Since the PISA-results bomb dropped last December, myriad reports have been released, op-eds written, and dinner conversations had comparing the American education system to high-achieving OECD nations. Some of them have been pretty smart. Others have been reasonably vapid, if well-intentioned. And almost all seem compelled to hail Finland. If only our system could be more Scandinavian, they croon.
Absolutely there are some elements of the Finnish system that should be lauded and emulated (their rigorous teacher training and constant loop of peer-feedback are big ones for me). But turning our schools into a United States of Finland will no sooner skyrocket our children's achievement than adopting whole-hog the policies of South Korea (with its strict, albeit slackening test-based culture) or even Poland or South Africa (which have been marking sharp gains in student achievement since stepping from the shadows of the Soviet Union and apartheid, respectively.
Thing is, there is no perfect system. And touting one in its entirety blinds us from some important points regarding international comparisons and takeaways.
Here is what we should be considering:
The Devil is in the details:
Sweeping comparisons of entire education systems make for explosive headlines and engaging reading (and fun ?what if? or ?if only? games). But when it comes to creating smart policy and manageable lessons from other nations, they do little to advance conversation. They push American exceptionalists to recede into their shells?declaring all the while that our nation, with its federalist history, rich cultural diversity, and market-driven principles cannot possibly be compared with Singapore's controlled and government-engineered society or Finland's homogeneous peoples.
Instead, small lessons?for individual education programs and delivery models?should be gleaned and savored. To fancy a nationally controlled education-delivery model (or even one best practice) is to misunderstand how innovation and individualism have shaped American past?and how they will shape American educational future. Individual states, districts, and charter operators need to take the reins on proposed reforms. Lessons from abroad should speak to them, not to those in Washington.
Here, not there:
No one does everything right in all circumstances. In fact, no one does even one thing right in all circumstances. What works in Shanghai's schools won't always work in their American counterparts. To capitalize on what others do well requires evaluating the individual strengths of specific schools, districts, and programs. We don't need to buy the whole pig if only the rump is grade-A.
Take off the blinders:
Once we stop looking to external education systems en masse for the silver bullet to student success, and instead focus on what is working in individual situations?and how we can adapt these efforts to fit our own models?we'll be able to tally gains. Looking past PISA's top scorers to countries like Brazil and India (and specific initiatives within these countries) is how we'll gain a smartly global take on education.
Maybe the American corporate world takes a page from the Brazilian playbook. There, corporations (often through their philanthropic arms) are opening schools, developing new teaching strategies, and working with individual districts to improve school management.
Maybe we grab and modify the idea of Pratham, an Indian education-services company that coordinates an army of volunteers to generate data assessing the quality of local schools. Districts feeling the heat from the recent cheating scandal fallout could well have benefited from some form of this initiative. And parents could become more energized and engaged in the assurance of a quality education for their children.
Of course there is much more to fixing America's K-12 system than a few programmatic alterations. We need some fundamental shifts in labor laws, governance arrangements, and teacher policies. Surely there are lessons from abroad that can speak to these elements of school reform too (both as examples to be emulated and those to be avoided). To construct a fitting twenty-first century schoolhouse, we need to use more than just the tools in our belts. Instead, we should be borrowing both the power tools from those with the best homes on the block as well as finishing nails and paint from our other neighbors. What we need not do is copy the blueprint of another?no matter how pretty their home's fa?ade.
