Since I was a kid (I’m 50 now) we’ve been told in article after article citing this study and that study how much more rigorous and comprehensive primary and secondary education is in the rest of the industrialized world vs the US, and basically how much we (US students) suck academically at the primary and secondary level compared to the rest of the developed world.
1: Is this all media hype? Do we really suck?
2: If we do suck so hard, how do we keep cranking out scientists and engineers and patents ?
The US education system is very broad. We have great schools and great students, we have awful schools and awful students. Average the two together and you get these stories. What is different from the past is that the US has, in the last 30 years, made a concerted effort to include more students in the educational system. Even if one assumes that equal effort is applied across the board, and I make no such claim, it is apparent that more low-performing students will be pulled into the system. After all, the high performers tend already to be in the system. So we have been adding low-performing students to the population of students. The effects on the average are obvious. That said, this is a good thing. It means we are reaching more kids. The high-achieving students and schools remain and continue to crank out scientists and engineers and patents. Coupled with the general improvement in the quality of teaching in American schools over the last 30 years, we are doing quite well. More students, better teaching methods, etc.
And yes, the situation in inner-city schools is awful and many classrooms don’t provide any education and things are really worse now than before in some places. Accepted. I still believe we are doing better than in earlier years-in good schools with good teachers. And there are lots of them around the country. And for all the geeks on this board, yes today’s teacher doesn’t know nearly as much as you do. But OTOH, today’s teacher knows a lot more than your teacher did 30 years ago.
Selective sample. Other countries often separate students after elementary school into academic and trade programs, usually by taking a series of tests. Only the academic programs are counted.
Thus those that do badly on the tests are not counted in the statistics. If you cut of the bottom 25% (or whatever the number is), the stats tend to look much better.
I’ve got to ask for a cite for both of these assertions - that the dividing of students is commonplace rather than existing in only a minority of systems, at least in the developed world (I find it hard to believe but am prepared to be proved wrong), and also that there’s such an obvious flaw in all multinational surveys.