Are Young Americans Losing their Competitive Edge in the Global Economy?

American students rank 25th out of 30 countries in math competencies. What can be done to improve student achievement to prepare every young American for a global future? Photo courtesy CSI High School for International Studies.

American students rank 25th out of 30 countries in math competencies. What can be done to improve student achievement to prepare every young American for a global future? Photo courtesy CSI High School for International Studies.

International comparisons are increasingly relevant and important to understand in today’s global environment. No longer do the residents of American cities and states vie only with each other for jobs; their competitors are located in countries around the world. Economists and social scientists agree that, increasingly, the educational abilities of a nation’s workforce will significantly impact its ability to remain economically strong. The students of today and tomorrow must be able to read and write well; they must have strong skills and knowledge of math and science. If they do not, the future well-being of the United States is in jeopardy.

The results of the 2006 Programme for International Student Assessments (PISA) were released on December 4, 2007 by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), showing that 15-year-old students in the U.S. continue to perform, in science and mathematics, at levels that demonstrate conclusively that far too many are unprepared for the global economy. In relative terms, the U.S. ranked 25th among the 30 OECD member countries in mathematics, down from 23rd of 29 in the 2003 test, and 21st of 30 in science this year, dropping from 19th in 2003. (OECD notes that the 2006 science scale is not directly comparable with the science scale used in the 2003 test.) That places the 15-year-olds in the United States below the OECD member country average in both subjects, not because students are scoring at lower levels on the tests, but because other countries, including Croatia, Estonia, and Azerbaijan are moving higher.

Seven national organizations co-hosted two briefings, one at the National Press Club in Washington, DC and one at Asia Society in New York on December 4 and 5 with Andreas Schleicher, head of the indicators and analysis division, OECD Directorate for Education and lead author of the report. At the briefings, the 2006 PISA findings were presented in detail with comments and analysis of the implications for U.S. educational policy provided by leaders of the co-hosting organizations:  Bob Wise, president, Alliance for Excellent Education; Vivien Stewart, vice president, education, Asia Society; Susan Traiman, director, education and workforce policy, Business Roundtable; Gaston Caperton, president, College Board; Gene Wilhoit, executive director, Council of Chief State School Officers; Roy Romer, chairman, ED in ’08; and Ray Scheppach, executive director, National Governors Association. More importantly, these events focused on what other countries are doing to improve their systems and rankings, while the United States stays static and what lessons the United States can learn from these higher-performing countries.

The PISA has been given every three years since 2000 to fifteen-year-olds in the thirty member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and in twenty-seven partner countries. Students are tested in reading and in mathematical and scientific literacy to assess whether they have “acquired the knowledge and skills essential in everyday life,” according to the OECD. The 2006 results, which concentrate on students’ scientific literacy, also included math and reading, however, a printing error resulted in a decision not to include U.S. students’ reading results for 2006 in the 2007 report.

For presentation and video from 12/5/07 PISA event in New York, NY at Asia Society, please visit FORA TV.

For presentation and video from 12/4/07 PISA event in Washington, DC, please visit the Alliance for Excellent Education Website.

 

AttachmentSize
PISA Press Release 12 4 07 (FINAL).doc962.5 KB
Joint Statement Regarding 2006 PISA Results 953 KB

It's very interesting how 'bottlenecks' are forming as a result of 'success'. Education isn't the problem. Adaption to the collective communities across Earth is. The distinctive features of American progress wasn't based solely on the output of schools and Universities. It was based on the market need to sustain the labor and talents of repetitive workers who had specific needs in their niche production arenas. From the cotton gin to the postal service. Education and invention had clear feedback and productive streamlining of established businesses.
In this generation, we have 'downsized' every support institution while increasing the 'complexity' of all our production systems. Intuitively, we have wrongly assumed that more 'expertise' was going to 'out-think' the problems of growth and development. This is not the case; the high numbers of Americans with 'good educations' that are jobless should be prima facie that this argument is moot! America isn't a developing country, ironically having more 'ideas' than possible resources should also be telling that 'our' educated graduates are not representing additive value to the market's needs at hand. These arguments remind me of the '1980s braindrain' and the 'topsoil export crisis' of the 1970s. Facts are... education in America and no place to take it is almost as damning as illiteracy! If we are going to have the edge back in this country, more quantitative emphasis needs to be on demonstrative skills and not test scores! Where are we going to get the money to do this? Universities and schools should competitively place its departments on student completions and not preliminary enrollment. It's a waste of resource and students to keep maintaining courses that don't develop proficiency and excellence. If a classroom can't communicate success in the field of study, students cannot be realistically expected to perform the thinking its teachers didn't give them! Funding has traditionally come from patronage in the academic system... this changed when technical sciences could deliver 'real world' products and solution from 'intellectual capital'. How would an 'English Department' fair against a 'Genetics Lab'? Without a command of language, you can't deliver the ideas to the marketplace. Students need to develop their written arguments to succeed in English... challenge example should be to publish a book by the end of the course?
It's just a thought of what an education can do.. it makes a person create something tangible. Do these things, and see how quick students can become successful at pursuing goals and accomplishments.

Post new comment

Your comments are welcome, please adhere to our guidelines

Be respectful. Personal attacks will not be tolerated; nor will profane, abusive or threatening posts.

Keep it short (150 words or less), Stay on topic.

Asia Society reserves the right to moderate all comments and remove or edit for guideline violations. Thank you.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.