用户名:   密码:

当前位置:首页社区国外译帖美国纽时专家vs屁民讨论室:在中国大学学历价值几何?
看世界译帖
美国

纽时专家vs屁民讨论室:在中国大学学历价值几何?


What Is a College Degree Worth in China?
译者:unknown     发布时间:2013-06-30     超过 0 位网友阅读

中国的大学都是垃圾——基本上。我想很多人都这样认为。但它们在改善当中。

原文链接:http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/12/02/what-is-a-college-degree-worth-in-china


Introduction
While China's economy keeps growing  at a rapid pace , the dim employment prospects of many of its college graduates pose a potential economic problem.
 
According to recent statistics , the average Chinese college graduate makes only 300 yuan, or about $44, more a month than the average Chinese migrant worker. In recent years, the wages of college graduates have remained steady at about 1,500 yuan a month. Migrant workers' wages, however, have risen to 1,200 yuan.
 
If China's graduates are unable to capitalize on their costly investment in education, then is it worthwhile for students to obtain a college degree? What does the imbalance say about China's education system and its economy in general?
 
引言
虽然中国的经济保持着快速增长,但是众多大学毕业生就业前景黯淡给中国带来了一个潜在的经济问题。
 
根据最近的统计数字,中国大学毕业生平均月薪仅仅比农民工多300元,折合约44美元。在最近几年,大学毕业生的工资稳定在大约每月1500元的水平,而农民工的工资已经上升到1200元。
 
如果中国的大学毕业生不能从他们昂贵的教育投资中获利,那么还值得去获得大学学历吗?我们能从教育的投入与产出不成正比大致看出中国的教育系统及其经济的什么东西?



专家1:
 
Yasheng Huang  is professor of international management at Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the author of “Capitalism With Chinese Characteristics.”
 
黄亚生,麻省理工斯隆商学院国际管理学教授,《有中国特色的资本主义》一书作者。
 
Reform the Private Sector
 
对私人部门进行改革
 
The expansion of China's higher education system has frequently been mentioned in connection to the lackluster earnings of its college graduates. But the supply-side explanation is at best incomplete and at worst misleading.
 
In 1998, China enrolled about one million college students; in 2008 this figure was more than six million. The supply-side explanation assumes that the 1998 enrollment number was just right and that subsequent expansion outpaced the needs of the Chinese economy.
 
The more important part of the story lies on the demand side. Despite all the hoopla that foreign analysts have heaped on China’s growth, the economy remains driven by manual labor, low-cost and low-margin manufacturing.
 
人们经常把中国大学毕业生皱巴巴的工资和中国的大学扩招联系起来。但聚焦于供给这边的解释,说好听点是不完全错误,说难听点是完全误导他人。
 
1998年,中国有大约100万大学生入学;2008年,这个数字超过了600万。针对供给这边的解释假定了1998年的入学数字是符合经济发展需要的,而接下来的扩招则超过了中国经济的需求。
 
这个问题我们更应关注的是需求这边。任凭外国的分析家对中国的增长套上多少光环,中国的经济仍然依赖手工劳动、低成本和低利润率的制造业来拉动。
 
While China is currently producing knowledge at an impressive rate, the vast majority of the knowledge production takes place in research institutes and academic institutions, rather than in firms. Knowledge production requires an elite but an extraordinarily small number of workers. As a result, it cannot absorb many college graduates.
 
The next source of demand for college graduates is government agencies, but China already has one of the largest -- if not the largest -- bureaucracy in the world. The base is already so big that it is unlikely to grow even more. In fact, now hundreds and even thousands of Chinese college graduates compete with one another fiercely for one civil service position.
 
As for China’s corporate sector, it is also not a huge source of demand for college graduates. Although China spends a lot of money on research and development, most of that spending takes place within government-sponsored research institutions, not within firms. The part of the corporate sector that employs college graduates has to do with finance, marketing and human resource management functions.
 
虽然中国当前正在以令人印象深刻的速度大量生产着知识,但知识的生产大部分发生在研究机构和学术机构,而不是企业。知识生产需要的是精英,很少很少的人就够了。因此,它不能吸收很多大学毕业生。
 
大学毕业生的另一个需求来源是政府机构,但中国已经拥有世界上不是最大也是最大之一的官僚系统了。基数已经这么大了,不可能再变得更大了。实际上,现在几百甚至几千的中国大学毕业生相互激烈竞争一个公务员的职位。
 
而对于中国的公司部门,它对大学毕业生的需求也不是很大。尽管中国花费了大量金钱在R&D上面,这笔钱大部分用在政府资助的研究机构上,而不是企业。那些招聘大学毕业生的公司还要解决融资、营销和人力资源管理等各方面的职能问题。
 
However, Chinese firms are extremely "top-light" -- that is, they have many workers but very few managers. The reason is that many of the Chinese firms are really factories. They receive export contracts and specifications and then they produce products accordingly. There is very little need for them to do their own marketing and product development.
 
Finally, the service sector is the Achilles’ heels of the Chinese economy. It is very weak and small, much lower, in terms of ratio to G.D.P., than India, United States, Japan and European countries. In fact, China’s service sector -- in relationship to G.D.P. -- makes China closer to oil producing countries in the Middle East rather than to any normal economy.
 
The reasons for the managerial underdevelopment of Chinese corporate sector and its small service sector are very complex but they all have to do with a distorted financial regulatory environment faced by Chinese private-sector firms.
 
The supply of Chinese college graduates is only “excessive” relative to the underdevelopment of its private sector and there is little possibility for change unless China undertakes bold reforms.
 
然而,中国的企业是非常“顶光*”的——即,它们有很多工人但很少管理者。原因在于许多中国企业实际上是一家工厂而已。它们接收出口合同和产品说明书,然后根据客户要求生产产品。它们几乎不需要做自己的营销或者产品改良方面的工作。
 
最后,服务业可说是中国经济的阿基琉斯之踵**。它非常脆弱,规模很小,占GDP的比率比印度、美国、日本和欧洲国家要低得多。事实上,中国的服务业——就与GDP的关系而言——使中国更像是中东的产油国而不是任何一个正常的经济体。
 
关于中国的公司部门管理不发达以及服务业规模过小,个中原因很复杂,但它们都与中国的私营企业面临着一个扭曲的金融监管环境有关。
 
中国大学毕业生的供应是“过量”的,就它不发达的私营经济而言。如果中国不采取大胆的改革,我们几乎不可能看到任何改变。
 
*:顶光,即来自顶部的光线,与景物、照相机成90度左右的垂直角度。人物在这种光线下,其头顶、前额、鼻头很亮,下眼窝,两腮和鼻子下面完全处于阴影之中,造成一种反常奇特的形态。因此,一般都避免使用这种光线拍摄人物。
 
**:意为致命弱点。



屁民1.1:Cornelia East,纽约
 
These are an extraordinary group of articles about education that tell us more about Chinese culture and economics today than any articles about Chinese culture and economics. I am very impressed. A lot of people throw the fact that China has so many more college educated people than we do as something that should make us quake in our boots. But the truth is, all of our societies are troubled and we need to learn how to make them work for everyone. The alternative is potential chaos. We are cheating people out of having a good life after promising them if they follow the rules, there are rewards ahead. Ain't so here or there. Every society has Achiles heels and they keep getting infected..It is very discouraging. Maybe the leaked cables will influence people's grasp on reality in a positive way.
 
这是一组*特别的关于教育而不是关于中国文化和经济的文章,但它们告诉我们更多的是中国当前的文化和经济。真让我印象深刻。许多人举中国有比我们多得多的大学生这个事实,以为会让我们害怕得发抖。但事实是,我们的社会各有各的麻烦,我们需要学习怎样使我们各自的社会都为每一个人服务,否则我们都会面临潜在的社会动荡风险。我们从人们那里骗取幸福生活,承诺他们如果遵循规则,我们就会奖励他们。家家有本难念的经。每一个社会都有阿基琉斯之踵并受其掣肘。这很令人丧气。或者维基解密事件会对人们关于真相的执着产生积极的影响。
 
*:这次讨论一共有四个专家从自己的角度写了四篇文章,所以说“一组”。



屁民1.2:Gaston,圣弗朗斯斯科
 
The absence of good employment opportunities for recent college graduates is a problem not limted to China. Actually, it would be news if China did not have this problem. Otherwise, not so much.
 
最近大学毕业生就业难的问题并不是中国特有的。实际上,中国没有这个问题才真是怪事。如果是中国特有的问题,我们就不会这样烦恼了。



屁民1.3:Lior Paritzky,北京
 
Dear Mr. Huang,
 
I think you have failed to mention the reasons to why the Chinese students who graduate from college do not become managers - lack of creativity and innovation. It is known that the Chinese are very hard workers and students. Yet, the method of teaching here does not fit western standards just yet. Memorizing or learning by heart does not produce good managers. Good managers are required to innovate, problem-solve, create and lead.
 
Another reason this is not happening right now is because the Chinese state of thought has not developed along with the economy. Although buildings, railroads and airports have all been built, innovation and creativity take much longer.
 
Only time will tell what will happen. There is no doubt that China is in need of managerial level people who can handle tough situations and make tough decisions.
 
I have recently wrote about creativity and innovation in China in my blog:  [url]www.laowaiblog.com[/url] . I invite everyone to read and comment.
 
Thank you!
 
