Customer Reviews

Learning Gap: Why Our Schools Are Failing and What We Can Learn from Japanese and Chinese Education

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Learning Gap is a thoroughly researched book highlighting concrete problems in America's education. It is of particular interest to me because I was brought up in the Chinese education system until I was 16 with two parents who were both Chinese teachers, and went through high school, college, and graduate school here in America. I, like the authors, also happen to be a psychologist whose research focuses on K-12 education. Reading both the Learning Gap and the Teaching Gap reminded me of my own experience growing up in Chinese classrooms, at home, moving to America, and now researching in American classrooms. Many of the phenomenon described in the book are prevalent in classrooms I have observed in Pennsylvania schools, even in award-winning teacher's classrooms. While I do believe the authors overstated the positives of the cultural and school environments in China (since I've been to many Chinese schools with lousy teachers and unmotivated kids), it did not understate the problem in American education today. Most imporantly, the book established that within-culture difference, while strong, is small compare to cross-culture differences. Its arguments are not based on hollow idealogy or fad, but data. That makes Learning Gap a rare gem of high academic integrity. It can serve as a good reference book for the evaluation of education for schools, parents, and students themselves. For an educator, a parent, or a concerned citizen, this book is very uplifting and energizing. Not because it highlighted problems (we hear problems every day just on the news), but because it narrowed down to the relevant, important, significant problems. The first step to saving education is to know which limited set of problems must we devote our limited resources towards. To quote a popular American slang, we need to "get the biggest bang for our buck" in education. I believe the Learning Gap and the Teaching Gap has done a marvelous job towards that end. My kudos to the authors for their research scholarship, for their strong stand based on data, and for a thoroughly well presented and uplifting book. I recommend this book for teachers, parents, concerned citizens, and even students themselves.

As early as first grade, average East Asian children routinely outperform the best American children on every sort of test of mathematical knowledge. And-across the learning spectrum-American children not only fail to catch up, they fall further behind their East Asian peers in every year after first grade. As Stevenson and Stigler (S&S) note, this learning gap is not a matter of money, but can be seen no matter the amount or source (public or private) of funding. If money is not the cause of the learning gap, what is? Genetics? TV? Class sizes? Not so, show S&S. In this highly-readable, jargon-free book, S&S show that the fundamental source of the learning gap is *cultural*. That is, whereas East Asian educators, parents, and children believe that math success comes from a long-term effort to acquire a mathematical system of knowledge, their American counterparts believe that that success stems from innate math-smarts repetitively exposed to a set of math skills. These different beliefs, S&S show, result in sterotype-exploding differences in student motivation, teaching practices and teaching support, and parental standards and expectations. If you think that improving American schools can come from looking at successes within U.S. borders, then read this book and prepare to be amazed!

This is the most amazing book I've ever read on education, and one of the most eye-opening books I've read period. Every day on the news you hear about 'education reform.' Politicians and administrators are refering to things like smaller classes, better equipment, and other non-issues. The reason American kids are doing so poorly compared to other countries is much deeper and fundamental than that. What makes this book so amazing is that it explores the issues from several angles. American parents' expectations are much lower than Asian parents'. They would rather the kids be well-rounded with extracuricular activities and a social life. School takes a lower priority. American society thinks natural ability is more important than effort. Asians think effort is much more important. American's way of thinking is a dead-end for students. They will not be motivated to keep trying, thinking they just don't have the ability. American teachers rate 'clarity of explanation' as among the least important qualities a teacher could have. They rate 'sensitivity' as the most important. In Asian society, teachers gave the opposite rating. How amazing, the quality of imparting knowledge is among the least important things considered by American teachers. The profession of teaching is much more respected in Asian societies. So Asian students do far better than ours, in spite of these facts: their societies are poorer; their parents are busier; they have a lot more time than American children for social interaction at school; they even watch more t.v. than American children.
If we as a society would read this book (and others like it), our eyes would be opened to the real problem with our schools, and we could take the first steps to transforming our society.

For those looking for a layman's overview of some of the critical cultural differences in education between East Asian and American societies, this book provides a compelling introduction. For those who are novices in the field of cross-cultural educational research, it is a must read. Although the research studies on which it is based are now somewhat dated (particularly in the mainland Chinese context), the conclusions Stevenson and Stigler reach remain largely relevant. I have given them four rather than five stars simply because some of their findings are dated, and because they occasionally succumb to binary thinking in their zealous attempt to draw sharp contrasts between American and East Asian cultures. In other words, they sometimes overgeneralize and, as another reviewer aptly noted, engage in a bit of cultural window washing without knowing they have done so. Many East Asian schools struggle to provide classrooms conducive to learning; in Japan this now takes the form of bullying and apathy among many teens. In China, it is more of a problem of access to opportunity, especially in higher education. Finally, it must be noted that the authors' findings are based on studies in primary (re: elementary) schools in atypical urban settings. The logistics of conducting a macro study over a cross-section of the educational systems in the four cultures investigated would have been a far too daunting task. This book makes the compelling point, too often overlooked in American public discourse, that the quality of learning outcomes is determined by much more than the state of school finances and the caliber of teacher and teaching facilities provided. As the authors keenly observe, successful learning outcomes also depends on more than active parental involvement and concern as well. Instead, as this book outlines, it is deeply rooted in cultural values and the societal expectations that accompany them. For instance, the authors make a compelling case that the prevailing Western perception that academic success has more to do with heredity and intelligence than diligence and persistence is both wrongheaded and ill-serving. Nor is East Asian education, contrary to popular perception, limited to the privileged few. Nearly all Japanese and South Korean children receive at least a secondary education and mainland China is striving to provide high school education for all its citizens. While tracking by school with the re-emergence of key schools is increasing in Chinese urban areas, little tracking is done within schools. Instead, as these authors also point out, all children are expected to acquire the same knowledge and skill, if not always at the same pace, before they graduate. Of course, nearly all East Asian classrooms benefit from ethnic homogeneity but have discernible class and gender disparities. Instead of engaging in an endless litany of complaints, however, East Asian schools make due with what they have. We in the West have much to learn from the East, not because what the latter offers is in all respects superior (that is hardly the case given, for example, the lack of attention to creativity and special learning needs in most East Asian schools) but because we have so far ignored it in our school policy reforms. We go in ideologic circles that have deep ruts rather, as Tyack and Cuban have elsewhere noted, rather than looked to another circle of experience for guidance. If nothing else, this book should be a clarion call for a broader-ranging reform effort--one that casts off ethnocentrism and instead invites insights from East Asian cultures. After all, they have been learning from us for more than a century; it is more than time for us to do the same, if for no other reason than to understand what is driving their economic engines of change in the global community.

This is a reasonably interesting book on the differences between education in the U.S. and Japan and China. I am a practicing educator and selected this text in hopes of garnering a few strategies to add to my repertoire. Essentially this book does not fit this need. The research is presented on the cultural differences, how the school day is organized, roles of the teachers, etc. It does not necessarily offer a variety of teaching strategies that one could borrow from the other cultures. If you are looking to develop your background knowledge on the differences between the educational systems then this is the book for you. If you are looking to improve your classroom teaching look elsewhere.

American students lag behind those in other countries, especially in Asia. At the same time, American businesses spend ('92) $25 billion/year on remedial education for their employees. Stevenson's cross-cultural comparison of pupils in China (Beijing), Taiwan, Japan (Sendai), and the U.S. (Chicago and Minneapolis) provides outstanding and surprising insights on how to close that gap.

American elementary children are in school about 30 hours/week, vs. 44 for their Asian counterparts (after the 1st grade), for about half the days of the year - compared to 2/3 in Asia. Asian subjects include sewing, calligraphy, martial arts, etc., as well as the standard academics. Asian children's attentiveness is boosted through 4-5 10-15 minute recesses/day, v s. Americans' single recess of about 50 minutes.

Asian elementary pupils receive considerably more homework than Americans during the school year, as well as homework during vacation periods. Asian class sizes range from 38-50, and responsibility for discipline rests largely with the students - especially the class leader, as position that rotates throughout the class.

Parental involvement in Asian academics is minimal prior to age six - Asian pre-school and Kindergarten classes are primarily focused on the children enjoying themselves. Thus, U.S. pupils do somewhat better than most Asian pupils in the 1st-grade. (Unfortunately, by the fifth grade the best American classes perform worse than the worst Asian classes.) Meanwhile, U.S. parents generally delegate learning responsibility to the school at the point, and express much greater satisfaction with their children's' progress than their Asian counterparts.

Asians expect all pupils to succeed, and that the child's effort is the prime determinant; Special Education has never been popular and exists only for the blind, profoundly deaf, or severely retarded. The U.S. view, however, is inconsistent - we generally believe that ability is the prime determinant of academic success (thus, are much less committed to homework), while at the same time believing that practice is necessary for sports, music, and dance success.

The common American belief that high levels of academic achievement are possible only in modern, well-equipped schools is countered by viewing typical Asian schools (pupils do much of the cleaning), especially those in China which often lack heating.

