Abstract
Using data from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2003, this study examines problem-solving skills among 15-year-old Japanese and Korean students in comparative perspective. Problem-solving skills represent student’s capacity of solving real-situation problems, which is not acquired simply by rote learning, memorization, and repetition of school subjects. Comparing problem-solving skills across countries demonstrates that the extraordinary academic performance, which has been widely known to Western audience, of Japanese and Korean students is not simply the result of practice drill, rote learning, or memorization. The analysis also shows that top performers in Japan and Korea exceed top performers in other countries, debunking the stereotyped criticism on Japanese and Korean education that their standardized education makes talented students mediocre. This study, furthermore, challenges the existing literature’s insensitivity of differences between Japanese and Korean education, by highlighting that Japanese and Korean high school systems significantly differ in the ways in which students are selected into high schools. Discussed are differences between the two countries in the extent to which between-school differences account for students’ performance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The statistical tests showed that the squared term of “family SES” was statistically significant in Japan and the United States, while it was not significant for the other three countries. The sign of the squared term was negative in Japan, while it was positive in the United States.
- 2.
Specifically, the model includes the index of ESCS as a measure of family SES in student-level equation predicting individual students’ score on the problem-solving scale. In school-level equation, the school’s mean SES, which is the average family SES among students attending the same school, predicts school’s mean achievement. The overall effect is the estimate from the OLS regression without taking into account the nested structure of data.
- 3.
The index is calculated as follows: the overall effect of family SES (OLS estimate) = η 2(Between-school effect) + (1–η 2)(within-school effect), where η 2 is the index of school segregation by SES (Willms, 2004: 13).
- 4.
In the Japanese PISA data set, there is one technical college, while in the Korean data set there are 11 middle schools. Those schools were excluded.
- 5.
The fundamental distinction between public and private schools is who the owner of school is. Private schools are owned by individuals and they do have rights to select teachers, although not students. Teachers in public schools should move to a different school in every 5 years within providence, while teachers in private schools usually stay in the same school for a long time period.
References
Baker, D. P., & LeTendre, G. K. (2005). National differences, global similarities: World culture and the future of schooling. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
Bryk, A. S., Lee, V., & Holland, P. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury, CA: Sage Publications
Buchmann, C., & Park, H. (2005). The institutional embeddedness of educational and occupational expectations: A comparative study of 12 countries. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Research Committee 28, International Sociological Association, Los Angeles, August 18–21.
Ganzeboom, H. B. G., De Graaf, P. M., & Treiman., D. J. (1992). A standard international socio-economic index of occupational status. Social Science Research, 21, 1–56.
Hanushek, E. A. (2002, Fall). The seeds of growth. Education Next, 2(3), 10–17.
Kariya, T., & Rosenbaum, J. E. (1999). Bright flight: Unintended consequences of detracking policy in Japan. American Journal of Education, 107, 210–230.
Kim, K. (2003). Modifications of the equalization policy and suggested policy measures. Korea Journal, 43, 200–214.
Kim, K., & Phang, H. (2005). Social class and gender differentials in Korean and Japanese higher education. Korean Journal of Sociology, 39, 119–151 in Korean.
Kim, K. H. (2005). Learning from each other: Creativity in East Asian and American education. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 337–347.
Koretz, D., McCaffrey, D., & Sullivan, T. (2001). Predicting variations in mathematics performance in four countries using TIMSS. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 9(34). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v9n34/.
LeTendre, G. (1996). Constructed aspirations: Decision-making processes in Japanese educational selection. Sociology of Education, 69, 193–216.
Lee, J.-H. (2004). The school equalization policy of Korea: Past failures and proposed measure for reform. Korea Journal, 44, 221–234.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (2004). Quality education for all young people: Challenges, tends, and priorities. Seoul: International Bureau of Education.
Ono, H. (2001). Who goes to college? Features of institutional tracking in Japanese higher education. American Journal of Education, 109, 161–195.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2004). Problem solving for tomorrow’s world: First measures of cross-curricular competencies from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Kim, J. (2002) Statistical issues in analysis of international comparisons. In A. C. Porter & A. Gamoran (Eds.), Methodological advances in cross-national surveys of educational achievement (pp. 267–294). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Schnepf, S. V. (2002). A sorting hat that fails? The transition from primary to secondary school in Germany (Innocenti Working Papers No. 92). UNICEF.
Stevenson, D. L., & Baker., D. P. (1992). Shadow education and allocation in formal schooling: Transition to university in Japan. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1639–1657.
Stevenson, H. W. (1991). Japanese elementary school education. The Elementary School Journal, 92, 109–120.
Stevenson, H. W., & Stigler, J. W. (1992). The learning gap: Why our schools are falling and what we can learn from Japanese and Chinese education. New York: Summit Books
Sung, K. (2005). A critical review on the results of the self-funded private school. Korea Journal of Sociology of Education, 15, 179–204.
US Department of Education. (1987). Japanese education today. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Willms, J. D. (1986). Social class segregation and its relationship to pupil’s examination results in Scotland. American Sociological Review, 51, 224–241.
Willms, J. D. (2004). Reading achievement in Canada and the United States: Findings from the OECD Program for International Student Assessment. Final Report. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Park, H. (2010). Japanese and Korean High Schools and Students in Comparative Perspective. In: Dronkers, J. (eds) Quality and Inequality of Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3993-4_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3993-4_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3992-7
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-3993-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)