Myth or reality? Assessing the validity of the Asian model of education.

Hawkins, John N.

It was not long ago that Asian countries were considered poor and under developed. Even Japan, a G8 country and well-established OECD member, was viewed as a struggling nation that produced products of questionable quality after the devastation of World War II. Economists often credit the phenomenal continued growth and development of these countries to the quality of their human resources, the talented and hard-working students and graduates of their educational systems, and the specific nature of those systems. These societies achieved universal primary and secondary education long ago and are now entering the era of massification of their tertiary sectors. It should be noted at the outset that Asia covers a broad regional footprint--one that includes some of the poorest nations on earth. In this article, Asian will refer to primarily the traditional Confucian societies of China (including Hong Kong), Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore, although many of the points made below apply to other parts of Asia as well, such as Vietnam, Thailand, and India.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

As these economies continue to grow and flourish, challenging those in Europe and North America (to say nothing of the rest of the world), one wonders: what is it that is different about these systems and approaches to education, and how are they changing as the pressures of globalization begin to impinge on traditional values and mores? Can we say that there is an "Asian model" of education? Probably not any more than we can say there is a Western or American model of education in any pure sense. But clearly there are some distinctive characteristics of each that are quite discernible, and this distinctiveness, influenced by Confucian thought and practice, offers other nations seeking to develop their economies an approach that has been tested and found to be successful. For the United States and other industrialized nations, these characteristics create both a challenge and an opportunity to learn new pedagogical strategies to maintain competitiveness in a globalizing world.

The Cultural Question

An educational methodologist colleague, in addressing the achievement gap between Asian and US elementary students as expressed on cross-national achievement tests, could only comment, "I guess we could all become Chinese if we wanted to compete with them." He, of course, was referring to the cultural stereotype that he and many other American educators often have of Asian students, both those they have observed in Asia and Asian-Americans in their own classrooms: they work harder, are more disciplined, are quiet, tend to be overachievers, excel in mathematics and science, and so on. The data to support these observations are available and often highlight what are generally called Confucian traits of self-denial, frugality, fortitude, patience, self-discipline, rote learning, memorization, and delayed gratification. The relationship between the rise of Confucianism and later neo-Confucianism and what might be called an Asian work ethic, an entrepreneurial spirit, has been widely discussed both within the region and outside. Suffice it to say there is a large literature both in Asia and outside the region that finds this correlation well substantiated. From the time Confucianism took hold in the Song dynasty (960 AD), these values spread throughout Chinese society (and other East Asian settings, such as Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong), and came to characterize both formal and information education.

The nationwide civil service examination system and the memorization that came to characterize this exercise drove the educational system and served as a powerful motivator not only for the ambitious but also for ordinary citizens as well. While the system did not work flawlessly, it was in many an open merit-based opportunity structure that by the mid-20th century imbedded the very powerful notion that successfully pursuing education led to a successful and prosperous life. It was a sector where hard work paid off.

The Educational System

While one may debate the idea of "Asian values," what about the educational structure in general? Is there something here that might help us understand why students help us understand why students from the region outperform students elsewhere in almost all categories? Commentators are usually quick to point out that the State plays a disproportionate role in the organization, guidance, and structure of education in the region. Certainly it plays a more central role than it does in the United States, where local states and school boards are dominant. It sets the tone and leadership, especially in administration, curriculum, and finance for both the pre-collegiate and collegiate levels. The educational structure is highly centralized and therefore is somewhat advantaged in maintaining more uniform high quality throughout what are diverse societies. What are some of the advantages of this form of structural centralization? Such systems obviously have more control over curriculum and can set national standards that teachers and students can more easily follow. Textbooks are coordinated, providing a more coherent set of learning material for both students and teachers that are in fact shorter and more efficient than those used in many other industrialized nations, where textbooks are produced by private publishers and may or may not reflect national wishes or goals for teaching and learning.

Other structural features that may contribute to better learning is a longer elementary and middle school day, broken up with numerous recesses for exercise; class sizes, that while larger than in the United States, are better organized; and time that is used very constructively with whole class learning and less tracking than elsewhere. Later, many opportunities exist for post-secondary students either go to a traditional college or university, or enter one of the vocational technical school that are typically closely aligned with the private sector.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Finally, supplementary education in the form of private tutoring and after school activities round out a unique integrated learning experience for Asian children. Deplored by many and praised by others, these programs come in many varieties and are sometimes referred to as "cram" schools. They range from individualized tutoring to large competitive companies. They are tied closely to the examination culture of these systems and are attended by 60 to 80 percent of all elementary and middle school students. In many respects they offer the students and parents an alternative to the standardized national curriculum. They can serve both gifted and slower learners, helping them to maximize their potential and providing the individualized instruction that may be lacking in the conventional school system.

In addition to these general academic efforts there also exist extracurricular science and mathematics clubs, among others, to focus on specific areas of the curriculum. Taken together with the mainstream school system, this form of supplementary education gives Asian students a competitive academic edge over students in many other countries. While they remain controversial and are regularly the object of official scrutiny, there is a strong enough belief among families that this additional hard work, in a quality-controlled environment, is essential to giving their child the extra chance they need to do the best they can in school and in the competition to enter the best colleges and universities, thus enhancing their life changes in the world of work.

Within the educational system, the role of the teacher is of course paramount. Here, too, there are some features of teacher preparation and practice that could be said to be part of an Asian model of education, particularly at the precollegiate levels. This is a complicated subject, but some critical points emerge that are relevant when comparing Asian teacher preparation with that in the United States. For example, teaching in Asia is a well respected and often well paid profession, and teacher training is focused on the craft of teaching with substantial mentoring taking place. Furthermore, comparative studies of Asian and US teaching experiences often show that Asian teachers generally fell "supported" and US teachers generally feel "alone." Contrary to the what many believe, classrooms in Asian elementary and middle schools are lively, inquisitive, inquiring places, with teachers and students engaged in mutual discussion and teachers utilizing a variety of instructional approaches to achieve the goals of nationwide standards and goals. Finally, teachers are in the classroom to teach, to concentrate on instruction according to a national set of expectations that both they and the students understand, and to focus on the group and not specific ability levels. They are not expected to be counselors, clinical psychologists, and disciplinarians. These roles are expected of the family and other professionals.

By focusing on teaching, student development is academically-oriented and both teacher and student are able to concentrate on learning and achievement.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Motivation and Achievement

What is there about the Asian learning experience that results in overall high levels of achievement? What motivates students to gaman, to try harder? Although some scholars quibble about the accuracy of cross-national test results like Trends in Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS) and Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), those tests and others consistently show Asian students outperforming US and other nations' students in a variety of subject matters. Even when Asian students migrate to the United States for advanced work, they are proportionately awarded more doctorates and STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) degrees, win more awards, and continue to outperform students who are the result of the US precollegiate system. They have been imbued with a culture of aspiration, achievement, and motivation, values that not too long ago were found in the United States as well. Several factors contribute to this value system, including but no limited to some of the structural aspects of the precollegiate educational system mentioned above. At critical points in the school cycle, teachers and parents take great and focused interest in the student pedagogical experience. The discontinuity between school and home is less than in other national settings, and both parents and teachers believe much more in the value of effort than in innate ability. A well known Chinese proverb speaks to the value of hard work when it encourages students to, in their studies, climb mountains in order to achieve the success that is expected of them.

It is in this latter area that data consistently show that educators and parents in Asia believe as strongly as the Confucian scholar Xun Zi did over 2,000 years ago that "achievement consists in never giving up." This means that making errors is a natural part of learning and not to be mocked or considered failing. Grades and testing results are a matter of public knowledge, encouraging students to work harder. Students are not grouped into ability or intelligence groups but taught in the whole class method, and when groups are formed they are meant to consist of a diverse cohort of ability. In other words, effort trumps the idea of innate ability every time. This is especially true at the middle school level (a critical time in child development) where extra effort is made to keep class size manageable, inculcate a feeling of belonging and care, and engage both parents and teachers in the learning process. One reason for this extra attention is of course the forthcoming regional and national exams that will determine so much for the child's future. So at a time when students in other nations (especially the United States) begin to fall off the academic track, Asian students are beginning to climb the achievement ladder. It is also here, however, where high stakes testing begins and students in some Asian settings such as China are tracked based on the quality of the high schools they test into. But by this time, their basic educational skills have been well-developed, and with the general expansion of higher education, there are beginning to be a wide range of post-secondary opportunities for them.

