East Asian Education System - Essay Example

Are the East Asian education systems a model for Australia? Name of student Name of the Course Professor’s Name Name of the School (University) Date Are the East Asian education systems a model for Australia? Many of students from East Asian countries have over the years reported to be doing well in international tests. In fact, the results the recent ranking by the Gaokao, a Chinese University Entrance Exam, reveals that the East Asian countries are once again on the top globally (Marginson 2011, p. 590). This has attracted the attention of other countries globally, including Australia, to try and analyze the reasons behind the success of East Asia education. In fact, the general push on Australia is to learn from “the best” and apply the lessons on its education system. It paints a picture that these education systems should be emulated by other aspiring academic institutions in the world. Many of research papers have praised this education system and tried to make a global comparison. There has been, however, an emerging shift of adapting new systems and abandoning the old ones in the East Asia. There are reforms now undergoing regarding education systems and policies such as long school hours, meritocracy, rigorous testing and direct instruction. What is emerging is that these education systems are deep rooted in the culture of East Asian countries. These are some of the reasons showing the other side of such education systems that international observers have long praised and envied. This paper will examine the reasons why Australia should not adapt the East Asia education systems as they are not a model to its situation. First, the East Asia education systems have a lot of adverse effects on the well being and health of a student. Students are burdened with excessive academic work such that they have little or no time for social life (Marginson 2002, p. 420). There have been concerns of high cases of depression and anxiety reported on the East Asia students compared to other students globally. Again, the physical health among young has been reported to be on decline (Ramburuth & McCormick 2001 p. 337). The students are prone to a lot of pressure to perform well academically leaving them vulnerable for these social problems. An ideal education system should allow the student to grow and develop all-rounded to face the world with confidence. What the East Asian education systems are doing is produce mentally and physically tortured graduates who may lack strength to face the world (Marginson 2002, p. 430). The mental health of a student is very important for his development in life. During schooling, the mental health should be nurtured well to ensure there is storage of important ideas. Second, concerns have been raise about lack of creativity and entrepreneurial talents among students. There has been a lot of emphasis on theoretical knowledge and concepts. Creativity is diminishing due to adherence to rigid structures and in structures regarding examination and testing. On the other hand, shortage of entrepreneurial talents is because the systems have failed to ignite the sleeping giants within students to change the world with their skills (Marginson 2002, p. 420). Many of students therefore are still focused at seeking formal employment instead of using their skills to innovate and change the world. Entrepreneurship is a process that bridges the gap between science and market. This is to say that the students engage in process of scanning the environment to identify gaps in terms of customer needs and then use their skills to bring value to the market. The education institutions in the United States are best examples for instilling entrepreneurial culture to students. Third, the East Asia education systems have rising levels of inequity in funding as well as student outcomes. In terms of funding, there is a big gap in how government fundings are distributed between school districts. This can be traced from the tradition of sorting students based on their exam performance and placing them in different quality schools, a system known as meritocracy. This process makes schools unequal in terms of design. Further, social inequalities are manifested when some students are hired for quality supplementary tutoring. There are long hours that have been set aside for tutoring classes where the parents go an extra mile to hire tutors to supplement their children with knowledge. The social inequalities arise because this means that the prosperous families will have money to get quality education service as compared to the poor families. This room for social inequalities may affect the psychology of students who may develop an attitude towards the education they are receiving as compared to other students. It is a sort of discrimination in quality of education for all. Further, the focus of East Asia education systems is only on performing well on tests. Here, no clarity is used to define learning, and instead what is emphasized is the recall of the content. For example, Singapore education program did away with subjects such as history and philosophy simply because these two were not tested in international education tests such as PISA (Mok 2007, p. 440). The reasoning was that students should be taught only what should be tested to enhance their mastery of content. This is an emphasis on the recall of the content only. On the other hand, in Australia, students enjoy a wide range of subjects that enhance their broad thinking. The East Asian countries spend less than Australia on technology. This is because PISA and other international tests do not test anything to do with the use of technology. To such countries, it is like they don’t see the need of technology in education curriculum. The education systems of East Asia countries are rigid to students. For example a student moving from mainland China to Hong Kong would not be offered resources to upgrade his English standards to catch up with the his fellow students in the same class (Mok 2007, p. 442). Instead that student is placed on a lower grade class. What is ironic to note is that Hong Kong prides itself for maintaining high levels of equity in education system. For example in 2010, about 67% of total 12700 form 5 students had qualified