尊敬的黄先生:
 
我想你没有给出为什么中国的大学毕业生不能成为管理者这一问题的答案——那就是缺乏创造力和创新。我们都知道中国人工作勤奋学习刻苦。但是这里的教育方法现在还未能达到西方的标准。死记硬背并不能培养出良好的管理者。优秀的管理者必须是能创新,能解决问题,有创造力,有领导力的。
 
这个问题的另一个答案是中国人的思维习惯并没有随着经济发展而发展。尽管高楼、铁路和机场建起来了,创新和创造力的建设还任重道远。
 
只有时间会告诉人们未来会发生什么。毫无疑问中国需要能够处理艰难的情况并作出艰难的抉择的管理层人员。
 
我最近在我的博客[url]www.laowaiblog.com[/url]写了一些关于中国创造力和创新的文章。欢迎各位阅读并留言。
 
谢谢。



屁民1.4:RS ,纽约
 
Is it any wonder in a nation that blocks the internet for dangerous political topics such as freedom and initiative, that academic learning hits a dead end?? China communism hive mentality prevents true innovation that only can come from individuals. Where are the Alexander Graham Bells, Edison, the Wrights, the Henry Fords or Steve Jobs?
 
China is a nation of great worker bees following a script that permits no deviation that will upset the status quo-- technology like the internet, Ipods, cell phones, and such challenge that. Personal communication technology always has. So instead, China grinds away with with brute labor, the old "work harder" mantra form Mao. China copies western technology, cuts corners in safety, and pollutes their nation until it will become unlivable, because for all that college learning, no one is allowed to question or debate.
 
Or course our own US colleges are getting pretty useless. Half of kids going drop out. Too many "articulated" degrees padded with extra useless subjects to make money for the schools. Professors detached from the real world thinking they are Neo-einsteins because they have the "Dr." title prefacing to their names. Students graduating with Masters who can't read or write because they paid big bucks for some online mercenary scholar to write for them.
 
For all the education and knowledge we have today, are we really living any smarter, happier, or safer from self-destruction? I don't think so.
 
一个国家屏蔽互联网,过滤诸如自由和首创精神等危险的政治话题,然后这个国家的教育走进了死胡同,这有什么好惊奇的??中国的共产主义蜂群思想*限制了真正的创新,真正的创新只能来自于个人。中国的贝尔、爱迪生、怀特兄弟、亨利·福特或者斯蒂夫·乔布斯在哪里?
 
中国是一个工蜂国家,这些工蜂很伟大,遵循剧本,容不得半点违背,因为违背会扰乱现状——像互联网、Ipod、手机等的技术和个人通信技术总是会带来的挑战就会扰乱现状。所以相反,中国带着它死脑筋的劳动力和陈旧的毛的“努力工作”的口号蛮干苦干。中国人山寨西方的技术,在安全的地方抄近路,并且污染他们的国家直至变得不可居住为止,因为所有的大学生都不准提问和讨论。
 
当然我们美国的大学也正变得非常差劲。一半的孩子在辍学。太多的“链式**”学位填充了多余而无用的课程,仅仅是为了给学校挣钱。脱离现实世界的教授认为他们是新一代的爱因斯坦,因为他们名字的前面有着“博士”的头衔。硕士毕业生连阅读和写作都不会,因为他们支付了大量的金钱给一些网络的雇佣学者来为他们写论文。
 
对于我们现在所拥有的所有学校教育和知识,我们真的过得比前人更聪明、更快乐、更安全、离自我毁灭更远?我表示怀疑。
 
*:蜂群思想是相对于个人主义的另一个极端,意指像蜂群一样听从指挥,合理分工,只考虑组织需要,不考虑个人利益。
 
**:“链式教育”是澳大利亚的TAFE学院(TAFE全称:Technical And Further Education,即职业技术教育学院)所提出的一种教育路径。通过一系列步骤来提高学生的等级资格从而让学生接受更高等的教育。



屁民1.5:Doublecreek,中国
 
"a distorted financial regulatory environment"
 
What a beautiful way to say "corruption".
 
“一个扭曲的金融监管环境”
 
多漂亮的“腐败”的另一个说法。



屁民1.6:Peter Melzer ,弗吉尼亚州
 
One pillar of success of the German economy has been Germany's healthy apprenticeship system. It provides the country with highly skilled workers contributing invaluably to all sectors of industry and public administration. Academic degrees should be made accessible to those who truly need them. Nobody would wish for an avalanche of useless degrees with no job prospect. Let us not forget, apprentices are paid, college education comes at great cost to the student. Only once we are provided with good options, are we able to make the choices that are right for us to the benefit of everyone. China must afford more options to her workforce by developing a more differentiated educational system with more viable choices, a system that permits students to develop their fullest potential. In the end, the value of education depends on the teacher as much as on the student.
 
Read more on the value of education here: [url]http://brainmindinst.blogspot.com...[/url]
 
德国经济成功的一个支柱是德国健康的学徒体系。这个体系为德国提供了在每一个行业和公共管理当中都作出着无价的贡献的高技术工人。学术学位应该是那些真正需要它们的人所能触及到的。没人会想要大量无用的没有就业前景的学位。让我们不要忘记,学徒是有工资的,而大学教育则要付出高昂的成本。好的选项只给了我们一次,我们能够作出对每一个人都有利的正确选择吗?中国必须担起责任,发展一个更多样化的、带有更多可行的选择的教育系统,一个允许学生充分发挥自己所长的教育系统,从而为她的劳动力提供更多的选项。最后,教育的价值,老师所占的权重是和学生所占权重一样大的。
 
关于教育价值,这里有更多信息:[url]http://brainmindinst.blogspot.com...[/url]



屁民1.7:George Recco ,纽约市
 
Too many worthless, overpriced college degrees??
 
So we do have something in common with China.
 
太多没用而高价的大学生??
 
所以我们和中国有些东西是共有的。



屁民1.8:Harry ,波士顿
 
These strike me as very valid observations. If one looks at the Chinese economy through the lens of value chain theory, China occupies no "pinch points" in the chain. It remains a subcontracting economy. That being the case, what is it to do with all its highly intelligent and well educated young people? China, for all its ten-year-old violin virtuosos, has yet to create and market a desirable name-brand product. I wonder if the communist dictatorship might have something to do with this failure. In value chains, undisciplined creativity trumps fierce efficiency every time. China makes Nikes, but has no idea how to create a Nike. Were a Chinese version of Soichiro Honda to pop up, the government would crush him.
 
这几篇文章让我很震惊,它们都是有根有据的评论。如果我们透过价值链原理的镜头来看中国的经济,我们会发现中国在整个链条上并没有占据任何"pinch point*"。它仍然是一个转包经济体。既然这样,那么中国怎样处理它的高智商的、受过良好教育的年轻人?中国仍要为它所有10岁的小提琴大师创造并宣传一个值得去拥有的名牌产品。我想知道共产主义独裁是不是与这个失败有关。在价值链,不受条框限制的创意总是要胜于激烈竞争的效率。中国制造耐克,但不知道怎样创造耐克。假如中国版的本田宗一郎**冒出来了,政府会把他消灭的。
 
*:没学过价值链原理,不知这个pinch point应该怎样翻译,不过意思应该是关键部位的节点。
 
**:本田汽车的创始人。



屁民1.9: David Straub ,杭州
 
I enjoyed reading all of the articles in this discussion and I think all of the authors bring up excellent points. For seven out of the past ten years I’ve taught English and history in China, so I have had a firsthand view of the pros and cons of China’s education system. Here’s a few points I wanted to bring up
 
1. Perhaps most important is the huge difference between how Chinese and Americans value a university education. In China, high school and the scores that they receive on the Gaokao exam is the apex of many students’ education. The Gaokao determines which school a student will be accepted into and while the prestige of the university is very important for parents and students, the quality of education that a student receives at university is not always of the greatest concern. Once students get to university, their academic skills are not nearly as rigorously tested as when they were preparing for the Gaokao. This is almost the polar opposite of education in the United States, where in the life of high school students socializing seems to be on par with school work and the most difficult years academically for students are typically their last two years of college.
 
2. Many private universities are simply diploma mills. This leads to a degree of apathy among the students, faculty and administrative that greatly diminishes the quality of education. There is little reason to study if you know you will receive your degree regardless of your in class performance. In turn, faculty and administrators lack incentive to improve their programs because parents and students often are more concerned about receiving a degree than receiving a quality education. I have found the students and faculty to be high intelligent, but there is almost a complete lack of any sort of academic planning.
 
3. There is a degree of economic mismanagement in high schools and universities that would not be tolerated in a developed Western nation. I have most definitively heard first and second hand stories of families bribing teachers and administrators in order to receive passing scores, but I think a bigger problem is that money is spent on project beautifying school grounds and for administrators to travel, rather than on salaries of faculty (though there are notable exceptions). Also, anyone who has worked in Chinese education for very long notices that top school administrators all drive very fancy cars, yet it’s widely known that their salaries could not possibly permit them to buy such vehicles.
 
4. I agree with Dr. Qiang Zha’s final words that in the long run a university degree will still have more value than simply working in construction or in a factory. Right now much of China's economic growth is driven in large by overdevelopment of the real estate market and the manufacturing of low cost products. The price per square meter of a residential property in many cities often rivals that of developed countries, but individual incomes are still quite now at just a few thousand rmb a month. This is not sustainable. Men dominate the construction industry, while women are the overwhelming majority of workers in manufacturing plants. If the real estate market were to enter a lengthy downturn, men lacking a university diploma could find themselves with many fewer employment options than they have today. I think that at least in the case of men, the salary gap between those with a university degree and those who have only graduated middle school or high school will widen.
 
我很享受阅读这次讨论的每一篇文章,我认为每篇文章的作者都提出了很精彩的见解。过去的十年里头有七年我在中国教英语和历史,所以我有着关于中国教育系统支持和反对双方的第一手资料。下面是我想提出的几个观点:
 
1、可能最重要的是中美两国之间怎样评价大学教育的巨大分歧。在中国,高中和高中生在高考获得的分数是许多学生的教育顶点。高考决定着一个学生能进什么学校,大学的声望对家长和学生来说是非常重要的,学生在大学所接受的教育的质量并不总是最被关心的。学生一旦进入了大学,他们的学习能力的检验不会像高考那样严酷。这几乎是与美国的教育截然相反。在美国,高中阶段,学生的社交活动似乎是与学校的学习成绩同等重要的,而大学的最后两年一般是学生学习最为艰苦的几年。
 
2、许多私立大学简直就是文凭工厂。这导致在学生、老师和学校管理层里面产生了一定程度的消极情绪,这种消极情绪大大地削弱了教育的质量。如果你知道无论你的课堂表现如何你都会获得你的学位,你还有什么理由去学习呢。反过来,老师和学校的管理者缺乏动力去改善他们的教学,因为家长和学生通常更关心的是获得学位而不是获得有质量的教育。我发现中国的学生和老师都很聪明,但他们几乎完全没有任何形式的教学计划。
 
3、中国的高中和大学存在一定程度上的经济管理不善,而这是西方发达国家所不能忍受的。我确信我直接或间接地听到了一些关于某些家庭贿赂老师和管理人员以让学生通过考试的故事,但我认为更大的问题在于这些钱花在了校园美化工程和学校管理人员的旅游上面,而不是拿来提升教师的工资(尽管也有显著的例外)。另外,任一个在中国的教育系统工作了很长时间的人都会发现,顶级大学的管理人员都开着非常炫目的汽车,但大家都知道他们的工资不可能允许他们购买这些车辆。
 
4、我同意Qiang Zha博士的最后的几句话,从长期来看,大学学位将仍然要比单纯当个建筑工人或工厂工人有价值得多。现在中国经济的增长很大程度上依赖于房地产市场的过度繁荣和低成本产品的制造。许多城市住宅的每平米价格可以和发达国家相媲美,但个人收入仍然相当低,每个月仅仅几千人民币。这并不是可持续的。建筑行业清一色的男性,而女性则在制造厂工人里面占据了压倒性多数。如果房地产市场即将进入漫长的衰退期,没有大学文凭的男性会发现他们拥有的就业选择比现在要少得多。我认为至少对于男性来说,有大学学位的人和仅仅初中或高中毕业的人之间的收入差距将会拉大。



===============================我是专家的分割线===================================
 
专家2:
 
Gordon G. Chang  is the author of "The Coming Collapse of China " and a columnist at Forbes.com .
 
Gordon G. Chang,《即将来临的中国崩溃》一书作者,福布斯网站的专栏作家。
 
Few Promising Opportunities
 
几乎没有出人头地的机会
 
Is a Chinese college degree important? It is if you want to shovel excrement in Wenzhou. The prosperous city in Zhejiang province this year advertised for college graduates to fill eight spots collecting “night soil.” More than 1,100 of them applied for the jobs. In these circumstances, skipping college to work as a migrant laborer looks like a smart career move.
 
So does joining the People’s Liberation Army. It wasn’t long ago that the military couldn’t attract degree-holders. No more. In 2009, 120,000 college graduates joined the P.L.A. That was three times the number in the preceding year and 12 times more than in 2006.
 
The People’s Liberation Army -- and the armies of night soil collectors -- have begun to attract college graduates because few promising opportunities are available for them in other fields. These days, they'd even covet jobs as domestic servants and nannies.
 
Experts say that salaries for college students generally rise after graduation. Yet the pay prospects for migrants and blue-collar workers may be even brighter. Why? Beijing’s poorly conceived population policies created an extraordinary bulge in the work force, and the members of the bulge are now retiring in great numbers.
 
中国的大学学历重要吗?重要,如果你想在温州铲粪。这个浙江的繁荣城市今年刊登广告招聘8个大学毕业生回收人粪。超过1100名大学毕业生申请了这个工作。在这种情况下,跳过大学直接当一名农民工看上去是一个聪明的职业生涯选择。
 
参军也是一个明智的决定。不太久之前,大学生是鸟都不鸟军队的。不过这种情况一去不复返了。在2009年,120000名大学毕业生加入了PLA。这个数字是上一年的3倍,多于2006年12倍。
 
人民解放军——和人粪回收队——开始吸引到大学毕业生了,因为在其他领域他们几乎没有出人头地的机会。最近,他们甚至开始觊觎佣人和奶妈的工作。
 
砖家们说大学生的工资一般会在毕业后有所提升。但农民工和蓝领工人的收入前景可能甚至更光明。为什么?过去,北京想法糟糕的人口政策使劳动力在某段时间异常暴涨,但暴涨的那部分劳动力现在正大量退休。
 
As they retire, China’s work force will quickly shrink. The country has been short of labor since 2004, and the number of workers will level off soon. Chinese demographers think that will happen sometime between 2013 and 2016.
 
It doesn’t take a college degree to figure out that migrant and blue-collar pay is set to increase. The pool of laborers that is shrinking the fastest is at the bottom end of the wage scale. The number of college graduates, however, has been soaring by about 30 percent a year this decade. The law of supply and demand says that lower-rung pay packets will climb -- and the salaries of degree-holders will fall.
 
Some say China’s dynamic economy will “upscale” so fast that bottom-tier manufacturing will migrate to Vietnam and Bangladesh. Yes, outsourcing will act as a brake on worker compensation, but the effect will not be great. Companies will move out of China -- and lose the substantial advantages of superb infrastructure and large networks of suppliers -- only after wages have risen substantially and it becomes clear they will climb indefinitely. For the foreseeable future, blue-collar wages will go up at a far greater rate than higher-level compensation.
 
My wife and I stopped to talk to two peddlers outside the Foxconn plant in Longhua this August. They had laid out a blanket on the sidewalk to display their wares, balsa model kits. “The workers have lots of money,” said one of them. They, on the other hand, did not. The pair, part of a bigger group of street hawkers, had not sold many kits that week. One was a college student in faraway Sichuan province, majoring in petroleum. The other hoped to be an engineer. They said peddling was the best job they could find.
 
当这些人退休了,中国的劳动力会迅速萎缩。自2004年以来这个国家就劳动力不足,工人的数目很快就不会再增长了。中国的人口统计学家认为这会在2013至2016年之间发生。
 
推导出农民工和蓝领的工资即将增长的结论并不需要大学学历。数量萎缩得最快的那部分劳动力一直拿着最低的工资水平。而大学毕业生的数量在最近10年以大约每年30%的速度疯长。供需理论告诉我们低端劳动力的工资将会攀升——而大学生的工资将会下降。
 
有人说中国活力四射的经济将会快速升级,从而低等制造业将会转移到越南和孟加拉。对,外包将扮演闸门的角色,妨碍劳动力工资增长,但它的作用并不会太大。外企如果离开中国,意味着失去一流的基础设施和庞大的供应商网络等众多好处,除非中国的工资水平已经大幅度提升而大家又认为它还将继续增长下去,否则外企将继续留下来。在可预见的将来,低端蓝领的工资增长速度将会远远比高端劳动力要快得多。
 
八月在深圳龙华区,我的妻子和我停下来,和富士康工厂外面的两个小贩交谈了起来。他们在人行道铺了一条毛毯,在上面展示着他们的货物和积木模型套装。“那些工人有很多钱”,他们当中的一个说道。而相反,他们并不有钱。这俩人,是整个街边小贩队伍的一个部分,这星期并没卖出多少套积木。两人当中的一个是遥远的四川省的一名大学生,石油专业。另一个希望能成为一名工程师。他们说小贩是他们所能找到的最好工作了。



屁民2.1:Ron Bannon ,新泽西
 
And it's any different here? What's worse here, is that Americans have no respect for being educated.
 
我说这儿和中国有什么不同吗?这里比中国还差的一点是,美国人对接受教育毫不尊重。



屁民2.2:RH,华盛顿
 
That may be true, Ron, but we also have no respect for blue collar work. What has happened to us that we've reached the point that our college graduates would rather move back in with their parents because they feel that they are above certain types of work? The baby boomers have destroyed this country's work ethic, social fabric, and ability to compromise to solve difficult problems.
 
也许这是事实,Ron,但我们同样不尊重蓝领工人的工作。我们发生了什么事?以至于我们的大学毕业生宁愿回老家和父母待在一起也不屑于从事某些工作。婴儿潮*出生的人破坏了这个国家的职业道德,社会结构,和折中解决困难问题的能力。
 
*:指美国第二次世界大战后的“4664”现象--从1946年至1964年,这18年间婴儿潮人口高达7800万人。



屁民2.3:Ben ,奥斯丁
 
Why are American college students worth so much more than a migrant laborer? Maybe the economic imbalance in the US is misshaping our expectations and the Chinese experience is the new normal.
 
为什么美国的大学生比移民工人要贵这么多?可能美国这次经济失衡正扭曲着我们的预期,而当前中国的经历会成为新的常态。



屁民2.4:Unemployed Attorney ,波士顿
 
It's good to know that America can still export our cultural capital. Seriously, substitute "America" for "China," "no jobs whatsoever" for "migrant work," and add the phrase "buried under hundreds of thousands of dollars of nondischargeable student loans," and this is an article about the doomed Generation Yers who made the mistake of attending a college not named Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Chicago, MIT, Stanford, Columbia, Williams, or Wellesley, and therefore unworthy of employment these days.
 
