Japan's education problems... is it the lack of critical thinking?

[Emoni]

KiraKira's explanation was quite well, and I am going to have to side with him. Science isn't based on facts, it is based on theories, hypothesis, and experimentation. Mathematical proof assists theories, but one frustrating problem is that everyone thinks that a theory is some how "not good enough" when in fact it is is one of the highest levels a scientific idea can reach. Theory = EXTREMELY strong. Yet, as KiraKira also stated, critical thinking and such allows the challenging of this, and that challenging (in the style of critical thinking) is strongly encouraged as it promotes further knowledge.

However, I won't disagree that critical thinking is absolutely MANDATORY in regards to historical study.

 

[Tsuyoiko]

critical thinking is about OPINIONS.... OPINIONS on things that are in the very least quasi-factual.
a subjective take on an objective thing...

I think you're confused about the meaning of the term 'critical thinking'. Here's a good definition: Critical thinking - Wikipedia

 

[Glenski]

Science isn't based on facts, it is based on theories, hypothesis, and experimentation.

Ahem. Just what do you think experimentation generates? Whimsy? It generates facts or highly regarded theorems, on top of what you wrote. Same with hypotheses: they are based largely on facts.

 

[theAlphaDuck]

yes i know what critical thinking is

and would argue thus:

Science is universal....it is the same subject the world over.

History is not...it is about the point of view...

liberator/occupier
freedom fighter/terrorist

it is this subjective element in history and current affairs that really flexes ones critical thinking, evaluation, and argument skills.

as science is the SAME the world over.... this can NOT be responsible for a lack of critical thinking...

HISTORY is where it's at...
and i think that it comes as no suprise that (from what iv'e heard)
in japan history is taught in the form of a Doctrine that is not to be questioned and a lack of critical thinking...

 

[caster51]

in japan history is taught in the form of a Doctrine that is not to be questioned and a lack of critical thinking...

anyway, I have so much critical thinking about that.
there are so many history otakus
German can not say anything.. it mean a lack of critical thinking?

 

[Glenski]

in an English classroom debate is encouraged...and the more heated the better!
is it the same in the Japanese classroom?
or do they sit down, be quiet and learn?
teacher knows best so don't question what he says?
i honestly don't know because i'm not Japanese...
but it would be interesting to find out.

Debate in Japan is like bowling. One person does his thing (speaks) while the others sit quietly and listen. Then, the next person takes over. Most of the time, debate in Japan is not point vs. counterpoint as you might expect from western standpoints.

Some rare classrooms will have lively debates, but most of the time, Japanese people don't know how to support their arguments/points like westerners do. In a classroom, unless there is a reason for tremendously close rapport, students feel very shy about such practices, especially refuting someone's argument. I've tried this in HS, where the kids have spent years together in the same homeroom, and it doesn't work. The kids really have to be trained hard to break their ingrained habits and feelings. Adults aren't much different.

 

[Emoni]

The only sense of "debate" I've witnessed or been part of is during a class in Japan which was an international mixed student class on the war, and then another on the atomic bombings. I can't say it was too impressive from the students stand point, even though the teacher was great.

Pretty much a majority of the international students (non-Japanese) never did the reading, and most of the time didn't have much knowledge on the subject (or purpose in Japan half the time, other than going to party and drink). 10% of the students were vocal and spoke about the reading, their opinion, and countered other's points... all done very politely and productively. The rest of the students who didn't do the reading either threw in an irrelevant point or tried to hide since they didn't do the 20 pages of reading that week. I would have been for a much more strict enforcement of the reading on that part...

As for the Japanese students, I'd say they put even less effort. While the reading was in English, the teacher did give other reading in Japanese to help them keep up with the class. They usually sat in the back scared to say anything, while we all hoped for them to add at least SOMETHING. There was one student however, who impressed the heck out of me, and she went through the reading and gave her opinion the best she could. However, she was quite shy, weak, and always scared. Intelligent, but absolutely spineless. Half of the Japanese students would just comment and talk behind the international students back about the content of the class and things that were said.

The class required a great deal of critical thinking, as most seminar classes do. I have to say I didn't see too many classes that were of this style (but I know they DO exist in Japan). There is a lot to be said for the material and insight gained from challenging other opinions, and talking about a subject without being immaturely attached personally to one subject in a class and unable to debate it without getting angry because someone "disagrees" with you. I do want to stress there IS a level of maturity in that regard, and is absolutely necessary for critical thinking activities such as debate.

Neither the international students nor the Japanese students impressed me much, but there was a clear lack of effort on the Japanese side to communicate and discuss the topics. You can count it down to cultural differences, but it also comes down to being completely unproductive in a seminar class as well. This is where critical thinking is absolutely needed, as well as a few other behavioral mindsets are required. I DO think the lack of participation, the catty talking behind the international students backs for certain views on history, lack of doing the work, and never countering a point that was made shows, among other things, a lack of critical thinking skills.

 

[caster51]

MY argument is that HISTORY is not taught correctly in Japan,
and thus i made comparisons to GERMANY

I think it is wrong from the begining..
there is no correct things in history
It doesn't seem to have taught a correct history at your school.either
I want to know your correct HISTORY in other topics

 

[JimmySeal]

off topic

Ahem. Just what do you think experimentation generates? Whimsy? It generates facts or highly regarded theorems, on top of what you wrote. Same with hypotheses: they are based largely on facts.

There's no such thing as absolute fact.
Drop a ball 100 times with a good timing mechanism and you'll be convinced that there is a gravitational constant equal to ~9.81m/s/s, but conduct a similar experiment on a quantum or relativistic scale, and it's not even remotely true.
100 years ago, Newtonian physics was "fact."

The scientific method allows us to be pretty sure about things, but in the end it's based on empirical observations, not facts.

 

[Emoni]

There's no such thing as absolute fact.

In regards to history and other areas of "interpretation" yes, this statement applies very well. What critical thinking offers is also the consideration that there are OTHER VIEWS that must be considered and evaluated whether they are accepted by larger educational organizations or not, especially if they have evidence and an argument to support them. By their very consideration, it facilitates expansion and the advancement of understanding of the field.

This is probably the single most beneficial aspect of critical thinking in regards to the study of history. It is this aspect that I often see lacking in Japanese education, as well as East Asia. Heck, it is needed more in the United States as well.

As I stated above, one of the "sins" in the teaching education of history is that there is a single accepted version of history... the one promoted and enforced by the Japanese Ministry of Education of course. The idea of a "right" version of history I ran into all too often, and when you have two people with two different versions of "correct history" speak without the ability to separate the issue from personal attacks. It's a problem. When you have millions and millions of people in East Asia accepting different national versions of history depending on a country with nationalist fervor and almost no personal study or research on the topic, let alone having been there... you have a REALLY BIG PROBLEM.

This is where critical thinking can bring the biggest benefit in the Japanese education system, international and interpersonal relations between nations. The open evaluation and consideration, not being a rebellious act, but an expected and encouraged path of thinking that is not meant to attack, or assault a country, nationality, but simply to gain an understanding from each angle.

That, above, is the benefits of introducing critical thinking in a stronger form in Japanese education.

I agree with many posters that history is one of the fields that would be most beneficial. My hesitation only comes from the opposition that I know it would certainly face if it was taught to kids and the backlash that would occur harming the movement for critical thinking as a tool of education in Japan. Changes don't happen over night.

 

[FrustratedDave]

Some rare classrooms will have lively debates, but most of the time, Japanese people don't know how to support their arguments/points like westerners do.

Even if most of those aguments can hold as much water as a paper bag.

I believe the thing people are misinterpreting about Japanese is that most Japanese won't voice their opinion unless they are pretty certain of what they are about to say, unlike most westerners. They certainly have the skills and capabilities to hold an aurgument no doubt about that. Westerners take the "foot in mouth" attitude about most things in discussions, westerners feel it necessary to voice their opinion even if it is wrong.
I feel that there is a big difference in not being able to support what they say and not wanting to say something that is potenialy wrong is two completely different things. Don't get those two confused

 

[Taiko666]

Even if most of those aguments can hold as much water as a paper bag.

I believe the thing people are misinterpreting about Japanese is that most Japanese won't voice their opinion unless they are pretty certain of what they are about to say, unlike most westerners. They certainly have the skills and capabilities to hold an aurgument no doubt about that. Westerners take the "foot in mouth" attitude about most things in discussions, westerners feel it necessary to voice their opinion even if it is wrong.
I feel that there is a big difference in not being able to support what they say and not wanting to say something that is potenialy wrong is two completely different things. Don't get those two confused

Although that's a good distinction, I don't think 'most' westerners are happy to voice their opinion even if they're not sure they're right. Only westerners I'd categorize as 'loud-mouths' or, more commonly, 'managers'

I'm certainly extremely reticent to speak in a meeting unless I'm 100% sure of my facts. (Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, rather than to open your mouth and prove it...) But I'm not reticent about pointing out (politely) somebody else's misunderstandings... I'm not sure most of my Japanese colleagues are the same in that respect.

 

[FrustratedDave]

Although that's a good distinction, I don't think 'most' westerners are happy to voice their opinion even if they're not sure they're right. Only westerners I'd categorize as 'loud-mouths' or, more commonly, 'managers'

I'm certainly extremely reticent to speak in a meeting unless I'm 100% sure of my facts. (Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, rather than to open your mouth and prove it...) But I'm not reticent about pointing out (politely) somebody else's misunderstandings... I'm not sure most of my Japanese colleagues are the same in that respect.

Very true, however b/c we are comparing here, westerners are far more likely to voice their opinion then a Japanese would if there was a little bit of doubt. I think the wording may inappropriate, I should have said westerners are far more likely to think they are right therefore voice their opinions more often.

 

[Emoni]

Well, keep in mind though, you can voice an opinion in the form of presenting a way to think about something and then tear apart the idea and build from that. Critical thinking skills are required there.

However, if you don't say ANYTHING... then how do you expect to go through a seminar class that requires critical thinking.

 

[pipokun]

I agree with Mars Man that it sounds like a joke to teach the knocking door or other very basic business manners at a junior college, but the main goal of junior colleges here is not to meet the expectation of students want to tranfer to a 4 year school, but just to give them more vocational skills (I highly doubt that the door-knocking is a skill, though...).

I don't think it is fair if you compare the everybody_welcoming_type junior colleges here with something like a boarding school in the UK.

 

[pipokun]

Debate in Japan is like bowling. One person does his thing (speaks) while the others sit quietly and listen. Then, the next person takes over. Most of the time, debate in Japan is not point vs. counterpoint as you might expect from western standpoints.
...

Your case is more foreign language matter than debate itself.
And correct me if I am wrong, the bowling what you call is also a type of debate.

 

[Mars Man]

One thing that seems to be getting left out here, is that critical thinking (thought process) is a mental matter. While it does greatly benefit from a good command of a language, it is not necessarily reflected in how outspoken a person is.

Therefore while the Japanese undergraduate student may not be so outspoken or argumentive in nature, that would not necessarily show that that student lacks critical thinking skills. That would have to be determined through a communicative process that would surely require a stretch of time.

I have had highschool students (studying English under me) who were on their highschool's (non-English) debate team (which teams do seem to be a little scarce here in Japan) so I can say that to some extent (and nothing new here) critical thought process is learned and applied in some settings at some highschools, at least.

I would (again) say it'd be better to work on developing such in 1-6 much more than what is.

Yes, pipokun san, that is correct about the difference between most jr. colleges and four year colleges here in Japan--the jr. college is more often somewhat of a conveyor belt system. Yet, teaching/applying critical thinking skills when it comes to interview questions (such as, Why do you want to work for us?) could stand to be bolstered. . . based on what I have seen, and heard personally and through facultiy meetings.

And again, as per the OP, this is far less a matter of creative thinking (imagination) than it is a process whereby critical thought approach is leveled against an objective.

 

[Glenski]

Jimmy (off topic),
Let's not get into the realm of quantum physics. Facts exist in science.

pipokun,
Yes, my bowling analogy can be seen as Japanese people doing debate in a different style than most westerners. However, it is a far cry from the critical thinking type of debates we are trying to establish here. Most of the "bowling" debates I've seen are just boring diatribes that do not tend to support themselves with ... uh... sorry, Jimmy... facts. And, supporting oneself is a mark of critical thinking, just as tearing down another person's ... uh... facts.... requires the same critical thinking.

 

[gaijinalways]

Sorry all, been busy recently. The last category, math prizes, is a subject I hold dear to my heart. Why? Because I used to tutor in math as well as particpate in math competitions in high school.

Winning these contests doesn't necessarily show critical thinking. I would often think that solving math problems is more pattern recognition and recall of solution methods. Now true, pattern recognition is often involved in critical thinking, as we need to notice when patterns are present to observe trends and then decide on a course of action based on those future possibilities.

But often I got Asian students (including Japanese) who simply had memorized solution methods to math problems. They didn't have to do a lot of critical thinking, mostly decide for example, this is like problem 4# on my list of solutions for algebraic problems.

What I found interesting was when I asked these same students to try to solve these problems in a different way, they couldn't do it. They only knew one solution method. That was the way they had been taught.

So yes, they are fast at recognizing solution methods, but these are based on memorized solution patterns, and of course practiced again and again.
Where critical thinking would be more involved would be with new math problems, and trying to devise ways to solve them.

 

[Emoni]

Disclaimer here before I say anything. I don't know math well at all, never have, probably never will.

However, I'm not sure math is really subject which can show a great deal of critical thinking. Knowing more than one way to solve a problem would show a deeper understanding of the mechanics, but does it really show that Japanese students know less critical thinking?

Heck... if they know one way to solve a problem that is probably better than most Americans... including me.

 

[pipokun]

gaijinalways, what I wanted to say in my #7 post was that Japan showed "not that good/bad" in something practical/unpractical.
The order below just means how practical it is in our daily life.

World Skills Competition
Patent
Paper, not toilet ones, but scientific ones
Nobel Prize
Math-related prizes
Ig Nobel Prize!

I simply think the opinions of Mars Man are just unfair to judge the education from the students who need remedial courses in his junior college.
I don't know what sorts/levels of remedies American community college students in the article below need, but nobody deny the US is the greatest country with millions of prize winners. And I am aware that there are many students in the US.

A Harsh Reality
According to the most recent federal statistics, 42 percent of public community college freshmen take remedial courses.
A Harsh Reality (Published 2007)

*snip
The competitors are not ambitious to be a mathematician in Japan, and the problem may be they want to enroll in a medical school, no matter how good/poor performances they showed in the competition.
But this is not about the critical thinking, but it is just their job choice.

 

[Mars Man]

Of course, pipokun san, we have no need to talk about what's happening in any other education system, really, since in the strictest sense here, we are looking at the Japanese education system only, and testing it to see if we can determine whether it lacks in a certain way--namely, in critical thinking.

The students coming to the jr. college department and the four-year department at our school come from a fair, broad range of high schools (up to just under the upper crust of the top 10%, although) from both in and out of the prefecture. I would yet argue that this will give me a good enough sample space to judge what type and degree of education is general in Japan.

Of course, I have three children here in the Japanese education system, and that, along with my having taught high school and jr. high school students, also gives me a glimpse of something to hold along side the other things, and visualize patterns.

The point is, however, that critical thinking skills are evidently lacking or slack among a material number of students, and the likely cause (and I am arguing a major cause) of that is the lack of sharpening those skills in the earlier grades through not teaching them, and (maybe more so) not applying them nearly enough.

At the university level--even in many, if not most institutions--undergraduate classes in subjects that would benefit from the teaching/application of critical thinking, evidence yet too much of a 'conveyor belt' process of rote memory. (be sure to note the wording here: yet too much)

 

[Emoni]

Of course, pipokun san, we have no need to talk about what's happening in any other education system, really, since in the strictest sense here, we are looking at the Japanese education system only, and testing it to see if we can determine whether it lacks in a certain way--namely, in critical thinking.

