GameBanshee Forums

Recently I have participated in discussions here at SYM about educational issues and education systems in different parts of the world. Also, as late as last week, my department asked me to be a member of the educational board who is going to set the curriculum for a new 5-year psychologist education program my uni is going to hold. This is of course a big responsibility, many things have to be considered carefully. Every autumn I teach postgraduate students, and occationally I also teach medical and psychology undergraduate students, but teaching is far from participating in putting together an entire university education!

However, all this have made my thoughts focus on educational issues. I of course have plenty of opinions, but before posting them, I'll post quotes from the recent discussions here to set off some thoughts.

Gwalchmai wrote:For example, one of my pet issues is education - I feel it is incumbent on a society to provide the best opportunity possible for the best education possible to the most people possible. Therefore, whom we elect to the local school board may be more important to this issue and me than who we elect to the presidency of the US. Those who deal directly with the allocation of funds, regulations, and oversight of our schools in my town require careful consideration. Going up the ladder, it is also important to carefully consider who I elect to be my representative in the state congress, who is my governor, and who represents my state in the federal House and Senate, but with diminishing impact. President Bush is a good example of how little impact the President has on my pet local issue.

Chanak]<snip>in each state wrote:

fable wrote:<snip>people are taught to believe what they read in schools. They aren't taught to think; if anything, they are frequently taught that education is a painful, ugly, and time-consuming process. So when they get out, they try to turn life into a mixture of required work and endless entertainment. And they believe whatever they're fed by whomever represents the political philosophy they naturally incline towards.

C Elegans long ago]The Third International Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS) included 0.5 million students from 41 countries. The East Asian students were the top scoreres wrote:
Comments to the above? Opinons and thoughts about education in general, it's purpose and aims? How successful are we really in educating people? And what should be taught?

This topic is close to home for me.

Coming up with a curriculum is no easy feat, CE.

I'm pressed for time right now but I just can't help but make a few comments and perhaps later on, I can give more input.

For starters I would like to ask you, what is YOUR philosophy in Education? I ask this because it would set as your guideline on how you want to structure your currirulum in the field of psychology.

I believe in the pragmatic approach in Education wherein hands-on and practical applications of the lessons are essential for the students' learning. John Dewey is a major proponent of this philosophy. If I had a say in it, I would consider giving weight and more premium to student output through practicals and self-learning through hands-on. I truly believe in the experiential approach since the students tend to appreciate their studies when they can actually see and feel the lessons.

These approaches enhance critical thinking since the learners question the theoretical principles handed to them by their teachers.

Another thing is: What would you consider as your core subjects? Subjects you think ALL your students of your target level (undergrad, postgrad) MUST AT LEAST KNOW.

We call it the Basic Learning Competency.

That's it for now. Hopefully I can have more time to expound later on.

A reply to Gwally from another thread concerning education:

Gwalchmai wrote:Those who deal directly with the allocation of funds, regulations, and oversight of our schools in my town require careful consideration.

I totally agree with you that a society should provide the best education to as many people as possible. However, if I understand things correctly, the means to do this differ between the US and Europe due to the organisation of the educational system, and thus what you say above about local impact on educational issues, seems to reflects exactly what I was asking for.

In most European (and many Asian countries), there is a national education plan which each school must fulfil and the individual school has little impact in fund allocation decisions as well as in general regulations. In Sweden, there are only a limited number of hours on the curriculum that are free for the particular school to fill with specific topics, and every year there are standardised national tests in subjects like Swedish, maths and English, in order to make sure every school is fulfilling the goals.

Primary school in Sweden is mandatory, and covers age 6-15. All education in Sweden is free. Private school exists up to university level (age 19-20), but they are not very popular and not regarded as better (rather the opposite) than the public schools. In any case it doesn't matter much since also the private school must follow the national curriculum. The Swedish educational policy in aiming for everybody who has gone through primary school to have more or less the same knowledge. Apart from the core subjects maths, science, Swedish, English, social sciences, and some more, all schools must also provide teaching in all major world religions and world history. All schools for kids over age 12 must provide teaching of a second major language (English is mandatory from age 9).

So as you see, the individual school board has little influence. The county educational board have some influence, but very limited. Instead, the Ministry of education is the executive organ in educational issues. Only when you reach university level, the national regulations are limited to general goals and scientific standards, each university sets their own curriculae.

