We are living in an age that will see
the rise of China as a potential superpower because of its progressive economic
development and population increase. China is Australia’s closest trading
partner in many industries especially in education. A significant amount of
Chinese international students are educated in Australia, not to mention a
large proportion of Chinese calling Australia home. The national curriculum has
recognised this dynamic in the world and within the Australian educational
sphere; this is reflected in the national curriculum standard which relates to
Asia and Australia’s neighbouring countries, (Bell, 1997).
The potential ‘Asianisation’ refers to
the indirect influence Chinese educational practices may have on the Australian
sphere. Due to the great focus of rote learning and direct instruction in
Chinese education, such practices are informing Australian understandings of
school instruction. Chinese education puts a great emphasis on intrinsic
rewards, for students this is translated in the form of competition, hard work
and perseverance.
According to an online article titled
‘”Asianising” education: the China option?’, the Australian’s Higher Education
Supplement oversaw a report which analysed the difference between the
educational practices of Confucian-heritage and Anglo-heritage cultures.
According to the report and its findings, the two educational systems share similar
view points and understanding on the concepts of originality, imagination,
independence and challenges to authority, (Finnane, 2012).
The cultural difference between the
Chinese and Australian cultural difference lies in what has been called a Darwinian
struggle; too many students, not enough places, while this may not be the case
in Australia we still have our fair share of competition and vying for spaces.
The ultimate difference lies in the emphasis on rote learning which has
vigorously been phased out of Australian educational practices. Rote learning
is a passive systematic mode of understanding which limits student creativity
and comprehension, (Bell, 1997). The arduous hours of study common with Chinese
students is somewhat alien to their Australian counterparts. This leads to a
friction in educational philosophy amongst educators who aim to project the
best of their educational practices. Also,
China is a communist country which has a tendency to stifle or censor free
speech or anything that challenges their status quo. This is indirect opposite
to its Australian counterparts which encourages creativity and free speech,
which is reflected in the national syllabus dot point that encourages critical
and flexible thinking.
Reference:
Bell, L. A. (1997). Theoretical
foundations for social justice education. In M. Adams,
L. A. Bell, & P. Griffin
(Eds.), Teaching for diversity and
social justice: A sourcebook
(pp.
3–15). New York: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment