I don’t know if it’s the American model or not. The old Chinese system was based on passing exams, so I think that’s the root of it in East Asia - it’s a very old part of the culture here.
I just don’t know how and why the test-based system got so big in the west (although it’s not equally big everywhere). It would be interesting to hear if someone knew the answer to that. Was that not the situation in Russia (or USSR)?
@ Bortrun, who asks about the test-based system getting so big in the West: “Was that not the situation in Russia (or USSR)?”
No Mark, I think it wasn’t. At least we didn’t have such tests in which you had to guess one correct answer from a few, some evidently stupid, suggestions.
We did have written tests at [secondary] school now and then, especially with math and science. We then were required. all at once, to solve a few same problems and write down our solutions during the class time. The teacher would later inspect what you have written and award a score, from 2 (failed) to 5 (excellent).
But the teacher, especially a good one, would rely more not on the written tests scores, but on our oral examination, on our “oral” performance during all the class time, on how we understand, solve and explain things during the semester. It was especially true for such subjects as languages, history, geography even biology. We spend, I think, more time standing at the chalk board and talking to the class than kids here in USA, Canada and Israel.
In the University/Institute, we also had written tests, but our actual score was figured out during the oral examination by a lecturer, or a lecturer and his assistance, after each session. You’d get say three questions, which of course cover only a small fraction of the semester material, but you’d have to explain this questions in you style, demonstrate your understanding, and the lecturer could ask you any questions about all the material.
I don’t think that the Soviet education system was so good. As to teaching languages, it was close to nothing. Just we are now talking about the disadvantages of the heavily test-based system. I think the Soviet system less suppressed your natural interest to the subject, if you had one. And it did not require you to learn test tricks.
My “Brin not like Medvedev and Putin” => should be: “Brin does not like Medvedev and Putin”
I had not wanted to redirect this thread to the Russian issues, but it slides their under my fingers.
I do not think that the Soviet achievements in science were indeed that spectacular and justified, provided their cost to the nation. ( Not mentioning the risk to the world). (The cost and the military reason why, actually, the Soviets had invested in science, is such a big and polemic story that I skip it).
Above I mentioned only 18 research institutes in Chernogolovka, a small town of 20,000, fully funded by the government, (Chernogolovka was first founded to research the physics of explosion and detonation). Such institutes were called the Academic Institutes, and they considered the best in the scientific level. In Moscow, the highest concentrator of the Academic Institutes, there were probably twice as many of them, and few in Leningrad. Besides the Acadimic Institutes, all over the Soviet Union there were lots of institutes destined to help certain branches of Industry.
Well, the number of the Nobel Prize winners from the Soviet Union were far behind the winners from the USA. While the percentage of the GDP directed to science were, perhaps, higher in the USSR. We were not that bad in theoretical physics (Richard, Feynmann considered Lev Landay superior to him, and Landay beleived the opposite). But we were clearly falling further and father behind in experimental physics, and in all that had to rely heavily on technology.
@Ilya, the evaluation system you describe sounds very good. It does depend greatly on the teacher’s judgement though. I don’t have a problem with that, but I think there’s a focus in North America on objective measures of education.
My background was adult ESL, and often in immersion schools, students will stay at a particular “level” until the teacher and student agree that they are ready to move on. I don’t see why that can’t be applied to other subjects as well. I don’t see why everyone must learn the same things, at the same time, in the same order, and at the same speed.
In the end, I think the best way to judge if someone understands something is to just talk about it with them. I don’t think we need to do all these tests/reports/essays/etc.
As for whether the education system in the USSR was good or not, I can’t say. However, the way of evaluating students seems better - although I’m sure there were other problems with it.
And don’t worry about slipping into Russian issues. I’m sure many people find it very interesting - I certainly do.
At any rate, I think we can agree that the sort testing that is done in schools is terrible for language learning. And, personally, I think it’ll be a long time before the average English-speaker can speak another language.
Although it’s nice to hear someone mention language learning in the public discourse 
@Bortrun
“I just don’t know how and why the test-based system got so big in the west (although it’s not equally big everywhere). It would be interesting to hear if someone knew the answer to that”
Check this RSAnimate presentation of parts of Ken Robinson’s TED talk. Well worth it.
Mark, let me reflect just on: “And, personally, I think it’ll be a long time before the average English-speaker can speak another language.”
I actually had thought the same. But now I am reading Farid Zakaria’s book “The Post American Word”. What a coincidence! It hins at such the answer. It’d take about as long as it will take other main powers, e.g. China and India, to approach USA econmically. I don’ t mean that the americans will be speaking necessary Mandarin, I mean the real change in the attuded to foreign languages in general)
Will it take long? May be just 20 years. I am currently on the chapter “The Challenger”, about China. “China has grown over 9 percent a year for almost thirty years,THE FASTED rate for a major economy in THE RECORDED HISTORY. In that same period, it has moved around 400 million people out of povetry, the largest reduction that has taken place anywhwer, anytime… The economist Jeffrey Sachs puts it simply: China is the most successful development story in the world history.” In the other place Zakaria explains that China has covered in 30 years the way that the West has covered in 200 years.