"Think Globally; Act Locally."

I disagree with this, since I think we should all try to think globally and act locally and globally. Most people are strongly affected by the "proximity principle", ie are most concerned with what happens in their close geographic surroundings as well as in a shorter time perspective. Issues that affect them in a direct, visible, way. Now, there is nothing wrong with this, it's very human, but it's not enough - probably neither in order for the human species to survive, nor in order for us to live in a humanistic society.

As I see it, the problem is that there are fundamental issues where acting locally makes little or no differece. One example is environmental issues: pollution, global warming, extinction of species and thinning of the ozone layer affects everything living on earth. Still, the individual consumer has little influence in this question, sorting your garbage at home and buying "ecological" products has no effect on the global fishing industry, etc.

Another issue is humanistic moral values: Is it acceptable that a majority of the worlds population live in poverty while we in the rich world consume more than we need to lead a good life? At a local level, you cannot do much about the 50 million people with HIV in Africa, but at a global level you can.

So, since both local and global acting is called for, I personally think one of the most important purposes with education should be to facilitate global and long term thinking, since this is what we humans naturally have most difficulties with.

Maharlika! Good to see you If you have time, I would greatly appreciate your further input both in the general topic of education and my own personal tasks.

Maharlika wrote:
For starters I would like to ask you, what is YOUR philosophy in Education? I ask this because it would set as your guideline on how you want to structure your currirulum in the field of psychology.

When it comes to teaching, I'm an amateur who lack strategical pedagogic thinking and mostly make use of my personality and passion.

What would you consider as your core subjects? Subjects you think ALL your students of your target level (undergrad, postgrad) MUST AT LEAST KNOW.

A very good question, I haven't even started to think about it. The psychologist education must fulfil the Swedish FDA's and Healthcare's requirements, since it is a profession where you must have a licence to practise. Apart from factual knowledge, all students must be able to work with patients according to the ethical rules and the international declaration of Good Clinical Practise, as well as having a good scientific understanding and be able to become researchers themselves. Hm..there is much to consider in detail here. You have already given me food for thought

You know the old saying, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." The same is true of Americans and education: you can try to give American children the best education possible, but you can't make them think. It's just too hard for them. They'd rather be doing something easy like watching TV or eating junk food. I once saw a TV commercial for Twix candy bars that depicted students in a classroom who didn't want to listen to their teacher because all they wanted was a Twix. A similar commercial for Slim Jim beef jerky strips showed a famous professional "wrestler" delivering the message, "Higher education got you down? Snap into a Slim Jim!" I'd say that's an accurate reflection of American priorities.

There are those who wish to learn despite the relentless American focus on non-learning. The sad part of it is, they're considered dorks, geeks, nerds. Then again, there's a saying: "Never make fun of a dork/geek/nerd. He'll be your boss someday." Boy is THAT true, on so many levels. Now, as I see it, the biggest problem is that you must cater to ALL students, which roughly translates to you're gonna please nobody. The smart kids will all be bored, the dumb ones will all be lost, the ones in the middle don't care. What a world we live in eh?

I become depressed when I think of the state of education here in the US. It seems that there is always plenty of funding for wars, political campaigns, Congressional pay raises, and corporate mergers. Yet, education always seems to fall by the wayside when supporters of learning step up to ask for funding.

It amazes me how political candidates can raise millions of dollars to pay warped public image consultants, advertising executives, and media producers to get them into office...yet the same people refuse to fund the arts, purchase good quality textbooks for grade-school children, and provide qualified teachers decent salaries they can live on. It's disgusting. It's the "dumbing-down" of America, whereby a suitably ignorant public is produced that will eagerly swallow whatever is fed to them by the media.

[QUOTE=Chanak]I become depressed when I think of the state of education here in the US. It seems that there is always plenty of funding for wars, political campaigns, Congressional pay raises, and corporate mergers. Yet, education always seems to fall by the wayside when supporters of learning step up to ask for funding. [/quote]

On a related note, I have to wonder if the UN has ever done a study of the average salaries of teachers cross-indexed for various schools levels and experience levels, and adjusted for the average national income and inflation? I'm curious who would end up at the top, paying the best--and how much that would be. Certainly many nations pay lip service to education, but pay their teachers very poorly, and then wonder at the poor quality of teaching that results.

