Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A Comparison of Curriculum in the United States and China
1
Abstract
Curriculum is a key issue in many education reforms worldwide. What are the
differences of curriculum based education reforms among nations, and what can we
learn from other countries? This paper provides information on curricula differences
by comparing two specific policies-the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in the
United States, and the Compulsory Curriculum Standards in China. The goals and
requirements of each policy are described and analyzed. The paper explores the
difference in both educational environments as well as how these specific curricula
generated. Additional negative effects of both policies are also discussed. Finally,
some suggestions for how each country can improve its curriculum are given by at the
end of this paper.
Key Words: Curriculum reform, Common Core State Standards, China Compulsory Curriculum Standard, CCSS
2
Introduction
With the advent of the information era, the contribution made by the production,
dissemination, and application of knowledge to society and economic development is
more prominent than any previous time in history. Technologies and large amounts of
information becomes an important force in promoting social progress. Such a
profound social change proposed new requirements in basic education, especially in
the field of basic education curriculum. New requirements of knowledge and skills
which should be gained before entering the labor market urge countries to make
appropriate changes to their curriculum systems. The curricula in China and the
United States were in need of change to face the constantly changing global
environment and local development, especially in past two decades. For more than a
century, the development and serial basic education curriculum reforms have lead the
two countries to different curricular structures and standards.
Today, China's basic education system has some problems, some of the problems
are: education resource inequality (Yun, 2005), young Chinese migrant children (Hu
& Szente, 2010), and difficult and impractical course content. Another problem is as
new ideas in science and technology emerge, the curriculum struggles to reflect this
new knowledge. Furthermore, course evaluation only emphasizes academic
achievement and enrollment rate. Education in China need a transformation of the
basic education curriculum toward cultivating talents with innovative spirit and
practical ability.
In the past fifty years, the main problem of basic education in the United States is
3
students’ lack of basic knowledge and low academic ability (Cobb & Jackson, 2011).
In addition, the quality of education is not highly regarded by the government (Doyle,
1992). New basic education curriculums are supposed to improve the value of
education by strengthening students’ basic knowledge and skills, especially in
mathematics, scientific knowledge, and the reading ability, It is also necessary to
strengthen the federal government’s control of education reform, and help to move
curriculum reform in the right direction.
The United States and China used to have totally different educational systems.
However, recent policies show each country is integrating elements of its counterpart.
The United States has adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), which are
similar to national standards in China. At the same time, the Chinese Minister of
Education desires to add flexibility in traditional education and reduce students’
academic burden in terms of the curriculum. These qualities are more characteristic of
American curriculum and pedagogy. Each country undertakes different policies to
fulfill their particular needs.
The structure of this paper is as follows: in Section two, I will examine the
background of the curriculum reform in the United States and China. In Section three,
I will introduce the formation of the specific curricula. In Section four, I will compare
the reform goals of the two countries. In Section five, I will analyze the differences in
the curriculum requirements. Section six will illustrate some reflections.
Background of Curriculum Reforms in the USA and China
In both China and America, numerous education reforms happened in recent
4
decades. In this section, I will introduce the recent key curriculum reforms happened
in the United States and China. By analyzing the aims, methods and shortages of each
reform, I will introduce the Goals 2000 Act, No Child Left Behind Act and Common
Core State Standards in the United States. And for Chinese educational reforms, I will
draw on the Feudal Imperial Examination System, The Republic of China Period, The
People's Republic of China Period and the recent New Curriculum Standard from
2001.
American Education Reforms
During the past two decades, American education was keeping reforming and
changing with various acts to enhance the global education competitiveness of
American graduates.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act (P.L. 103-227) in 1994
In 1989, President Bush and state governors established National Education
Goals (NEG) aimed to accomplish six specific reformed national education goals
(Goal 1-6 in table 1) by 2000 to help all students in America to enhance their
international competitiveness in future global economic, five among which focus on
improving students’ basic knowledge and skills (Goal 1, 2, 3, 5, 6) (Swanson, 2000).
Table 1
5
The Content of Goals 2000(Swanson, 2000)
Goal No. Content
1 Readiness for School
2 High School Completion
3 Student Achievement and Citizenship
4 Teacher Education and Professional Development
5 Science and Mathematics
6 Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning
7 Safe, Disciplined, and Drug-Free Schools
8 Parental Participation
Signed by President Bill Clinton on March 31, 1994, the Goals 2000 Act aimed to
help America create a friendly education environment where all students could
maximize their potentials (Doyle, 1992). Besides the National Education Goal
mentioned above, two additional goals (Teacher Education and Professional
Development and Parental Participation) are added.
Goals 2000 Act not only required new curriculum, but also asked for innovative
teaching methods and requirements from other aspects of the society. The new
requirements address creating drug-free schools, increasing the number of qualified
math and science teachers, and provide professional development to teachers.
However, the act was not smooth. None of the eight goals came true in
2000(Pederson, 2007). Also none exact, but vague, requirements or standards of
curricula are aroused in the GOALS 2000: EDUCATE AMERICA ACT. The failure
of this act was not only owing to the extreme high goals without carefully considering
6
actual situations, but also because of the lack of clear standards for measure and
punishment. It was finally replaced by No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act.
No Child Left Behind Act (H.R. 1)
Proposed by President George W. Bush on January 23, 2001 and signed into law
on January 8, 2002, No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was designed to provide
unbiased and high qualified education to all students in America. According to this
bill, schools need to pass annual tests and have to judge the improvement of every
individual student from grade 3 to grade 8 made in a recent year.
From the perspective of curriculum, the NCLB Act mainly focuses on the
promotion of students’ reading and mathematics skills (Cawelti, 2006). A lot of
schemes and methods are given to ensure the effectiveness of this act. For example,
the state of Pennsylvania proposed tying the students’ scores to the salary of teachers.
For existing teachers, they also have to meet the requirement which used to judge new
teachers- with fully certified bachelor’s degree and pass several tests. Students should
pass the standardized test to show that they have received minimum required skills.
Some statistic results showed that such NCLB act improve students’ academic
performance. According to Fuller, Gesicki, Kang and Wright’s report (2006), Reading
and math scores for black and Hispanic nine-year-olds reached an all-time high.
Additionally, America's nine-year-olds posted the best scores in reading (since 1971)
and math (since 1973) in the history (Fuller, Gesicki, Kang and Wright 2006).
America's 13-year-olds earned the highest math scores the test ever recorded (Fuller,
Gesicki, Kang and Wright 2006). Nevertheless, critics about standardized test would
7
arouse some problems, such as “teaching to the test” and unfairness for non-English-
language immersion schools. The judge standard in the bill disregards most variables,
such as local economic standard, cultural diversity and parents’ education
background. In order to leave more time and resources for learning mathematics and
English and pass the standardized test smoothly, since 2007, almost 71% of schools
abridged instruction time in other subjects such as arts, history, language and
music(Fuller, Gesicki, Kang, & Wright, 2006). Most importantly, state governments
would reduce the difficulty and lower the requirement about some vital but hard
contents. NCLB act have given American school an “a mile wide and an inch deep”
status (Pederson, 2007). This means that American schools teach knowledge in a large
number of subjects; however, the depth of knowledge is really insufficient to ensure
their future development. And I will provide further discussion and information about
the “a mile wide and an inch deep” the in section five.
The Common Core State Standards Initiative
In order give a common standard of K-12 mathematics and literacy for every
state, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) was published in June 2010 with the
collaboration of 48 states. This initiative contains two standards- the English
Language Arts standards and the Mathematics standards. Except Texas, Virginia,
Alaska and Nebraska, 45of the 50 states in the US have adopted the initiative and
Minnesota only accepted the English Language Arts standards. English Language Arts
& Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects contains
specific detail requirements about reading, listening, speaking and writing.
8
Different from the totally standardized NCLB standard, CCSS English Language
Arts standards has supplemental instructions, for instance, Application to Students
with Disabilities and Application of Common Core State Standards for English
Language Learners. These instructions provide diverse standard for special groups.
This improvement is helpful for students with various backgrounds to improve
academic performance. In brief, CCSS is designed to provide fair, competitive and
coherent curriculum standard for students in a variety of states. I will discuss the
CCSS in more detail in the following sections of my paper.
Figure 1.The mechanism of CCSS (Bradly, 2012)
Figure 1 shows the basic mechanism of CCSS. There are three main steps during
the instructional guidance and improvement process, and all these steps focus on a
core learning trajectories. The classroom assessment would provide data to state
education departments to make specific standard for various group of students and
help teachers and schools accomplish the learning trajectories in a more smooth and
9
easily-accepted way. After the publishing of new standard, the instructional practices
process would do high stakes assessment during practicing, and this assessment also
offers data to standard making process. Throughout this feedback process, the whole
education system could slowly reach equilibrium to better carry through learning
trajectories.
In summary, previous American curricula reforms happened in past two decades
aimed at increasing higher standards and centralized education system to better fulfill
the need of powerful position of the United States. However, the outcome is not
impressive. And CCSS was published to relieve such long-term education dilemma.
China Education Reform
Feudal Imperial Examination System (202 B.C.-1911A.D.)
The Chinese education system-feudal imperial examination system- seldom
changed, from Han Dynasty (202 B.C.) to the end of Qing Dynasty (1911 A.D.). Even
tens of dynasties and about two thousand years has passed, the system was widely
accepted by a range of emperors for the sake of the large importance of the stability of
government and society. For the feudal imperial examination system, liberal art
subjects, such as literature, art and history were necessary for an individual’s official
career and reputation (Franke, 1960). In addition, Etiquette was also highlighted.
However, science and technology were disregarded. As the advancement of military
thought and large population, China could maintain flourish and leading position
during the cold weapon era. Such successes strengthen Chinese governors’
10
confirmation of their social system, including the education system. A wide social
agreement- “To be a scholar is to be the top of society”, some strange phenomena
happened: students would spend decades, even all their life to pass the examination
(Song, 2005). The annually examination was only referred to some classic texts, and
students spent all their life to recite every word; the topic of examination seldom
changed (Haifeng, 1999).
The Republic of China Period（1912-1949）Chinese imperial examination system had dominated China education system for
two thousand years until the first modern university in China, Tianjin University, was
built in 1895. Since Qing Dynasty still governed China, education was combined with
Chinese traditional education and modern technology ideas. New Culture Movement
in 1919 totally overturned traditional out of date and stubborn feudalism culture.
Confucian classics were never the only measurement and standard to evaluate talents.
A series of course were imported, such as music, manual training and agriculture
(Zhu, 2007). Additionally, modern Chinese replaced the classical Chinese in
textbooks. This improvement basically enhanced the efficiency of the total education
system. Before that, teachers need to spend approximate four fifths of the course to
explain the obscure language in the textbooks, which had little practical significance.
Finally, the politics became another strengthened part. Unlike traditional students
hundreds of years ago, who are assessed as “Successful scholars do not need to learn
anything other than books”, students were required to know about the political trends
and understand about the key thoughts, such as the Three People’s Principles (Franke,
11
1960). As a consequence, such development altered Chinese education to culture
updated and practical talents.
The People's Republic of China Period (PRC) (1949- present)
After the founding of new China on October 1, 1949, Chinese education system
copied Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) education system just as other
aspects of the whole country(Davey, Lian & Higgins, 2007), such as industry, military
and politics. Based on China 9-Year Compulsory Education strategy, children of
school age are required to receive 9 years’ free education (six years’ primary school
and three years’ junior school). The curricula of elementary school and middle school
(including both junior school and senior school) changed every four years by Minister
of Education (MOE).
1978 is a crucial year in modern Chinese history. The class struggle ended and
new generation of governors made a significant decision-the open up policy. As
reforms happened in every aspect of the history, curricula and teaching methods were
restructured, and some more advanced ideas also brought in. About 70% of
elementary and middle school would use the text books published by People’s
Education Press (Huang, 2004). From 1949, China had seven major curricula
reformats, as concluded in the table 2.
Table 2
Chinese former seven major curriculum revolutions, from 1949 to 2000(Zhong, 2006)
Times Year Content
1 1949-1952 Publish the Primary School Teaching Plan.
2 1953-1957 Income labor skill courses and enhance operation ability of students.
12
3 1958-1965 Shorten the period of schooling and increase the time on labor work.
4 1966-1976 The Cultural Revolution happened. Students were required to go to
factories and country to do labor work.
5 1977-1985 Publish the unified test book and recover from the Cultural
Revolution
6 1986-1991 Increase the teaching hours on basic subjects and schools should
leave more time for students to do outdoor exercise
7 1992-2000 Highlight the moral education
New Curriculum Standard from 2001
The eighth curriculum reform distinguishes from other seven times as it is
centered on students’ individual character development. Minister of Education tried to
build the new basic education standard for the 21th century. “Three level of
management” policy was strengthened, and local governments have more right to
make curriculum plan with local needs and situation. Schools are required to pay
more attention on moral education. High-tech teaching tools, such as computer and
media, were encouraged to apply during education (Zhong et al. 2001). Instead of
exam-oriented education, students’ personality and practical activity are also required
in addition to the knowledge. There are three main transformation-from
“centralization” to “decentralization” in curriculum policy, from “scientific discipline-
centered curriculum” to “society construction-centered curriculum” in curriculum
paradigm, and from “transmission-centered teaching” to “inquiry-centered teaching”
in teaching paradigm” (Zhong, 2006, pp. 373-374). More specific discussions and
13
comparisons of the new curriculum standards will be made in following sections.
