Think Again: Education

Relax, America. Chinese math whizzes and Indian engineers aren't stealing your kids' future.

BY BEN WILDAVSKY | MARCH/APRIL 2011

"American Universities Are Being Overtaken."

Not so fast. There's no question that the growing research aspirations of emerging countries have eroded the long-standing dominance of North America, the European Union, and Japan. Asia's share of the world's research and development spending grew from 27 to 32 percent from 2002 to 2007, led mostly by China, India, and South Korea, according to a 2010 UNESCO report. The traditional research leaders saw decreases during the same period. From 2002 to 2008, the U.S. proportion of articles in the Thomson Reuters Science Citation Index, the authoritative database of research publications, fell further than any other country's, from 30.9 to 27.7 percent. Meanwhile, the number of Chinese publications recorded in the same index more than doubled, as did the volume of scientific papers from Brazil, a country whose research institutions wouldn't have been on anyone's radar 20 years ago.

This shift in the geography of knowledge production is certainly noteworthy, but as with the international study market, the United States simply represents a proportionally smaller piece of a greatly expanded pie. R&D spending worldwide massively surged in the last decade, from $790 billion to $1.1 trillion, up 45 percent. And the declining U.S. share of global research spending still represented a healthy increase in constant dollars, from $277 billion in 2002 to $373 billion in 2007. U.S. research spending as a percentage of GDP over the same period was consistent and very high by global standards. The country's R&D investments still totaled more than all Asian countries' combined.

Similarly, a declining U.S. share of the world's scientific publications may sound bad from an American point of view. But the total number of publications listed in the Thomson Reuters index surged by more than a third from 2002 to 2008. Even with a shrinking global lead, U.S. researchers published 46,000 more scientific articles in 2008 than they did six years earlier. And in any case, research discoveries don't remain within the borders of the countries where they occur -- knowledge is a public good, with little regard for national boundaries. Discoveries in one country's research institutions can be capitalized on by innovators elsewhere. Countries shouldn't be indifferent to the rise in their share of the research -- big breakthroughs can have positive economic and academic spillover effects -- but they also shouldn't fear the increase of cutting-edge discoveries elsewhere.

PHOTOILLUSTRATION; JUSTIN GUARIGLIA/EIGHTFISH; ISTOCKPHOTO

 SUBJECTS: CHINA, EDUCATION, INDIA
 

Ben Wildavsky, a senior fellow in research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation, is author of The Great Brain Race: How Global Universities Are Reshaping the World.

MALICEIT

12:31 PM ET

February 22, 2011

RE:

Yes lets quote PISA on our assessment. That's like fox news quoted onion that one time...

 

DRCIVIL

4:07 PM ET

February 26, 2011

Yah Right .....

Is this a joke? Am I suppose to feel better after reading this article? Those of us in higher education KNOW for a fact how our childrens falling behind. This is a serious issue and we need to address it.

 

GEZACSATH

5:08 AM ET

March 19, 2011

Um...

Is THIS a joke? You shouldn't be depressed if you'd actually read the article as paragraph 4 says, "...American students' performance is only cause for outright panic if you buy into the assumption that scholastic achievement is a zero-sum competition between nations, an intellectual arms race in which other countries' gain is necessarily the United States' loss. American competitive instincts notwithstanding, there is no reason for the United States to judge itself so harshly based purely on its position in the global pecking order. So long as American schoolchildren are not moving backward in absolute terms, America's relative place in global testing tables is less important than whether the country is improving teaching and learning enough to build the human capital it needs."

See? Reading can be fun!

 

YASST

12:42 PM ET

February 22, 2011

Disagree

"In fact, the U.S. education system has been having this sort of Sputnik moment since -- well, Sputnik."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but the U.S. economy and stable middle class in the age of the first Sputnik was very different and not reliant so much on advanced education.

Most current and near future job skills will actually require this higher level of aptitude that in the past was not necessary to have a comfortable lifestyle. Now it will be necessary.

 

BIG BOY

11:04 AM ET

February 23, 2011

Time Frame Consideration

The United States will continue to enjoy its position of dominance for decades to come and although there is tremendous momentum upwards coming from China, it will take China decades to reach a level that might challenge the US simply because the US got an enormous head start industrializing and creating a mature knowledge economy.