Personally, I've always been in favor of a sharp rise to teachers' salaries in the US, accompanied by mandatory, regular examinations by peers to see what level of knowledge and instructing skills each teacher is truly bringing to the classroom.

[QUOTE=fable]On a related note, I have to wonder if the UN has ever done a study of the average salaries of teachers cross-indexed for various schools levels and experience levels, and adjusted for the average national income and inflation? I'm curious who would end up at the top, paying the best--and how much that would be. Certainly many nations pay lip service to education, but pay their teachers very poorly, and then wonder at the poor quality of teaching that results.

Personally, I've always been in favor of a sharp rise to teachers' salaries in the US, accompanied by mandatory, regular examinations by peers to see what level of knowledge and instructing skills each teacher is truly bringing to the classroom.[/QUOTE]

My mother-in-law is a very active retired teacher. In fact, we had a discussion on this very topic last weekend when my wife and I spent a Saturday with her parents in San Antonio. She feels the same way. A higher base salary, coupled with higher and more stringent professional standards, would encourage skilled and dedicated teachers to stay in the field of public education.

Of course, I go a bit farther and would like to see the American school year modeled after most systems in Europe. Consistent schooling throughout the year encourages retention. The antiquated summer vacation was more relevant when America was primarily agricultural, as children were needed to lend an extra hand during the harvest on the family farm. This does not mean children won't enjoy time off during the year....they do, but not in the lengthy, wasteful lumps as is the case here in the US. I've heard some ideas on how breaks would be meted out throughout the year, and just about all have equal merit and stand on good ground. Permitting teachers to pursue continuing education...affordable education...is also key to a well-rounded educational system, I would think.

One problem I see, fable, is the attitude that education should primarily equip children to find a job. There is a fatal flaw inherent in this outlook, I believe, that becomes evident as one takes a look at the college grads of recent years. Many possess dismal writing skills...a lack of exposure to the classics...and a surprising ignorance of issues and subjects beyond their major.

Originally Posted by C Elegans long ago
The Third International Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS) included 0.5 million students from 41 countries. The East Asian students were the top scoreres, together with Hungary, Finland and the Czech repulic. The US students only outperformed 4 countries in both maths and science - those countries were Iran, Cyprus, Portugal and Lithuania. Also rich European countries like the UK and Germany scored surprisingly low, although not at low as the US. East Asian students were twice as good as the average. However, another international study comparing 11 countries, measured reading ability in the students' mother toungue. The result showed that US students were somewhat above average in reading ability

This doesn't surprise me. In richer countries, students assume that whatever happens, they will be provided for, they can always reap unemployment benefits, or get an unskilled job whatever happens. In countries such as Asia however, students work as hard as possible to gain a prescious universtiy place, and provide for their family. I belive the schooling system in the UK is not efficient, or well thought out, and from what I have experienced, the German schooling is with almost complete lack of discipline. Another problem in the UK is the vast difference in the quality of schools. In my small city alone, the weighted average point score for General Certificates Of Secondary Education. (Exams at age 16) Ranged from 30 to nearly 80 out of 100. And the thing was, the private schools of the area were not top of the list. In fact, a (quote) "School for High Achievers" Was second bottom on the list, despite fees of £16000 a term (About $22000, I think)

Personally, I think this goes to show that the pressure is on the pupil to learn, not the school to teach, which, in my opinion is wrong.

Originally Posted by fable
<snip>people are taught to believe what they read in schools. They aren't taught to think; if anything, they are frequently taught that education is a painful, ugly, and time-consuming process. So when they get out, they try to turn life into a mixture of required work and endless entertainment. And they believe whatever they're fed by whomever represents the political philosophy they naturally incline towards.

I agree with this. Especially in faith based schools, pupils are taught to accept what they are taught. I go to a Church of England school, for example, and, especially in Religious Education, pupils are scorned, if not punished, for looking at, or asking questions from, the position of a non christian. This brainwashing (for want of a better word) leads to pupils not thinking for themselves, and, as fable said, turning school into something to be endured, not enjoyed.



It's the "dumbing-down" of America, whereby a suitably ignorant public is produced that will eagerly swallow whatever is fed to them by the media.

Another point i agree with. Although in some instnces it may seem comical, in most cases it is sad to what we have to stoop to nowadays. I recently purchased a new mobile phone, and, in the manual, after a description of every feature was the phrase Note: Your Phone must be switched on to use this feature This occured at least once a page on most pages of a 109 page booklet. Why? I asked myself. Is society really so uneducated these days that they thjought they could use their cell phone without turning it on? Obviously someone has tried, and complained, because otherwise it would not have been thought of to put it in the book.

To conclude, western education, is, for the most part, in need of a definite revamp, and reorientation

[QUOTE=giles337]Although in some instnces it may seem comical, in most cases it is sad to what we have to stoop to nowadays. I recently purchased a new mobile phone, and, in the manual, after a description of every feature was the phrase Note: Your Phone must be switched on to use this feature This occured at least once a page on most pages of a 109 page booklet. Why? I asked myself. Is society really so uneducated these days that they thjought they could use their cell phone without turning it on? Obviously someone has tried, and complained, because otherwise it would not have been thought of to put it in the book.[/quote]

Good point, Giles. This reminds me of a sci-fi story by CM Kornbluth, written back in the 1950s, called The Marching Morons. It's about a scum of a real estate agent who accidentally ends up as a victim of experimental cryogenics, and wakes up a century from now. Over-breeding by people with low IQs has led to a populace that never doubt whatever they're told, and need everything spelled out fifteen times before they can absorb it. These are the marching morons of the title: complacent, dull, good-natured, self-centered, only interested in entertainment, willing to accept as fact without question everything.

Kornbluth is remarkably prescient in the examples of social malaise that he supplies. His malfunctioning vending machine (it drops the cup after pouring scalding water and grounds all over the place) and his television newscasters don't read as funny any longer, but as fact: these things happen, today. That's scary. On the other hand, Kornbluth is more typical of American techno-fiction writers of his day in his belief in nature vs nurture as a determinant for "intelligence," whatever that is, so he doesn't consider, as you do, the importance of education, much less cultural, in this. It is rather scary to consider the implications of his belief in people being inherently smart or stupid. Of course, this may have simply been a premise necessary for his story, which would have been sidelined if the vast population could have been educated out of mass ignorance, instead of being fundamentally moronic--but I'm digressing.

To conclude, western education, is, for the most part, in need of a definite revamp, and reorientation

I hope that some day, somebody publishes a good comparative study of instructional models and test results in Soviet vs post-Soviet era schools. It would be fascinating because the Soviet educational system (whatever else one may think of it) produced many of the world's finest scientists and artists in the 20th century. Was this due to oversight of the teaching process? Beter pay? A culture that had formerly lacked public schools, and never lost a respect for learning? A government that considered this a matter of patriotic pride, and getting one-up on "decadent teaching systems of the lax Western bourgeois culture"? Perhaps all of the above. In any case, there has been enough news leeking out to indicate that the Soviet era teaching establishment is either moving west, or relocating to private schools.

You hit it right, giles.

giles337 wrote: This doesn't surprise me. In richer countries, students assume that whatever happens, they will be provided for, they can always reap unemployment benefits, or get an unskilled job whatever happens. In countries such as Asia however, students work as hard as possible to gain a prescious universtiy place, and provide for their family.

I agree with you completely. I mentioned this before in a thread long ago that Asian families tend to give a lot of premium in education, similar to that of Jews. Finishing highschool is not enough and tertiary education is a must if one wants to live a better life.

If I'm not mistaken, blue-collared jobs could still give you a decent life if you are in a developed country. Hence, finishing highschool is basically enough for most, though others would also opt to further their education in a vocational technical school. In a number of developing Asian countries, to have a blue-collared job wouldn't give you a decent standard of living.

Even for those who finished tertiary education find it hard to get a decent paying job.

I suppose, it's the attitude of the students towards education and its RELEVANCE OF WHAT THEY LEARN IN SCHOOL TO THEIR OWN LIFE.

@CE: I will try to find my notes in making a curriculum and try to share them as soon as I can.

When it comes to teaching, I'm an amateur who lack strategical pedagogic thinking and mostly make use of my personality and passion.

I don't see any problem there since Curriculum and Instructions are two different things. Curriculum basically would be the areas/subjects to be learned while Instructions would deal on pedagogical techniques. It's like two Biology teachers in a big school where they teach the same grade level but since there are many classes in the same batch, they divide the sections between them. Hence, you'll have these teachers following the same curriculum, using the same laboratories, likely the same main textbooks but being individual professionals, they would have different teaching styles.

