Political & Elections

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

RE: US school systems are still ahead

Abyss · Senior Member

Canuckguy wrote:
I was thinking specifically of the Zhejiang-Simon Fraser agreement, where less than 10 students from each school are involved each year.

I have also been told that since computer science is such that the quality of students can be quantified , the students are not as prestige conscious as students in the more qualitative disciplines. In short, talent scattered more widely among institutions.

The best estimate I have for quality of students in the field is probably this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACM_International_Collegiate_Programming_Contest#2010_World_Finals

As you can see, we in North America are falling behind the Eastern Europeans and the Chinese in recent years. MIT looks like a good match for Tsinghua, but the performance of St. Petersburg and Shanghai Jiao Tong left me breathless.
The performance of the elites are really disappointing. Maybe it is time to stop social engineering for a change?

I don't put much thought into stuff like this, honestly (extremely *small* sample size, 5 hour timed test).

I tend to think that US value creation in high tech is virtually unrivaled - the lead isn't what it once was, but high tech within the US is certainly one of the most healthy industries.

-- Edited by Abyss on Thursday 10th of February 2011 06:35:18 AM

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

Abyss wrote:

Hard for me to imagine any undergraduate institution in the world has better students than CalTech, to be honest. Not a knock on Tsinghua (as it's a much bigger school and would therefore be much harder to maintain percentile advantages).

I was thinking specifically of the Zhejiang-Simon Fraser agreement, where less than 10 students from each school are involved each year.

I have also been told that since computer science is such that the quality of students can be quantified , the students are not as prestige conscious as students in the more qualitative disciplines. In short, talent scattered more widely among institutions.

The best estimate I have for quality of students in the field is probably this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACM_International_Collegiate_Programming_Contest#2010_World_Finals

As you can see, we in North America are falling behind the Eastern Europeans and the Chinese in recent years. MIT looks like a good match for Tsinghua, but the performance of St. Petersburg and Shanghai Jiao Tong left me breathless.

The performance of the elites are really disappointing. Maybe it is time to stop social engineering for a change?

Abyss · Senior Member

Canuckguy wrote:
You are right. I would love to see a similiar program between Tsinghua and CalTech/MIT, or Beijing and Harvard and see how the students match up. I have this funny feeling they are still ahead, although the gap may be smaller.

My original point still stands. If one can get into Beijing, Tsinghua, or specialty institutions such as the Chinese Conservatory of Music, it makes more sense to stay. Otherwise, if you are a B/C student, and can afford it, try your luck elsewhere.

Hard for me to imagine any undergraduate institution in the world has better students than CalTech, to be honest. Not a knock on Tsinghua (as it's a much bigger school and would therefore be much harder to maintain percentile advantages).

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

Abyss wrote:

Canuckguy wrote:
A better description of Asian students coming to our shores are the B students, who could not make it back home. The top graduates usually stay home and attend their national institutions.
A few years ago, MacLean Magazine told the story of Zhejiang University striking a deal with Simon Fraser University to train computer specialists that are capable of working in in both cultures. The program was intended to last five years, where the elite students chosen would spend the first year at home, then spend alternate years at the host school.
It did not take them long to run into trouble. They discovered quickly that the Chinese students not only are much stronger in their second language than the Canadians, they are far ahead in their sciences as well. Although the Zhejiang faculty was willing to help to tutor the Canadians, and do so on their own time, it was finally decided to allow the Chinese students to graduate a year early, while the Canadians had to put in five years.

Zhejiang is a strong institution, but it is not Beijing or Tsinghua.

Simon Fraser? It is one of the top medium size schools in Canada.

A bit unfair, don't you think? You'd want to measure those schools by which percentile of the population they serve.

You are right. I would love to see a similiar program between Tsinghua and CalTech/MIT, or Beijing and Harvard and see how the students match up. I have this funny feeling they are still ahead, although the gap may be smaller.

My original point still stands. If one can get into Beijing, Tsinghua, or specialty institutions such as the Chinese Conservatory of Music, it makes more sense to stay. Otherwise, if you are a B/C student, and can afford it, try your luck elsewhere.

Abyss · Senior Member

nbachris2788 wrote:
I have been in Asia many times in my life, have grown up in an Asian household while knowing lots of other Asian families, and am currently working as an English teacher in an Asian country.
Your epxeriences, while not invalid, deal with a very specific and small segment of the Asian student population. The vast majority of Asian students will not go to America and study in American universities.

With that said your experiences certainly weigh more. I just don't understand how one can even construct an argument that Asians lack motivation/creativity though.

South Korea and Japan have the highest patent production rates *in the world*. I'm not sure what other facts are needed to completely immolate your hypothesis.

-- Edited by Abyss on Tuesday 8th of February 2011 10:25:57 PM

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Abyss wrote:

Ummm, I never said otherwise. I doubt your experiences have had more weight though.

I have been in Asia many times in my life, have grown up in an Asian household while knowing lots of other Asian families, and am currently working as an English teacher in an Asian country.