很好,知道了美国仍然能输出我们的文化资本。不内涵,把“中国”换成“美国”,把“农民工”换成“什么工作都没有”,然后加上这个短句,“被压在好几十万偿付不能的大学贷款之下”,而这就成为了一篇关于绝望的Y一代*的文章。Y一代作出了一个错误的选择,就读的大学并不叫做哈佛,耶鲁,普林斯顿,宾夕法尼亚,芝加哥,麻省理工,斯坦福,哥伦比亚,威廉姆斯或者威尔斯利,所以今天他们并不值得拥有一份工作。
 
*:美国人把1980年到1995年间出生的人称作“Y一代”。这些20来岁的人有个特点:只想做有意义、有用处的事情。 “Y一代”对个人成长有很高的期许,即便在初级职位上也是如此。他们当中超过半数的应届毕业生拿到学位就会回家乡,因为父母的支持让他们有机会选择自己真正想要的工作。他们也很喜欢自主创业。



屁民2.5:Bruce ,深圳
 
I have lived in Shenzhen, the Special Economic Zone north of Hong Kong, for the last ten years. To my eyes, this debate about the value of a college education in China is very theoretical and "macro," because the NY Times has chosen a bunch of academics to debate it.
 
So let's be more realistic. In Shenzhen, several tens of thousands of white-collar jobs at multinationals and big state-run firms are open SOLELY to college/university degree holders. If you haven't got a degree, you can't get an appointment with Human Resources. Period. Entry-level jobs often mean a salary of RMB2,500-3000 (US$375-450) + medical insurance + paid (albeit short!) annual vacation, and a 5-6 day workweek. With 3-5 years of work, a lucky white-collar employee can hold a middle-level management job that pays anywhere from RMB5,000-15,000 (US$750-2,250) a month, including actual salary and other grey-economy benefits like kickbacks for favoring a given vendor, etc. I personally know dozens of white-collar workers who now have a mortgage in Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen, and most are under 30.
 
A taxi driver in Shenzhen earns around RMB3000 (US$375) and works 7 days a week. I have spoken with thousands of taxi drivers during my 28-year stay in China, and a good portion of those in Shenzhen have enough money to build a house in their hometown in Hunan, Sichuan or Hubei after 5-7 years of work. To balance this view, remember that 5-7 years of driving a taxi without rest may result in all sorts of long-term illnesses and disability.
 
A migrant worker in a Shenzhen factory earns RMB1,000-1,200 (US$) monthly and works 6-7 days weekly. She may well perform the same motions every minute and hour throughout the working day. There are only two ways up in a factory for a local female, since almost all management jobs are held by Hong Kong and Taiwanese males: earn a posting in the QA/QC department, or sleep with your manager, a common occurrance in the factories surrounding Shenzhen where there are 7 females (aged 18-22) for every male on the site.
 
Hopefully, the above description helps explain why Chinese want to get a university education in a more realistic way than those described by the spokespeople chosen by the NY Times.
 
在过去的10年,我都住在深圳,香港北边的经济特区。在我看来,关于中国大学教育的价值的这次讨论是非常理论化和“宏观”的,因为《纽约时报》选了一些专门搞学术的人来进行讨论。
 
所以让我们现实一点。在深圳,跨国公司和大型国有企业的好几万白 领职位仅仅 开放给 大学毕业生。如果你没有大学学位,你不会获得人力资源部的面试机会。道理就是这么简单。一份入门级的工作通常意味着月薪2500-3000元(375-450美元)+医疗保险+带薪年假(虽然很短!)和每周工作5-6日。工作3-5年后,幸运的白领员工可以获得一个中层管理职位,月薪5000-15000元不等(750-2250美元),包括名义工资和其他灰色收入,例如帮助某个指定供应商的回扣等等。个人而言,我认识几十个白领工人,他们在北京、上海和深圳都有按揭,大多数都未满30岁哦。
 
深圳的的士司机每个月大概挣3000元(375美元),每周工作7天。我在中国总共逗留了28年,期间和数千名的士司机谈过话。在深圳,很大一部分的士司机工作5-7年都有足够的钱在他们的湖南、四川或者湖北老家建一栋房子。当然,要说得全面一点,请记住,不休息连续驾驶的士5-7年可能会让你患上各种各样的长期疾病和身体缺陷。
 
深圳工厂的农民工每个月挣1000-1200元,并且每周工作6-7日。很可能一整天她都在做同一个操作。在工厂,对于当地的女性,只有两种方法可以获得升职,因为几乎所有的管理层职位都被香港和台湾的男性把持着。其一是获得一个质量控制部的派遣,其二是和你的经理睡——深圳周边工厂的常事,因为在这些工厂现场,每一个男性管理着七个女性(年龄18岁-22岁)。
 
上面的描述可望以一种更现实的方式帮助解释为什么中国人想要获得大学教育,而不是像《纽约时报》挑选的演说家所描述的那样空洞。



屁民2.6:Troyce Key ,河内
 
Let me add this anecdote to the commentor's: a few years ago I was given a teaching appointment, at Jiao Tong University, an institution of higher education long considered as the second or third place university, in China (their Princeton or Yale depending on whom you ask). As the months marched on, I became more and more suspicious of what exactly as teachers we were doing there. One day I was talking with one of the university's most venerated and celebrated professors. Of course I knew what department he was a member of but his views on education were alarming to me in this conversation. I rhetorically asked him what exactly does he teach. He looked at me with disdain and surprise because I had to even ask him and replied-"Conformity!"
 
The following day, I went in and resigned my teaching post. My superiors were agast and told me that I was Jiao Tong family, well liked, and considered to be a potentially long term faculty member. When asked why I would quit, I told them i couldn't work at a institution of higher learning that would express these sentiments. They just couldn't understand what I was trying to tell them.
 
For the last few years, every time President Hu gives a public address he urges, "Innovate, Innovate, Innovate!"
 
If the adage is true that when we don't acknowledge history then we are doomed to repeat it, China education system still reflects a great many aspects of its modern history when it attempted to enact its belief that it could mandate human behavior. You simply cannot order one to innovate after teaching them to conform. The result of that thought in this system is piracy.
 
让我把这件趣事也添加在留言的故事里面吧:几年前,我获得了一个在交通大学执教的机会,这是在中国的高等教育机构里面长期被认为排行第二或第三的大学(中国人会告诉你这是中国的普林斯顿或者耶鲁,取决于你问谁)。几个月后,我越来越怀疑我们作为教师,每天在这里做的都是什么?一天,我和这间大学最受人尊敬和最有名气的教授之一聊了起来。当然我知道他是哪个部门的成员,但在这次交谈当中,他关于教育的观点仍然吓了我一跳。我委婉地问他,他每天都在教些什么东西。他以鄙视和惊讶的眼神看着我,因为我竟然会问他这个问题,并答道:“服从!”
 
第二天,我走进领导的办公室申请辞职。我的上级吃了一惊,告诉我我是交通大学的一份子,很受大家喜欢,被认为是教师团队里面一名潜在的长期成员。当被问到为什么我要走,我告诉他们我不能在一间会表达这些情感的高等教育机构里面工作。他们就是不明白我一直努力告诉他们的东西。
 
在过去的几年,胡主席每次公开演讲,他都会敦促“创新,创新,创新!”
 
谚语有云,当我们不承认历史时,我们注定会重复这段历史。如果这个谚语是对的,那么中国的教育系统仍然反映出它的现代史的许多东西,在这段历史里面,中国试图践行其它能控制人类行为的信念。在你教学生学会服从之后,你是不可能命令他进行创新的。在这样的教育体系下要求创新,结果是大量的盗版行为。



===============================我是专家的分割线===================================
 
专家3:
 
Yong Zhao  is the University Distinguished Professor in the College of Education at Michigan State University. The author of "Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization," he often blogs about education issues .
 
赵勇,密歇根州立大学教育学院特聘教授。《追上或引领:全球化时代的美国教育》一书作者,他经常在这里写关于教育话题的博客:[url]http://yong-zhao.com/category/blog/[/url] 。
 
High Test Scores, Low Ability
 
高分低能
 
There's a frustrating paradox in Chinese education. On the one hand, millions of college graduates cannot find a job -- at least a desirable job that pays substantially more than what a migrant worker makes. On the other hand, businesses that want to pay a lot more can't seem to find qualified employees.
 
Multinational companies in China are having a difficult time finding qualified candidates for their positions. According to a recent survey of U.S.-owned enterprises conducted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai, 37 percent of the companies that responded said that finding talent was their biggest operational problem. A separate study by McKinsey Quarterly  found that 44 percent of the executives in Chinese companies reported that insufficient talent was the biggest barrier to their global ambitions.
 
The explanation: a test-oriented educational environment.
 
China invented the keju system, which used tests to select government officials. It was a great invention because it enabled talents from across the society to join the ruling class regardless of their family backgrounds. Hence, a great meritocracy could be created. But it evolved into a nightmare for China as the system gradually changed into one that tested memorization of Confucian classics.
 
中国教育存在着一个令人丧气的矛盾。一方面,数以百万计的大学毕业生找不到一份工作——至少找不到一份有吸引力的工资比农民工多得多的工作。另一方面,愿意支付高薪的企业却似乎找不到合格的员工。
 
中国的跨国企业现在很难为他们的职位找一个合格的应聘者。根据最近一份由美国商务部在上海对美资企业实施的调查报告,回答寻找人才是他们最大的运营问题的公司占了回复总数的37%。另一份独立的《麦肯锡季报》的研究报告也显示,受访的中国企业高管当中44%的人回答人才不足是他们施展国际化雄心的最大障碍。
 
问题答案:应试教育。
 
中国发明了科举制度,通过考试来选拔政府官员。它是一个伟大的发明,因为它允许来自社会各个阶层的人才都能进入统治阶级,无论他们的家庭背景怎样。所以,一个有能者居之的伟大体制建立了起来。但它随后变成了中国的一个噩梦,因为科举制度逐渐变成对孔夫子经典的背诵测验。
 
Associated Press
 
Teachers sorting college entrance exams in Chengdu, Sichuan Province, in June 2009.
 
美联社
 
2009年6月,四川成都,教师们正在为高考试卷分类。
 
Keju is dead now but its spirit is very alive in China today, in the form of gaokao, or the College Entrance Exam. It's the only exam that matters since it determines whether students can attend college and what kind of colleges they can attend. Because of its life-determining nature, gaokao has become the “baton” that conducts the whole education orchestra. Students, parents, teachers, school leaders and even local government officials all work together to get good scores. From a very young age, children are relieved of any other burden or deprived of opportunity to do anything else so they can focus on getting good scores.
 
The result is that Chinese college graduates often have high scores but low ability. Those who are good at taking tests go to college, which also emphasizes book knowledge. But when they graduate, they find out that employers actually want much more than test scores. That is why another study by McKinsey  found that fewer than 10 percent of Chinese college graduates would be suitable for work in foreign companies.
 
Chinese educators are well aware of the problems with the gaokao system and have been trying to move away from the excessive focus on testing. But seeking other valid indicators of strong academic records will take time, especially in a country of 1.3 billion people.
 
现在科举已经不复存在了,但它的精神仍然活跃在中国,披上了高考的外衣,或者你可以叫它大学入学考试。这是唯一一个有意义的考试,因为它决定着学生能否升入大学以及能升入什么大学。由于具有决定学生命运的性质,高考成为了指挥整个教育乐队的指挥棒。学生,家长,教师,学校领导,甚至当地的政府官员,通通合作起来,为了取得良好的分数。从很小的时候开始,孩子们便没有其他的负担,或者说被剥夺了做其他事情的机会,以便他们能专注于考取高分之上。
 
结果是,中国的大学毕业生通常高分低能。那些擅于考试的人升入了大学,而在大学里面,书本知识仍然是最被强调的。但当他们毕业了,他们发现雇主要求的比考试分数多得多。这就是为什么麦肯锡的另一份研究报告显示,低于10%的中国大学毕业生能胜任外企工作的原因。
 
中国的教育工作者很清楚高考体制的问题,并正努力不再过多地关注考试。但寻找其他有效指标,以选拔出学习能力优秀的学生是很花时间的,尤其在一个拥有13亿人口的国家。



屁民3.1:Jack D ,上海
 
Unfortunately I have to concur with this assessment. Having hired and fired more than a few"straight out of university" employees, my experience has been mostly negative. They come in with high marks and high wage demands but can't complete even the simplest real world tasks. They might be able to solve math problems quickly but real world problems leave them frozen.
 
很不幸,我不得不同意“高分低能”这个评价。招聘并解雇了并不算少的“直接从大学出来”的员工,我的经历大多数情况下并不好。他们带着高分和高薪要求进入公司,但连现实世界最简单的工作都完成不了。他们可能能够很快解出数学的问题,但现实世界的问题让他们呆若木鸡。



屁民3.2:D. P. Behonek ,加利福尼亚
 
Our own politicians and the U.S. education establishment might benefit from reading "High Test Scores, Low Ability." This is what happens when you teach children how to pass tests instead of how to think.
 
我们自己的政治家和美国的教育部门应该能从阅读这篇《高分低能》的文章中获益。当你教育孩子怎样通过考试而不是怎样思考时,这就是你想要的结果。



屁民3.3:Starvosk,纽约
 
I would agree. When I studied abroad, I had tutors in China that were startlingly good at what they did, offering tips on how to memorize vocabulary or study for tests. When we went out for drinks though, it was really startling how insulated they were from how the actual world works.
 
Many middle-class Chinese kids from the city have never worked, or held a job until after they finish college. They don't date, socialize, or fraternize during their school years, so when they start working they go on binges or stumble over things we dealt with when we were kids.
 
At the Chinese engineering firm I interned at, the engineers acted more like children than serious professionals.
 
Video Games, dating drama, and binge drinking have severe effects on their work habits and work ethic.These things affect Western workers too of course, but honestly, most of us learned how to deal with rejection, getting dumped, getting wasted, or playing too many video games in our teenage years. Chinese kids have had no such luxury, and that behavior comes out when they start working.
 
我同意这篇文章的观点。当我在国外求学时,我在中国有几个家教,他们惊人地很会教人,给我提供了一些怎样记忆词汇和怎样学习考试的窍门。然而当我们出去喝酒时,他们对于现实世界如何运作的一窍不通,同样让我吃了一惊。
 
来自城市的许多中产家庭的孩子直至大学毕业前都未工作过或者拥有过一份工作。在读书的时候,他们不约会,没有社交活动,也不交朋友,所以当他们开始工作的时候,他们会沉迷于我们小时候就开始做的事情上,或者绊倒在我们小时候就开始处理的事情上。
 
在我实习的那间中国工程公司,工程师的行为更像一个孩子,而不是严肃的专业人员。
 
电视游戏,约会看电影和饮酒作乐对他们的职业习惯和职业道德有很严重的后果。这些事情当然也会影响西方的工人,但坦白而言,我们大多数人在我们还未成年时就学会了如何处理被拒绝、被丢弃、被糟蹋和玩过多电视游戏等问题。中国的孩子没有这些奢侈活动,而当他们开始工作的时候,这些行为就会发生在他们的身上。



屁民3.4:Ken ,芝加哥
 
This certainly represents a warning message to the increasing numbers of politicians and education systems who seem to lean ever heavier on standardized testing to measure teaching performance. It's like using a thermometer to gauge whether or not your soup is any good to eat.
 
越来越多的政治家和教育制度似乎前所未有地倾向于以标准化考试来测量教学表现,这篇文章可谓给他们敲响了警钟。这就像用温度计来测量你的汤是否好喝。



屁民3.5:luboman411,华盛顿
 
I wouldn't say that top colleges in the US are any better at teaching real world skills than Chinese universities. They emphasize theory far more than they emphasize practical skills. I should know, since I went to top-tier undergrad and grad programs in America. What is evident, though, ,is that the top colleges in the US attract the cream of the crop of a system that teaches creative-problem solving in conjunction with book-smarts. The top end of middle schools and high schools (especially the public magnet schools) teach children from the very beginning to question, interact, and cultivate strong problem-solving skills. These children then end up going to top universities and major in philosophy, economics or other very esoteric subjects, and come out establishing companies or becoming highly productive professional workers. But it's the groundwork in middle and high school that alllows for this, and not the universities themselves that do the bulk of the work in forming the creative class in the US.
 
我不会说美国的顶尖大学在教现实世界的技能方面会比中国的大学教得更好。它们对理论的强调远远重于对实际技能的强调。我知道这些,因为我参加过美国顶尖的本科和研究生教育项目。很明显,美国的顶尖大学吸引了整个教育体系里面的精英,这个体系不仅教授创造性地解决问题的方法,也教授课本的知识。顶尖的初中和高中(尤其是那些公立的磁铁学校*)从最初开始就教导孩子学会提问,学会互动,并培养良好的解决问题的能力。然后这些孩子就进入了顶尖的大学,并以哲学、经济或其他抽象难懂的学科为专业,毕业后就创立自己的公司或者成为高生产率的专业人士。但这是初中和高中打下的基础使这成为了可能,而不是大学本身在塑造美国的创造性人才里面做了主体部分的工作。
 
*:此词始于1965年的美国,是一种公立学校,有着特别的课程设计与教学方式,以吸引各种背景的学生,希望有助于各种种族间的融合。



屁民3.6:Josh,匹兹堡
 
This analysis is so wrong that I do not know where I should to start to rebut. First of all, the problem of China higher education is not Gaokao. The entrance exam is vigorous and fair to everybody. It is a much better system that the US SAT exams. The US college admission system is plagued with so many corruptions: subjective, often with personal prejudice assessment by a reader, all sorts of political and financial agenda, favoritism, racial and ethnic preference. Based on my teaching experience in a major US research university, an average chinese high school graduate can easily outperform an American counterpart in math and science in average.
 
Now here is the problem: Most of the post-doc fellows from China in my lab appear very weak and inappropriate trained, even from some of the most elite Chinese Universities, at least in the beginning. I sometimes wonder whether Chinese are running some diploma mills. The problems of Chinese college or graduate school graduates are not because of GaoKao, but with its college education curriculum and training for the students. These problems lie with the quality of its college professors and administrators, not of high school. They should reform the University education system with more vigorous screening of qualified faculties and programs, but should keep its college admission system.
 
You grossly misdiagnose the disease.
 