The is indeed large changes occurring in China but people need to realize that Rome wasn't build in a day and likewise, China will need 50 to 100 years to establish the vision that its leaders strive for. At least for now, people need to simply relax and enjoy the ride because by the time China is large enough for ordinary people to feel its gravitational pull, you would have been long dead.

 

TCH

9:37 PM ET

February 27, 2011

Information

Where did you get yout estimates from?

 

PUBLICUS

11:49 AM ET

March 1, 2011

Estimates???

There are 700 000 000 Chinese who live on USD $2 a day or less. The real market in the PRC consists of some 500 000 000 living in the crescent from Beijing down the East Coast and down around through Hong Kong to Macau. There's no doubt 500m is a lot of consumers and pairs of imported Italian shoes etc, but the CCP in Beijing will have to deal with the 800 000 000 who are its les miserables. I recall Mao's premier Cho En Lai when he was asked what he thought of the French Revolution, saying "It's too soon to tell." The mentality of China is inherently slow, even slower than that of the House of Bourbon which literally lost its head.

 

ADAM ONGE

12:14 AM ET

February 24, 2011

Standardized Tests Are One Dimensional

The PISA test like almost all "educational metrics" is a one-dimensional measure. How can you judge a complex human being, even a young child by using a single real number. A similar mistake is made in the Financial World when they over-use VAR.
I've been teaching kids math for over 30 years and I wouldn't dare to judge a student's ability using one single test. Besides human intelligence is multi-faceted and diverse. We should stop making social ad political decisions based on such simple one-dimensional metrics. Unfortunately the for the bean-counter bureaucrats, administrators and politicians a single number is all they can understand. They should be educated first!

 

DOV HENIS

7:10 AM ET

February 26, 2011

Science In A Technology-Tradeunion Culture?

US losing lead in science?

"The proportion of papers authored by US researchers, Wagner reported, dropped by 20 percent from 1996 to 2008."
News From AAAS
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/57994/

Just the proportion of the "papers"?
Otherwise the US "papers" have been, are, and prospected to be of scientific value?

See "Hope For Science?"
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJJM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/articles/248628

And see the following two samples of presently taboo, nonAAASkoshered nonpeerreviewable notes:

===========================

1st sample

Genes And Genomes Are Both Organisms

Genomes Are RNA-Evolved Template ORGANISMS
EpiDNAtics Is Not Epigenetics

From "Dispel Some Figments Of 2010 Science Imagination"
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJJM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/articles/245540

The "heritable or enduring changes" are epiDNAtics, not epigenetics. Alternative splicing is not epigenetics, even if/when not involving alteration of the DNA sequence. Earth life is an RNA world.

It's the RNAs that evolve proteins. AND IT'S THE RNAs THAT HAVE EVOLVED AND PRODUCE AND EMPLOY THE RNA and (stabler) DNA template genome organisms for carrying out life processes, i.e. for enhancing Earth's biosphere by proliferating RNAs, for augmenting and constraining as long as possible some energy by augmenting its, RNA's, self-propagation, constraining temporarily some of the total energy of the universe, all of which is nevertheless destined to fuel the ongoing cosmic expansion.

IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN AND IT STILL IS AN RNA EARTH LIFE.

Science should adjust its vision, comprehension and concepts.

Dov Henis
(comments from 22nd century)
Seed of Human-Chimp Genomes Diversity
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJJM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/articles/53079
03.2010 Updated Life Manifest
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/54.page#5065

==========================

2nd sample

Suggested 2010 Updated Concepts Of Evolution, Natural Selection
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJJM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/articles/261519?listPage=index
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJJM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/articles/261527?listPage=index

On The Nature And Origin Of Cosmic, Including Life, Evolution, Beyond Darwin And Einstein

The purpose of OUR life and of its promotion is ours to formulate and set. It derives solely from our cognition. The nature and origin of cosmic, including life, evolution:

Natural Selection Derives From Cosmic Expansion

"Evolution is energy temporarily constrained in a mass format to postpone reconversion of the mass to the energy fueling the cosmic expansion".

I.

Origin And Nature Of Natural Selection

Life is another mass format, a self-replicating mass format.
All mass formats are subject to natural selection.
Natural selection is the delaying conversion of mass to the energy fueling cosmic expansion.
Cosmic expansion is the reconversion of all mass to energy.

Natural Selection Updated 2010, Beyond Historical Concepts:

Natural Selection applies to ALL mass formats. Life, self-replicating format, is just one of them.
Natural Selection Defined:

Natural selection is E (energy) temporarily constrained in an m (mass) format. Period.

Natural selection is a ubiquitous property of each and every and all cosmic mass, spin array, formats. Mass strives to increase its constrained energy content in attempt to postpone its reconversion to energy and to postpone addition of its constitutional energy to the totality of the cosmic energy that fuels the cosmic expansion going on since Big Bang.

Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)

Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/260/122.page#4887

------------------------------------------

II.

Longevity Schmongevity Genes?

It's Not The Procedure, But The Concept That Is Absurd

Longevity Genes Search Reflects Science Decadence
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/320/122.page#6368

A. For most centenarians, longevity is written in the DNA.
A study of people who live past 100 reveals many genetic paths to a long life.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60772/title/For_most_centenarians%2C_longevity_is_written_in_the_DNA

B. Longevity is about survival, which is about "natural selection", which is about energy constrainment, which is about life evolution, which is about cosmic evolution. All mass is destined to reconvert to energy to fuel the ongoing cosmic expansion. This is why organisms and black holes etc., eat, digest energy in mass forms, to delay-postpone conversion to energy. This is evolution, which is natural selection, which is survival, which is longevity.

All mass formats age, degenerate back into enery. Life is a mass format. Searching for longevity genes is searching for evolution genes...

C. The search for longevity genes is a reflection of the 20th-21st centuries science decadence

Its concepts and terminology reflect the abandonment of basic science for adoption of the pretentious cancerous capitalist 20th-21st century technology culture.

Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)

-------------------------------------

III.

Rethink Astronomy And The Universe
( even without Quantum Unique Ergodicity, but with plain commonsense )

Galactic clusters formed by dispersion, not by conglomeration. The proof of this is their behaviour, including acceleration, as Newtonian bodies.

These bodies formed at the start of inflation, when all energy was still in mass format, and the inflation was the start of reconversion of cosmic mass into energy. Cosmic expansion acceleration rate differs for galactic clusters, proceeding according to Newton's laws, proportional to the various galactic clusters' masses.

Rethink
- A Basic Physics Tenet
- The Universe In Which We Live

A. Neutrino quick-change artist caught in the act
A transformation from one ‘flavor’ to another confirms the elusive elementary particles have mass and suggests a need for new physics.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/59825/title/Neutrino_quick-change_artist_caught_in_the_act

B. Adopt

- Each and every particle has mass.
- Dark energy and dark matter YOK. All the universe energy and mass are plainly accounted for.
- Higgs field/particle YOK. Mass forms below some value of D in E=Total[m(1 + D)] .
- Do not be afraid of embarrassingly obvious answers. Adopt space-distance in lieu of space-time.

C. And Rethink The Universe

By the presently available data our universe is a dual-cycle array, between the mass and energy poles.

One cycle, the present, started from singularity, with all cosmic energy in mass format, and it has been proceeding to reconvert all the mass resolved at the Big Bang back to energy, by expanding the cosmos, by accelerating away the galaxy clusters.

The other cycle, the cycle leading to singularity, will re-start when expansion consumes most of the mass that fuels it. Gravity will then overcome expansion and initiate reconversion of all the energy back to mass, to singularity, again.

Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)

Dispel Some Figments Of 2010 Science Imagination
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJJM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/articles/245540
03.2010 Updated Life Manifest
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/54.page#5065
28Dec09 Updated "Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)] "
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/180/122.page#3108
Evolution, Natural Selection, Derive From Cosmic Expansion
http://darwiniana.com/2010/09/05/the-question-reductionists-fear/

 

TCH

9:34 PM ET

February 27, 2011

Your point?

You seem to be a bit vague here.

 

GEZACSATH

5:13 AM ET

March 19, 2011

Peanut?

Most people come to read the FP articles, not windy comments in the peanut gallery.

 

FREETRADER

10:34 AM ET

March 20, 2011

There are many ways to define "crazy"...

and this is one of them.

 

DOV HENIS

7:48 AM ET

March 2, 2011

My Points...

My Points:

- From "Hope For Science?"
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2SF3CJJM5OU6T27OC4MFQSDYEU/blog/articles/248628

Nature of AAAS:
American Association Against Science, a trade-union-guild-establishment, the instrument for acquiring/exploiting public and industry funds for the promotion, maintenance and benefit of its management-administration-members.