Your epxeriences, while not invalid, deal with a very specific and small segment of the Asian student population. The vast majority of Asian students will not go to America and study in American universities.

Abyss · Senior Member

Canuckguy wrote:
A better description of Asian students coming to our shores are the B students, who could not make it back home. The top graduates usually stay home and attend their national institutions.
A few years ago, MacLean Magazine told the story of Zhejiang University striking a deal with Simon Fraser University to train computer specialists that are capable of working in in both cultures. The program was intended to last five years, where the elite students chosen would spend the first year at home, then spend alternate years at the host school.
It did not take them long to run into trouble. They discovered quickly that the Chinese students not only are much stronger in their second language than the Canadians, they are far ahead in their sciences as well. Although the Zhejiang faculty was willing to help to tutor the Canadians, and do so on their own time, it was finally decided to allow the Chinese students to graduate a year early, while the Canadians had to put in five years.

Zhejiang is a strong institution, but it is not Beijing or Tsinghua.

Simon Fraser? It is one of the top medium size schools in Canada.

A bit unfair, don't you think? You'd want to measure those schools by which percentile of the population they serve.

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

nbachris2788 wrote:

I meant do you have experience with the average Asian student? The B students in Korea or Japan who will go to their national universities?
The Asian students who come to America tend to be a self-selective group. Usually, only the best or the wealthiest/connectedest go to America. You're not getting an accurate sample.

A better description of Asian students coming to our shores are the B students, who could not make it back home. The top graduates usually stay home and attend their national institutions.

A few years ago, MacLean Magazine told the story of Zhejiang University striking a deal with Simon Fraser University to train computer specialists that are capable of working in in both cultures. The program was intended to last five years, where the elite students chosen would spend the first year at home, then spend alternate years at the host school.

It did not take them long to run into trouble. They discovered quickly that the Chinese students not only are much stronger in their second language than the Canadians, they are far ahead in their sciences as well. Although the Zhejiang faculty was willing to help to tutor the Canadians, and do so on their own time, it was finally decided to allow the Chinese students to graduate a year early, while the Canadians had to put in five years.

Zhejiang is a strong institution, but it is not Beijing or Tsinghua.

Simon Fraser? It is one of the top medium size schools in Canada.

Abyss · Senior Member

nbachris2788 wrote:

Abyss wrote:

nbachris2788 wrote:
Do you have any experience dealing with Asian schools and Asian students?
PS Asian-American students are completely irrelevant to this topic so just to avoid confusion, "Asian" will always refer to students in China, Korea, and Japan.

Yeah, both Chinese & Taiwanese. They send quite a few over to California engineering schools. I never noticed a lack of motivation or creativity. I worked directly with a few (~5 total maybe?) on group projects while in school.

I never studied with Korean/Japanese - but I've met a few (engineers) casually and came away extremely impressed.

I meant do you have experience with the average Asian student? The B students in Korea or Japan who will go to their national universities?
The Asian students who come to America tend to be a self-selective group. Usually, only the best or the wealthiest/connectedest go to America. You're not getting an accurate sample.

Ummm, I never said otherwise. I doubt your experiences have had more weight though.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Abyss wrote:

nbachris2788 wrote:
Do you have any experience dealing with Asian schools and Asian students?
PS Asian-American students are completely irrelevant to this topic so just to avoid confusion, "Asian" will always refer to students in China, Korea, and Japan.

Yeah, both Chinese & Taiwanese. They send quite a few over to California engineering schools. I never noticed a lack of motivation or creativity. I worked directly with a few (~5 total maybe?) on group projects while in school.

I never studied with Korean/Japanese - but I've met a few (engineers) casually and came away extremely impressed.

I meant do you have experience with the average Asian student? The B students in Korea or Japan who will go to their national universities?

The Asian students who come to America tend to be a self-selective group. Usually, only the best or the wealthiest/connectedest go to America. You're not getting an accurate sample.

Abyss · Senior Member

BigG wrote:

My impression of Asian asian engineers is that they are "a meter wide and a kilometer deep" in their specialities. There is cooperation between specialities to accomplish projects but, for example, a structural engineer specializing in poured concrete will be "abysmally" ignorant of electrical engineering.

American asians and asians from Asia educated in the US have a much broader overall grasp of the various engineering disciplines.

I think that is why they use US schools.

Just one person's experience from 8 to 10 projects involving multinational groups...

I agree. The "Asian Asians" I've worked with (all Chinese) definitely have 'ultra-specialization'. However, that might be simply a function of what it actually takes to get a US work visa. An American company is not going to sponsor an H1-B who is a jack of all trades. They can pick up any number of American engineers to fulfill that role. And if they can't they'll probably try to pick up someone who speaks English better (Canadian/Australian/English/Indian, and then to the Europeans) before going for an East Asian.

BigG · Guru

My impression of Asian asian engineers is that they are "a meter wide and a kilometer deep" in their specialities. There is cooperation between specialities to accomplish projects but, for example, a structural engineer specializing in poured concrete will be "abysmally" ignorant of electrical engineering.

