U.S. Fails International Competitiveness Test: Schools (Rightfully) Blamed
On February 1, 2008, President George W. Bush said "the fundamentals of the economy are strong; we're just going through a rough patch right now" (UPI). Even while the economy was crumbling all around him, presidential candidate John McCain insisted on September 15, 2008, "the fundamentals of our economy are strong."
Perhaps these "fundamental" misperceptions by our national "leaders" are why the U.S. just failed the Global Competitiveness Stress Test from the Lausanne-based Institute for Management Development's World Competitiveness Center. Perhaps "failed" is not the right word, but the U.S. did finish average -- 28th among the 57 ranked nations. Yet, similar results in international comparisons with math and science tests have led to the use of that particular f-word as applied to public schools. The Stress Test evaluates how well countries will cope with the current global recession.
The U.S. finished behind such nations as Qatar, Malaysia, Chile, Thailand, Jordan and Kazakhstan. Denmark is #1, but India (13th) and China (18th) are ahead of us, too.
If this result came from an international comparison of young people (9- and 13 year-olds) on math and science tests it would make front page news of most newspapers, but I'm betting it doesn't get any coverage at all (this is being sent just after the embargo hour has passed, EDT). But I'm also betting that the people who sent the economy over the cliff were not people who couldn't do the arithmetic.
The stress test included four factors, Economy Forecasts, Government, Business, and Society each made up of about a half-dozen sub-components. The United States' lowest ranking, 33rd, was on the Business component. That component itself is comprised of ethical practices, credibility of managers, corporate boards, corporate values and entrepreneurship. It appears that the Business Roundtable, National Association of Manufacturers, and independent businesses, don't have much to offer in these areas.
These results confirm allegations in the April 24th, 2009 Wall Street Journal that the principal culprits in the present debacle are indeed the schools, namely, the business schools. "What have business schools failed to teach our business leaders and policy makers?" asked Walter Jacobs, himself a B-school professor. As the U. S. Chamber of Commerce and the Center for American Progress put it in a different context, "the measures of our educational shortcomings are stark indeed."
First, everyone agrees that "incentive systems that rewarded short-term gain took precedence over those designed for long-term value creation." A proper B-school education would inoculate against such folly.
Second, "as Washington scrambles to restructure the financial regulatory system, those who still believe in the private sector are asking why corporate boards were AWOL as institution after institution crumbled. Why did it take rumors of nationalization and a drop in Citicorp stock to below $2 a share to inspire Citigroup to nominate directors with experience in financial markets?" Jacobs reports giving a speech at a B-school after which one student, only weeks away from her MBA, said she'd never heard any discussion of the responsibilities of boards or the rights of shareholders.
Third, while B-schools taught the value of a diversified portfolio, they did not examine the notion of "agency cost." "The concept is simple: When money provided to homeowners or businesses comes from an anonymous source, possibly half way around the world, there are serious challenges to operating a functioning system of accountability... It should come as no surprise that financial institutions amassed securities that consist of a diversified portfolio of deadbeats."
Jacobs thinks we could have avoided the problems we now face had we attended to the three items noted above. "America's business schools need to rethink what we are teaching -- and not teaching--the next generation of leaders."
Now there's something Bob Wise, Roy Romer, Eli Broad, and Bill Gates and the rest of the professional K-12 fear mongers should pay attention to. It's much more important than how well 4th and 8th graders bubble in answer sheets on math and science tests. But it's doubtful that the fear mongers will let go of their lucrative propaganda machines.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
We were told our jobs will start going to Mexico for three dollars per hour. When asked how we could compete they responded you can't. Perhaps it's the schools.
Is this a joke?
"First, everyone agrees that "incentive systems that rewarded short-term gain took precedence over those designed for long-term value creation." A proper B-school education would inoculate against such folly. " People go to business school to learn MONEY manipulation and that is what has been going on for the last 30 years.....
Doesn't every boomer remember the 50s and 60s when the soldiers had come home from WW2 and the tax rate was 91% and there were real family jobs...We need to put the taxes high enough that it is better for them to pass the money down the line where the tax rates are less....Ri
The strength of the US has always been its ability to get the best and the brightest to move here and contribute their knowledge to our economy.
One of the major reasons US schools compare poorly is the loss of rote learning. Few children have eidetic memory. Without rote learning basic facts are soon forgetten.
Gerald-- your last few sentences make no sense at all. How is Bill Gates being a fear monger by pointing out problems with public school science education? I also fail to see how this charitable effort of his is a "lucrative propaganda machine." The country would no doubt muddle through and perhaps even be better off if all the B schools closed. But we wouldn't last long without good science and engineering.
the issues with public education have been going on FOREVER,,, because we have the most regressive way of funding public education. that is draining property taxes from the working class....I
There's nothing wrong with schools. There's something wrong with parents.
Certain students excel within the current system, going out of their way to do more. The majority of students just get by within the same system.
Don't blame the schools. Place it where it belongs- at home!
http://www
Okay... you want the solution? Make teacher pay an attractive income, and then you can get much more restrictive on both college entrance and job expectations.
But until you're willing to pay for really good people, you'll continue to get some good ones and some weak ones.
A basic free-market reality. Step up and fund it, conservatives.
Interesting that the 'chamber of commerce' and tne NFIB type folks their agenda always seems to be lower taxes and let the 'market do it' so then education funding gets CUT and then we get students who can't be competitive and this is the result....
and mothers are working 40 hours a week and then coming home drained.. and then they get 1 week of vacation..
department of education spending reports show that education funding has done anything but gone down since 2001. our students can't be competitive because of the content disparity they are presented with vs that of foreign curricula. throwing money at the issue won't stand in place of high standards and expectations for our high school graduates.
for example, it is shown that middle school students in the US are taught math at a level that is 2 years behind that of the Japanese middle schoolers. we think that we are competitive, but until we really examine the potential of our students via increasing academic standards, we won't ever be top competitors in the field of academics.
Another factor. The US has been saddled with an absurd program called Affirmative Action for the past 40 years. No other country in the world has a program of moving club-footed rabbits to the front of the line. All other countries are able hire and promote on the basis of experience, training and education and put the best in leadership positions. Affirmative Action throws all that out the window in favor of race and gender quotas. It's alledged purpose was to raise the level of quota groups to compete, but its effect has been and lowering of the bar. Suprise, Suprise.
Affirmative Action hires represent such a small fraction of hires that it's not even a factor. As well, Affirmative Action hires are replete with success stories themselves.
The article above happens to be talking about a bunch of old white guys who screwed us over.
Affirmative ACTION was never practiced at GE,,,,one in 33 of the management team was black and there were NO WOMEN at all... The military has always done better than this, ask Colin Powell...
Even though I am do not condone AA, I must point out this is completely untrue. Brazil, China, Canada, Malaysia, New Zealand, most of Europe, and South Africa all have implemented forms of affirmative action in their own right. (a simple google search can shed light on the matter, in fact) Might I also point out that these are precisely the countries we were compared to in this study. So, the argument that we were putting our "club-footed rabbits" ahead thus causing our competency in coping with global recession to decline on average, is flawed.
actually, there is an interesting article at www.organi
Gerald Bracey for Education Czar. Just as I have written President Obama on numerous occasions.
Stop using that ridiculous word, please. There are no czars in our representative republic.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
