Korean Job Discussion Forums

[rapier]

I thought this makes for a good general read:

Redirecting Korea's Youth Education
Young S. Kim, Ph.D., Professor of Nuclear Physics (ret)

Korea's new generations must learn to think on his or her own - not to follow a "master".


The per capita number of Oriental (Chinese, Japanese, Korean,,,) winners of the Nobel Prize for science and technology is essentially zero compared to the corresponding figure for the Americans (including Americans of Oriental origin). In fact virtually all technological inventions and scientific discoveries of the last 2-3 centuries were made in Europe and America.

It is true that the ancient Chinese invented paper, gunpowder, compass and many other basic technologies which the modern civilization is founded upon, but since the middle ages, the Orientals have contributed precious little to the progress of science and technology.

This lack of creativity is not due to any lack of college grads in Asia. One must hasten to emphasize that all humans (black, white, brown or yellow) are born equal in mental capacity (the brain size and the number of nerve cells).

For example, South Korea has more colleges and Ph.D.'s per capita than America or any European country. Its literacy rate is higher than that of most 'white' nations. Then, how come the Korean scientists and engineers have made no earth-shaking inventions?

The answer lies in how the Korean youth are educated. The Korean schools emphasize memorization and regurgitation. Students are forced to study 6 days a week, 8 hours a day in class rooms and then get tutored for several more hours each day. There is hardly any time to digest or do any creative thinking. The more books and 'standard' exam problems covered, the better chance of passing an exam.

This form of "dictatorial" education is a carry-over from the Confucian system of education instituted during the Chosun Dynasty. It was assumed that the ancient sages and masters knew everything, and the students were forced to memorize the ancient chronicles and scriptures. The number of passages one could recite from memory - whether he comprehended the basic principles being enunciated or not - was used as the basic measure of his scholarship.

Tens of thousands of bright students from Oriental colleges come to America for graduate studies. They excel in "theory" and mathematics, but they often fail to solve even the most "freshman" problems. They are lost as to where or how to tackle a 'new' problem. They would say that "I've never seen this problem before and therefore I cannot solve it".

Some people say that the American education system is too 'lenient' with the students, that the students are given too much 'idle' time, too much 'liberal arts' courses, too much social and extra-curricular activities, etc. The American students are "free" compared to their "restricted" counterparts in Asia.

Do "free" students become more productive than "restricted" students? Several researches conducted with laboratory animals seem to suggest an affirmative answer to this question.

Do 'free' cats catch more mice than 'restricted' cats?
Suppose we have 300 kittens - 100 'smart' (grade A) breeds, 100 dull (grade C) breeds and 100 in-between (grade B). The cats are randomly separated into two groups and then raised in two different environments: one in which the cats are restricted (limited movement, living space, etc.) and the other in which the cats are 'free'.

When the kittens mature, we observe how often they fail to catch a mouse (all cats are given an equal opportunity to catch a mouse). The results ('analysis of variances' - ANOVA) would look as shown in the figure.

see link for graph:
http://www.kimsoft.com/1997/rats-edu.htm


One sees a significant (< 0.05% error) difference between the free cats and the restricted cats. The free cats make fewer errors and thus catch more mice than the restricted cats.

Even the dull ('C') cats in the free group do well compared with the bright ('A') cats of the restricted group. In another word, the 'A' restricted cats perform not much better than the 'C' free cats.

The Biophysics of 'Restricted Cats'
Biophysics findings indicate that all humans are born with about the same number of brain cells. Brain cells are basically storage devices and the 'real' brain or intelligence is set by one's ability to associate the right cells for the right purpose at the right time. Human intelligence is roughly proportional to the number of brain-cell links. Newborn babies have a limited number of links (so-called 'instinct') and additional links ('neural' connections) are created during the formative years (0 - 18 years).

Brain-cell links are analogous to a computer-database index file. Simple indices - for example, 'binary'' search index - are adequate for data storage and retrieval (i.e., memorization and regurgitation). However, projections and creative associations do require more sophisticated 'data mining' capabilities.

An infant's intelligence develops at a rate set mainly by the environment surrounding it - external stimuli, nutrition, sense of security, etc. By the age of 4 or 5, a child's IQ capacity is more or less set and it becomes evident even at this early stage that all children are not equal intelligence-wise. Some kids are 'smarter' than others. Statistically speaking, roughly one third of the kids of a given age group are 'A' pupils, one third 'B' and one third 'C'. There are always exceptions (statistical 'flukes' or 'outliers'): a few are extremely bright ('geniuses') and a few are significantly dull ('idiots').

It is believed that "free" educational environment is conducive to creative (inventive) minds, whereas "restricted" educational environment yields 'machine-like' beings who are good at copying other people's 'things' and at blindly following orders.

Of course, not everyone can be an Einstein. A society cannot handle too many chiefs or not enough Indians. One must strike a proper balance of 'free' thinkers and 'slaves'. The government controls the educational system in Korea, and it is unrealistic to overhaul the system, which has persisted for several centuries, in a few years. However, revising the law to allow one or more experimental school systems apart from the main system will be a good investment in Korea's future.

[Homer]

Good read indeed.

But..Rapier...are you turning into Real Reality Redux??

Say it ain't so...say it ain't so!

[newinseoul]

[quote]rapier

Redirecting Korea's Youth Education
Young S. Kim, Ph.D., Professor of Nuclear Physics (ret)

Korea's new generations must learn to think on his or her own - not to follow a "master". [quote]


This will never happen in my lifetime. This Korean confusianist society has been the same for a long time. It is ingrained in the cultural mindset.

The whole school system will not change. The school is a top down model of management where the director dictates how the kids are taught and what curriculum should be used. Rote learning and memorization is how these kids are programmed. In one of my classes I am teaching a junior high prep class.

I follow the text most times but, when I go off the text and get them to have a conversation with me. They look at me and seem lost. If they can't have a decent role playing conversation with me then they will never function out in the real world. If I ask them what they think about something, I get really strange looks. It is terribly sad but, your statistics and the cat study really ring true.

This also leads to kids taking less risks and comes back to following the leader. To risk is to learn even if we make mistakes. How terribly sad for these kids considering in the west our mindset is so opposite (individualistic).

[tomato]

We see the effects of an uncreative environment even in the preschool.
I once taught in a Korean kindergarten where there was not a single child's drawing displayed on the walls.

I centered each lesson around a noun. One of the activities was a drawing activity. Supposing that the word for the day was "house," I drew a picture of a house and asked, "Who can draw a house?" That always caused a flurry of "����, ����!" Usually, the volunteers would draw the house exactly the way I drew it.

All went well until I centered a lesson around an adjective: "red." I held up a red crayon and asked, "Who can draw something red?" That drew a blank. After enough coaxing in each class, I got a volunteer. Since the remaining volunteers had someone to copy from, it was easier to get subsequent volunteers.

In the youngest class, I did not have that problem. Here, the children shouted "����, ����!" just as they always did. Then each volunteer made only a scribble, but it was a different scribble.

[rapier]

[guangho]

A lack of creativity also points to a lack of coping skills. When placed in an environment different from what is the "norm" or a social situation not encountered before, Koreans, especially men, tend to completely fall apart....

[joe_doufu]

You've got to wonder about a culture where the elementary school students (age 13) are smarter, more creative, healthier, and happier than the middle school students (age 15), who are themselves brighter, healthier, and more attractive than the high school students (age 17). There are many countries with poor education systems but it's a real accomplishment to actually de-educate children and make them *worse* as they get older.

[Hater Depot]

I would say people in every country get less creative as they age. It's a natural thing.

I will say that it is pretty extreme among Korean children though.

[joe_doufu]

[TheUrbanMyth]

[Kenny Kimchee]

This argument is pretty weak.

Premise 1: Per capita, Korea produces more PhDs than Western countries

Premise 2: ��The per capita number of Oriental (Chinese, Japanese, Korean,,,) winners of the Nobel Prize for science and technology is essentially zero compared to the corresponding figure for the Americans. In fact(,) virtually all technological inventions and scientific discoveries of the last 2-3 centuries were made in Europe and America.�� (BTW, what does ��essentially zero�� mean, anyway? Either there are ��zero�� Asian laureates or more than ��zero.�� Do a little more research next time there, buddy).

Premise 3: Asian students learn in a ��restricted�� environment that places emphasis on rote memorization, while Western students learn in a ��free�� environment that encourages creative thinking and problem solving.

Conclusion: The lack of inventors and Nobel laureates in science from Asian countries is caused by ��restrictive�� Asian pedagogies.

While I agree with his argument, his supporting evidence is nonexistent.

Dude cites a study on��cats? He says that cats raised in a ��free�� environment are more successful at catching mice than cats raised in a ��restricted�� environment. He doesn��t really define these environments, except saying that they have ��limited movement, living space, etc.�� How restricted? Living in a 1x1 foot cage?

To bolster his argument (?) he observes:

��An infant's intelligence develops at a rate set mainly by the environment surrounding it - external stimuli, nutrition, sense of security, etc. By the age of 4 or 5, a child's IQ capacity is more or less set and it becomes evident even at this early stage that all children are not equal intelligence-wise. Some kids are 'smarter' than others. Statistically speaking, roughly one third of the kids of a given age group are 'A' pupils, one third 'B' and one third 'C'. There are always exceptions (statistical 'flukes' or 'outliers'): a few are extremely bright ('geniuses') and a few are significantly dull ('idiots').��

He then concludes:

��It is believed that "free" educational environment is conducive to creative (inventive) minds, whereas "restricted" educational environment yields 'machine-like' beings who are good at copying other people's 'things' and at blindly following orders.��

I��m sorry people, but cats are not humans. Cats hunt on instinct and if they��re raised in an environment where they don��t exercise that instinct then they can��t hunt very well. They need practice, too; were these hunt figures based on when they first let the cats out of the cage, or were they permanently impaired?

The whole bit about children��s I.Q. is totally extraneous, unless he��s trying to say that Korea and the West have roughly an equal number of intelligent people before these people enter compulsory education, and that the Western system cultivates more free thinkers; he doesn��t make this connection clear, though, and doesn��t provide any supporting evidence.

I wrote better papers in my sophomore year.

Grade: D

[AbbeFaria]

Seems like all those commericials you see in the U.S. that tell parents to support the arts, that kids who play music do better on tests etc., are really on to something.

One day, if ever I have children, they'll definately be playing an instrument. And doing excercises that require them to think 'outside the box'.

-S-

[bitter_hag]

It's not really earth shattering. I think what is significant is that it's a Korean saying this and not an outsider. The funny thing is it seems that it definitely was written by a Korean because the argument he uses isn't very strong. But, at least, he's making the argument.

I've been here for awhile and that was evident with my first class of very nice, sufficiently motivated, but problem-solving challenged university students. Now that I've shifted gears from teaching and have gone back to school here, it's the same thing. It's just that I'm observing it in my classmates. I get the competitive advantage of being able to think on my feet and I'm used to expecting to be called on in class or engaging in discussions in class (especially on the graduate level). It's amusing to watch a class of "graduate" students in complete shock when asked a question (which you can easily anticipate if you're used to that style of education) or asked to give their own input.

It seems to anyone, Korean or not, sees there is a problem. Now they'll have to find a way to implement change. I don't see it happening for awhile because even now most parents encourage the same standards for their kids. Unless they're very well off, they can't afford to send their kids elsewhere for an education. But I know some who have the cash and their kids are amazing because those kids have the best of both worlds. They have the intense work ethic coupled with the ability to be comfortable thinking outside of the box.

[fusionbarnone]

The Japanese have recognized the restrictive nature of education and it's pressuring influence on creativity as well as it's influence on psychic wellbeing. Thus, the gradually growing support for schools along the line of Pepper Tree(featured in Time) which allows children a choice in their study environment. Which, is indicative of a need for change in this social/education sector and, an acknowledgment to answers to problems affecting childrens creative growth, as long overdue.

The Japanese for example, have won Noble prizes before but, what was interesting is recognition came only as the recognized laureate was about to board his plane. Therefore, the rigidity of socialized ideas surrounding hierarchy and one's role and place within it, appears to be ingrained and justified because it has worked during economic growth periods requiring rigid systemization.

The Japanese inventor of the transister radio (also responsible for an impressive range of other innovative inventions) led the world pace in electronics. In contrast, IBM lost it's competitive edge mostly because it failed to see a future in personal computers. So perhaps, tradition whether it be culturally devised or complacently accepted in the size of a corporate hierarchy, reflect a culture/modus operandi until, competition forces adaption to change in order to remain abreast of competitors.

3M has a major monopoly on independently contracted creative thinkers. Creativity that produces profit has always been coveted yet as the saying goes "masterminds are best hired rather than allowed to roam freely". The creaters of many aspects of the web which we take for granted were once hackers(whitehat) and "given" access to advanced technologies and funding to create(Darpa became Arpa reflecting a non-military influence).

