President Obama has praised the South Korean school system. The students have exceptionally long hours (and consequently less sleep than most), most rigorous testing schedules, and high familial and peer pressure to achieve and qualify for top colleges. The results are impressive: scores among the highest in the industrialized world.
Some complain, however, that the schools stifle creativity by focusing on rote memorization, and deprive children of proper socialization and free time by loading them down with homework and supplemental tutoring. Some South Korean officials see their education system as deeply flawed, costing them enormously for standards that ought not be that difficult to maintain. And considering the benefits of minimizing cramming and maximizing sleep for optimal performance, I think they are right to be concerned.
Vindication of this view (to the point of alarm) can be found in Finland. The Finnish school systemhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/world_news_america/8605791.stm is a recipe for disaster: the shortest hours in the industrialized world, one of the later starting ages (7), and a habit of pairing together the highest and lowest-achieving students for instruction instead of separating them.
But it works.
Somehow, the relaxed schedule in Finland produces the highest average scores in the world, topping even South Korea's hyper-competitive classes.
The system is defined by uniformity: all the country's schools perform at approximately the same level, and the way the classes are mixed, the poorer students are given extra help so that they keep up with the class averages. Learning is very much a group activity, with relatively little emphasis on exams and personal performance. It is simply designed to be engaging, and the information sticks.
There are criticisms that the Finnish system shortchanges the brightest students, however, not allowing them to speed ahead when they are capable of doing so, but instead keeping them around to help along the others. There are currently programs in the works to make the most of the top percentiles' potential, but little is currently known about how well — or whether — they will work.
_______________________________
How do you think these education styles compare to those in the United States and other more mediocre nations? Should we move closer to one or the other? Is our current balanced approach workable (merely needing better administration for efficiency), or do we need to adjust our basic methods?
Some complain, however, that the schools stifle creativity by focusing on rote memorization, and deprive children of proper socialization and free time by loading them down with homework and supplemental tutoring. Some South Korean officials see their education system as deeply flawed, costing them enormously for standards that ought not be that difficult to maintain. And considering the benefits of minimizing cramming and maximizing sleep for optimal performance, I think they are right to be concerned.
Vindication of this view (to the point of alarm) can be found in Finland. The Finnish school systemhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/world_news_america/8605791.stm is a recipe for disaster: the shortest hours in the industrialized world, one of the later starting ages (7), and a habit of pairing together the highest and lowest-achieving students for instruction instead of separating them.
But it works.
Somehow, the relaxed schedule in Finland produces the highest average scores in the world, topping even South Korea's hyper-competitive classes.
The system is defined by uniformity: all the country's schools perform at approximately the same level, and the way the classes are mixed, the poorer students are given extra help so that they keep up with the class averages. Learning is very much a group activity, with relatively little emphasis on exams and personal performance. It is simply designed to be engaging, and the information sticks.
There are criticisms that the Finnish system shortchanges the brightest students, however, not allowing them to speed ahead when they are capable of doing so, but instead keeping them around to help along the others. There are currently programs in the works to make the most of the top percentiles' potential, but little is currently known about how well — or whether — they will work.
_______________________________
How do you think these education styles compare to those in the United States and other more mediocre nations? Should we move closer to one or the other? Is our current balanced approach workable (merely needing better administration for efficiency), or do we need to adjust our basic methods?
Last edited: