Education: a Crisis in the Making

Today, Sept 28^th, is the Teacher’s Day in Taiwan, a National Holiday when people express their gratitude and show appreciations to all teachers. It is the 2,559^th birthday of Confucius, the most revered and the greatest educator in Chinese history. His words of wisdom compiled in the Analects (論語) include the principle of “One must offer education to anyone regardless” (有教無類), Part 15 verse 39 that can be considered equal opportunity in education in modern context.

Confucius’ teachings and influence on Chinese civilization is so far reaching that Confucianism has often been considered synonymous with Chinese culture and a key component of East Asian countries as well. Indeed Confucian culture has been so deep rooted that it was a central target during the destructive 1966-1976 Culture Revolution in communist China launched by then its supreme leader Mao Zedong. It is also not an accident that with the morals, rites, ethics and philosophy Confucius developed, championed and later adopted by most rulers in China, religion has played much less a role in Chinese society compared to that in Western and other civilizations.

Of course, it did not happen by accident; there were significant economic and political incentives for being an educated man in Imperial China, in addition to its social statue. The implementation of open and fiercely competitive National Civil Service Examinations throughout the history of Imperial China offered rare opportunities to non-privileged people regardless who they are and where they are from to change their socio-economic status and rise to prominence in government. Although the system wasn’t a truly open and leveled playing field (e.g., wealthy families could hire high-priced tutors), the ideals of fairness and promotion of competency has been largely recognized by the public and has been operated for over 1,000 years.

In contrast, Western education system (see e.g., The History of Education by Ellwood Cubberley) can be traced back to Ancient Greeks with great teachers and philosophers like Socrates (who is 82 years younger than Confucius). It had gone through several transformations and hit the low point in early Middle Ages when the sole purpose of education was to serve the Church. Over the subsequent centuries however, starting with the stimulation through Spain of the great intellectual development of Mohammedans in Baghdad based on Hellenic learning, study centers of various subjects became popular across Europe as the authority of the Church weakened on secular matters and modern nations were formed. With the diversity in Western Europe geopolitical map and further thrust for exploration and dominance, science and technology had become a forefront of the learning and invention. It wasn’t until 18^th century however, public education system and literacy began to become a reality as democratic movements gained momentum in Europe. Meanwhile, Chinese Imperial court of Qing dynasty and many continued to bury their heads in the sand, ignoring the importance of modern education and eventually found themselves woke up too late at the end of 19^th century. The rest is history.

Today, United States, as a young, rich, vibrant nation with continuous influx of skilled immigrants has enjoyed unprecedented prosperity and power. While it has drawn admirations for its post-secondary schools and advanced researches, there have been increasing concerns and debates by some for its K-12 education with its decentralized public and private education system. Before we discuss it further, it is interesting to note a social attitude gap. In Part 16, Verse 9 of the Analects, Confucius was quoted to have said “… As to those who are dull and stupid and yet do not learn; they are the lowest of the people." Such a statement in U.S. today would certainly be criticized as politically incorrect and elitism.

According to various statistics, U.S. does spend significant amount of resources in education. Department of Education statistics shows that U.S. tax payers spend about 1 trillion dollars, or about 9% of its GNP, in education of all levels: 500+ billion dollars on K-12 and almost 400 billions on higher education, Yet at the same time, there are indications that US is slipping in its performance especially in K-12. For example, not long ago, OECE (Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development) published its latest PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) survey results and analysis of science, mathematics and reading knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds students. The assessment was carried out in 2006 with an extensive two-hour test comprising both open-ended and multiple-choice questions. More than 400,000 15-year-old students participated from 57 countries, including the 30 OECD member countries. Together these countries make up close to 90% of the world economy. One of the results showed the relative standing of the US student average performance in mathematics has dropped from 18th (out of 27) in year 2000, to 24^th (out of 29) in year 2003, and then 25^th (out of 30 OECD member countries) in year 2006. Similar deteriorating trends are also noted in Science and Reading.

One must wonder why more money did not get better results? Or one may ask a more basic question: why should one care when we are the most dominant nation with the strongest economy? The answer lies with the longer term implication on economic development of the country. While there are debates about the quantification of how education/academic achievement impacts the GDP (Gross Domestic Products), it is intuitive and researchers do agree that it definitely plays a significant role. (For more detailed discussions, see e.g. Debbie Viadero’s article on Education Week, 4/22/2008). As the foreword of the PISA report said well “…The prosperity of countries now derives to a large extent from their human capital, and to succeed in a rapidly changing world, individuals need to advance their knowledge and skills throughout their lives. Education systems need to lay strong foundations for this, by fostering learning and strengthening the capacity and motivation of young adults to continue learning beyond school.” Further, the reality is if others nations continue to improve, they will become more competitive and overtake yours. Thus one cannot be complacent and remains at the same performance level even.

Obviously, there is no magic formula or model of an ideal education system and the root causes of serious deficiencies are complex and widely varying. There are some who suggest that it is due to lack of “respect” for teaching profession (and lack of self-respect in some?). Although there is the myth and joke “He who can, does. He who can not, teaches.” (in George Bernard Shaw’s Maxims for Revolutionists , an appendix of his play Man and Superman: a comedy and a philosophy, 1903), I am not aware of any material differences, based on first- and second-hand experiences between say Taiwan (that scored highly on PISA assessments) and here. There are also those who suggest it is due to teachers’ (low) compensation. I am sure more pay would help, however I am not aware of any study that shows those countries whose students perform better paid their teachers any better. Further, wouldn’t the market forces of supply and demand correct it? Note the Department of Education 2008-9 Report shows that there are currently about 4 millions K-12 teachers for 50+ millions of students in the country. The median (9 months) salary of K-12 teachers was about $43+K in May 2006 and a 12% growth in demand is being expected that does not look totally out-of-wack. There are also those who criticize teachers’ unions had become a problem when they often emphasize seniority and job security over performance and development. How much of this is true is debatable but the fact of matter is that “pay by performance” concept, while intuitive, is by no means easy to implement given the lack of consensus of how to evaluate the performance of teachers.

When one looks beyond those details and local issues, I do believe there are a few fundamental and structural problems and solutions that are clear: For one, U.S. is one of the very few nations (or the only?) that do not have a coherent national education funding system and standard setting. The PISA study mentioned above has shown (see PISA presentation for U.S.) clearly a significant correlation of better student scores in Science and the adoption of coherent standard-based external exams. Of course, there is a simple historical reason for it - the Constitution had said nothing about education and thus left it to the states and locals. Indeed state level accounts for approx 46% and local 37% of the total funding of school systems. As a result, while there are benefits such as significant community participations in K-12 education, it does not always produce positive results and education often became victim of the local political, socio-economical and religious issues.

In his NPR interview and article “First, Kill All the School Boards” on the Atlantic Journal, Matt Miller of the Center for America Progress argued forcefully a radical proposal to nationalize the public school systems and establish equitable funding and coherent standards across the country. Indeed bold actions like it is needed to bring attention to the national level (haven’t we noticed the lack of it in the presidential and congressional elections?) and to focus people on the central challenge of education – intellectual and skill development of human capitals. I have no doubt that a practical and balanced approach can be developed with Federal standards and funding while supporting effective local autonomy.

Meanwhile, instead of waiting and doing nothing, there are a few things each of us can do to help. As a starter, if you are an administrator, on school board, or a concerned citizen, you should take a look of the recent report of the experimentation undertaken by the Oakland Unified school system. With its new equitable funding policy, the average student performance there has seen dramatic improvement. If you are a parent, pay attention and show by actions that you care very much about your children’s education and progress that will definitely help them for a better life in the future; you must not shy away from your responsibility and hide behind the excuse such as “kids should decide and figure out for themselves”. If you are a student, respect your teachers who try to help you, and study hard for your own better future.

And if you a teacher? Care for your students. Motivate them by raising expectations and show your confidence on them. Happy Teacher’s Day and talk to you soon!

The Year of Change

Republican Presidential candidate Senator John McCain had pulled off some stunts prior to and during the Republican National Convention that had just concluded last Thurs in St Paul, Minnesota. Since then, the newly revived Republican campaign and dynamics has dominated much of the discussions and commentaries by inquisite media that created the appearance of momentum.

First and foremost, Senator McCain has chosen to dance to the same tune of “CHANGE” that has propelled his Democratic Party opponent Barack Obama, passing the powerful “EXPERIENCE” candidate Hillary Clinton, from near-obscurity to where he is in short 18 months. McCain had obviously recognized and concluded that there is no hope to fight the waves and thirst for change by majority of American people. Instead of fighting it, he figured out correctly that a better strategy is to join and ride the Change message. In the best case, he may steal the message since change is a rather illusive term; in the worst case, he would at least neutralize Obama’s advantage and headstart. Of course, this is easier said than done. Every marketing people know in order to execute such a strategy, one still needs to differentiate McCain’s “Change” message from Obama’s. Further, for quite sometime, McCain’s has had difficulties to separate and distance himself from the Bush administration and at the same time to get material support from the conservative Republic base.

I have to say McCain and his team did manage to come up with a brilliant solution of which the nomination of Sarah Palin (or someone like her) for VP candidate is the lynchpin. First, it further differentiates McCain’s “Change” from Obama’s by doubling down on his “Reform” brand. It allows McCain play up anti-establishment image without naming names and thus dis-associate himself from whoever and whatever voters dislike about current and past Republican politicians including George W. Bush at one fell swoop. Secondly, it shores up, as expected, the support of conservative Republic base including the Evangelical Right. Salin Palin scores very high on several critical issues of concern to those for which McCain has been perceived to be too moderate. The nomination gives those conservatives just enough excuses to vote for the ticket and overlook their objection to McCain. Thirdly, with a white woman candidate on the ticket, it may just give enough excuses to some unconscious racists and feminists to vote for the ticket; few outspoken feminists (or reverse-sexists) already voiced their support without knowing much about Sarah Palin. Fourthly, being from Alaska, a sparsely populated state, her rural small town background could project a connection with many rural areas in the lower 48 states.

But can McCain really be an effective change agent and get the country onto a different and better direction? What change is he talking about? Or is it just a semantic and labeling game? Does he have visions or just dabble around some myopic reform issues with guts driven conviction? Can he persuade sufficient number of people to follow him and to chart and implement the changes needed? Is his character as strong and righteous as he likes us to believe? Or is it more like what Ted Rall wrote in his Feb 2008 CommonDreams.org article that “… McCain knows what he ought to do. He starts to do the right thing. But John McCain is a weak man who puts his career goals first”?

Yes, I do believe McCain is a decent, loyal citizen and credible career politician. With his upbringing and being born to a highly successful and decorated Navy Admirals father and grandfather, Senator McCain does appear to have a much more than average sense of honor and shame (which is good by Eastern philosophy and experience) than many typical politicians. He was ashamed of his signing of the prepared confession by North Vietnam captors after being captured, jailed and severely tortured repeatedly. As a result, he worked hard to redeem himself and demonstrated with his extreme loyalty and patriotism. He is also one of the very few Republican politicians who called for the closing of the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp and did stand up against Bush’s policy on water-boarding and torture of terrorist suspects. He was ashamed of being one of the Keating Five in mid 1980s and has worked hard to redeem himself with campaign finance reform efforts. He was ashamed of abandoning and divorcing of first wife Carol McCain after she was severely disfigured and crippled from an auto accident, as evident from his answer to Pastor Rick Warren’s question “… what would be the greatest moral failure in your life…?” during the interview in August 16^th Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency. Only thing I am wondering is how and if he has been redeeming himself for this sin of his?

But courage and patriotism can only carry you so far and is not enough. It is one thing to be a maverick in congress by disagreeing with your party and pushing alternate legislations. It is quite another to create and lead with visions and to set direction and drive a massive government machinery with stability. At the end of the day, you don’t hear congressmen or executives being called maverick when their policies got implemented and legislations got passed. Has he been over-generously rewarded by the media for his failed attempts? Reform promises in campaign often end up being just promises and pipe dreams. Sarah Palin’s resume is also too short to prove her skills and ability. To be successful, as candidate Obama often reminds us, change needs to come from below, not from above. It has to be a sustaining grass root effort backed and worked by many with a visionary leader. For the answer to the 64 billion dollars question: which vision of change is more real and promising, I would definitely take Obama-Biden’s.

This year’s presidential election dynamics is an intriguing one. With less than 8 weeks to go, this is a dangerous time for Obama-Biden as Obama’s Change message gets diluted and blurred by McCain-Palin’s and the discussions get more and more focused on the character, personality and image. The danger is if the campaign continues to move down the path of contesting for being a more attractive populist, McCain-Palin can indeed pull off a big upset and surprise in November. I don’t know about you, but it is surely scary for me when I saw on TV many voters including the pundits form instant opinion of a candidate like Sarah Palin based on superficial sound bites and images. Am I asking too much of the media and people to learn, think and then make an informed choice?

Talk to you soon!

American Vice Presidents

One of the highlights of the quadrennial Democratic and the Republic National Conventions is the (official) party nomination of the Vice President candidate. After seeing strong evidences for the last eight years that the choice of Vice President (AND President) do matter, it is useful to look at the history of American Vice Presidents and the nominees this time.

The fundamental role and qualifications of the Vice President is intuitively obvious - the first successor of the President in case the President cannot perform his or her duty. Many have noted such a “spare tire” role leaves the Vice President with mostly ceremonial duties and as a result, the impact and qualifications of Vice President candidates in election was often de-emphasized. Of course, it is really up to the president how and what roles and responsibilities would his/her Vice President would have beyond attending funerals and presiding over the Senate and casting the rare tie-breaking vote. The current Vice President Dick Cheney, for example, has enjoyed tremendous influence and power being entrusted by George W. Bush for significant decisions and policy making. One also must not forget that historically, there were 9 Vice Presidents (out of 46) succeeded the Presidency before the term expired due to death and resignation (see e.g., Wikipedia entry on American Vice Presidents). Among the recent ones, Gerald Ford succeeded Richard Nixon in July 1974 when Nixon was forced to resign as a result of Watergate scandal and cover-ups. Lyndon Johnson succeeded John Kennedy when he was assassinated in 1963. Harry Truman succeeded Frank Roosevelt when he died less than 3 months into his un-precedent 4^th term on April 12, 1945.

Truman’s case is in fact most illuminating. Prior to the day Frank Roosevelt passed away, Truman was seldom contacted by Roosevelt and oblivious to major discussions and decisions of President’s office (including the Manhattan Project). Simply put it, he was not in the loop and was totally unprepared as most VPs were. According to the famous story, when offering his consolation to the widowed Eleanor Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman asked, "Is there anything I can do for you?" Mrs. Roosevelt responded, "Is there anything we can do for you? For you are the one in trouble now."

To his credit, now regarded as one of the great American Presidents by most historians, Harry Truman managed to learn and step up quickly to the job. He ended up making several huge and crucial historical decisions some of which were controversial and not popular during his presidency from 1945 to 1953. They include dropping atomic bombs in Japan twice to force the surrender of Japan and end the WWII, creating the Marshal Plan to help rebuild postwar Europe despite the domestic economic challenges, supporting the creation of UN and establishment of Israel, entering the Korean War under UN’s authorization. The proclamation of the Truman Doctrine in 1947 for containment of communist’s expansion led by Soviet Union set the tone for American’s foreign policy and cold war till late 1980’s and early 1990’s. In retrospect, for most parts these decisions were good ones and have had long lasting positive impacts.