With the increasing danger of spyware/keystroke loggers, etc., the greatest attact according to some conspiracy theorists and freedom enthusiasts, is not only the possibility of monitored privacy but theft of creative ideas beneficial to industrial conglomerates.

Innovation has been built on innovation and in that respect inventiveness can be acquired through either specific training or head hunting, creative talent. And, original innovators not always benefited from their inventions or found patent law adequate in protecting their intellectual property. The case of the inventor who submitted his patented system for modern car locks to one of the US car manufacters found they had copied his prototype, installed it into their production line; he's been fighting the company ever since.

Point I'm trying to make from all of this is competitiveness breeds and maintains it's own culture in order to survive. Asian business is still doing a brisk trade in "duplicating" western products/ideas whether(legal/illegal) has found little need to deviate from the status que.

If neccesity is the mother of invention than it could be probable that maintaining a global market share of in a technologically advantageous niche will nurture inventiveness. In Korea, this can be seen in alternative energy research(solar) which presently leads the world which is only one of the innovations Korea is gaining recognition for.

Education is the wealth-builder for any nation but I suspect the USA attracts the brightest from around the world more than any other nation producing a swell of outstanding talent. Education geared toward specific specialities will encourage innovation when harnessed to extreme rote learning as evidenced in Asia. How long can a "bright" student continue looking at the same processor without thinking of ways to enhance or improve the original idea?

[fusionbarnone]

The Japanese have recognized the restrictive nature of education and it's pressuring influence on creativity as well as it's influence on psychic wellbeing. Thus, the gradually growing support for schools along the line of Pepper Tree(featured in Time) which allows children a choice in their study environment. Which, is indicative of a need for change in this social/education sector and, an acknowledgment to answers to problems affecting childrens creative growth, as long overdue.

The Japanese for example, have won Noble prizes before but, what was interesting is local recognition came only as the internationally recognized laureate was about to board his plane. Therefore, the rigidity of socialized ideas surrounding hierarchy and one's role and place within it, appears to be ingrained and justified because it has worked during economic growth periods requiring rigid systemization.

The Japanese inventor of the transister radio (also responsible for an impressive range of other innovative inventions) led the world pace in electronics. In contrast, IBM lost it's competitive edge mostly because it failed to see a future in personal computers. So perhaps, tradition whether it be culturally devised or complacently accepted in the size of a corporate hierarchy, reflect a culture/modus operandi until, competition forces adaption to change in order to remain abreast of competitors.

3M has a major monopoly on independently contracted creative thinkers. Creativity that produces profit has always been coveted yet as the saying goes "masterminds are best hired rather than allowed to roam freely". The creaters of many aspects of the web which we take for granted were once hackers(whitehat) and "given" access to advanced technologies and funding to create(Darpa became Arpa reflecting a non-military influence).

With the increasing danger of spyware/keystroke loggers, etc., the greatest attact according to some conspiracy theorists and freedom enthusiasts, is not only the possibility of monitored privacy but theft of creative ideas beneficial to industrial conglomerates.

Innovation has been built on innovation and in that respect inventiveness can be acquired through either specific training or head hunting, creative talent. And, original innovators not always benefited from their inventions or found patent law adequate in protecting their intellectual property. The case of the inventor who submitted his patented system for modern car locks to one of the US car manufacters found they had copied his prototype, installed it into their production line; he's been fighting the company ever since.

Point I'm trying to make from all of this is competitiveness breeds and maintains it's own culture in order to survive. Asian business is still doing a brisk trade in "duplicating" western products/ideas whether(legal/illegal) has found little need to deviate from the status que.

If neccesity is the mother of invention than it could be probable that maintaining a global market share of in a technologically advantageous niche will nurture inventiveness. In Korea, this can be seen in alternative energy research(solar) which presently leads the world which is only one of the innovations Korea is gaining recognition for.

Education is the wealth-builder for any nation but I suspect the USA attracts the brightest from around the world more than any other nation producing a swell of outstanding talent. Education geared toward specific specialities will encourage innovation when harnessed to extreme rote learning as evidenced in Asia. How long can a "bright" student continue looking at the same processor without thinking of ways to enhance or improve the original idea?