via: peking duck - Nicholas Kristof: Chinese Medicine for American Schools
Kristof最近在《纽约时报》上发表了一篇称赞中国教育的文章，认为中国在基础教育，特别是自然科学和外语方面，以及学生和社会对教育的重视程度方面，值得美国学习．
peking duck blog转贴了这篇文章，一些国外的网友对此进行评论．
评论一：
The thing is, the Chinese education system is doing exactly what it's aim is: greating a graduating class fully versed in math and science. But at what cost? Obviously the article talks about lack of spare time, lack of romance. What he doesn't mention is the incredible inability for Chinese students to think. That, and their maturity level is astoundingly low. It's even worse in Taiwan, where the populace is educated enough to do the hard scientific work for companies led and guided by the few creative individuals (but mostly foreign firms). There is little room for hands-on problem solving and critical thinking; combined with the incredible study schedule from birth to high school graduation, China is producing a huge populace of sleep-deprived mathmaticians who don't know what the math is for.
实际上，中国的教育机器目标就在于：用牺牲孩子们业余时间和兴趣爱好的代价，生产出精通数理的学生，更糟的是，文章中没有谈到，这些中国学生严重缺乏独立思考的能力，而且他们的心理成熟程度也很低．在台湾，情况更严重 ... 从出生到高中毕业，几乎所有时间都被用来读死书，用来学习动手能力和思考能力的时间少的可怜，可以这么说，中国并不缺少睡眼朦胧的＂数学家＂，但是，这些＂数学家＂并不知道学习数学用来干吗．
评论二：
The problem I see with Kristof is that he keeps on overemphasizing the amount of studying that the Chinese kids do without mentioning that they're studying useful subjects like math, science, or business/law. I've always found the Western emphasis on humanities education quite like the Qing dynasty's emphasis on Confucian knowledge--it's quite good to know, but it can introduce a sort of ridiculous dogma into society as a whole (when people take ideas articulated by Locke and somehow use them to justify affirmative action and quota systems for poorer students--much like how the ideas of Confucius were/are used to justify authoritarianism)--leaving that particular society vulnerable to being technologically outclassed and economically outdeveloped.
我觉得问题的关键不是中国孩子多努力，而是他们努力的领域是数理，外语，法律等实用学科，而这是kristof所忽略的．现在西方国家中对人文学科的强调，在我看来，很象清朝对孔子学说的重视，给社会带来了某种荒谬的教条主义的僵化 ...
对评论二的评论：
... I have to disagree with your dismissal of liberal arts education. Liberal arts subjects teach us how to think, how to use our creativity, to problem-solve, how to look at the world in different ways. On a purely practical level, strong writing skills are awfully useful in today's world, in just about any high-level job. You learn to write by reading, along with writing. And I know there have been studies that correlate reading/writing skills with overall ability to think critically.
无法同意您对人文学科的偏见。人文学科教给我们怎样思考，怎样运用我们的创造力，解决问题，怎样从不同的角度认知世界。从实用的角度看，写作能力在很多工作中也非常有用 ... 而且，有研究表明，阅读和写作能力与批判性思考能力紧密相关。
评论三：
I've lived in mainland China for 5 years and it still boggles my mind how people can spend so many hours studying and come out not knowing shit about shit, particularly the high school kids. Even when I try to engage them on subjects they (according to Kristoff) are expert on (biology, hard sciences) I often find the paltry science of my liberal arts education is enough to run circles around them (t_co).
It's not just that the English teachers can't speak English, I'm also not so sure the engineers can do engineering.
Also, as a teacher I can tell you that number of hours studying means precisely jack shit compared to the efficiency and efficacy of your study methods.
我在中国大陆待了5年，不过到现在我还搞不明白，中国学生，特别是那些高中生，整天埋头读书，可是仍然缺乏常识，整个一书呆子模样。既是在所谓中国学生擅长的自然科学上，我也能用我可怜的三板斧耍得他们晕头转向。
在中国，不光是英文老师不会说英文的问题，我看工程师也不咋的。我也是个老师，实话实说，中国学生整日埋头读书正好反映了他们学习效率和效果的低劣。
评论四：
Hell yes. They do the same thing here -- they memorize for the test and then forget it promptly afterwards. And under no circumstances is what they learn in class to be connected to what goes on in the real world. It's mostly the people who pass through Asia from on high who laud Asian education systems.
... 他们为了考试而死记硬背，考完了立刻忘的一干二净，而且所学非所用，和现实世界脱节十万八千里 ...
评论五：
Is my memory still serving me - did Thomas Frieman say the similar thing? Less English majors, more science majors?
Can both Friedman and Kristof be wrong at same time? If yes, why?
如果没记错的话，好象Thomas Frieman也说过同样的话 - 西方教育体系应该引入更多的自然科学，而减少语言课程。
Friedman和Kristof不会同时作出错误的断言吧？ 他们都这么讲，总有些道理吧？
注：这是bellevue的评论，KAO，这么有学问的人，怎么发起疯来象小丑一样？还在“华文大报”工作呢，匪夷所思。
评论六：
Lots of spot-on comments. I do give the Chinese school system high marks for doing so much with so little, but that's about all I can say for it.
Chinese schools are memorization sweatshops. They are also typically long on theory, short on application. Worst of all, they completely fail to teach young people how to think. All that intense studying is mostly just memorizing in order to pass tests, after which the information is dumped. The classic example from my field (English): students with large, memorized vocabularies, who struggle mightily to string together the simplest of sentences in casual conversation. They learn to recite, not to speak. What a waste.
Oddly (or maybe not, this is Kristoff), he failed to mention a key hallmark of the Chinese education system: astonishingly rampant cheating, tolerated and even abetted by teachers. If you can get into college, you are virtually assured of graduating. Even theses are often simple cut-n-paste jobs. Small wonder the end result is a nation of plagiarists, pirates and copy-cats.
Occasionally I hear Chinese joke about Americans having poor geography skills. The joking usually ends when I ask the speaker if they are, at that moment, to the east or west of the Pacific Ocean. Surprisingly often the answer is "I don't know". North or south of Nanjing Lu (main street of Shanghai)? "I don't know." Do you live in the north, south, east, or west part of your district? "Don't know."
The diligence of Chinese students can be impressive and inspiring. If their school system some day serves them better, there is no height they cannot reach. However, until that day, the potential of most will go largely untapped. And that is an appalling waste for any society.
未完待续