At any rate, majority of Vice Presidents did not get a chance like Harry Truman or Dick Cheney did; they found it to be an extremely boring job indeed. Theodore Roosevelt, another highly regarded American President, was quoted to have said “ I would a great deal rather be anything, say professor of history, than Vice-President” when he was serving as Vice President.

Then we got some downright embarrassing ones without making material contributions. Topping the list was Spiro Agnew of Nixon’s vice president since 1969; the only vice president thus far had resigned from the office (in Oct 1973) due to criminal charges (less than a year later Nixon joined him and made the history as the first pair that resigned from the office). Then there was Dan Quayle, the young VP of President George H.W. Bush from 1989-1993. He couldn’t stay out of trouble even when visiting elementary schools. His infamous gaffe of correcting a student’s correct spelling of “potato” into “potatoe” stayed with him forever. Of course, he was already permanently damaged from the televised vice-presidential debate against Democratic candidate Lloyd Bentsen earlier in 1988. In that debate his attempt in comparing himself to John F. Kennedy backfired. That is the memorable moment when Senator Bentsen gave his deadly rebuttal: "Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy"

How Vice President gets selected has changed over time somewhat. According to Mark O. Hatfield’s Vice Presidents of the United States, 1789-1993, initially under the system the framers created, the candidate receiving the most electoral votes would be president. The runner-up would be vice president. This sounded good on paper but it turned out when the two could not work with each other as Jefferson and Burr showed, system was paralyzed. As a result, the 12th Amendment was ratified in 1804 to address the issue and the current system became effective whereby electorate cast separate ballots for president and for vice president and each party would put up a joint president and vice president ticket.

For the subsequent decades, party bosses have considerable sayings about who would be the Vice President nominee until Frank D. Roosevelt, the most popular American President in history, insisted on choosing his own Vice Presidential candidate in 1940. It became the common practices to this date and most of the time Party’s Presidential candidate would announce his/her pick prior to the convention.

There is no exception this year. Barrack Obama announced the veteran Senator Joe Biden as his pick two days before the Democratic Party Convention. Then John McCain shocked the world last Friday by announcing his pick of the current Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin three days before the Republican Party Convention.

While everyone would agree that vice president nominee should be someone who can step up in no time to be the President when needed, it often did not work out that way for political reasons and with calculations to increase the chance to win the election by gathering additional supports from key voter blocks. McCain’s decision can only make sense under those considerations that is ironic for someone who has always wanted to project an image of being above politics and country first. This does offer an indirect indication of the desperation that without someone like Sarah Palin on the ticket with extremely conservative stances, McCain is not likely to get strong support from the traditional Republican Christian Right voter base that would almost guarantee his defeat in Nov.

But what about the risks that the good people and the nation have to carry if McCain-Palin ticket wins? There were some parallels and analogues situations in the past. According to the Republican spin machines, Governor Palin started her major “executive” and “reformer” experience as a school PTA member (a side note; my wife served once as a PTA president of a much bigger school that would qualify her for Presidency then?), council member, and then mayor of Wasilla from 1996-2002, a small town with a population about 7,000. She was elected to the Governor late 2006. In contrast, Spiro Agnew, Nixon’s VP pick, had been the Baltimore County Board Executive for 4 years (1962-1966) and then 2 years (1966-68) as Governor of Maryland prior to his 1968 nomination to VP. Of course, Maryland and Baltimore County are much more populated than Alaska and Wasilla, respectively. Further before Nixon selected Spiro Agnew, they had only met once just like McCain and Palin. Coincidentally, Nixon had also considered George Romney for VP who was competing with Nixon for Republican presidential nomination just like McCain and Mitt Romney, George Romney’s son, were!

Some may consider these bad omens for McCain-Palin. However the only way we can make sure the history does not repeat itself with disastrous outcomes is to go to the poll in Nov and vote for Obama-Biden, don’t you agree? Before I go, here is a funny parody of McCain-Palin on Youtube for your entertainment, passed on to me from my good friend JC. Talk to you soon!