Just like you, I use my personality (I use a lot of humor in class so that my students would always look forward to our sessions) and passion (I rarely see my work as a job, I love what I'm doing.) whenever I teach my kids.

So far, what I can suggest is that you focus on what you perceive as very relevant areas in Psychology that your students MUST learn, couple that with lab courses so that the learners could appreciate the theoreticals and concepts handed down to them from the core subjects. I'm not a Psychology major so I can't recommend major courses. What comes to mind though are The Classics in the field of Psychology as well as modern studies in Psych that support or debunk these classics. Of course there are also different areas in Psych like Child Psych, Adolescent Psych, Adult Psych, Clinical Psych, Educational Psych, etc.

Aside from the core subjects, you may also include elective courses that the students would find interesting and relevant to their "taste." Maybe 9 to 12 units of elective courses would be sufficient.

That's all for now.

[QUOTE=Opalescence]There are those who wish to learn despite the relentless American focus on non-learning. The sad part of it is, they're considered dorks, geeks, nerds. Then again, there's a saying: "Never make fun of a dork/geek/nerd. He'll be your boss someday." Boy is THAT true, on so many levels. Now, as I see it, the biggest problem is that you must cater to ALL students, which roughly translates to you're gonna please nobody. The smart kids will all be bored, the dumb ones will all be lost, the ones in the middle don't care. What a world we live in eh?[/QUOTE]

Wow. That was the first word that came to mind when you said,"The smart kids will all be bored, the dumb ones will all be lost, the ones in the middle don't care." That's exactly what happens in my class and my previous classes. Right now, I am in the smartest 7th grade class in my school and district. Nearly everyone in my class is always atleast day dreaming in our class, and yet when ever the teacher calls on us, we still know exactly what's going on, thus proving your first point about the smart kids. In another class I had in elementry school, it was all mixed students (my talent for my genius had not been discovered then but heck, i was still way smarter than the idiots in my class [btw i'm not trying to be braggy]) almost every 10 minutes a kid would ask, "wait Ms.(Teacher) can you explain that again?"Thus proving your second point. Honestly I was very sad to see this. I wish I could install a micro chip that can advance their learning by 999 to the ninth power And then there were the other kids. I knew they were smart because they got very high grades on their tests, but they would never raise their hands, but most of them were also in the glee club (concert chorus) so it couldn't of been because they were nervous. So I had a talk with one of these kids one day, and he said he doesn't give a hoot. Then I asked him about Stuyvesant (smartest high school in NYC, and my goal since 2nd grade) he said,"what's the point of going to a smart high school? I'd rather just get my high school diploma and work at some McDonalds for the rest of my life" I remeber that these were his exact words. I knew he would regret them later on in life. So this proves your last point. You know, it's pretty amazing how you pin-pointed one of the exact points in my life.

Any how, I just wanted to say that I hope that there will be some kind of motivation for kids to do better than me myself. Instead of hearing these commercials

[quote="vondondu] A similar commercial for Slim Jim beef jerky strips showed a famous professional "]

I hope that they will turn the commercials around and make it so that kids WANT to study.

[quote="VonDondu] You know the old saying"]

I know you are speaking in general, but that's still making kids like me sound like we're idiots,too, but we're not!!! Kids like me have many awards and enjoy studying. Kids like me study the SAT many years before they even take it. It's kids like me that will lead America on in the future.

Relax, Dark Elf...

[QUOTE=Darc_Elv_Nyte]I know you are speaking in general, but that's still making kids like me sound like we're idiots,too, but we're not!!! Kids like me have many awards and enjoy studying. Kids like me study the SAT many years before they even take it. It's kids like me that will lead America on in the future.[/QUOTE]

Point well taken. Hope that you are not actually upset...

...on another note, didn't you say that you're Bengali?

Bangladesh is a developing Asian country just like the Philippines.

Perhaps your family had instill in you the importance of having a good education as having to get a good one too in college.

This reminds me of this scene in the movie "The Perfect Score" where a group of highschool kids attempted to steal the SAT answer key...

...when the question was raised who would normally top the SAT's, the Asian dude (Roy) said that it would be the middle-class Asian girls.