Honestly, there is no need to ask people to stay on topic in almost every single post. Moreover, any comparison and information on differences between the use of critical thinking between Japan and America via teaching methods benefits this thread. I have already been surprised by the very warm reception to this thread since I posted it originally and the amount of information everyone has generously given on the subject (including you MarsMan), and anything related to education and critical thinking that would lead to a better understanding Japan's educational problems (formal and informal) is greatly welcome.

Now, somewhat in reference to Pipokun's article which mentioned testing; in Japanese testing, are there critical reading essays given at any point I wonder? Often colleges in the United States REQUIRE that this is taught through a class or a writing test before one can graduate at the university level. While I'm not going to say this is a grand example by comparison to Japan and a writing test in the United States, but this is an intricate part of the University system that I have seen that requires mandatory critical thinking (as well as the writing skills that they are testing). What I am more curious is if any entrance exams at all require or test this thinking.

I have talked to a dozen Japanese student friends of mine about the test and so far I have found that the entrance exams themselves mostly focus on multiple choice answers and very short essays on very specific questions. Analysis and critical thinking, from what I have heard, are entirely absent. Even with the University entrance exams... a place where critical thinking should be mandatory. Moreover, if you place such great importance on these tests you are in some ways stifling critical thinking as well, as anything that is not going to show up on the test, is study time wasted. Those who gain entrance and simply do other activities have now just invested their time better for entrance into the University instead of thinking deeper.

Here is one last question for MarsMan, which you don't have to answer as it is directly personal. With your children in the Japanese education system facing what you have stated you see as a problem, do you feel personally that there are avenues and methods for you to teach your children to think critically and apply that thinking? That is, despite the education system not supporting it. Do you feel your children would in fact have a harder time in the education if you taught them successfully to do so? In what manner?

 

[Glenski]

Tests in class and test for entrance exams tend to be multiple choice just because it is easier to grade them. Math classes, of course, expect you to show your work, but there has been argument on this thread as to whether those questions truly represent critical thinking.

I've seen some of the entrance exams. Students are sometimes expected to analyze graphic or tabular data or to get the gist of a paragraph describing such data. That's about as far as it goes for critical thinking, IMO. But, there is obviously a limit for how to measure it in a classroom, too. You could ask, "How does any other country test it?", but that's not the real point.

Many tests (English, history, whatever) do far worse here in terms of presenting problems to be solved. Lots of times the questions are nearly word for word paraphrases of the answers, so it is pretty easy to find.
Example:
What was the reason Johnny couldn't go to work?
Answer (as written in the paragraph): Johnny couldn't go to work because he was sick.
Students would either copy that verbatim, or look for it as answer A, B, C, or D.
Inferring answers without such giveaways is a sign of critical thinking, and it is very hard to instill in students. Japanese teachers tell me this is difficult even in their classes using Japanese!

 

[Emoni]

"You could ask, "How does any other country test it?", but that's not the real point."

Yes, how the other country tests it isn't the point, but when compared to Japan in regards to critical thinking and how tests in other countries that consider critical thinking as well as how that material could be applied to Japanese education is.

One thing you mentioned about answering those questions verbatim.

One thing I noticed during my classes in Japan is that when questions like that were asked and there was any group assignments or the answers were read out, you could almost always tell the "Westerner's" answers. The same goes for comparing my own answers with the Japanese students, as well as the other students from Asia.

When a question was asked like that, almost 95% of the time the "non-western" students would simply copy the exact paragraph from the sentence above. Those from "western nations," including myself, rarely did this and often paraphrased it or wrote more of a deeper explanation. I often reject the "group" pushing to just copy the sentence from the reading passage to present as an answer on the grounds that it was not truly answering and just copying the question. This is one example I believe falls under critical thinking for sure.

I'm curious Glenski, have you run into this sort of pattern?