American asians and asians from Asia educated in the US have a much broader overall grasp of the various engineering disciplines.

I think that is why they use US schools.

Just one person's experience from 8 to 10 projects involving multinational groups...

Abyss · Senior Member

nbachris2788 wrote:
Do you have any experience dealing with Asian schools and Asian students?
PS Asian-American students are completely irrelevant to this topic so just to avoid confusion, "Asian" will always refer to students in China, Korea, and Japan.

Yeah, both Chinese & Taiwanese. They send quite a few over to California engineering schools. I never noticed a lack of motivation or creativity. I worked directly with a few (~5 total maybe?) on group projects while in school.

I never studied with Korean/Japanese - but I've met a few (engineers) casually and came away extremely impressed.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Abyss wrote:

nbachris2788 wrote:
I'm talking about Asian students, not Asian-American students.

I didn't see it for either group.

Do you have any experience dealing with Asian schools and Asian students?

PS Asian-American students are completely irrelevant to this topic so just to avoid confusion, "Asian" will always refer to students in China, Korea, and Japan.

Abyss · Senior Member

nbachris2788 wrote:
I'm talking about Asian students, not Asian-American students.

I didn't see it for either group.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Abyss wrote:

nbachris2788 wrote:

But what I do think is true is that Asian students are never taught how to motivate themselves. They're driven by fear and force, but rarely by curiosity (which they have in droves). This curiosity and self-motivation remain dormant for way too long, and by the time they get to university, it's too late. Either they remain mentally passive forever, or they just burn out.

Not in my experience. At all.

I'm talking about Asian students, not Asian-American students.

Abyss · Senior Member

nbachris2788 wrote:

But what I do think is true is that Asian students are never taught how to motivate themselves. They're driven by fear and force, but rarely by curiosity (which they have in droves). This curiosity and self-motivation remain dormant for way too long, and by the time they get to university, it's too late. Either they remain mentally passive forever, or they just burn out.

Not in my experience. At all.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

That's an interesting position, nbachris.

I agree with you.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

The problem with Chinese (and Korean, and maybe Japanese too) education is it's authoritarian, top-down nature. Students are taught to be passive receptors of education and are constantly bombarded with learning 24/7. Add the monumentally crucial university entrance exam, and what you get are students who are hand-fed education and driven on a narrow one-way street towards a certain goal.

But what happens after that goal has been achieved?

I believe this is why seemingly brilliant Asian high school students don't automatically turn into brilliant university students. For one, there's burnout. But also importantly, they've never been taught to pursue education on their own or to find out what their interests are. Everything has been structured and delivered to them. If anything, they've only learned what the most efficient and discreet ways to avoid education are.

I hate the "creativity" line of argument. It reeks of old racist assumptions of viewing out-groupers as soulless and inhuman. It's lazy and self-serving.

But what I do think is true is that Asian students are never taught how to motivate themselves. They're driven by fear and force, but rarely by curiosity (which they have in droves). This curiosity and self-motivation remain dormant for way too long, and by the time they get to university, it's too late. Either they remain mentally passive forever, or they just burn out.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

pima wrote:

How old?

The eventual dominance of China in the global economy honestly isn't even a discussion. It's merely a "when".

I recall a decade ago +/- a few yrs that it wasn't China for WHEN, but Japan. They were buying up RE in the US like a 8 yr old eating candy on a Halloween, yet a decade later it is Japan WHO?

Additionally, I would say this when it comes to educational dominance:

When the global world starts sending their kids to China for college over the US ( HYSPM), that is the day we, as Americans, agree they hold dominance in the educational world.

Tell me if I have this fact wrong...McDonald's, Taco Bell KFC are US companies, correct? Apple and Microsoft are US, right? Name me a Chinese company that the avg American is willing to pay a weeks salary for dinner? Look at a grand opening of Mc D's in China and they are wrapped around the block to get a Big Mac.

Bring a Chinese automaker to the US and you will not see an American pay over the sticker price or lining up to get one. Take a Jeep Grand Cherokee to China and it would be like driving a Porsche here.

The US has something that China doesn't...allure! Allure creates demand, demand creates allure. Pure economics, money makes the world go round, but way to make money is demand.

You think the US will have "allure" forever? How much longer can you keep coasting on a mid-20th century belief that America is the beacon and everywhere else is a garbage dump? Have you ever been to East Asia for any significant amount of time? Or do you just believe what you read in the papers?

It's funny that you bring up cars, since I can't think of one American car brand that people aspire to own. And brands can quickly achieve remarkable turnarounds. Hyundai is a good example of a joke company that was laughed at barely two decades ago that has transformed itself into a quality brand. There's no reason why a Chinese motor company can't do the same.

Using the top American universities to tout American education is laughable, considering that the great great majority of Americans will never ever attend those universities.

