legislation on education reforms, the book review in the middle section of the article is quite an interesting read--
...Yong Zhao’s Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Dragon? Why China Has the Best (and Worst) Education System in the World. Zhao, born and educated in China, now holds a presidential chair and a professorship at the University of Oregon. He tells us that China has the best education system because it can produce the highest test scores. But, he says, it has the worst education system in the world because those test scores are purchased by sacrificing creativity, divergent thinking, originality, and individualism. The imposition of standardized tests by central authorities, he argues, is a victory for authoritarianism. His book is a timely warning that we should not seek to emulate Shanghai, whose scores reflect a Confucian tradition of rote learning that is thousands of years old. Indeed, the highest-scoring nations on the PISA examinations of fifteen-year-olds are all Asian nations or cities: Shanghai, Hong Kong, Chinese Taipei, Singapore, Korea, Macao (China), and Japan.
Zhao explains that China has revered a centrally administered examination system for at least two thousand years as the sure path to professional esteem and a career in government. A system called keju [科舉] lasted for thirteen hundred years, until 1905, when it was abolished by the emperor of the Qing dynasty. This system maintained Chinese civilization by requiring knowledge of the Confucian classics, based on memorization and writing about current affairs. There were local, provincial, and national examinations, each conferring privileges on the lucky or brilliant few who passed. Exam scores determined one’s rank in society. The keju was a means of social mobility, but for the ruling elite, it produced the most capable individuals for governing the country.
Keju, writes Zhao, was China’s fifth great invention, “along with gunpowder, the compass, paper, and movable type.” Because it was seen as meritocratic, the keju system was adopted in other East Asian nations such as Japan, Korea, and Vietnam. It “shaped East Asia’s most fundamental, enduring educational values.” Zhao holds keju responsible for China’s inability to evolve into a modern scientific and technological nation:
For example, the Chinese used their compass mainly to help find building locations and burial sites with good fengshui—not to navigate the oceans and expand across the globe as the West did. Gunpowder stopped at a level good enough for fireworks, but not for the modern weaponry that gave the West its military might.
China had all the elements necessary for an industrial revolution at least four hundred years before Great Britain, but keju diverted scholars, geniuses, and thinkers away from the study or exploration of modern science. The examination system, Zhao holds, was designed to reward obedience, conformity, compliance, respect for order, and homogeneous thinking; for this reason, it purposefully supported Confucian orthodoxy and imperial order. It was an efficient means of authoritarian social control. Everyone wanted to succeed on the highly competitive exams, but few did. Success on the keju enforced orthodoxy, not innovation or dissent. As Zhao writes, emperors came and went, but China had “no Renaissance, no Enlightenment, no Industrial Revolution.”
Being raised mainly in a foreign land myself, i am not sure how well known this problem is to Chinese parents in general. I suspect friends here who has decided to send their kids to International Schools recognize this issue better than most local parents in HK. 科舉是否中國千多年科技等停滯不前的致命原因? or is the problem usually much greater than the parts to the whole? I would love to hear the views from fellow parents here in the IS forum. |
|