Are students stressed as they begin to enter the high-stakes testing levels of schooling? Contrary to popular thinking on this topic, a variety of studies show that they are no more stressed than students in other settings and in fact may be less stressed about test taking because they are so thoroughly prepared. This is not to say, however, that such forms of testing do not involve hard work and endurance and, depending on the setting, it does take a toll. This is being addressed through the reform of the post-secondary national examination system in many Asian nations.

Higher Education

When confronted with the reality of high population and limited space, Asian students know that competition to any university in their country requires sacrifice now and reward later. Gaining access to these top institutions is well worth this sacrifice. Those bright students who are able to attain admittance to schools are rewarded for their sacrifice. What happens to all these bright, well-educated kids once they go through "examination hell" and finally end up in a university or college (higher education institutions--HEI) (or vocational technical school)? The first point is that the numbers going to tertiary education have been steadily increasing and in some settings (Japan and Korea) have matched or overtaken other industrialized nations, including the United States. The advantage in access to higher education once held by the United States and other European nations is now waning as wealth in Asia grows and higher education expands. Despite the examination culture and rote memorization methods of Asian education, higher education has been steadily improving and producing high-quality graduates, specifically in the critical STEM fields. This is impressive, especially at a time when enrollments in such fields is declining in the United States. The brain gain once enjoyed by the United States, as the best and brightest from Asia's exceptional precollegiate schools came to the United States seeking its superior higher education (and then stayed helping to power the US research and development efforts), it slipping away. Now secondary school graduates in Asia are "looking East," as HEIs in Asia expand and are becoming more competitive as world-class institutions. China and India have respectively three times and two times the number of students enrolled in the critical STEM fields, compared to the United States.

Another measure of the growing competitiveness of Asian HEIs are the number of scientific patents and research breakthroughs, which are all increasing in number year by year. In 1983 American scholars authored 61 percent of all articles in the world's top physics journals; by 2003 it had dropped to 29 percent, as Asian scholars among others began to take up the slack. In other words, the old stereotype of non-competitive Asian universities that provide a place of rest and relaxation for stressed out secondary school graduates is becoming less true. To be sure, the best US HEIs are not in danger of losing their edge any time soon, but the playing field is much more level not, and this will undoubtedly affect the number and quality of the best Asian students coming to the United States.

Paradoxically, this is occurring as the state, so important in driving educational excellence in Asia at the precollegiate level, begins to withdraw financial support for higher education in the context of decentralization and privatization. The neoliberalism affecting higher education in the United States and elsewhere is also a force in Asia, but within the context of a state that continues to provide overall "guidance." In short, what is developing is an Asian educational system that consists of a rigorous and high quality precollegiate sector, now buttressed by an increasingly improved and high-quality higher education sector closely aligned with the needs of the national economy. This is a truly formidable force for future economic growth and development.

Conclusion

It is possible that an Asian model of education is emerging, which has clearly contributed to Asia's dramatic economic growth, global competitiveness, and comparative high levels of achievement. Although one can cite many caveats when looking at cross-national tests, it is clear that innovative learning is taking place in the countries discussed here. And if learning of basic skills is important, then it can be said that the "Asian model" is succeeding. Much of this success may have to do with what has been called "Asian values," but these do not seem very different from values progressed in other national settings. What seems to be different is that they are acted upon and shared strongly by parents, teachers, and students alike. Furthermore, these values are implemented in an educational system that is tightly aligned with national goals and standards, as well as with what learning theory tells us about how to get the most out of the educational experience.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

A key element in the smooth functioning of this "model" is a strong belief in the power of effort over innate ability. Failure is not easily accepted. In the East Asian region, the links between motivation and the family, self-concept, locus of control, educational management and administration, and the curriculum seem to form a chain that encompasses a more comprehensive view of what accounts for motivation and hard work. This is moving the discussion beyond the familiar bounds of psychology and social psychology into structural issues of school management and administration. To the degree that "culture learning" can take place, it is likely that some of these behaviors and/or practices can be emulated (as indeed they were throughout the region) by others. The US system, if it can be called that, is a hodge podge of educational forms borrowed from Germany, the UK, and other European nations, Many nations in Asia are now emulating aspects of the US model of HEI, especially with regard to issues related to quality assurance and overall administrative matters. Conversely, evidence indicates that we have to learn much to be learned, borrowed, and adapted from the Asian model.

JOHN N. HAWKINS is Professor of Social Sciences and Comparative Education in the Graduate School of Education and Information Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is also editor of The Comparative Education Review, and Director of the Center for International and Development Education (CIDE).