In fact, that's a common line of argument I see used by people whose patriotism seem to require them to unconditionally toot America's horn even in the face of problems or even failure. Just so long as the most elitest of elite American schools/companies/people are better than the most elitest of elite Country X's schools/companies/people, all is well. It seems that in the face of individual powerlessness and confusion, they're resorting to having avatars fight for them.

Yes, McDonald's and Starbucks are big. And this proves what, exactly? Those multinational corporations aren't some good old American family businesses. They became big a long time ago when there was less competition in the world, and have since become global brands that maintain internaitonal popularity by attracting international talent. It's not as if it's some enclosed American environment where top American students are funneled into the company and showing the rest of the world what America can do.

The real question is how many more McDonald's and Starbucks could start right now? These things are relics of an America-centric past. You can't keep clinging to the past to stay relevant in the future.

Every single one of your arguments relies heavily on maintaining that "allure" and dominance that America achieved in the past century. This does not bode well for the future. I'm not a fan of China and would rather have America as the leading power, but it still irritates me when people just lazily assume that America has some kind of innate appeal and superiority that doesn't need constant innovation.

Abyss · Senior Member

Canuckguy wrote:
Here is something interesting from Texas:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/19/appeals_court_upholds_affirmative_action_plan_at_university_of_texas

I find this particularly interesting:
While the percent admissions plan, the decision says, "may have contributed to an increase in overall minority enrollment, those minority students remain clustered in certain programs, limiting the beneficial effects of educational diversity." The decision compares the enrollments of different colleges within the University of Texas at Austin. In social work, for example, nearly a quarter of students are Latino and more than 10 percent are black. But in business, only 14 percent of students are Latino and 3 percent are black.

What about physics?

Another dog bites man story. It infuriates Liberals to no end that higher quant majors are very exclusively white/asian.

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

Abyss wrote:

Canuckguy wrote:

I guess my attempt at provocation has not worked, if all I got is one single response. Surely this has to be a major issue in the US, is it not?

It obviously is. Liberals don't believe in data, so they aren't gonna say anything. Conservatives don't want to appear as racists. So they won't say anything.

Here is something interesting from Texas:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/19/appeals_court_upholds_affirmative_action_plan_at_university_of_texas

I find this particularly interesting:

While the percent admissions plan, the decision says, "may have contributed to an increase in overall minority enrollment, those minority students remain clustered in certain programs, limiting the beneficial effects of educational diversity." The decision compares the enrollments of different colleges within the University of Texas at Austin. In social work, for example, nearly a quarter of students are Latino and more than 10 percent are black. But in business, only 14 percent of students are Latino and 3 percent are black.

What about physics?

Abyss · Senior Member

Canuckguy wrote:

I guess my attempt at provocation has not worked, if all I got is one single response. Surely this has to be a major issue in the US, is it not?

It obviously is. Liberals don't believe in data, so they aren't gonna say anything. Conservatives don't want to appear as racists. So they won't say anything.

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

Abyss wrote:

Canuckguy wrote:
If selection of immigrants based on skills such as Australia and Canada make such a difference in outcome, does this mean the groups right of centre have a point about immigration reform?

No, of course not. Lets continue to import illiterate peasants. There is no need to worry about skill based qualifications for immigration - the US economy is just so strong, so rich, and so powerful we'll always be the best in everything regardless of what anyone says.

I guess my attempt at provocation has not worked, if all I got is one single response. Surely this has to be a major issue in the US, is it not?

Abyss · Senior Member

pima wrote:

Really? People said the same 50 years ago regarding any East Asian company.

Now look what we have:

Toyota/Honda/Nissan/Mitsubishi Heavy Industries/Fuji Heavy Industries/Sony/Canon/Toshiba/Hitachi/Panasonic/Sharp/Samsung/LG/HTC/Foxconn/Daewoo/Hyundai/Keppel/STX/Acer.

Sure, and we also sell our automobile products like GM and Chrysler in Asia too.

What is your point? The corporate world is global in every aspect. That doesn't mean anything to the sky is falling and China is going to own the world.

Let's also time warp 50 yrs, because China has a 1 child rule, they have a negative population growth...in 50 yrs population wise they are not going to be as big as they are now. They will be facing the exact problem we are facing with our baby boomers...not enough people paying into the system as workers for those that are taking out benefits as the same time because they are too old to work.

As it always works in the global economy companies outsource to the cheapest country, but the more companies go to one particular country the higher the cost rises due to demand. Eventually it will peak and they move onto a new country with lower costs, which than puts the country into an economic tailspin...i.e. can we say Japan, Taiwan, etc. China is peaking now, give it a few yrs and they will be Taiwan or Japan.

You said something stupid regarding the lack of world class Chinese products. Of course there are none. That means nothing on a 50 year timeline.

No East Asian country had globally recognized brands 50 years ago. Now look at the global market place.

pima · Guru

Really? People said the same 50 years ago regarding any East Asian company.

Now look what we have:

Toyota/Honda/Nissan/Mitsubishi Heavy Industries/Fuji Heavy Industries/Sony/Canon/Toshiba/Hitachi/Panasonic/Sharp/Samsung/LG/HTC/Foxconn/Daewoo/Hyundai/Keppel/STX/Acer.