- Present long stifled science (distinct from technology) may not evolve in a trade-union-guild-establishment culture framework.

DH

 

GEZACSATH

5:15 AM ET

March 19, 2011

Enough...

...we wanted to read someone else's blog, wouldn't we be there instead of here?
And that's not your point, that's someone else's point. Peanuthead.

 

ZAOTAR

1:21 PM ET

March 2, 2011

It's Good To See Some Critical Intelligence On This Issue

The US has always lagged well behind international competitors in these tests for the simple reason that large underperforming minority sectors drag us down. We have never been at the top of education for that reason, as this article rightly points out. And there is zero reason to think that will change, given our expanding population of low-performing Hispanic students. This is just a boring, obvious demographic truth. It's nothing new. We will never come close to beating Finland, Japan, Shanghai, etcetera. Never. We don't have the necessary demographics.

Likewise, the greatness of the American educational system lies in its top end, not in its averages. What's lost in the dialogue is the fact that America's elite undergraduate/graduate students and schools are superb -- and their educational success is what matters far more than the rest. The bottom 30% of our students are truly lousy, but their academic success was never going to matter much to our economic vitality anyways. Plain truth. Those students won't be using trigonometry in their occupation, and their inability to comprehend it doesn't really matter. Not worth getting worked up over.

It's certainly true that much of the developing world is increasing its educational competence in spectacular ways --- notably China. But that's inevitable. They weren't going to live in ignorance forever, nor should we want them too. This may eat away at American opportunities in technical and scientific fields, but that is impossible to stop from the American end. And there are huge benefits to the world as a whole from the increasing educational triumphs of nations like China etc.

 

JNELSON631

10:38 PM ET

March 4, 2011

How about the fact that our

How about the fact that our country attempts to educate everyone and not just the kids who aren't sewing nikes. Our schools would soar if we only educated a select group.

 

GEZACSATH

5:16 AM ET

March 19, 2011

Good point.

I hear the selection for higher learning is stiff from a young age in China.

 

RKLANN

12:29 AM ET

March 7, 2011

Why the difference in PISA results?

Canada and the US are both nations built on immigration, and are neighbors that share many similarities. Why does Canada routinely perform so highly on PISA and the US does not? What is Canada doing differently from the US in terms of education? Is there anything to be learned here?

 

FSILBER

7:00 AM ET

March 15, 2011

Difference between Canada and USA

The main difference is that Canada does not have a history of slavery like ours, and also that it is further from Mexico and Latin America. The impact of immigration depends on where your immigrants come from.

 

OODOODANOO

11:24 PM ET

March 9, 2011

Immigration helped during Cold War

After World War II, we gained a lot of scientists who had emigrated from Europe. During the 60's and 70's, we opened the doors to Chinese and Indian professionals. We provided a better opportunity to these people than they had in their own countries. We benefited.

Because their countries were basket cases -- either because they were re-building from the Second World War, or because they were enamored with socialism/communism, we had a free ride. Our manufacturers dominated here and abroad. People with only a high school education could apply to the local car factory and be set for life.

No more. Those countries have righted themselves. They have conquered our markets. They provide wonderful opportunities for their best and brightest, so they wouldn't even dream of coming here.

Meanwhile, we've decided that we're not really a nation of immigrants. There are tons of people right here who are bright and hardworking, thank you. If the government would just bring those jobs back here, they'd show you. No irony there.

This is a nation that wants low taxes but no cuts to entitlements. It doesn't just need education. It needs special ed.

 

FSILBER

6:58 AM ET

March 15, 2011

Not really the schools' fault, anyway.

It's not that our children are falling behind so much that we are not having children and instead are being replaced by Americans from historically low-achievement cultures and ethnic groups.

 

THE_OBSERVER

12:43 AM ET

March 16, 2011

The_Observer

And after several abortive attempts at "affirmative action", the University of California is now getting rid of SAT II as a requirement and instead asking for "life experience" and other soft requirements for entry???
This new entry policy is actually used to cut back on the number of Asians attending UC. After all there are many Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Indians take the specialist SAT II exams. Other American universities are also starting to use subjective criteria to restrict the Asian intake without having to give reasons for doing so.