这篇文章的分析错得如此离谱,以致我不知道从哪里开始进行反驳。首先,中国高等教育的问题并不是高考。这个入学考试是有效力的,对于每个人都公平。它比美国的SAT考试要好得多。美国的大学入学系统受到了如此多的腐败行为的困扰:主观,通常带有评审员个人偏见的评价,各种各样政治和融资的议事单,偏袒,种族和民族偏好等等。根据我在美国一家重要的研究性大学的执教经历,平均而言,一个普通的中国高中生在数学和自然科学上能轻易胜过美国的学生。
 
现在的问题是:我实验室的大多数来自中国的博士后员工表现不佳,似乎是受到了不正确的训练,甚至来自中国最出色的大学的那些人也这样,至少他们一开始的时候是这样。有时我会想中国是不是也有野鸡大学。中国的本科生或者研究生的问题并不在于高考,而在于它的学生的大学教育课程和训练上。这些问题应该归因于中国的大学教授和管理者的素质上,而不是中国的高中的质量上。他们应该改革大学教育制度,更严格地筛选优质的教师团队和教学课程,但不应该改变大学入学制度。
 
你非常严重地诊断错了病根哦。



屁民3.7:Pierce Randall ,亚特兰大
 
I think tests of general aptitude can be a better predictor of employment success than a college degree. What gives tests a bad name are tests of learned skills, which allow cramming. Organizations that use aptitude tests, like the armed forces in the United States, tend not to have too much trouble identifying those who can be taught to perform a skill. And let's face it--most of the corporate jobs in the United States do not require skills that are explicitly taught in school (other than language skills, which can be measured by aptitude), and can be taught quickly to bright individuals.
 
I hate to be elitist, but I share a college degree with people who can't even write a complete sentence, or master rudimentary Excel. How am I supposed to indicate to an employer that I can do these things if they'll crumple up GRE and SAT scores indicating math and language competence, and colleges will continue to discount them in their application process?
 
要招聘到公司合适的人才,我认为对一般能力的考试是比大学学历更好的指标。对学习能力的考试让考试背上了骂名,因为这种考试鼓励死记硬背。使用一般能力考试的组织,如美国的武装部队,没多大困难就能发现那些能够学以致用的人。我们就认了吧——美国公司的大多数职位并不要求大学明确教授的能力(除了语言能力,它能通过一般能力考试测量),而且这些能力能够很快就教给聪明的人。
 
我不想成为精英,但我和那些甚至不能写出一个完整句子或者连Excel的初级应用都不会的人持有着相同的学历。我应该怎样告诉雇主我能做这些事情,如果他们不再以GRE和SAT成绩来衡量数学和语言能力,并且大学进一步削减它们在入学申请当中的重要性?



屁民3.8:Steve W. , 康涅狄格州
 
I appreciate Dr. Zhao's "frustrating paradox in Chinese education" all too well. And the newly minted wealthy Chinese parents who fret about their children's future know it all too well. That is why I and other western educators, are being actively courted to bring "Western education methods" to Chinese high schools in a growing trend to prepare tens of thousands of Chinese high school students for US university seats.
 
Here in Wuhan, a city of 8 million residents in Hubei Province, a program operated by Central China Normal University allows parents of top "public school" students to pay a premium for an all-English US university preparatory program modeled after a private US secondary school, beginning in senior grade one and running the full course of the students' high school career. These students and their parents have chosen, while in middle school, to "opt out" of gaokao, the Chinese national university admissions test that has been the underpinning of the Chinese education system's reputation for rigorous academic performance.
 
As programs like these proliferate in response to the pressures exerted by China's nouveau riche and concern that their children escape the trap of "high scores" and "low ability," a perfect storm seems to be in the making back in the US. While change comes hard and slow in the Chinese university system, anxious Chinese parents are marshaling their resources to prepare students for what looks like a tsunami of applications in the coming years for ever more precious seats in good US universities. Today's US students, whose parents' jobs may have been lost to globalization, may very well face the prospects of losing their seats in a top US university to students whose parents gained from those lost American jobs.
 
我很赞赏赵博士说的“中国教育存在着一个令人丧气的矛盾 ”这一说法。新近富裕起来的中国家长如果紧张他们的孩子的未来的话,也会意识到这个问题。这就是为什么我和其他的西方教育工作者越来越多地被拜托把“西方的教育方法”带给中国的高中,以便为数以万计的中国高中生到美国大学留学做好准备的原因。
 
武汉这儿,一个有8百万人口的湖北省城市,华中师范大学正实施着一个项目。这个项目允许家长支付一笔钱让他们就读于顶尖“公立学校”的孩子参加全英的仿照美国私立高中的美国大学入学准备课程。课程从高一开始,覆盖学生整个高中生涯。这些学生和家长在初中时就已经选择“放弃'高考,即中国的大学入学考试。高考正是中国的教育系统背上只注重僵化的学习成绩的骂名的主要原因。
 
随着中国新近富裕起来的人表示对中国的教育感到压力很大,关心他们的孩子怎样逃离 “ 高分低能”的怪圈,作为回应,像华中师范大学这样的项目会逐渐得到推广。而反过来,在美国,一场暴风雨似乎正在酝酿当中。中国的大学教育改革步履维艰,进展缓慢,焦急的中国家长在未来几年都会把他们的资源集中起来,为孩子们的海量申请做好准备,全力争取美国一流大学前所未有地显得珍贵的入学名额。今天美国的孩子,他们的父母很可能被别人抢走了工作职位,而他们自己也很可能面临着被这些人的孩子抢走顶尖美国大学入学名额的前景。



屁民3.9:Shanghai Jill ,阿什维尔,北卡罗来纳州
 
When I was living in China, I was hiring an assistant and the resumes poured in touting their English proficiency, yet when it came to the interviews, very few could communicate with me. They'd passed the tests without learning to speak on a rudimentary level. Also, once I'd hired people, they weren't that curious about learning the business and if something else came along, they'd just leave. The odds that an assistant will stay a year are very slim. Which is not to say that all Chinese college grads are lazy. I hired and met a lot of very bright and curious young people -- but only after a good bit of digging.
 
The teach to test system has also had a very big effect on innovation. If all you think about is learning it the way you are told, you don't think outside the box and that is where innovation comes from. I think it explains why China is great at copying but not so great at invention (at least in the last century.)
 
当我住在中国时,我要招聘一名助理,然后简历就涌了进来,向我兜售着他们流利的英语。但当我面试他们的时候,很少有人能够和我交谈。他们通过了考试,但他们连最基础的英语口语也不会。同样,有次我招聘了一些人,他们对学习公司的业务并不很感兴趣,并且如果他们遇到工作内容以外的事情,他们会选择推脱掉。一名助理能够留下来一年的几率是非常小的,更不用说所有的中国大学毕业生都是很懒的。我也招聘和遇到过许多非常聪明和有好奇心的年轻人——但你不得不花一番功夫去好好挖掘。
 
应试教育的教学方法同样对创新有着很大的影响。如果你所有要做的仅仅是按你听到的去做,你不会跳出人们的思维习惯,而这正是创新的来源。我想这解释了为什么中国擅于模仿而不擅于发明创造(起码在最近的一个世纪里面是这样)。



屁民3.10:Dan,台北
 
Chinese culture emphasizes obedience to one's elders much more than Western culture does.
 
In practice this means that even at the university level, students are encouraged to dutifully revere their teachers. Offering criticism or synthesizing new ideas simply isn't valued. You could easily be in your thirties or forties before ever having to generate something new. That situation promotes stability and conservatism, but not the sort of creativity international firms are looking for.
 
As long as received wisdom takes precedence over innovation, the Chinese school system will suffer.
 
中国的文化比西方的文化更强调晚辈听从长辈的话。
 
实际上,这意味着即使在大学,学生也被告知要尊师重道。提出批评或者综合形成新观点是不被提倡的。很容易你就三四十岁了,而在你的人生里头还没做出过什么新的东西。这种状况鼓励人们求稳和保守,而不是跨国企业寻找的创造。
 
只要人们的成见仍然优先于创新,中国的教育体制就会一直有问题。



屁民3.11:Ben,香港
 
Many people who comment here seem to agree "Chinese college graduates often have high scores but low ability", but I think it is not the case, at least not to the extent as the author stated. First the author only cited statistics from "foreign" or "international" companies. It is unfair to generalize from these statistics to say something like "businesses that want to pay a lot more can't seem to find qualified employees". Secondly some people said that Chinese students boost high GRE scores but cannot say or write a complete sentence. I think it is unfair too, because they are just entering an English speaking environment. When learning a foreign language, it is easier to learn reading because you can make it on your own, but writing and speaking needs environment and iteration between people, which is not so easy to get. What's more, English is not a fair criteria to judge student's quality. Japanese students usually have much worse English skills, but they are mostly well competent.
And the author's analysis is not well founded either. You cannot blame all to the Gaokao system. I think more important reason is Chinese students have much fewer opportunities to join international programs like exchange between colleges and NGO programs. It is the fault of a closed political system and a lack of global vision and competent of educators. The second reason the quality of professors in chinese univ. are low comparing to USA.
 