Sure, and we also sell our automobile products like GM and Chrysler in Asia too.

What is your point? The corporate world is global in every aspect. That doesn't mean anything to the sky is falling and China is going to own the world.

Let's also time warp 50 yrs, because China has a 1 child rule, they have a negative population growth...in 50 yrs population wise they are not going to be as big as they are now. They will be facing the exact problem we are facing with our baby boomers...not enough people paying into the system as workers for those that are taking out benefits as the same time because they are too old to work.

As it always works in the global economy companies outsource to the cheapest country, but the more companies go to one particular country the higher the cost rises due to demand. Eventually it will peak and they move onto a new country with lower costs, which than puts the country into an economic tailspin...i.e. can we say Japan, Taiwan, etc. China is peaking now, give it a few yrs and they will be Taiwan or Japan.

Abyss · Senior Member

Canuckguy wrote:
If selection of immigrants based on skills such as Australia and Canada make such a difference in outcome, does this mean the groups right of centre have a point about immigration reform?

No, of course not. Lets continue to import illiterate peasants. There is no need to worry about skill based qualifications for immigration - the US economy is just so strong, so rich, and so powerful we'll always be the best in everything regardless of what anyone says. confuse

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

Canuckguy wrote:

The argument is still raging over PISA.

Here is an interesting piece:

http://www.nationalreview.com/agenda/255997/are-tino-sanandaji-and-nea-same-page-us-educational-performance-reihan-salam

and Tino's response:

http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-well-do-above-average-american.html

This debate is still bothering me at a visceral level so I went back to Tino's original article:

http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-about-pisa-scores-usa.html

Is it really appropriate to divide student performance along racial lines? Do we not sink or swim together as a nation whether you like it or not?

If selection of immigrants based on skills such as Australia and Canada make such a difference in outcome, does this mean the groups right of centre have a point about immigration reform?

Abyss · Senior Member

pima wrote:

How old?

The eventual dominance of China in the global economy honestly isn't even a discussion. It's merely a "when".

I recall a decade ago +/- a few yrs that it wasn't China for WHEN, but Japan. They were buying up RE in the US like a 8 yr old eating candy on a Halloween, yet a decade later it is Japan WHO?

Additionally, I would say this when it comes to educational dominance:

When the global world starts sending their kids to China for college over the US ( HYSPM), that is the day we, as Americans, agree they hold dominance in the educational world.

Tell me if I have this fact wrong...McDonald's, Taco Bell KFC are US companies, correct? Apple and Microsoft are US, right? Name me a Chinese company that the avg American is willing to pay a weeks salary for dinner? Look at a grand opening of Mc D's in China and they are wrapped around the block to get a Big Mac.

Bring a Chinese automaker to the US and you will not see an American pay over the sticker price or lining up to get one. Take a Jeep Grand Cherokee to China and it would be like driving a Porsche here.

The US has something that China doesn't...allure! Allure creates demand, demand creates allure. Pure economics, money makes the world go round, but way to make money is demand.

Really? People said the same 50 years ago regarding any East Asian company.

Now look what we have:

Toyota/Honda/Nissan/Mitsubishi Heavy Industries/Fuji Heavy Industries/Sony/Canon/Toshiba/Hitachi/Panasonic/Sharp/Samsung/LG/HTC/Foxconn/Daewoo/Hyundai/Keppel/STX/Acer.

Just a few from the top of my head.

To doubt the economic prospects of China seems mindboggling. China, at it's core, is quite similar to the South Korea/Japan/Taiwan/Singapore. It's just 50 years behind them.

-- Edited by Abyss on Tuesday 18th of January 2011 07:51:52 PM

-- Edited by Abyss on Tuesday 18th of January 2011 07:52:37 PM

Abyss · Senior Member

john doe wrote:

"When the global world starts sending their kids to China for college over the US ( HYSPM), that is the day we, as Americans, agree they hold dominance in the educational world."

Exactly, I had a bunch of students who are from China. How many Americans go to China for school?

I don't think that American University excellence is declining. That was never in doubt.

The question relates to the levels below that.

-- Edited by Abyss on Tuesday 18th of January 2011 07:56:42 PM

-- Edited by Abyss on Tuesday 18th of January 2011 07:57:02 PM

Abyss · Senior Member

Bullet wrote:
Ah, the arrogance of "it's inevitable". I wish I had a nickle for every pundit out there who stood on the mountain and shouted at the world "It's inevitable!" only ot be proven wrong.

Funny, my hometown ISN'T owned by the Japanese as was predicted in the 80s. Or the Suadi's as was predicted in the 90s.

As to S. Korea and Taiwan? Nice that they have a strong economy, pretty impressive with what they've built over there. It still makes their economic strength LESS than the State of California, much less the U.S.

Look, I also think it's gonna be pretty hard to stop the juggernaut that is the potential Chinese economy. They do stand a chance to replace the US, mostly because the size of the population as a potential market.

But let's not forget that history has shown time and again that nothing is ever "Inevitable"....

And if Japan had ten times the population of that it currently has it would absolutely dominate the US economically.

I wonder what country has a population that is ten times the size of Japan.

Well...here's some simple writing on the wall.

(GDP per capita)*(Population)=GDP.

US: ($45,000)*(300,000,000) = 13.5T

China: 13.5T/(1.3B) = $10,384 per capita GDP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita

and/or

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita

john doe · Guru

"When the global world starts sending their kids to China for college over the US ( HYSPM), that is the day we, as Americans, agree they hold dominance in the educational world."

Exactly, I had a bunch of students who are from China. How many Americans go to China for school?

pima · Guru

How old?

The eventual dominance of China in the global economy honestly isn't even a discussion. It's merely a "when".

I recall a decade ago +/- a few yrs that it wasn't China for WHEN, but Japan. They were buying up RE in the US like a 8 yr old eating candy on a Halloween, yet a decade later it is Japan WHO?

Additionally, I would say this when it comes to educational dominance:

When the global world starts sending their kids to China for college over the US ( HYSPM), that is the day we, as Americans, agree they hold dominance in the educational world.

Tell me if I have this fact wrong...McDonald's, Taco Bell KFC are US companies, correct? Apple and Microsoft are US, right? Name me a Chinese company that the avg American is willing to pay a weeks salary for dinner? Look at a grand opening of Mc D's in China and they are wrapped around the block to get a Big Mac.

Bring a Chinese automaker to the US and you will not see an American pay over the sticker price or lining up to get one. Take a Jeep Grand Cherokee to China and it would be like driving a Porsche here.

The US has something that China doesn't...allure! Allure creates demand, demand creates allure. Pure economics, money makes the world go round, but way to make money is demand.

Bullet · Senior Member

Abyss wrote:

Bullet wrote:

Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan all follow very similar models on risk / reward for their industries, based on capitalism. Industries in these countries are willing to take the risks required for new innovation and entrepreneurship becuase they know if their innovations are successful, they can achieve those rewards.

China's model, while shifting somewhat towards this paradigm, still stiffles this type of ingenuity. Granted, they have the will and the means to become leaders in manufacturing in many of the industries you mentioned, but until the Chinese leadership fully embraces capitalism, they will always lag behind in innovation (where the true measure of economic longevity can be measured). And if the Chinese were to fully embrace capitalism, they may find just a few bumps in the road that make your predictions of their impending world domination just a bit tougher than you continually espouse.

Does China currently have MANY advantages towards making your predictions true? Certainly. But they are just that, advantages. Not garauntees. There are always obstacles that suddenly and unexpectedly pop up. If this wasn't the case, the Yankees would be World Series Champions every year.....

-- Edited by Bullet on Monday 17th of January 2011 07:02:42 AM

-- Edited by Bullet on Monday 17th of January 2011 07:03:00 AM

I'm not sure what you're talking about. China's per capita income might be 10% of that of the US. They aren't even second world. They *are* a third world country. Talking about China's adherence to capitalism now is like comparing it to Taiwan or South Korea in 1960. Both of those countries weren't model capitalist countries back then. They were highly protectionist planned economies with some elements of the free market. The *same* exact position China is in now.

The eventual dominance of China in the global economy honestly isn't even a discussion. It's merely a "when".

Ah, the arrogance of "it's inevitable". I wish I had a nickle for every pundit out there who stood on the mountain and shouted at the world "It's inevitable!" only ot be proven wrong.

Funny, my hometown ISN'T owned by the Japanese as was predicted in the 80s. Or the Suadi's as was predicted in the 90s.

As to S. Korea and Taiwan? Nice that they have a strong economy, pretty impressive with what they've built over there. It still makes their economic strength LESS than the State of California, much less the U.S.

Look, I also think it's gonna be pretty hard to stop the juggernaut that is the potential Chinese economy. They do stand a chance to replace the US, mostly because the size of the population as a potential market.

But let's not forget that history has shown time and again that nothing is ever "Inevitable"....

Abyss · Senior Member

Bullet wrote:

Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan all follow very similar models on risk / reward for their industries, based on capitalism. Industries in these countries are willing to take the risks required for new innovation and entrepreneurship becuase they know if their innovations are successful, they can achieve those rewards.

China's model, while shifting somewhat towards this paradigm, still stiffles this type of ingenuity. Granted, they have the will and the means to become leaders in manufacturing in many of the industries you mentioned, but until the Chinese leadership fully embraces capitalism, they will always lag behind in innovation (where the true measure of economic longevity can be measured). And if the Chinese were to fully embrace capitalism, they may find just a few bumps in the road that make your predictions of their impending world domination just a bit tougher than you continually espouse.

Does China currently have MANY advantages towards making your predictions true? Certainly. But they are just that, advantages. Not garauntees. There are always obstacles that suddenly and unexpectedly pop up. If this wasn't the case, the Yankees would be World Series Champions every year.....

-- Edited by Bullet on Monday 17th of January 2011 07:02:42 AM

-- Edited by Bullet on Monday 17th of January 2011 07:03:00 AM

I'm not sure what you're talking about. China's per capita income might be 10% of that of the US. They aren't even second world. They *are* a third world country. Talking about China's adherence to capitalism now is like comparing it to Taiwan or South Korea in 1960. Both of those countries weren't model capitalist countries back then. They were highly protectionist planned economies with some elements of the free market. The *same* exact position China is in now.

The eventual dominance of China in the global economy honestly isn't even a discussion. It's merely a "when".

soccerguy315 · Guru

teaching kids how to bubble should only take like 5 minutes at the very most. Then another minute to stress that the kids should make sure they bubble in the answer for the question they are answering, and not on the line for different questions.

IMO what you described says more about the teachers than the tests. If the teachers teach the material, the kids will get mostly right answers on the tests. It's not that complicated. These tests are not that difficult.

here's a graph of OECD spending on k-12 education:
http://mercatus.org/publication/k-12-spending-student-oecd

Of course, then you have places like Detroit discussing whether or not they should close half their schools and expand class sizes to 60+ students: http://detnews.com/article/20110112/SCHOOLS/101120356/Without-aid--DPS-may-close-half-of-its-schools

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

"Teaching to the test" (to me) implies practice on the kinds of questions that are asked on standardized tests, while ignoring developing critical thinking skills. Instead of learning how to develop computational or writing or other critical thinking skills, time might be spent on pre-testing before the test.

I saw teachers actually take up valuable class time in the weeks ahead of the big standardized tests that started in 2nd grade in how to bubble in answers, how to read the questions and even taking practice tests.

Years ago, our current school board president who is a huge public school/education advocate and with several degrees in Education opted to have her children sit out ALL of the standardized tests. She figured they were better off in the Principal's office reading or doing packets than testing. I am not sure she was wrong.

Bullet · Senior Member

Abyss wrote:

Bullet wrote:

What China is VERY good at is making technicians who are very good at taking the information they've stolen from other countries and backwards engineering their own products.

What they are NOT very good at is creating entrepreneurs with any sense of creativity to solve the "next" problem, which is what is usually required to make the next big break-through in technology.

Also not sure if the ruling class in China is ready to fully embrace all of the aspects of capitalism that would support the creation of effective entrepreneurs in their society.

Japan/South Korea/Taiwan were all the same way. They initially copied and then innovated once they caught up. Now they are global leaders in many things - Shipbuilding, Consumer Electronics, Automobile Design/Manufacture.
It's an unrealistic benchmark to even think that China has first tier technologies - of course they don't. But they are catching up at an extremely rapid pace and soon there will be Chinese multi-nationals competing against US/Japanese/European firms in every industry.

-- Edited by Abyss on Sunday 16th of January 2011 06:22:38 PM

-- Edited by Abyss on Sunday 16th of January 2011 06:22:57 PM

Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan all follow very similar models on risk / reward for their industries, based on capitalism. Industries in these countries are willing to take the risks required for new innovation and entrepreneurship becuase they know if their innovations are successful, they can achieve those rewards.

China's model, while shifting somewhat towards this paradigm, still stiffles this type of ingenuity. Granted, they have the will and the means to become leaders in manufacturing in many of the industries you mentioned, but until the Chinese leadership fully embraces capitalism, they will always lag behind in innovation (where the true measure of economic longevity can be measured). And if the Chinese were to fully embrace capitalism, they may find just a few bumps in the road that make your predictions of their impending world domination just a bit tougher than you continually espouse.

Does China currently have MANY advantages towards making your predictions true? Certainly. But they are just that, advantages. Not garauntees. There are always obstacles that suddenly and unexpectedly pop up. If this wasn't the case, the Yankees would be World Series Champions every year.....

-- Edited by Bullet on Monday 17th of January 2011 07:02:42 AM

-- Edited by Bullet on Monday 17th of January 2011 07:03:00 AM

soccerguy315 · Guru

"teaching to the test" is a weird phrase to me... it gets thrown around a lot but I don't really know what it means. Does it mean the state history test asks when the Civil War was, and the kids are supposed to bubble "1861-1865"? Then if the teacher teaches them this fact, they are "teaching to the test"??? If the test shows a graph and asks about it (eg: how many people owned a yellow shirt?"), and the teacher taught the kids how to read a bar graph, did the teacher "teach to the test"???

I was never in a class that stressed end of year state exams, they were more of a nuisance and time for us to get out of class and take it easy, if anything (like many CC posters, I'm sure you could say I was "above average"). I did get a 2 week crash course on 20th century US history junior year before the state test because I was taking "history of the americas" (an IB class that goes exploration to 1900), but it is what it is.

Abyss · Senior Member

Bullet wrote:

What China is VERY good at is making technicians who are very good at taking the information they've stolen from other countries and backwards engineering their own products.

What they are NOT very good at is creating entrepreneurs with any sense of creativity to solve the "next" problem, which is what is usually required to make the next big break-through in technology.

Also not sure if the ruling class in China is ready to fully embrace all of the aspects of capitalism that would support the creation of effective entrepreneurs in their society.

Japan/South Korea/Taiwan were all the same way. They initially copied and then innovated once they caught up. Now they are global leaders in many things - Shipbuilding, Consumer Electronics, Automobile Design/Manufacture.

It's an unrealistic benchmark to even think that China has first tier technologies - of course they don't. But they are catching up at an extremely rapid pace and soon there will be Chinese multi-nationals competing against US/Japanese/European firms in every industry.

-- Edited by Abyss on Sunday 16th of January 2011 06:22:38 PM

-- Edited by Abyss on Sunday 16th of January 2011 06:22:57 PM

Bullet · Senior Member

What China is VERY good at is making technicians who are very good at taking the information they've stolen from other countries and backwards engineering their own products.

What they are NOT very good at is creating entrepreneurs with any sense of creativity to solve the "next" problem, which is what is usually required to make the next big break-through in technology.

Also not sure if the ruling class in China is ready to fully embrace all of the aspects of capitalism that would support the creation of effective entrepreneurs in their society.

Bogney · Senior Member

We better keep our military strong. We can become the new North Korea, impoverished but really scary.

Abyss · Senior Member

Bogney wrote:

Do you know how the numbers compare? Do the Chinese have more excellent engineers / scientists / per capita than the U.S.? Given their population, that would be a shock. If not, then their population is catching up to ours, which is a bummer but somewhat inevitable if theor society is progressing isn't it?

Obviously a third world country doesn't have the same level of technical talent on a per capita level.

It's 100% inevitable that their economy, in the next 100 years, will absolutely dwarf every other economy (yes, this includes India).

Bogney · Senior Member

Do you know how the numbers compare? Do the Chinese have more excellent engineers / scientists / per capita than the U.S.? Given their population, that would be a shock. If not, then their population is catching up to ours, which is a bummer but somewhat inevitable if theor society is progressing isn't it?

Abyss · Senior Member

Bogney wrote:

Ah, after a brief respite, into the Abyss again.

Doesn't Chinese economic growth have more to do with cheap labor than "better" education?

How do their elite math / science students compare to ours in terms of ability, and number?

How do you stack up against your Chinese counterparts?

Chinese economic growth, currently has to do more with cheap labor. However, in about 20-30 years there will be a significant shift in the work that China is doing (ie: their patent production is currently on a massive growth trend and it will only continue).

Their elite students are very, very good. The amount of research done by Chinese born scientists is extremely large portion of worldwide scientific research (lower than what their per capita share should be - but certainly good for their economy size). And you clearly haven't seen what graduate science education looks like in the US. It's possible to actually have some classes taught in Mandarin within the US because the professor and every single student speak it (realize that it's possible that graduate classes can sometimes have only a few students, 5-10). Oh, did I mention there are quite a lot of them as well?

I don't know how I stack up with my Chinese counterparts. During my education there were a few Chinese students that I studied with. They were above average for my major (MechE).

-- Edited by Abyss on Sunday 16th of January 2011 04:22:27 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Very interesting article- but I do highly question the very last sentence of the article. Are we really fostering "creative" learning? It seems to me (and I admit, I have VERY limited experience with public schools as I have only been in contact with three districts) that we are "teaching to the test" because schools are afraid of not making AYP. This kind of teaching to the test doesn't really seem like teaching our kids to be independent thinkers.

IMO- we really do need the federal and state government to give a lot more leeway to the teachers/principals. In the district I work in, they can't even really take field trips because they are on such a tight schedule to bring their students up to Michigan standards. (Mind you- the reason that they're failing is because the school is almost all ELL kids who are given the same test no matter what language they speak or what level of English they're at.) Creativity IS what makes American education great IMO, but it seems like that "creativity" is being stifled.

But hey- what do I know?

Bogney · Senior Member

Ah, after a brief respite, into the Abyss again.

Doesn't Chinese economic growth have more to do with cheap labor than "better" education?

How do their elite math / science students compare to ours in terms of ability, and number?

How do you stack up against your Chinese counterparts?

Abyss · Senior Member

Who cares about Western Europe? Entire countries are performing at levels that are .75 standard deviations above the US *average*. If I'm looking for future economic growth I'm not going to look at the US.

Taiwan, South Korea - and more importantly - China (although a proper Chinese average wasn't done, I'm still sure they'd absolutely maul the US in math/science scoring).

Bogney · Senior Member

Nice posts again, Cannuckguy. It is nice to have a little optimism on a Sunday morning counterbalancing Big G's predicitions of imminent dire consequences (not saying your wrong Big G).

It always struck me as absurd to compare a very small very homogenous country like Finland to the U.S. It should be far easier to control an educational system the size of Finland's than one in the U.S., which are generally balkanized local systems anyway.

We are smart, dammit! smile