to proceed for form 6, but only 35000 students actually proceeded (Louie & Ryan, 2007, p. 410). There is general lack of options available for students. All students are treated the same as there is no individual assessment of a student’s potential. When students are proceeding to another class they should be presented with a range of options on what they can take or do in order to pursue the subjects of their choice. As it is now, these systems are too rigid for students. Further, the success of East Asia countries based on tests-taking is rooted on Confucius culture. Many countries in East Asia such as China, Singapore, Hong Kong and Korea have a strong link with Confucius culture (Healey 2008, p. 336). This culture treasures passing of exams as the basis for achieving success in social mobility. The education stakeholders in these systems such as parents and teachers are highly dedicating to helping their students pass the exams. Students, on the other hand, are extremely diligent to proving they are worth the success by working hard to passing the exams and tests. Many researches show that students from this region who migrate to other parts of the world display the same performance on the international tests because of the cultural legacy of Confucius (Healey 2008, p. 337). For this reason copying these education systems means copying culture of other countries which definitely may lead to loss of identity. Australia is not suffering from lack of cultures to show to international community and therefore it should not follow in this trap. Moreover, the systems are based on teacher-centered practices. These practices are pedagogical in nature as they emphasize giving instructions directly, memorization of rote as well as transmission of knowledge (Mazzarol, Soutar & Seng 2003, p. 95). This further reveals the rigidity of such systems. The students are supposed to adhere to strict instructions from teachers on how to carry out assignments. This reduces their creativity and therefore they have no room to generate alternatives in solving problems. As a result, the students grow to be poor decision-makers. The idea of a teacher transmitting knowledge to students paints a picture that a teacher is the sole source of knowledge. This is a misleading statement. In learning, people should interact and learn from each other through discussions. It is in such forums that the learners will be able to understanding various concepts well. They will be able to interrogate theoretical concepts and ideas and know how to apply them in real life situations. The East Asia countries are recently borrowing ideas from West education systems. The idea for defining ability of students through excessive testing is being done away with. Instead, just as other countries in West such as the United States and Australia, the East Asia countries as focusing on the individual talents and uniqueness and giving them an opportunity to exploit their individual potential. This aims at reducing the pressure on students in terms of excessive exam testing. Further, the work burden is being reduced. There is emphasis of students competing against themselves to exploit their unique potential and talents instead of competing with other students. This aims to broaden the thinking of students and live a self fulfilling life defined by purpose for serving humanity in a unique way. Again, such West education systems promote the culture of creativity and entrepreneurship (Mok 2007, p. 435). The students are able to relate what they have learnt in schools to real live situations and hence focus on solving the day to day problems as well exploit the prevailing opportunities using the skills they have acquired in school. Finally, the education systems in most East Asia countries are too much in hands of private sector. While the governments struggle to make education systems equal to all children the private sector sets and defines the direction of education in these countries (Healey 2008, p. 340). When this happens, it is likely for the quality of education to be compromised. The long hours children spend out of class are commercialized by private individuals leaving poor parents unequal from their rich counterparts. In conclusion, the education systems in East Asia countries can only be termed as decorated ones in the face of international domain. Many countries have for long admired these systems and expressed interests of emulating them. However, in this paper it has been explained that these systems concentrate on teaching their students the “art of mastery” where they concentrate on recalling the content of what they have been taught. Most of these systems are based on Confucius cultural legacy that emphasized on tests passing to achieve success. This is the reason why most of students from these counties perform very well in international tests that are based on theory. Australia should not fall into a trap of emulating these cultural practices that merely emphasize on exam-testings. For such reasons, Australia should not adapt the East Asia education systems as they are not a model to its situation. References Healey, M, N 2008, ‘Is higher education in really ‘internationalising’?’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 333-355. Louie, K & Ryan, J 2007, ‘False dichotomy? ‘Western’ and Confucian’ concepts of scholarship and learning’, Journal of Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 404- 417. Marginson, S 2002, ‘Nation-building universities in a global environment: the case of Australia’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 409-428. Marginson, S 2011, ‘Higher education in East Asia and Singapore: rise of the Confucian model’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 587-611. Mazzarol, T, Soutar, N, G & Seng, Y 2003, ‘The third wave: future trends in international education’, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 90-99. Mok, H, K 2007, ‘Questing for internationalization of universities in Asia: critical reflections’, Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 11, no.3-4, pp. 433-454. Ramburuth, P & McCormick, J 2001, ‘Learning diversity in higher education: a comparative study of Asian international and Australian students’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 333-350. Read More