Don't know if that is true though.

[QUOTE=Darc_Elv_Nyte]I know you are speaking in general, but that's still making kids like me sound like we're idiots,too, but we're not!!! Kids like me have many awards and enjoy studying. Kids like me study the SAT many years before they even take it. It's kids like me that will lead America on in the future.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I was speaking of kids in general, and yes, of course there are exceptions, just like you.

Right now, I am in the smartest 7th grade class in my school and district. Nearly everyone in my class is always atleast day dreaming in our class, and yet when ever the teacher calls on us, we still know exactly what's going on,

You hit the nail on the head. For the first time this year, we are streamed according to ability for subjects at my school, and i can say for certain that this has increased my learning tenfold. Before that, the whole class had to go at the pace of the slowest person. In an end of term report card, for chemistry, i got an 'A' Grade for acheivement, but an 'E' Grade for class involvement and effort.... need i say more....

[QUOTE=Maharlika]Point well taken. Hope that you are not actually upset...

...on another note, didn't you say that you're Bengali?

Bangladesh is a developing Asian country just like the Philippines.

Perhaps your family had instill in you the importance of having a good education as having to get a good one too in college.

[/QUOTE]

First of all I would like to point out that I am Bengali (and proud of it ) I was born in Bangladesh but I came to America when I was barely 6 months old, so what's stopping me to say I am equally American as well

and I didn't take it personnally (i didn't get upset either) i just wanted to point out (like VonDondu said) there ARE exceptional students like me that do want to learn and do want to excel in life (i used the '!' and ' ' to get my message through )

[QUOTE=Opalescence]Now, as I see it, the biggest problem is that you must cater to ALL students, which roughly translates to you're gonna please nobody. The smart kids will all be bored, the dumb ones will all be lost, the ones in the middle don't care. What a world we live in eh?[/QUOTE]

I beg to differ, my school has the 6th, 7th, and 8th grade classes all seperated into groups. Each one has a Special ED class, a normal class, an S.P. class, and (my class) an A.R.P. class. Now you see, those classes are listed from lowest rank to highest rank. They take each and every student's grade from their previous classes and put them into the group they will excel most in. So in other words, EACH AND EVERY STUDENT IS ACCOUNTED FOR, BUT THE CLASS MOVES AT THE SAME PACE. That means one student can't slow the entire class down as you say. If one student is doing better than the rest, he/she will be moved into a higher rank (class), and vice-versa for the student that is slower.

I don't know why, but why do most Asian students (Indian, Bengali, Chinese, Phillipine (sorry i'm not sure how to spell it) etc.) do better than the average ordinary American student?

[QUOTE=fable]I hope that some day, somebody publishes a good comparative study of instructional models and test results in Soviet vs post-Soviet era schools...[/QUOTE]

The Soviet educational model is impressive. I suspect that, planted into a society with more liberties, its achievements would be the envy of the world. One horrible mistake committed by the American mind is the notion that communism is monolithic...and that nothing of value could come from it. On the contrary, academics were literally worshiped in the former USSR. We could learn much by studying their educational system.

When I read these studies, my first reaction was "What the @#$% is this?" The US is the world's leading country is science. It's also the richest and most powerful country in the world. How can the results from these studies be explained?

CE, I guess the main advantage in the US was the aglomeration of good brains in the beggining and the imported brains from other countries. US was, and perhaps is, the nation with the best capabilities to garther researchers in the world, specially because of your lust for domination and money.

But dont get this in a bad way, I mean, it is good. US moves the world. If US goes down, the world goes.

US educational style is good, very good. However, in Asia they have a tendency to apply more to math than to other cultural issues. Korea has been made behind this: Economists with stron math formation and engineers ready to benchmark and reduce costs of products for export. But they have - in my opinion, hope this dont hurt anybody - a lack of cultural (language, lore, history and stuff) aspects on education.

[QUOTE=Luis Antonio]
US educational style is good, very good. [/QUOTE]

What's good about it? It severely underpays the teaching profession, provides no review of teachers, employs out of date textebooks and media, encourages simple rote memorization of material and the complacent acceptance of all standards and "received wisdom." It discourages research, challenging of evidence, the development of logical skills and the emergence of talent. How many American schools have you attended or books about the US public school system have you read, to back up such a statement?