Two basketballs half a world away from each other showed Xiaochen Su the fundamental differences in the educational systems of the United States and Japan. Congratulations to Xiaochen Su, our 2nd runner-up and the winner of a $100 scholarship!
2nd Runner-Up
Xiaochen Su
Yale University
Difference between American and East Asian Education
On a winter day of 1999, I was fighting over the last available basketball with a classmate in the gym of Juyichiya Elementary School in Kanazawa, Japan. Seeing the conflict, a supervising teacher walked over to us and said, “Why don’t you guys play together?” We the two students exchanged tense smiles. As the teacher left happily thinking that the problem is solved, an uneasy game of one-on-one basketball began. A year later, on a winter day of 2000, I was fighting over the last available basketball with a classmate in the gym of Washington Irving Middle School in Boston, MA. Seeing the conflict, a supervising teacher walked over to us and said, “Who had the ball first?” My clever competitor quickly raised right hand. As the teacher left happily thinking that the problem is solved, the classmate ran away happily to shoot some baskets while I stood flabbergasted and dumbfounded. The two education systems, those of the United States and Japan, have essential philosophical differences in their explanation of what is necessary to achieve ultimate success in society: the difference between American individualism and East Asian collectivism.
In America, schools teach the students to obtain individual success by utilizing all the possible resources available to you in the society. Significant contribution of the individual to the society in the form of philanthropy and other financial and material donations only occurs after individual success. The teaching philosophy is best illustrated by the emphasis on the “American Dream,” the epitome of rag-to-riches stories taught so prevalently in American childhood education. Most notably in such subjects as social studies and history, the teachers repeatedly told the students life stories of Andrew Carnegie, Abraham Lincoln, and the characters in Horatio Alger novels. Students, taught to show deep respect for and strive to emulate such personalities, are indirectly instilled with the idea that individual efforts can lead to success, defined as expansion in wealth and influence, no matter how unfavorable the start point. Associating with others, besides for purposes of entertainment and social necessity, logically becomes something to be pursued simply and practically as important social connections to obtain power and wealth for themselves in the future. Only with large income and influence position secured should the individuals devote themselves to pay back their debts to society by serving its interests or donating large sum of money.
On the other hand, East Asian education stresses the importance of cooperation with others as sign of success. The wealth and influence of individuals are proportional to the wealth and power of the society as a whole and the role the individual played in it. In Japanese elementary school, the teachers often told stories of collaboration and sharing among strangers. For example, I was told of my teacher’s personal experience with a resident of his apartment building was diagnosed with cancer. With deep emotions he told us that all the residents of the building donated whatever they could from their salaries and savings. Through inducing sorrow and respect of the students for residents of the building, there is a clear implication that individuals can receive admiration and attain higher status in society only through assisting others in times of need and actively involving themselves in the community beginning even at a young age when financial security and personal power are existent. A similar message is echoed by proverbs often used by Chinese teachers such as “close neighbors are better than distant relatives.” The formation of close relationship with the immediate community is more significant to individual success than family or social connections. Contribution to society is the cause of individual success, not the result.
Through different educations, the products of individualism and collectivism exhibit strong differences in strengths and weaknesses. Although individualism engenders many short-term conflicts of personal interests and is inherently unsympathetic to the weaker elements of the society, the openness of the conflicts allows for relative stability in the long term and a resulting sense of individual optimism. While collectivism generates a sense of social harmony and mutual assistance in the short run, the divisive forces of individual interests kept in check by social cooperation can instantly burst in large uncontrollable open conflicts to bring a society to brink of anarchy. The situation is best illustrated in the conflict over the last basketball. In the collectivist solution, both students had the opportunity to play with the ball equally, yet it is inevitable that the two will hold, for an extended time period, a sense of quiet hostility toward each other and the teacher for being placed in a situation of unwanted cooperation with a competitor. The hostility may lead to many larger conflicts between the two students. In contrast, if the ball is awarded only to one student, the losing student may be angered at the moment, but almost never hold any long-term grudge against the classmate and may even befriend him as they are now more familiar with each other. The trade-off between long- and short-term advantages is the major determinant of whether the society is individualist or collectivist and influence major aspects of its political decisions and socio-economic structure.
Xiaochen understands the benefits and drawbacks of both societies. You should try to do the same when you study in another country, both to be a better student and a better world citizen.
Bookmark this Page