Friday 20 December 2013

Education in East Asia – by the numbers

Education in East Asiaby the numbers
Breaking down the region’s strong performance on the PISA 2012 exam

Secondary school students in East Asia continue to outperform their peers in other regions of the world and the gap appears to be growing, according to the latest results of an international standardised test. The Programme for International Student Achievement (PISA) exam, released earlier this month by the OECD1, show that the top six scores globally all belong to countries and economies located in East Asia. This is an improvement from 2009, when “only” five of the top eight scores came from the Far East.


                                      
The PISA exam assesses the capabilities of more than half a million 15-year-old students across 65 participating countries in three broad subject areas: mathematics, reading and science. All told, eight countries/economies in East Asia achieved total scores higher than the OECD average, with only three countries – all located in Southeast Asia – falling short of this standard.

Among East Asian countries and economies which participated in the last PISA exam in 2009, only Indonesia recorded a net decline in its 2012 score, while Thailand, Taiwan and Singapore, Japan and Shanghai all increased their total scores by more than 10 points since 2009.




Much media attention has been paid to the latest results, particularly the sterling performance of Shanghai’s students, who again topped the charts in all three subjects by a sizeable margin. At the same time, sceptics have pointed out that Shanghai’s scores are hardly representative of China as a whole, where more than half of eligible students fail to finish secondary school.

What’s more, while Shanghai is the wealthiest major city in China, it forbids children of migrant workers – who have moved to Shanghai from other regions of China – to enrol in the city’s secondary schools, thus removing them from the pool of students participating in the PISA exam. Even when accounting for Shanghai’s inflated scores, however, the latest results show strong and improving academic performance across the East Asia region.

On the other hand, these high levels of educational achievement have come at great expense, both for governments and households in East Asia, resulting in downward pressure on birth rates in all of the top-scoring countries and economies. As education standards increase in East Asia and parents respond by enrolling their children in expensive private academies and tutors to supplement their education, the costs of child rearing are also on the rise, leading to smaller family sizes.

Fewer births per woman mean greater educational resources are concentrated on each child, but a shrinking labour force in the future will slow economic vitality, putting even greater burdens on today’s students to one day support an aging population.



While many columnists and policy makers will point to the latest PISA results as an indication of rising competitiveness in East Asia and a concomitant decline in Western countries, low birth rates throughout the East Asia region also mean that many of these countries/economies will be forced to import workers in the future. This will naturally impact their overall human capital stock and should drive greater competition in East Asia to attract and retain internationally mobile students.

Somewhat surprisingly, there is little to no correlation between the performance of countries and economies on the PISA exam and the quality of their domestic higher education sectors. The U.S. and U.K. higher education systems, for example, are ranked among the very best in the world3, but their secondary school students generally perform poorly on the PISA exam; meanwhile, the quality of China’s higher education sector lags far behind developed country levels, but students in Shanghai achieved scores nearly 20 per cent higher than their American counterparts on the latest PISA exam.


This disparity between student performance and education provision is what drives international mobility, particularly at tertiary levels, and helps explain why the U.S. and U.K. remain the world’s largest host destinations for international students, and China the world’s largest source.


So what lessons can UK institutions draw from the PISA 2012 results? For one thing, that strong academic performance across East Asia is driving up demand for high quality higher education – whether at home or abroad. It is not a coincidence that the countries and economies which score highest on the PISA exam also send students overseas at above-average rates; UK institutions will continue to benefit from this influx of talented and motivated international students so long as this gap in perceptions exists between the quality of higher education provision in the UK and in East Asia.

Yet, if this quality gap begins to shrink, it is not difficult to imagine a future in which East Asia’s students seek alternate education options closer to home. Malaysia and Singapore already have designs on becoming regional education hubs, and China is not too far behind. In this sense, the PISA results speak less to the global competitiveness of secondary school students than to the increasingly global competition among education institutions to recruit these students.




This article was written by Jeremy Chan, British Council Head of Research and Consultancy (East Asia). Specialising in the economics of education, Jeremy works with a team of analysts throughout the East Asia region to provide external clients with the data, analysis and insights required to succeed in Asia’s dynamic education sector.

Wednesday 11 December 2013

Nelson Mandela memorial: Barack Obama's speech in full



AT HIS TRIAL IN 1964, MANDELA SAID “ I HAVE FOUGHT AGAINST WHITE DOMINATION. I HAVE FOUGHT AGAINST BLACK DOMINATION. I HAVE CHERISHED THE IDEAL OF A DEMOCRATIC AND FREE

SOCIETY IN WHICH ALL PERSONS LIVE TOGETHER IN HARMONY, AND WITH EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES.  IT IS AN IDEAL WHICH I HOPE TO LIVE AND TO ACHIEVE..  BUT IT IS AND IDEAL FOR WHICH I AM

PREPARED TO DIE .”


December 10, 2013 -- Updated 1349 GMT (2149 HKT)
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • President Barack Obama: "The world thanks you for sharing Nelson Mandela with us"
  • "He would erect a constitutional order to preserve freedom for future generations," he said
  • Obama: "Nelson Mandela reminds us that it always seems impossible until it is done"
  • "Mandela understood the ties that bind the human spirit," said the President
Editor's note: Below is the full transcript of U.S. President Barack Obama's speech at Nelson Mandela's memorial on Tuesday, December 10, 2013.

Johannesburg, South Africa (CNN) -- To Graça Machel and the Mandela family; to President Zuma and members of the government; to heads of state and government, past and present; distinguished guests -- it is a singular honor to be with you today, to celebrate a life unlike any other.

To the people of South Africa -- people of every race and walk of life -- the world thanks you for sharing Nelson Mandela with us. His struggle was your struggle. His triumph was your triumph. Your dignity and hope found expression in his life, and your freedom, your democracy is his cherished legacy.

It is hard to eulogize any man -- to capture in words not just the facts and the dates that make a life, but the essential truth of a person -- their private joys and sorrows; the quiet moments and unique qualities that illuminate someone's soul. How much harder to do so for a giant of history, who moved a nation toward justice, and in the process moved billions around the world.

Born during World War I, far from the corridors of power, a boy raised herding cattle and tutored by elders of his Thembu tribe -- Madiba would emerge as the last great liberator of the 20th century.
 

Sunday 8 December 2013

How Dare Najib Discredit Mandela



By Kee Thuan Chye
Yahoo! News
9.12.2013

Umno President Najib Razak diminished the stature of a great man when he said last Saturday at his party’s general assembly that Umno fought for the “same cause” as Nelson Mandela, who had died two days before.


What same cause? Mandela fought against racial discrimination whereas Umno institutionalised racial discrimination a few decades ago and still upholds it. 

Mandela never advocated black supremacy, whereas Umno promotes Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy).

After he became president of South Africa, Mandela proposed reconciliation and sought to bring the races in his country together, whereas in Malaysia, Umno divides the races in order to keep itself in power. 

Even at its general assembly, Umno’s delegates lobbied for the ethnocentric ‘1Melayu’ to replace the more inclusive ‘1Malaysia’, bashed the Chinese for not supporting the party at the last general election, and demanded a bigger stake in the economy, totally ignoring the reality that most of the country’s economic development is now already in Malay hands. 

Furthermore, no less an Umno leader than Awang Adek Hussin, who is also the country’s deputy finance minister, proposed that private companies should declare how they support the Bumiputera agenda in their annual reports. He also insisted that, because Malays now make up almost 70 per cent of the population, the hiring policy of private companies should reflect the country’s racial composition at every level. 

This is effectively saying that CEOs of private companies should also be Malay, and that their staff should be 70 per cent Malay. Indeed. Apa lagi Umno mahu? (What more does Umno want?)

On the other hand, does the civil service reflect the country’s racial composition? Are there 30 per cent non-Malay heads of department? In our public universities, are 30 per cent of vice-chancellors non-Malay?

Mandela did not take away the businesses of the whites in the name of affirmative action for the black South Africans. He allowed the whites to continue to control the economy and as a result of its being in experienced hands, South Africa’s economy grew at a steady, robust rate.

Mandela also believed in inclusiveness, in humanity and human rights. But Umno abhors lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transsexuals (LGBTs) although they are no less human beings. One delegate denigrated them by saying at the assembly that LGBTs exist so that “orang jahat (bad people) can be purged, leaving behind only the good people to inherit the earth”. How simplistically stupid, or stupidly simplistic.

Neither does Umno tolerate Shiite (Syiah) Muslims. Delegates urged that the Federal Constitution be amended to give recognition only to Sunni Islam. And Umno vice-president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, in his customary aggressive manner of winning support from the Umno flock, seized the moment to accuse the “No. 2” man in the Opposition party PAS of being a Shiite leader. He called for action to be taken against the latter. It was a clear manifestation of gutter politics posing under the guise of religion.

How, then, could Najib have had the temerity to draw parallels between Umno and Mandela? They couldn’t be more worlds apart. How could he have said what he said and not appear foolish to the outside world? He might have been able to deceive his audience of Umno members, but he cannot deceive the intelligent and discerning.

He apparently rationalised it by claiming that no race has been deprived under the New Economic Policy (NEP). He probably knows better – or else he is ignorant or dumb – but he still played to the gallery. When he asked his audience, “Were (other races) sidelined during the NEP? Did we ever hurt the livelihood of other races?”, they of course responded with a resounding “no”. This of course is an act of syiok sendiri too.

They chose to conveniently forget the millions of non-Malays who over the decades have been deprived of places in public universities, scholarships, jobs in the civil service, promotions, higher ranks in the security forces, government projects (except the big crony Chinese companies), etc. 

They pretended not to know that the non-Malays most hurt by the NEP were the low-income and middle-class groups. Many of their children could not pursue tertiary education through lack of means. Those who could had parents who worked extra hard to make extra money to send their children to private institutions. 

They chose to ignore the truth that the push for Ketuanan Melayu caused non-Malays to be sidelined in unjust, uncountable ways and turned them into second-class citizens.

Now, to add insult to injury, they profess no knowledge of all that, still present the Malays as victims after more than 50 years of independence from the British “oppressors”, brand the “foreign races” (meaning non-Malays) as threats, lament that the Malays might become “slaves in their own land”, ask for more handouts, more projects, more quotas. 

Enough is never enough. At every annual general assembly, they dish out the same laments, the same non-Malay bashing, the same demands for more opportunities while at the same time moaning that Malay entrepreneurs still need “hand-holding”. Their thinking is this: Ask and it shall be given. Just like that. No need to prove their abilities first, no need to be free of “hand-holding” first, no need to work to attain their goals. That’s the attitude they take. 

And this is equated with Mandela’s struggle?

This sort of attitude exhibited by Umno is what pisses off a lot of people and makes them hate the party. If Najib’s comparison between Umno and Mandela doesn’t piss off the South African Government, well, that’s its business. But if it does, President Jacob Zuma might want to demand an apology from Najib for showing disrespect and distorting the principles of the great Mandela.

Najib cannot exploit a good man’s name to justify his party’s petty schemes.


Read more: