Saturday, September 13, 2008

Peterson: China’s One Child Policy Requires that Voters Should Pass School Referendum

Well, well… Mark Peterson, the far Left professor at UWWC and occasional commenter, has been picked up by the West Bend Daily News to write a weekly column.  Here’s the story on Mark’s background.  I welcome Mark to the pages of the dead tree media and wish him the best.

His first column out of the gate is about education and his support for West Bend’s impending school referenda.  His logic comes up… well… let’s take a look.  Mark starts out by praising China’s education system. 

With all that noise it took me nearly two years to notice the most important detail: most of the 18-year-olds I met can speak English and do calculus. Now, despite the carnival fireworks of a Six Flags over Asia Olympics and the addictive spending that goes with low low Made-in-China prices, all I can think about are those 18-year-old kids.

   Here’s why:

   How many kids graduating from West Bend district schools can speak Mandarin Chinese and do calculus?

   Answer: not most of them – and that’s going to be a problem.

He then goes on to explain why China’s education system is churning out 18-year-olds who can speak English and do calculus.

How does China produce so many 18-year-olds who can speak English and do calculus? One explanation is China’s “One Child Policy.”

   In order to cope with their catastrophic population explosion China legislated that couples would be allowed one child. Most people are immediately sidetracked by the ethical implications of this policy, so we miss the key educational and economic side effect: each only-child in China usually has two parents, four grandparents and no cousins. The grandparents are retired, on pensions and have nothing to do all day but look after the educational interests of their grandchild.

   Can you imagine if each American kid had four grandparents who did nothing all day but help them with homework? The Chinese aren’t imagining it, they’ve done it and, as a consequence, these Chinese kids speak English better than I do and can do calculus by the time they leave high school.

On the one hand, Peterson is right.  Family makes a difference and if every person had two parents and four grandparents helping them succeed, it would undoubtedly lead to better educational outcomes.  But is that what we want here in America?  Government restricting us to a single offspring?  Is that a price worth paying for 18-year-olds who can do calculus?  Apparently, it is to Peterson.

On the other hand, Peterson leaves out some important details.  For example, here are some comments from Pat Herdrich, the Superintendent of West Bend Public Schools:

For example, students in China have to pass an exam after every year to proceed to the next level. If they don’t pass one exam they are done with school and start their long life of working in a factory. “The students know education is their only chance at a good life so they take school very seriously,” said Herdrich.

[...]

“They all wear uniforms. Every morning at the start of every school day they line up and do exercises together. They also do eye exercises at 10 am in every class room,” said Herdrich.

Making sure they stay focused on their studies, Chinese students aren’t as involved in other activities as we are in the United States. Children under the age of 18 are not allowed to be employed while still in school. The only way they could get a job is if they didn’t pass an exam and dropped out of getting an education. Also, there aren’t as many school sports. Though ping pong, basketball, and baseball are big in China, there isn’t much going on within the high school level.

According to Herdrich, most students do not own cell phones or keep up web pages such as myspace or facebook, as their parents feel that owning these items will distract them in school.

Now, I support some of these things, like limiting cell phones and school uniforms, but the rest?  Mark Peterson saw some 18-year-olds who can speak English and do calculus.  Did he see the millions who washed out and are slaving away in the fields and in the factories?  Does Peterson support a “one attempt” testing structure where if you fail, you head over to UWWC to clean the gum off of the desks?  Sure seems like it. 

Then Peterson goes on to slam the free market. 

The market has already “taken care of us.” The market is what got us here. Our relationship with China, or the rest of the world for that matter, is not merely economic – it’s also political.

Nevermind that the free market has given America the largest, strongest, most vibrant economy in world history and that it is STILL larger than China’s economy with a quarter of the population and that American’s enjoy a standard of living that is better than anyone in the world has ever seen.  (Sorry for the run-on.)  China is just catching up with America now.  Why?  Because they loosened their grip on their economy a bit and allowed the marketplace to work - a little.  

Finally, Peterson takes all of this and turns it into support for West Bend’s School Referenda.

So, ask yourself this question: “How much should we invest to make sure our kids can compete in a world where 300 million Chinese can speak English and do calculus?”

   Answer: We have to invest enough.

   That’s why we need to pass this referendum and fully fund our schools. If we can’t compete with China in the schoolhouse, then we won’t stand a prayer in the marketplace.

But wait?  I thought that China’s educational success was because of the One Child Policy?  Nowhere did Peterson compare how much per pupil China spends compared to America.  If we need to emulate China in order to be successful, shouldn’t we emulate their One Child Policy instead of pouring more money into education?  Shouldn’t we implement a “pass the test or you’re out” policy?  Peterson gave one reason for China’s educational success and then offered up a completely different initiative for improving West Bend’s educational system. 

Perhaps Peterson is thinking that more money is needed for more Mandarin and calculus classes.  But that’s not what the referenda are for.  They are for more buildings and renovations.  They have nothing to do with the curriculum.  Did Peterson look into how much China spends on school buildings compared to West Bend?  Is it relevant? 

If Peterson keeps writing columns like this, it’s going to be fun.

(22) Comments
Posted by Owen at 1111 hrs
Foreign Affairs + Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. who cares?

    McCain mailing draws complaints
    The Wisconsin board that oversees elections is fielding complaints that Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s campaign is sending out a mailing that includes an application for an absentee ballot - but in some cases the address is wrong.

    Democrat Beverly Jambois of Middleton got one of the fliers addressed to her husband Robert, a lawyer for the state Transportation Department. They’re registered to vote in Middleton, but the absentee ballot application was addressed to the Madison city clerk’s office.

    “They’re trying to knock me off the rolls,” she said. “I can’t tell you how upsetting it is to me. This is how you win elections? By disenfranchising other voters?”

    Kyle Richmond, a spokesman for the Government Accountability Board, said there have been 10 complaints in the past two days from those who got the McCain flier. The board’s staff is investigating, he said.

    Absentee ballots may only be used in the locality where the person is registered to vote, he said.

    Mark Jefferson, executive director of the state Republican Party, denied there was any intent to prevent people from voting. The wrong absentee ballot applications were the result of incorrect information in databases used for the mailing, he said.

    “You do the best with the lists you have, and no list is perfect,” Jefferson said. “There is certainly no type of suppression effort going on.”

    He said the mailing was directed to hundreds of thousands of voters.

    Local clerks now are processing absentee voting applications. The absentee ballots aren’t sent until about four weeks before the election.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 13, 2008 at 1214 hrs


  2. matt,

    Pollute our comment threads with off-topic cut-and-paste again and you’re banned.

    There’s a forum link at the top.  Feel free to post.

    Posted by Jed on September 13, 2008 at 1244 hrs


  3. I’ll stay on topic here. 

    Great summation of what the Leftists in academia think.  Remember, these guys are teaching our kids.

    You may recall that we had the same complaints about our schooling vs. Japan in the 70’s and 80’s.  We allegedly weren’t spending enough and needed more and better facilities.  How competetive is Japan now?  Pretty level playing field.  Competetiveness is all about the cost of labor.  As China’s labor costs rise, their goods will be less competetive here.  It happened with Japan, Korea, Taiwan, EU, it will happen with China.

    Posted by Steve on September 13, 2008 at 1328 hrs


  4. Owen, I’m ashamed of you, metaphorically taking candy from a baby with your fisk of that column.

    That stink-bomb will put Palin v. Biden into Technicolor.

    Is it possible that the author is a McCain double agent?

    Posted by dad29 on September 13, 2008 at 1338 hrs


  5. I lived in Vermont. They spend MUCH more per student than we do, and have a student/teacher ratio that’s about 1/3 less than ours, in a state whiter and more affluent than ours. And they rank worse than we do.

    Money doesn’t cure education’s ills. It can help, but it’s not enough by itself. You need standards: classic standards, not the mush they teach in public schools today.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 13, 2008 at 1501 hrs


  6. Good teachers make for good students. It’s that simple. Throwing away away a bunch of money on schools and administrators and bad teachers - does nothing to educate children.