Moreover, the systems are based on teacher-centered practices. These practices are pedagogical in nature as they emphasize giving instructions directly, memorization of rote as well as transmission of knowledge (Mazzarol, Soutar & Seng 2003, p. 95). This further reveals the rigidity of such systems. The students are supposed to adhere to strict instructions from teachers on how to carry out assignments. This reduces their creativity and therefore they have no room to generate alternatives in solving problems.

As a result, the students grow to be poor decision-makers. The idea of a teacher transmitting knowledge to students paints a picture that a teacher is the sole source of knowledge. This is a misleading statement. In learning, people should interact and learn from each other through discussions. It is in such forums that the learners will be able to understanding various concepts well. They will be able to interrogate theoretical concepts and ideas and know how to apply them in real life situations.

The East Asia countries are recently borrowing ideas from West education systems. The idea for defining ability of students through excessive testing is being done away with. Instead, just as other countries in West such as the United States and Australia, the East Asia countries as focusing on the individual talents and uniqueness and giving them an opportunity to exploit their individual potential. This aims at reducing the pressure on students in terms of excessive exam testing. Further, the work burden is being reduced.

There is emphasis of students competing against themselves to exploit their unique potential and talents instead of competing with other students. This aims to broaden the thinking of students and live a self fulfilling life defined by purpose for serving humanity in a unique way. Again, such West education systems promote the culture of creativity and entrepreneurship (Mok 2007, p. 435). The students are able to relate what they have learnt in schools to real live situations and hence focus on solving the day to day problems as well exploit the prevailing opportunities using the skills they have acquired in school.

Finally, the education systems in most East Asia countries are too much in hands of private sector. While the governments struggle to make education systems equal to all children the private sector sets and defines the direction of education in these countries (Healey 2008, p. 340). When this happens, it is likely for the quality of education to be compromised. The long hours children spend out of class are commercialized by private individuals leaving poor parents unequal from their rich counterparts.

In conclusion, the education systems in East Asia countries can only be termed as decorated ones in the face of international domain. Many countries have for long admired these systems and expressed interests of emulating them. However, in this paper it has been explained that these systems concentrate on teaching their students the “art of mastery” where they concentrate on recalling the content of what they have been taught. Most of these systems are based on Confucius cultural legacy that emphasized on tests passing to achieve success.

This is the reason why most of students from these counties perform very well in international tests that are based on theory. Australia should not fall into a trap of emulating these cultural practices that merely emphasize on exam-testings. For such reasons, Australia should not adapt the East Asia education systems as they are not a model to its situation. References Healey, M, N 2008, ‘Is higher education in really ‘internationalising’?’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 333-355.

Louie, K & Ryan, J 2007, ‘False dichotomy? ‘Western’ and Confucian’ concepts of scholarship and learning’, Journal of Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 404- 417. Marginson, S 2002, ‘Nation-building universities in a global environment: the case of Australia’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 409-428.

Read More