Another major difference in U.S. vs. Asian education is that the proportion of teacher-led activities is much higher in Asian classrooms - U.S. schools emphasize small groups and individual study, while Asians stress whole-class instruction.

Bottom Line: Asian school pupils' academic achievement considerably outstrips that in the U.S., and at lower cost - eg. 3.7% of China's GNP, vs. 6.8% in the U.S.

"The Learning Gap" is an invaluable guide to improving American education, if only we would learn from it.

This book provides a comparative study of the differences (and similarities) between educational systems, on the elementary school level, between the U.S. China (both Formosa and mainland China) and Japan. It does this from the perspective, and with the goal, of improving the U.S.'s educational system at this level. The study is based primarily on surveys and observations made by U.S. educational scholars in China and Japan. Unfortunately the research is dated as it was conducted in the late 1980s and early 1990s (the book was published in 1992).

The book starts out with test results from China, Japan and the U.S. and shows that students in China and Japan, not surprisingly, surpass the median test scores of U.S. students in the first and fifth grades (unfortunately no results are presented for grades two through four) in a number of fields (i.e., math, science, reading, geography, etc.). These differences start small (in the first grade they are not that large) but become much larger by the fifth grade. The authors, in most of the remaining sections of the book discuss factors they consider responsible.

There are a fairly large number of such factors. Some of the more important are that teaching, as a profession is considered much more highly in Asia than the U.S. As a result the profession is able to draw on a much higher caliber of applicants. In Japan, for example, three times as many applicants take exams for teaching positions than the U.S. In the U.S., on the contrary, teachers, providing they are willing to relocate, have relatively little problem finding work (i.e., there are about as many applicants as there are positions). Another important factor contributing to Asian success, again in the author's opinion, is teaching technique. Teachers there spend considerable time preparing classes and homework and much less time than their counterparts in the U.S. This permits them to prepare higher quality classes (again in the authors' opinions) . Teaching is also much more centralized in Asia, from the perspectives of both financing and curriculum. This makes movement within these countries less detrimental to students and reduces inequities stemming from regional differences in financing. Schooling in Japan is also organized around more breaks and playtime for students in the U.S. In the U.S. there is typically only one major break between classes (other than lunch) with more breaks for "playtime". In the authors' opinion this leads to the students being much more attentive and interested than in U.S. classes. Teachers in Asia also are not expected to serve as social workers, unlike in the U.S. where they are expected to assist students with problems in the home . In Asia these problems are considered in the realm of family responsibility as opposed to be being a teacher's. This enables teachers to spend more time and effort on teaching. Asian teachers also serve much longer apprenticeships and much more closely supervised and for much longer periods of time than American teachers (who receive little in the way of training through apprenticeships).

The book also provides many tid-bits of information that are quite interesting. Some of these include, for example, the fact that American parents do not know that their offspring's are doing relatively poorly compared to Asian students. Also, American parents are much more likely to take the side of their sons or daughters in disciplinary issues with teachers. American parents are much more likely than Asian parents to overestimate their children's' performance compared with the counterparts in the U.S. (i.e., students of same age). Asian teachers receive far less education than U.S. teachers. In Asia they typically only have Bas (in many cases in China not even that) where as U.S. teachers tend, in general, to have MAs.

All and all a very interesting book. Much of the research contained therein, however, needs to be updated and expanded (unfortunately the authors' studies only looked at 3 cities in Asia and about an equal number in the U.S.) . This is especially relevant considering the large amounts of money that are being thrown at the U.S. education in an attempt to provide a much needed "reform" .

This book explains very well why kids in Japan, Korea, and China learn more than kids in the US. Every teacher should read this book to improve his/her teaching methods. Every parent should read this book to see what a big difference an involved parent can make in the education of his/her kids. I also recommend "The Teaching Gap" by the same authors.

This book gives the basic fundamentals on why the American education system isn't nearly as successful to the Chinese and Japanese. After reading this, I think the Chinese and the Japanese have a very well structure cirruculum. Bottom line is America needs to do something about the current education system if we want our future generation to be competitive.

Great Book. I am in the special education field as a result of not meeting my full potential as a student. When I read about the Asian school systems for teaching especially maths I could not keep saying to myself - if only my teachers taught it that way. I especially liked the idea that materials are taught in a more hands on manner and the group learning which make for better ties between children in the class room. definitaley buy this book if you were left unawares as to why or how the school system didn't quite succeed when you were a student.
Being in Control: Natural Techniques for Increasing Your Potential and Creativity for Success in School Being in Control: Natural Solutions for ADHD, Dyslexia, and Test Anxiety (Book & Video)