    That’s what parents want and what they will pay for. Everything else is just waste and fluff.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 13, 2008 at 1513 hrs


  7. Grin.  I was only raising the question, Owen. 

    You said all during the last referendum that we don’t need to spend so much money on our schools.  Me, I see them as important a the Strategic Air Command was during the Cold War.  You have a right as an American (and the obligation!) to disagree with me as much as you like—and vice versa.

    My observation over the past 30 years is that Americans have become complaisant about their responsibilities to the future and have clung instead to the slogans of political parties rather than working it out as individuals.  I’ve seen increasingly attempt to privatize even our civic responsibilities.

    But seriously, the “Free Market” made America strong?  I suppose in the sense that corporate welfare is a kind of freedom, sure.  I am surprised that you of all people should still believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus, but okay.  A full stomach and kids in private school make the world look pretty rosy, I’m sure.  I know your kids will never need either calculus or Mandarin or have to compete with the Chinese or that you’ll find a way to get them there without having to carry the burden of paying taxes to help the children of other people. 


    Anyway, as for logic, I’m content to be discovered wanting, in these columns, and content to be picked apart—if you and your readers will do me that kindness.  My job, as I see it, is simply to provide another way of looking at the world than through the rose tinted glasses of elitist head-in-the-sand neo-conservative nostalgia.

    And besides all that, they’re publishing me in the Saturday paper.  I’ve heard nobody reads the Daily News on Saturday.

    What I always keep in mind is that today’s paper will be used tomorrow to wrap old fish and pick up dog poop.

    Sic transit gloria dude.

    hiho!
    Mark

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 13, 2008 at 1914 hrs


  8. In other words… you don’t really care about linear thought or making any sense whatsoever as long as you make people think (as indicated by the rolling of their eyes)? 

    Interesting.

    Posted by Owen on September 13, 2008 at 2033 hrs


  9. I was glad to see Mark Peterson’s column in the Daily News this morning, good topic, and some good points brought forward - I have always enjoyed the perspectives introduced by Mark here at this site.  But for readability, I would consider Owen’s input valuable.  If you bore people or confuse them in the first paragraph, very few people will read the rest of the article.

    And don’t take it personally if many people don’t read it - I have occasionally asked people if they read Owen’s column (in the hopes of discussing that particular topic), and am told no.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 13, 2008 at 2116 hrs


  10. Hiho right back at ya, Mark.

    I was prepared to make comment on the ill-written column, but Owen beat me to it.

    My grandson had six sets of grandparents and only one sibling.  According to your theory, he will be a boy genius.

    The bottom line of the referenda is to deal with the fallout from misappropriated funds, AND THEN begin to do some renovation. 

    Let’s not punish the taxpayers in our district because someone screwed up the finances.

    And while I’m at it, Question #1 of the referenda SUCKS.  Throwing that Jackson School onto the pile of backlogged maintenance issues is absolutely insulting.  Let’s take care of what did NOT get done, do what is necessary, then give the taxpayers a CHOICE if they want to spend additional monies on a new Jackson school.  That SHOULD have been a third ref. choice.

    Posted by GAMazy on September 13, 2008 at 2248 hrs


  11. lol.  I’m apprenticed to a 2500 year old tradition of eye-rollers.  I’m doing it right now in fact. :^) 

    But not everyone is rolling their eyes.

    My values are simple, but the clever “lefty professor” wrapping paper you used makes them look all intellectual and complicated.  They aren’t.  They boil down to one thing: I believed the Pledge of Allegiance when I said it back in kindergarten, especially the last part: “with Liberty and Justice for All.”  That’s the sum of my political values right there. Everything else is a distraction.

    So, I’m sorry you won’t agree with anything I write. That’s how things go.

    I’m afraid that, to me, your blog generally presents a vision of America that diminishes individual liberty and shrugs off the civic responsibilities that make our liberty possible in the first place; it’s a vision that removes justice from the reach of the little guy and—more than anything else—delegates the blessings of liberty and justice to “some” rather than “to all.”  When you put a dollar value on our civic life, that’s where it leads.  Wanna argue about linear thinking here?  We’ll need more than our usual 720 word limit.

    So, sorry about that. We’ll be disagreeing on most everything.  But I also believe that’s a good thing.  I’m a big believer in Federalist #10, on the inevitability of faction in American life.  The Founding Fathers were brilliant—you and I are just part of the parade. 

    I still think we should have coffee sometime.  Why don’t we do it publicly at the university?  Open forum, on stage.  I’d love to be convinced that there’s anything conservative about neo-conservatism.  [Moment of seriousness… really, I’d love to hear your account of it.]

    In the meantime, be well.

    hiho
    Mark

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 14, 2008 at 0024 hrs


  12. You are right, Mark, when you say your values are simple.  The Plege of Allegiance goes much further than “with Liberty and Justice for all”.  We also recite “one nation, under GOD” and “to the Republic, for which it STANDS.”

    Repubic:  The word originates from the Latin term res publica, which literally translates as “public thing” or “public matter”.

    Thus, a republic is recognized by the people having direct influence and impact on their government.

    When the Pledge links all of the above together, it literally translates into “one community with a common bond under the authority of God, having the ability to act or believe freely without fear, assuring moral rightness.

    One does not recite the pledge and say “I believe especially this portion or that portion”.  It is meant to be taken at it’s entirety.

    Parade?  Yes.  We are part of it.  Just glad my position is one that proudly marches with the band, not one that lends itself as the proverbial streetsweeper.

    Posted by GAMazy on September 14, 2008 at 0905 hrs


  13. Mark,

    You have responded with hundreds of words and said, exactly, nothing. 

    In your column, you praised China’s One Child Policy and credited it with the successes in their education system.  Do you support such a policy for America? 

    You also advocate for passage of the referenda, but offer no reasoning to support your position.  Explain how passing the referenda will improve education in West Bend and have all graduates speaking Mandarin and doing calculus. 

    You see, this seems to be your MO.  You throw out these ridiculous positions and when you are asked to defend them, you hide behind “I’m just asking questions to make people think.”  That may be fine in a classroom, but here in the real world it doesn’t wash. 

    You offered an opinion. 

    Defend it.

    Posted by Owen on September 14, 2008 at 1120 hrs


  14. Americans have become complaisant

    Ehhhh….a little French-lingo, there, Mark?

    Posted by dad29 on September 14, 2008 at 1721 hrs


  15. I offer a consolation prize to Peterson:

    The one child policy has also left China a dying country with a fertility rate of around 0.8.  So, educated or not, they’re going to grow old before they grow rich.  The only Chinese that will truly prosper after the next generation or so, will be those who move to America.

    Posted by Mike Gallo on September 14, 2008 at 1835 hrs


  16. I thought the message was fairly clear and simple.  Everything else aside the Chinese have put an emphasis on education the likes of which have rarely been seen.  They will use this educated group to become very powerful in the world both economically and politically.  We as a nation need to develop a clear vision of what we want for our future and move in that direction. 

    I agree with Owen that we as a country have done more than anyone else and done so with great success, but there is no guarantee that will continue.  This is especially true if we cling to ideas from the past.  One of the worst trains of thought is that there is an easy answer to this problem.  It is complex and will require many different ideas to be successful.  So, no private and parochial schools are not the answer.  Neither is the public school system as it has been for the last 50 years.  Home schooling will not solve our problems and virtual will not either. 

    The answer is coming and will be here in the next decade.  What it is I do not know, but we as a nation need to step out of our outmoded ways of thinking and start finding new approaches.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 14, 2008 at 2112 hrs


  17. One thing he doesn’t mention is the social tension building in China. I’ve been BS-ing with our engineers who spent time there. There are about 3x the number of graduates for each college level job and that’s causing enormous social tension over there.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 14, 2008 at 2156 hrs


  18. As with most education debates, the one thing missing is the realization that it is each individual who is most responsible for achievement. At its core, as long as books are available, and a classroom and teacher is provided to help explain the concepts, the public has done all it can do - the “learning” can only be done by the individual. No amount of money can overcome lack of effort or focus by the person who is supposed to be learning and improving himself…and the tiniest amount of resources can achieve it if the person is truly driven.

    I don’t believe any of this has bearing on the upcoming referendum one way or the other.

    As for market forces, the biggest advantage America has had through the last century was productivity - the current factories of Asia were invented here in the early 19th century. The computers and information services of the 20th century were invented here. What has gone missing is an understanding of the relationship between a job (a person’s labor) and the value of the marketable asset (product or service) that is being produced. Too few Americans really understand their place in the global economy.  They assume their job just “exists” regardless of the demand for their product or service (of course with more and more being government jobs, they’re right!). We can’t just assume that, if we send our kids off to college and hope they get their degrees, they’ll be off and running, earning six figure salaries.

    China’s success, such that it is, can be attributed to a culture that imbues its youth with the importance of education…and then backs it up with a fairly harsh set of benefits and consequences. They separate the serious and capable learners early on in life (because not every person is cut out for academia)...and they don’t wait until the kid has washed out of college in a beer-soaked fog after six years to let him know he may need to make other plans for his life.  Their kids learn to speak English because it is the language of international business - do we really know that Mandarin will be the future…or is it the past? I remember when we were all supposed to learn Japanese because they happened to be dominating the financial world in the ‘80s.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 14, 2008 at 2244 hrs


  19. Parents would want and would be willing to pay for good teachers! That’s it!

    Posted by San Antonio Lawyer on September 14, 2008 at 2337 hrs


  20. Their kids learn to speak English because it is the language of international business - do we really know that Mandarin will be the future…or is it the past? I remember when we were all supposed to learn Japanese because they happened to be dominating the financial world in the ‘80s.

    I couldn’t agree more.  All the hype about Mandarin Chinese being the language of the future seems outdated and more of a “fad” than anything else.  It does not, and will not, make or break a student’s future academic status.  There are many other areas that our nation could be looking to as educators (regardless of education choice) that will advance their academic levels.  Let’s look to what is solid and necessary, not to what is trendy and “looks good.”

    Posted by GAMazy on September 15, 2008 at 0522 hrs


  21. The discussion surrounding the idea of Mandarin being trendy is an important discussion.  When the school board was deciding if that was a direction that the district needed to go I asked the question as to which language would be next.  Because I lived through the time when Japanese was all the rage and we felt we needed to “keep up” with the Japanese.

      Several points to consider.  One, the next couple of anticipated languages are Hindi and then Eastern European languages like Romanian or Bulgarian.  The reasoning is that those are the current places that China is losing business to right now and those are the places that American business will be going for cheap manufacturing. Two, the learning of the language is not the only reason that learning Mandarin is important.  Language is half of the story.  It is the learning of the culture that the district is emphsizing that will make the biggest difference in the future for students of today.  The culture is equally important because if a person does not understand the culture they will not be successful in China or any other country.  Think back to the first George Bush in Australia.  He did not understand that the simple hand gesture of a “thumbs up” which here means all is good or things are OK, but in Australia it means “up yours.”  He insulted millions in seconds with that.  I was living in Australia at the time and saw the outrage.  I was questioned as to how a President could not know what he was doing.

    So, education in the US continues to be a complex situation that will require complex approaches to help keep Americas future bright.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 15, 2008 at 0651 hrs


  22. Also, don’t forget that China has a strikingly high suicide rate among teens and college aged kids compared to the rest of the world.  The pressure on them is THAT high.  Even worse, they can work extremely hard, pass all the exams, and still not get the life they thought those exams promised them because the demand is still very high.  The dissapointment can be crushing.  That’s also why the young Chinese (especially men) are zoning out more and more playing video games.

    Posted by Nick on September 15, 2008 at 0828 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.