Mark, have you, or any one else out there (this expression I learned on the Forums) read this book? It is extermely readable and full of insight, not just staistics. I’d say I am enjoying it more than the Interview ( the link to which is in the begining of this thread). Would be intersting to discuss the “Post American World”
Nice animation Dooo. Clearly, adults must be entertained during the TED talks
I mean the real change in the attuded to foreign languages => I mean the real change in the attitude to foreign languages.
Praise by Walter Isaacson (one of my favorite American Journalists) for THE POST- AMERICAN WORD. 2008.
“Fareed Zakaria has been consistently brilliant in his analysis of world affairs but also something far more rare: he has turned out to have been right. Now he’s produced another masterpiece of insight. With great reporting and cultural understanding, Zakaria explains a future shaped by may emerging power centers. This bookk isn’t about America’s decline, it is about how it can deploy its unique strength to prosper as the rest of the world does so well. It’s a definitive handbook for political and business leaders who want to succeede in a global era.”
@Ilya, I haven’t read the book although I’ve seen Zakaria discussing it. Yes, China has grown very quickly, but it has a lot of catching up to do. I think that eventually, China and India (and other places) will develop and have a similar standard of living to the US. But look at Japan - very high standard of living in a competitive world economy, but most people don’t speak a foreign languages.
I don’t know - there’s such a cultural resistance to learning foreign languages in English-speaking countries. The US is so big and the average person is fairly isolated from the rest of the world. I can’t see the average person in Kansas speaking a foreign language. Perhaps it’s a failure of my imagination…
@Dooo, I’ve seen Robinsen’s presentation on creativity, but maybe not this one. I’ll give it a watch. Cheers.
=> “But look at Japan - very high standard of living in a competitive world economy, but most people don’t speak a foreign languages.”
But look at Japan 40-years-ago or more. Neither you nor Dooo nor Steve would be employed there back than, nor had enough incentive to learn Japanese. And look how much they (what I’ve heard) invest into it.
The trend is there. But I agree that the current rate of change is slow, at least in the american word.
And China is not Japan, it is One Billion and 300 Millions. Let’s say 00.1 percent of the Chineese population pay 1$ for the LingQ begginer content 20 years from now. It is already difficult for me to compute.
Yeah, and don’t foget the the average American, as well as Canadian, will be much more immigrant very soon.
And look how much they (what I’ve heard) invest into it. => I mean how much japanese invest in learning English, not you in Japanese -
Yes, it is true that the Japanese invest a lot of time and money into learning English, but the results are not very good. After studying for 6 years, the average high school graduate will be unable to have conversations like “Where do you live?” or “What kind of music do you like?”, although they will have memorized the japanese translation for many English words.
I think one of the reasons this situation persists is that there is not much opportunity or necessity to use English. And I think that is largely true for the US as well.
I kind of suspect that at some point, the Chinese are going to start demanding that other people learn Mandarin if they want to do business in China, rather than all of them learning English.
While English will probably remain the language of choice among international people and cosmopolitans and whatnot, I’m not so sure that it will filter down to the point where the average person in a country like Japan or China can speak English fairly well.
But there’s no doubt that there’s a fortune to be had in language education in China in the near future.
@ Mark’s : “While English will probably remain the language of choice among international people and cosmopolitans and whatnot, I’m not so sure that it will filter down to the point where the average person in a country like Japan or China can speak English fairly well” .
Theoretically. it should eventually filter down to that, though nobody knows when. Let us substitute English for “a common language that any person can speak fairly well”, and imagine ourselves the fiction writers who write about a PEACEFUL and prosperous future on Earth. Then I need more imagination (like the cosmic diaspora) to imagine that it will not have filtered down to that.
But actually, of course, what you have said is more “down to Earth” now 
Ok, I understand. I agree that in the future (perhaps not so distant) we will have some form of international communication, but I don’t think it will be English as it exists now. It may be a kind of simplified English that doesn’t have idioms, and has a reduced vocabulary and perhaps more regularized grammar and spelling. A kind of international English-based creole or pidgin. If that is the case, I think that English speakers will also have to learn how to communicate in “International English.”
You can even see that phenomenon now. When people first come to Japan, they may have a thick accent, and they may use a lot of regional expressions, slang, idiomatic expressions, and so on. It may be difficult for Japanese people to understand them. But after they’ve been here a while, their accent “neutralizes”, and they tend to use less regional expressions and slang and whatnot. I’d say that their English “internationalizes” because, even as a native speaker, you spend a lot of time talking to non-native speakers in English.
This is one of the reasons I like Esperanto, it gives you the feeling of what it would be like to communicate in such an international language.