China's Super Kids

nytimes ^ | November 22, 2002 | NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

[laurav]

Americans say that good pupils do well because they're smarter. Chinese say that good students do well because they work harder

A good point. I've seen research showing that if you tell kids "Wow, you did great, you're so smart" they're less motivated to try things than "Wow, you did great, you must have worked very hard." The first comes across as a statement of their identity, and they become afraid to fail. The second is simply an indication that they worked- something they have control over. So they're willing to take risks the next time.

[weikel]

My buddy Shuo here is about as smart as they come.

[CyberCowboy777]

I do not know what I think of this.

Should a child be in class or be in organized learning situations 12+ hours a day after the 5th birthday until 18? Maybe not, but they do it anyway.

If they are doing it, what should we do. If we continue as we are will we lose our position in the world?

What of our own people using "outside" the box techniques to teach their kids? Will those outside our failing public education system make par with the future of China?

[Cogadh na Sith]

'Course when you have 1,200,000,000 people to pick from, the top 5% is waaaaaaay up there as compared to anyone else.

[Charlie OK]

But since urban Chinese families now have only one child each are forced to abort any children beyond their firstborn, no expense is too great for one's "little emperor."

Gee, what a great idea! I bet this fact doesn't bother this brilliant writer. Not as long as they continue producing perfect little workers.

[egarvue]

This article reminds me of one of the original pro-communist reporters (NY Times, I forget his name for the moment) who was a correspondent in the USSR during the 20's and 30's. He refused to believe that there was massive famine under Stalinism, because he was shown only happy, productive farmers and ate sumptious meals in his hotel, all courtesy of Uncle Stalin. How can there be famine, he would write back in the NYSlimes, when they have such delicious food in such great quantities?

The same stupid reasoning applies here. The above writer was carefully shown only what the Chinese government WANTED him to see. What about the millions, the billions of peasant Chinese that will never get the education that the urban elite kids do? The author dismisses them in passing. Stupid leftie.

[chilepepper]

His name was Walter Duranty I believe...

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

what should we do.

Quit handing them free nuclear secrets and quit buying the billions of low-quality junk products they produce in their factories/prisons.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Not as long as they continue producing perfect little workers.

...and we continue buying what the little workers produce.

[Dan from Michigan]

But these kids know their calculus and are driven by a work ethic and thirst for education that make them indomitable.

Bingo. Damn! I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Kristof on anything.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

That will make our children's education better than theirs (???).

You are presuming that what was shown to the reporter was something other than scripted Chinese propaganda.

[aruanan]

A good point. I've seen research showing that if you tell kids "Wow, you did great, you're so smart" they're less motivated to try things than "Wow, you did great, you must have worked very hard." The first comes across as a statement of their identity, and they become afraid to fail. The second is simply an indication that they worked- something they have control over. So they're willing to take risks the next time.

Exactly right. The apparently phenomenal learning taking place among these Chinese kids is simply a reflection of a child's native intelligence (of whichever race) being able to flower in the right kind of environment. It used to be this way in the U.S. (and still is in some isolated places). 8th grade graduates around the turn of the 19th century were far more able than many college graduates today. The difference in approaches is seen even in subjects like art. Chinese students are taught how to draw. American students, by and large, are encouraged to be creative but are not rigorously taught the methods of drawing (lest their creativity be harmed and their self-esteem damaged by showing them that there are things they just do not know and must make an effort to learn). The Chinese students end up with the tools and skills that enable them to express their creativity. The American students end up trying to convince themselves and others that their execrable output is really a sign of their unique artistic vision.

[tortoise]

Of course, almost all extremely high sigma children become dysfunctional adults that don't accomplish much of real value when they are older. Encouraging this extreme savant-ism in children usually results in psychological damage that limits the practical application of what they learn.

[beckett]

I am surprised that you would put any stock in the ramblings of Kristof, dennis. The guy makes his living by tearing down his own country, after all. Let him put his money where his mouth is and send his kids or grandkids to school in China.

The numbers depicting the supposed superiority of foreign students vis-a-vis American students are always skewed due to heterogeneous populations in the USA, the lower quarters of which steadily improve over the course of one or two generations, but nevertheless drag down the average at any given point in time in a constantly renewing cycle. Even our underclass, once thought to be permanently disenfranchised, has shown signs of dimishishing in size and improving in prospects over the last few decades.

Bottom line, we out-produce everybody in the world, providing the best standard of living and more wealth than any other country on the planet. If the Chinese (or anybody else) can't say the same, how much does it really matter what their schoolkids can do?

[Fiddlstix]

Bump