Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Difference between the Best in West and East: Comparative Analysis of School-Education systems in Scandinavian & East Asian Countries

Mon, April 15, 3:15 to 4:45pm, Hyatt Regency, Floor: Bay (Level 1), Bayview A/B Foyers

Proposal

This paper seeks to explore and examine the differences between the two of the most acclaimed school-education systems, which are, firstly, the Scandinavian contexts and, lately, the East Asian countries. The comparative analysis is based on The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA 2015) data which captures various student level and school level characteristics along with the learning scores across various countries.
In the latest large-scale PISA assessment data on Mathematics scores, the East Asian countries (which includes Singapore, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Japan, China, South Korea & Vietnam) occupy the top ranks of the chart with an average score of 535 in comparison to Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway & Sweden) whose mean score is at 504.5 units. The two cross-cultural contexts vary on various fronts and multiple levels and yet they are consistently upheld as successful models of education systems in the entire world.
This paper brings forth and highlights the factors that explain and contribute to the difference in the average mathematics scores between the two contexts. It also marks the differences at student level and school level characteristics thus demonstrating the plurality in school-education models thriving for excellence & efficiency over a ‘one-model fit all’ or a universal or standardized model of school education systems. It challenges the homogeneity in current frameworks and the uniform policy interventions that are often replicated globally to enhance learning outcomes. This work seeks to contribute to debates on policy focus by arguing, how school-education systems can be different and diverse (rooted and developed in the own socio-cultural and economic contexts) but also be efficient and best at producing higher learning scores.

Authors