这里留言的许多人似乎都同意“中国大学毕业生高分低能”的说法,但我认为不是这样的,起码没作者说的那样严重。首先作者只给出了来自“外国”或者“国际”的公司的数据。从这些数据归纳出像“想付高薪的企业找不到合格的员工”这样的结论是不公平的。其次,一些人说中国的学生有着很高的GRE分数,但却不能说也不能写,我认为这也是不公平的,因为他们才刚进入一个英语口语环境。当学习一门外语时,阅读通常是更容易学的,因为你一个人就能做阅读训练。但写和说却需要环境和人与人之间的互动,这个并不是容易得到的。另外,拿英语能力去判断一个学生的素质是不公平的。日本学生通常英语渣多了,但他们大多数都富有竞争力。
 
作者的分析也有逻辑问题。你不能把一切都推给高考制度。我认为更重要的原因是中国的学生参加像大学之间的交换生项目和无政府组织的项目等的机会要比我们少得多。这要归咎于封闭的政治制度、缺乏全球视野和有能力的教育人才。中国教育问题的第二个原因是和美国相比,中国大学教授的质量实在太差了。



屁民3.12:Lynn ,原州,韩国
 
This is also true in South Korea, the most Confucian of Asian societies. With English instruction, it is a stupid system that stresses memorization and a useless emphasis on learning grammar rules that renders students tongue-tied so afraid they are of making a grammar mistake. But they are good at passing tests. And many of the teachers aren't any better, having 'learned' English without ever the benefit of a native speaker. Many Korean teachers are well-meaning but largely useless.
 
在韩国也是这样呢,这个全亚洲最儒家的社会。对于英语的教学,这简直是一个愚蠢的体制,只会强调死记单词硬背语法,使得学生都不敢说话,害怕不知怎的又犯了一个语法错误。但他们擅于通过考试。而许多老师也不比学生好多少,他们学英语也从来没有得到过以英语为母语的人的指导。许多韩国老师都心地善良,但大部分都是没什么能力的。



===============================我是专家的分割线===================================
 
专家4:
 
Qiang Zha  is an assistant professor of education at York University in Toronto, and a co-author, most recently of, “Portraits of 21st Century Chinese Universities: In the Move to Mass Higher Education.”
 
Qiang Zha,多伦多约克大学的教育学助理教授,也是最近的《21世纪中国大学肖像:向高等教育扩招进发》一书的合著者。
 
A Stratified Education System
 
分层化的教学系统
 
It is ironic that as China’s economy keeps growing, the degrees produced by its colleges seem to be rapidly losing their value. Investment in education and training are not paying off for many college graduates. Why? Does China not need knowledge workers?
 
In the past decade, Chinese higher education enrollment soared more than sevenfold, and the system now produces close to six million graduates a year. Shouldn’t these graduates be rewarded for their education credentials and qualifications and not be treated “as cheap as cabbages”?
 
The problem is due largely to a structural disorder in Chinese higher education.
 
With the quick expansion of higher education came stratification of the system. Chinese higher education has grown to be steeply hierarchical, with a small number of elite national universities (around 100 in total) sitting on top of the hierarchy and protected from overexpansion. Meanwhile, the majority (95 percent or so) of local universities and colleges have to accommodate most of the increased enrollment.
 
The elite universities enjoy strong state patronage in terms of higher concentration of public resources while the local ones are largely left to rely on market forces, which means that they have to take in more students in order to secure their revenue.
 
很讽刺,随着中国经济持续增长,它的大学生产的学位似乎正快速失去它们的价值。对教育和培训的投资,对很多大学毕业生来说都没有得到相应的回报。为什么?中国不需要智力劳动者?
 
在过去的10年,中国的高等教育入学数字疯长了超过7倍,而这个系统现在每年生产接近6百万大学毕业生。这些大学毕业生不应该从他们的文凭和证书中得到回报,不以“白菜价”被人贱卖吗?
 
问题主要在于中国高等教育的结构性混乱。
 
伴随高等教育快速扩张而来的是教育系统的分层化。中国的高等教育已经变得严重的等级化,只有一小撮全国招生的优秀大学(总数大约100所)位于金字塔顶端,从过度扩招当中得到了保护。同时,大部分(大概95%)只面向本地招生的大学和学院不得不消化掉绝大部分的扩招学生。
 
位于顶端的大学获得了国家强有力的支持,公共资源都高度集中在它们身上,而地区性的大学大部分要依赖市场的力量,这意味着它们不得不吸收更多的学生来保住它们的收入。*
 
*:看到这里不得不感叹一下,这就是教育领域里面的“先富带后富”啊~~~一直都没有注意到呢。
 
This widening gap inevitably led to deterioration of the quality of higher education in many colleges, especially the newly created ones but also the private ones, which suffer from a severe shortage of qualified and experienced teaching staff.
 
Worse still, many of these colleges favored adding “soft” programs, e.g., accounting, business/public administration, international commerce, foreign languages, etc. These popular programs require modest resources, thus providing an effective means for fast expansion. Graduates of these programs used to be welcomed into the job market. However, the proliferation of these programs has created a huge discrepancy between the supply and demand side.
 
With the market economy developing, divisions in China’s job market naturally emerged. The elite university graduates and those who studied “hard” programs, i.e., the sciences and technology, found better opportunities in the primary job market where there's great demand for their knowledge and skills.
 
The local college graduates and particularly those who studied “soft” programs are more likely to be pushed to the secondary job market, which is characterized by low wages and high levels of labor turnover.
 
However, as more opportunities become available in a maturing Chinese economy, those who have college degrees -- regardless of their field of discipline -- will benefit. In the long run, it is likely that the wages of most college graduates will improve.
 
两个阶层的大学之间不断扩大的差距不可避免地会导致许多学校高等教育质量的恶化,尤其是那些新近建立的私人学校,它们严重短缺优质和有经验的教学人员。
 
更糟糕的是,这些学校许多都热衷于开设“软性”的课程,例如会计,工商/公共管理,国际商务,外语等等。这些流行的课程需要的资源不多,所以提供了一个有效的手段去快速扩张。这些课程的学生过去是在就业市场很受欢迎的。然而随着这些课程的泛滥,供给远远超过了需求。
 
随着市场经济的发展,中国的就业市场自然而然地形成了分化。那些学习“硬”专业,即理工科,的顶层大学毕业生会在一级就业市场找到更好的职位,在这个市场有着对他们的知识和技能的巨大需求。
 
地区性大学毕业生,尤其是那些学“软”专业的,更有可能被推到二级就业市场,这个市场的特征是低工资高流动率。
 
然而,随着中国经济越来越成熟,就业市场将会有更多的机会,那些拥有大学学位的人——无论他们的专业是什么——都会从中获益的。长期来看,大多数大学毕业生的工资都有可能得到改善。



屁民4.1:sande ,西雅图
 
In 1997, I taught philosophy at a well-known university in southern China. The unit I taught in was completely hierarchical: party loyalists at the top, conversational English teachers at the bottom. My contact had a Harvard M.A. and was finishing a Ph.D from Beijing. He was obsessed with crowd control. Not a single text I introduced to the graduate seminar was valued by the managers of the academic unit unless it added to institutional control and public image. What does elite institution mean when its critical-educational practices are subservient to expedient politics? In some ways, Chinese higher-education is very similar to the contortions of American institutions.
 
1997年,我在中国南方一间知名大学教哲学。我所执教的单位是完全阶级分化的:忠实的党员在最顶部,英语口语教师在最底部。我认识一个哈佛的文学硕士,他正要获得北京的一个博士学位。他对人群控制感到厌烦。我递给研究生研讨会的建议书没有一篇获得学校单位的管理者的重视,除非我添加了机构控制和公共形象等内容。当关键的教育行为从属于应急的行政措施,顶尖的教育机构还有什么意义?在某些地方,中国的高等教育很像扭曲了的美国的教育制度。



屁民4.2:J.T.,纽约
 
There's a certain comfort in knowing that your competitor suffers your same woe.
 
知道你的竞争对手和你经历着同样的痛苦,我感到了一丝安慰。



屁民4.3:dm ,纽约
 
The description by Quiang Zha sounds a lot like the divisions in the US between elite IVY-like universities and community colleges and underfunded state colleges. It's not quite the same problem because here college grads do still get a bump in pay and opportunity, but there are a lot of rotten degrees being sold in our unregulated market. Is it ethical any longer to ask for tuition to train people to work in, say, print journalism? Is it ethical to train people to get a PhD in English or Comp. Lit. when there haven't been jobs commensurate with the number of degree earners in decades? Is it ethical to ask for tuition when a majority of your institution's classes have more than forty students per teacher?
 
Qiang Zha的描述听起来很像美国的常青藤联盟这样的大学和社区大学及资金不足的州立大学之间的分化现象。美国的分化和中国的分化不尽相同,因为这儿大学毕业生仍然有着高收入和众多就业机会,但有很多劣质的学位在我们监管不力的市场上出售。去开设一门训练人们印报纸这样的课程还合乎道德吗?而当提供给大学毕业生的职位数数十年以来都远远及不上大学毕业生的人数的时候,培养一个英语或者比较文学的博士还合乎道德吗?当你学校的大多数班级每个老师要带多于40个学生的时候,继续开班授课还是合乎道德的吗?



屁民4.4:Dennis T ,纽约
 
There's a saying: "dance with the one who brung ya". If China's manufacturing economy has been so strong for an era it will be a slow and uphill battle to convert it to one that is service oriented.
 
China has been the world's greatest exporter of manufactured goods for decades now. It has not been a service economy driven by knowledge workers. This will change over time, perhaps 25 to 50 years hence. So the supply of college graduates, growing at 30% annually, has far outpaced the demand from China's blue-collar driven economy.
 
有这样一个说法:“和带你去舞会的那个人跳舞。”如果中国的制造业经济在整整一个时代都这么强劲,那么去把它转变成服务业经济将会是一场漫长而艰巨的战争。
 
中国数十年来都是世界最大的加工产品出口商。它不是一个由智力劳动力驱动的服务业经济体。这将随着时间而改变,可能从现在开始要25到50年来完成这一改变。所以每年以30%的速率增长的大学毕业生的供应,已经远远超过了中国这个蓝领驱动经济体的需求。



屁民4.5:Kostas,纽约
 
> So the supply of college graduates, growing at 30% annually, has far outpaced the demand from China's blue-collar driven economy.
 
It is not a question of quantity but of quality - i am a high-tech enterpreneur living in china and if i were able to find people who would work for me for 1200 yuan i think i could quickly grow. The fact is that if you want someone with actual skills, and basic honesty and integrity, and willingness to work hard - you have to get someone from a top university and those people are not cheap, i would say 7-10 thousand yuan is a minimum.
 
>所以每年以30%的速率增长的大学毕业生的供应,已经远远超过了中国这个蓝领驱动经济体的需求。
 
并不是数量的问题,而是质量的问题。我是一家高科技公司的老板,现住在中国,如果我能找到愿意接受1200元月薪来为我工作的人,我想我的公司很快就会壮大。事实是,如果你想得到一个有真才实学、有基本的诚信和对企业的忠诚并且愿意勤奋工作的人,你不得不到顶级的大学里面去找,而这些人并不便宜,我想说月薪7千到1万元是最低的要求。



屁民4.6:jomama,多伦多
 
As a young engineer on my first job in the Silicon Valley, I worked for a man with Chinese man with a PhD from a Chinese university for about 3 months until they replaced him with me, and moved him to the side.
 
I've never seen someone throw a greater tantrum. An adult man, screaming and throwing things.
 
He really sucked. He couldn't write software - at all. He was hired for his 'education'.
 
In his culture, he was guaranteed a certain amount of respect, status, income and credibility, in the 'what can you do for me today' values of the Silicon Valley - he was basically unemployable, really.
 
Chinese Universities are basically junk - for the most part. I think many people know this. They are improving however.
 
It would not be that hard to set up some kind of international organization that can at least do a 'bare bones' assessment of what an education at a specific school really means.
 
I'm from Canada where the #1 source of immigration is China - and they gain points for having eduction. Our immigration boards often claim that these people have 'higher education' than the average Canadian. This is bunk.
 
The world will benefit a lot when Chinese schools improve. Perhaps education is something that the West can begin importing into China?
 
当我还是一个年轻的工程师,在硅谷从事我第一份工作时,我的职位原本是由一个来自中国的博士所担任的,但3个月后我的老板就找我取代了他,把他放在了一边。
 
我从未看见有人比他发更大的脾气。一个大男人,一边尖叫着一边乱扔东西。他真是差劲透了。他不懂编程-一点也不懂。他是被他的“学历”所招聘的。在他的文化下,他保证会获得一定程度的尊敬、地位、收入和信任;而在硅谷“今天你可以为我做什么”的价值观下,他真的仅仅是一个失业者而已。
 
中国的大学都是垃圾——基本上。我想很多人都这样认为。但它们在改善当中。
 
设立某种国际组织,让这个组织至少能在某间学校评估出教育的本质是什么,这并不太难。我来自加拿大,这里移民的第一来源国是中国——他们会因为他们的教育而获得加分。我们的移民局经常宣称这些人的受教育程度要比一般的加拿大人高。一派胡言。
 
如果中国的学校改善了,整个世界都会受益匪浅。也许现在开始西方就可以向中国出口教育?



屁民4.7:David ,纽约
 
People with soft degrees don't do so well in the US either--try getting a job with a bachelor's degree in English. Only people whose college educations teach something useful for work life will earn more than the uneducated. That is capitalism par excellence.
 
美国拥有软专业学位的人表现也并不好——试试以英语学士学位去申请一份工作。念大学的人只有当他的大学教育教会了他一些实用的工作技能时,他才会比没接受过大学教育的人挣到更多的钱。这才是真正的资本主义。



屁民4.8:Peter,北京
 
I'm writing from the dormitory of a "Top University" in Beijing. This is my third semester here. I did my bachelors degree at a top 20 university in the US before I moved out here. When I first came, I was told to keep an open mind to the differences between western and eastern styles of education. Regardless of cultural differences, the two are apples and oranges. Top universities in China aren't even on par with community colleges in the US. When it comes to middle and lower tier universities, calling them "higher education" is borderline criminal. I once spoke to a graduate of a middle tier school in the south west who majored in computer science. In 7 years (Bachelors and Masters degree) he didn't touch a computer. The university didn't have any, they learned from outdated, poorly translated textbooks. Now he writes code for a prominent software company. There is a great deal of talk about Chinese progress in western media. The view on the ground is a bit different.
 
我正在北京一家“顶尖大学”的宿舍写这条留言。这是我的第三个学期。在我来这之前,我在美国的一所前20名的大学取得了本科学位。当我初来乍到时,我被告知对东西方之间教学风格的差异保持一颗平常心。撇开文化差异,这两者的确差距很大。中国的顶尖大学甚至不能和美国的社区大学相提并论。而对于中低档次的大学,把他们称作“高等教育”已经接近犯罪了。我曾经和一名毕业于西南地区的一间中等档次的大学的毕业生交谈过,他的专业是计算机科学与技术,但整整7年(本科+硕士),他没有碰过电脑。他的大学连翻译得很差的外国书籍也没有,他们学的都是过时的知识。现在他为一家著名的软件公司写代码。西方的媒体有大量关于中国进步的讨论。但现实的情况恐怕并不如此。



屁民4.9:XJ,乔治亚州
 
I think the author overestimated the number of elite university in China. 100?! Really? Does everyone believe Chinese government is that rich to support 100 elite universities? People in China say 90% of the education resources are concentrated on the Big Two "Tsinghua University" and "Peking University". All the others share the rest 10%. In that sense, only the big two can be called elite. Degree value drops very fast once you move on to the third, and frankly speaking, no one cares about who is the third. Things are even worse at the local level.
 
However, one thing to point out is that unlike the U.S. system where education costs a fortune, college education is fairly cheap in China. I spent ¥4,200/year for my tuition in a Top 10 university. That translates into a bit over $500/year. It could be doubled if you include the living expense. But even so, it is still not expensive at all for my family which is nothing more than a ordinary urban working-class family. It is true that education is a investment for any Chinese family, but it is more a concern about time and devotion than money.
 
我想作者高估了中国顶尖大学的数字了。100?!当真?有人相信中国政府有这么多钱去支持100所顶尖大学吗?中国人说90%的教育资源都集中在清华和北大这两家巨头之上。其他的所有大学共同分享剩余的10%。在这个意义上,只有这两家巨头可以被称作顶尖。当你去到只排第三的那家大学,你的学位的价值就迅速下降了。坦白说,没有人关心谁是老三。对于地区性大学,情况甚至更糟糕。
 
然而,有一点必须指出来,不像美国的体制那样大学教育要花一大笔钱,中国的大学教育成本是相当低廉的。我在一家排名前10的大学每年交4200元作为学费,折合500美元一年多一点。如果你把生活花费也算进去,大概就是翻一番吧。但即使这样,对于我的家庭来说仍然一点也不贵,我的家庭仅仅是城市里面普通不过的工薪阶层而已。的确,对于任一个中国家庭来说,教育都是一笔投资,但它更像是时间和汗水的投资,而不是金钱的投资。



屁民4.10:Rohit,印度
 
Am glad about the Indian Situation which is much better.
 
The expansion (explosion is more correct) here is in Engineering Education rather than "soft subjects". Most of them are getting decent jobs in Information Technology where recruitment is brisk.
 
It is manufacturing which is neglected and has poor employment lure though employment potential exists.
 
我很高兴印度的情况要好得多。
 
这里教育的扩张(或者说爆炸式增长更贴切一点)发生在工程专业上,而不是那些“软专业”上。工程专业的毕业生都会在IT公司找到一份体面的工作,这些公司的招聘活动总是那么活跃。
 
制造业一直被人忽视,而且也没什么就业吸引力,尽管有一定的就业潜力 。



屁民4.11:Shan,北京
 
I'm studying at Peking University this year, and I feel like I am at a community college in rural America. Actually, it's worse than that. Not only is the quality of instruction poor, the administration here is unfriendly (because they are self-important) and surprisingly incompetent. And this is the best school in China? China's higher education system has a LONG way to go.
 
今年我在北京大学学习,而我感觉我就像在美国农村的一家社区大学学习。实际上,它连社区大学都不如。这里不仅教学质量差,而且管理当局对你并不友好(因为他们很自大),令人吃惊地非常不称职。这就是中国最好的学校?中国的高等教育体制还有很长很长很长很长很长一段路去走。
 
 
 
(真的很长,我说的是这篇文章\(^o^)/~会有人看完吗?看到这里你就赢了~\(≧▽≦)/~)


更多
评论加载中。。。
我还要发表看法:
"看世界"温馨提醒:
1、请勿发表违反国家法律评论,评论请文明用语;
2、禁止发布广告评论。
匿名发表  用户名: 密码: 验证码:

浏览过本页的网友还关注:
美国译帖 - 热门推荐
第一赞助商
双语美文 - 阅读榜
第二赞助商
美国译帖 - 最新收录
第三赞助商
国外优秀论坛 - 为您推荐
第四赞助商
经验分享 - 阅读榜
欢迎爱好网帖翻译的朋友加入我们:
QQ群:307195648
联系邮箱:seas_2000@sina.com
无觅关联推荐,快速提升流量