The Formation of the Specific Curricula
In this paragraph, I would discuss about the formation of the different curricula in
the USA and China, from the political, economic, and social climate perspectives.
Politics
In the United States, state governments have strong right and power to make rules
or law for the specific state (Kirst & Wirt, 2009). However, the legislative procedure
in China is worked out by the People’s Congress and its Standing Committee.
Provincial governments have to obey the decision made by the top segments. All
provincial and local education systems are regulated or reformed based on the bills
from MOE (Oksenberg, 2001). Subsidiaries have no rights or power to make local
laws without the permission of center government. Politics difference could explain
the development of state-varied standardized examinations and uniform national
examinations.
Population Stress
China has the largest population all over the world; however, its economic is not
well developed. Higher education not only means better employability, but also
represents superior learning capacities in future career. Still 16.4% people with
bachelor degree could not be employed in China (Zhang, 2013). Thus, students are
intensely focused on higher degrees. Higher incomes give people better social status,
as well as purchasing power to satisfy their lusts.
However, the enrollment rate is not sufficient for all students. Table 3, Figure 1
14
and Figure 2 are the evidences. China has the compulsory 9-year education policy (six
years in primary school and three years in junior school). Thus the enrollment rate in
primary school and junior school are really impressive- more than 95%. For primary
schools, the number of existed positions is large then the actual school age population,
which produces a gross enrollment rate larger than 100%. However, the high school
enrollment rate is tremendous reduced to 52.7%, which means the educational
resource is too limited for all students. Therefore, students have to study really hard to
obtain these previous opportunities.
Table 3
The status quo of China education (Yang, 2005)
Schools Teaching Staff Students
Gross
Enrollment
Rate
Higher education 2273 1,050,164 20,949,645 21%
Upper Secondary 31561 2,060,383 39,900,939 52.70%
Lower Secondary 62486 3,471,839 62,149,442 95%
Primary
Education36213 5,592,453 108,640,655 106.40%
Pre-schooling ed. 124404 721,609 21,790,290 41.40%
15
Figure 1.Gross Enrollment Rate of various education degrees in China (Yang, 2005)
Figure 2.Secondary School Enrollment All Genders, 2005-2010, Percent (Population
Reference Bureau 2010)
Even the enrollment rate increase fast with the increasing educational financial
16
support, the supply could not fulfill such as large population base.
Thus, Chinese students have to study harder to get better academic performance.
Teachers are also well praised and rewarded, if their students receive remarkable
scores in the examinations. Then, teachers all want their students could have higher
scores in examinations. So did the students’ parents. This snowball effects make
Chinese students’ burden and pressure increase significantly. Their school hour are
also be lengthened. The courses which weight more in the examinations would take
more school hours.
While for the USA, people could easily get jobs, even job market is increasing
competitive than before, since less population and strong economic strength offer
relative sufficient positions in the job market. The data from Bureau of Labor
Statistics (2013) show that the unemployment rate in the US is about 4% for people
with bachelor degree, 8% for people with high school diploma, and about 12% for
people with education less than a high school diploma. Thus, Chinese students are
more fevered about higher degree, and this cause the growing academic burden due to
academic performance is the merely measurement for higher education.
Social Economics
Even Chinese people finally realize that technology and science are also vital to
the growth of an country in the recent 20th century, such strongly fixed sense of
superiority promote increasing number of students to become the slave of Exam-
oriented education(Franke, 1960). Such examination is the most effective and
affordable way for the one of the most poor and populous countries to screen talents
17
(Davey, Lian & Higgins, 2007). In another hand, it kills the creativity and innovation
of Chinese students, and makes some of them become study machine. Engineers
could have more chance to be employed, earn higher and stable salary. However, the
students with degrees in arts, literature and laws may face unemployment when they
enter the society. Thus, Chinese students and parents would like to choose science
based subject as future career. With more learners, the difficulty and the time on these
subjects (mathematics, physics and chemistry) granularly increase to fulfill such need
of screening talents (Davey, Lian & Higgins, 2007).
In the United States, however, jobs in many aspects could be well-paid and have
better working environments, as well as social statuses. Medical science values
experience, architecture needs fantasized ideas and arts skills, and law science
emphasizes on writing skills and expression capacities. Engineers only earn averages
wage with relative harder work (Autor, 2010). Additionally, American traditional
industry were keeping moving the labor-intensive industries to less developed
countries, such as Vietnam due to the advantage of low labor costs. And then the need
of engineers are reduces gradually after decades’ development. Absolutely, the
passion and will for learning mathematics and science would lessen. Class hours on
them would be cut.
In conclusion, various political, cultural and economic factors make the relative
different curriculum system between the USA and China.
The Goals of the CCSS and China’s 2001 Curriculum Reform
18
It is occasional and interesting to find that the USA and China are reforming
their specific curricula toward each other, even no official evidence or proofs show
that the United States and China make any agreement or corporation in education
reforms. In order to compare the curriculum reforms movements in the United States
and China, I will discuss the goals of the most recent curricula in each country. I will
focus on three areas: the power transfer during the curriculum process, the breadth
and depth of the curriculum, and the connection between the curriculum and
postsecondary education.
Similarities
While curriculum reform in the US and China has been quite different, then it is
important to note that there are some similarities. Both in the United States and China,
Curriculum reform on each subject stressed that students should adapt to the basic
learning skills and the methods to learn, especially the cultivation of students'
employability and values. Reforms should also focus on attitude change, moral
qualities, aspects of health education and the cultivation of aesthetic taste
requirements, and they should be defined from a variety of disciplines. The disciplines
should focus on students 'learning procedure to promote students' self-learning,
inquiry-based learning and cooperative learning abilities. Students should be
encouraged to participate in the teaching, answering questions from different angles,
and strive to explore solutions to the problem a variety of ways while allowing them
to participate in a variety of social practice recommendations. The Basic Education
Reform Outline necessitates that students should be equipped with healthy bodies and
19
good psychological qualities while establishing a good way of living, and forming the
correct values along with learning basic knowledge and skills (Swanson Beverly,
1991).
Role of the Central Government: Power Concentration VS. Power Devolution
Common Core State Standard
America is famous for its checks and balances, which gives local state systems
more power to make laws and rule for their specific needs. This is also a truth for
education system. The federal governments make the national guidance and standard
and local government would revise them to adjust local residents based on local
environment and situation (Kirst & Wirt, 2009). Since every state in America has
relative independent education system, students in various states would have different
curricula and knowledge gained during their learning experiment would also
tremendously dissimilar. Such disunity of knowledge structure may cause some
problematic issues when students firstly enter universities, and the problems-lower
academic requirement and knowledge variety from states- may be enlarged with
years’ studying (Fuller, Gesicki, Kang and Wright’s report, 2006). Common Core
State Standards aim to make relatively uniformed curriculum standards for all
American K-12 students to help them gain enough knowledge and skills when
entering the university.
This negative situation is especially serious, after the No Child Left behind Act
Bill was signed. To avoid the punishment of inability to reach the standard, most
20
states lower their state standard. For example, mathematics became wide but easy. In
another word, teachers teach broader range of topics and the requirement of each topic
is becoming lower. Such reflections reduce the authority and practical meaning of this
bill. Survey conducted by Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in
2006 showed that the science and mathematics attainments are under the average level
of OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation). Based on curriculum standard
in a variety of countries, such as Finland, China, Japan and Belgium, Common Core
State Standards is a new national standard for all accepted state to form a unique
curricula standard.
Compulsory Curriculum Standard
However, China adopted the opposite approach after the eighth curriculum
reform in 2001. Instead of national unified curriculum standard and textbooks, three-
level curriculum management system (nation, province, and local government) was
taken. Local government could make their specialized requirement and standard for
schools located in their scope of jurisdiction. Since China has a very unbalance
economic development and a range of different local cultures, to focus all provinces
to obey the national standard could be unhelpful to reach the goal-build China as one
most of powerful country in the world. Issues, such as lack of individual development
of Chinese students and too heavy academic burdens, are concerned by the public
with the strengthening of open-up policy. Chinese people and education departments
now realize China’s education is unsuitable for Chinese students’ future development
and even the whole country. Thus, center government plans to give local governments
21
more power to design reasonable curricula for students resided in different areas. New
standard aim to cultivate more talents in various realms to enhance the national
competitiveness as a whole.
For example, Chinese university entrance examination has become a combination
of national tests and provincial tests. Some courses, such as mathematics, Chinese and
foreign languages, would be national uniform propositioned-all students need to take
these examinations wherever they participant the examination. But other courses,
including physics, chemistry, biology, history and politics, are tested with the
questions made by their specific province. Such strategy gives provinces increasing
power to make their own teaching guidance (Yang, 2005).
Brief Summary
Recent curriculum reformats in the USA and China reflection the power transfer
between the local governments and center government. In America, federal
government need more power to better control the whole country and execute plans.
Nevertheless, China is delegating power to local government to enhance the total
competitiveness and efficiency of the whole nation.
Curriculum Difficulty: Mile Wide And an Inch Deep VS. Repeated & Difficult
Study
In this part, I will compare the depth and breadth of knowledge in the United
State s and China basic education, based on the analysis about mathematics standards
in both countries. In the United States, the old curriculum was described as “a mile
wide and in inch deep,” while the curriculum in China consisted of repetitive and
22
difficult study.
Common Core State Standard
The Michigan State Standards provide a helpful case study in how standards
changed after the introduction of the CCSS. The comparison table is shown in
Appendix I. Michigan Department of Education changed their state curriculum
standard after the adoption of CCSS. By collecting the data from website of Michigan
State Government (shown as Table 3), some characteristics of the CCSS could be
concluded. It is easy to find that many subjects were removed from original curricula.
Before the CCSS, Michigan state standards emphasized on a wide a range of
knowledge. However, after the CCSS, Michigan state standards, large amounts of
knowledge and courses are removed and moved to other grades. For example,
“Create, describe, and extend simple geometric patterns; Compare length and weight
of objects” moves to Grade 1 from Grade K. “Draw and identify lines and angles, and
classify shapes by properties of their lines and angles” moves to Grade 4 from Grade
2, also “solve problems involving multiplication and division” moves to Grade 3 from
Grade 2. Topics, such as proportional relationships, linear equations and radicals and
integer exponents are all moved from Grade to Grade 8, based on new CCSS. And
large amounts of topics were moved out from the previous state curriculum to make
students spend more time on remained topics (Michigan Department of Education,
n.d.) . More details could be found in the Appendix I. Such movements make the
student focus on fewer amounts of topics, but the difficulty would increase.
Such changes present the abandon of “a mile wide and an inch deep” curriculum
23
for K12 students. Students need to study fewer contents, but the difficulty should be
enhanced. With the new CCSS, American students could gain better mathematics
attainment for their future academic development and professional career. Such
polities make the federal government has greater power than before. In contrast, the
developers of the CCSSM appear to consistently focus on the different aspects of
central or core mathematical ideas (Wu, 2011).
Chinese Compulsory Curriculum Standard
By comparing about data searched from China Ministry of Education (n.d.),
Appendix II is made to compare the difficulty of the curriculum between China and
the USA. From the table in Appendix II, we could find that Chinese students have to
learn more mathematics than American students. For example, Differential equations
are university-level course in America. Chinese students would have to learn them in
high school. American students also do not need to proof or calculate complex three
dimensional geometer questions; however, Chinese students need to finish
complicated questions. When comparing about the content in textbooks, we could
find out that the content of Grade 10 textbook in China is harder than American Grade
12 (China Ministry of Education, n.d.) .
Additionally, Chinese students would spend third year of their junior and senior
year to review and prepare for the higher degree entrance examination. During these
years, students would do workbooks again and again to strengthen the knowledge in
their mind. Some students would have to keep studying for years if they did not have
good scores in the paper based annual examination.
24
Brief Summary
When comparing about the standard of mathematics during basic education,
Chinese curriculum really has more difficult standards than the United States, but
Chinese government is trying to lessen the difficulty. However, American education
departments and schools has realize such dilemma, increasing difficulty and
decreasing of the curriculum breadth is made by CCSS.
University Selection Process: Independent Application
VS. Unified Examination
The goal of education is to help students gain acceptance to colleges and
universities. Thus, the educational system, including education departments, schools
and teachers, would make exact curricula and taught in specific ways to help students
get admission from higher education institutes. And this is the one important reason of
the formation of different curricula.
American University Admission System
In American, university admission offices would evaluate students with a
combination of consideration in a series of items:
1. National Standardized Test hold by Education Testing Service (ETS), such as SAT
and GRE;
2. Previous Academic Performance, such as GPA and outcomes in various aspects
(say science, competition, sport and art) in high schools;
3. References which means the evaluation of applicants from teachers;
4. Personal Statement, which shows the motivation about pursuing higher education,
25
as well as the writing skill of one particular applicant.
These four items (N.A., 2013) ensure the admission officers could hold an overall
perspective toward an applicant. Thus, American students would keep studying to
maintain a good GPA in long-term studying. Unconsciously, they could gain
knowledge and try to practice them.
Chinese University Entrance Examination
Chinese students have to pass two or three national annual examination. The
performance in the examination would definitely determine their future career and all
their life happiness. Even Chinese student have the same 12 year elementary
education; they would spend the last year in the junior school and high school to
review all the knowledge gained before again and again to increase the scores in the
final fate examination (Davey, Lian & Higgins, 2007). And universities could only
admit students based on the scores. Such judgment seems unfair when disregarding
their potentials in other aspects.
Chinese MOE recently allowed some national key universities to select a small
number of talents besides university entrance examination. This opportunity drives
Chinese students crazy about in national mathematics, physics and chemistry tests,
questions of which are even difficult for a master student to accomplish. Therefore,
Chinese students concentrate on the final scores of examinations, which are vital to
their future. Rather than the process, Chinese students, parents and teachers would
focus on the final results. Though they also had stronger fundament of basic
education, this attitude is unhealthy for their mental development without the
26
supposed to be encouraged struggles before final success.
Brief Summary
American university all have their own qualification to select talents who are fit
to their education purpose. American university entrance process is more
comprehensive than China’s. To some degree, Chinese curriculum are too condensed-
junior and senior students need to learn everything within two years which should be
finished in three years. However, American university selection process is too
subjective. Many of the supporting documents might be forged. These different
college entrance standard make the students and teachers pay attention toward diverse
courses. Finally, different curriculum standards and arrangements are made by the
education departments and schools in these two countries.
The Requirements of the CCSS and China’s 2001 Curriculum
Reform
Because the United States and China are pursuing different goals in their
curriculum reforms, the curricula in both countries are quite different. In this section, I
will discuss the Components of each country’s curricula; the degree of difficulty of
each country’s curricula; and how the curriculum emphasizes individual or group
learning.
Curriculum Components
American Curriculum Structure
By comparing the data collected from websites and journals, differences in the
curriculum structure in the USA (take Chicago, Florida, Washington and Arizona as
27
example) and China would be detected. First of all, different states in America have
different emphasis on different courses. When attentions are paid on native language-
English, different states have the similar credits requirement about it, which occupied
ranging from 15.8% to 18.2% of all the required credits for successful graduation.
Chinese Curriculum Structure
In China, 16%-20% school hours are paid on science subjects, and only 4.3%
time is paid on social science. In contract, American schools are care about social
science and the percentage of science is lower than Chinese. Chinese education
system arrange more time for PE, since students do not have sufficient disposable
time for physical exercises. Additionally, Chinese have the special moral education
lessons, about 7-9% in the curriculum. From Table 5, we could find out that with the
adoption of CCSS, Arizona gradually increase the required credits of math from 2011
to 2013. Comparing with USA, Chinese schools do not provide selective courses for
students. All courses are arranged at the beginning of semesters.
Table 4
High School Graduation Requirements in the USA and China (Florida Department of
Education, 2011; Zhou, Zhu, You, Wang, Gao & Zhao, 2007; Arizona Department of
Education, 2011; Chicago Public School, 2012)
The USA China
Chicago Florida Washington Arizona China
ITEMS Credits Percent
age
Credit
s
Percentag
e
Credit
s
Percentag
e
Credit
s
Percentag
e
Percentag
e
English/Chinese 4 16.7% 4 16.7% 3 15.8% 4 18.2% 20-22%
Mathematics 3 12.5% 4 16.7% 2 10.5% 4 18.2% 13-15%
Science 3 12.5% 3 12.5% 2 10.5% 3 13.6% 16-20%
28
Social Science 3 12.5% 3 12.5% 2.5 13.2% 3 13.6% 4.3%
World Language 2 8.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6-8%
Fine Arts 2 8.3% 1 4.2% 1 5.3% 1 4.5% 9-11%
Physical
Education
2 8.3% 1 4.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10-11%
Health and fitness 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 10.5% 0 0.0% 0.0%
Career Education 2 8.3% 0 0.0% 1 5.3% 0 0.0% 0.0%
Electives 3 12.5% 8 33.3% 5.5 28.9% 7 31.8% 0.0%
Moral Character
Building
0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7-9%
Total 24 24 19 20
Table 5
High School Graduation Requirements in Arizona from 2011 to 2013(Arizona
Department of Education, 2011)
Year 2011 2012 2013ITEMS Credits Percentag
eCredits Percentag
eCredits Percentag
eEnglish/Chinese 4 20.0% 4 20.0% 4 18.2%
Mathematics 2 10.0% 3 15.0% 4 18.2%Science 2 10.0% 2 10.0% 3 13.6%
Social Science 2.5 12.5% 3 15.0% 3 13.6%Fine Arts 1 5.0% 1 5.0% 1 4.5%Electives 8.5 42.5% 7 35.0% 7 31.8%
Total 20 20 22Brief Summary
American schools are care about social science and the percentage of science
courses is lower than Chinese. Different states have altered their curriculum
components to better execute the CCSS. Comparing with USA, Chinese schools do
not provide selective courses for students. All courses are arranged at the beginning of
semesters.
School Hours and Academic Burden: Tired vs. Exhausted
American School Hours
By comparing the school hours in the USA and China, we could find out that
29
Chinese students would go to school earlier and go home later. American elementary
school students and high school students have similar daily school hours; however,
Chinese high school students would have to stay at school for about 14 hours every
day.
Figure 3.School hours in the USA and China (U.S. Department of Education, 2004;
Zhang ,2013)
Chinese School Hours
Chinese students’ academic burden would be further strengthened, when
considering about the average school days. However, longer school hours also explain
Chinese students’ better academic performance. American students seem to spend less
time in school and more time in Extracurricular Activities, such as music and sports.
30
Figure 3. Average Length of School Year in Days and School Day in Hours in USA
and China(Beijing) for High School Students(U.S. Department of Education, 2004;
Yang & Wu, 2003)
Table 6 and Figure 3 present that Chinese students’ school hours before and after
the eighth curriculum reform were slightly reduced, but only a little. Chinese students
still have really heavy academic pressure. Without sufficient time left for individual
development, just like American students, Chinese students’ creativity and innovative
thinking capacities would be weaken.
Table 6
Class hours of Chinese student (Yang & Wu, 2003)
Total Weekly Class Hours
(1-9 grades’ total )
Annual School Attendance
Days(days)
Primary Junior
New Curriculum 264 195 200
31
Previous Curriculum 277 200 205
Figure 7.Class hours of Chinese student of the new curriculum and previous
curriculum (Yang & Wu, 2003)
Brief Summary
To sum up, Chinese students have heavy academic burden due to the higher class
hours which are decided by curriculum.
Class Structure: Cooperation or Individual thinking-
Group Discussion in American Classes
In America, students would have more flexible time for individual interest
growth. Students may make friends with anyone; say in elective courses and chorus.
Group discussions are common and students would like to express themselves. And
the final scores are not decided merely with the final examinations. Students have
chances to select courses that they like and the curricula are flexible.
32
Chinese Students’ Group Consciousness and Individual Thinking
In China, students from kindergarten to university are assigned into different
classes, and labeled Class Number. The small group (about 50 students) would be
unchanged until they graduation from that school. All courses, activities and rewards
are based on class level. Especially considering the relative longer class hours,
Chinese students are indoctrinated teamwork spirit – nothing for an individual would
be of larger importance than the group. Since this sort of group consciousness could
reduce the governing cost and difficulty, as well as it is also the core value of the
Chinese red army, who win the war in 1940s and Chinese government (Franke 1960).
Notwithstanding, group assignment or group discussion are rare in Chinese courses.
The measurement of academic are only relied on individual paper based tests.
Brief Summary
It is easy to find that Chinese would have greater individual learning capacity, but
American students would do better with a group. Even the corporation spirit is
emphasized by the education system; the tough collection of students in Chinese
schools would to some extent be negative to their growth. Problems are also happened
in the USA. American students may form laziness that they could depend on their
team members. Good students will be active thinker, who explore and express their
views. However, other students become the audience. They would often not
independent think and have the opportunity to obtain information directly from the
good students. This thought would harm the productivity of the whole group. This
phenomenon results in fewer benefits.
33
Conclusion
Curriculum reform of basic education has been spectacular among both the
United State and China in the past 20 years. The reasons of curriculum reforms should
be in consideration of political reforms and the needed employability of employers for
the sake of effectiveness and benefits to the companies. On the direction of the value
of the educational objectives, both countries stressed that the basis of education
should be committed to improve students’ mastering of basic knowledge and skills,
emphasizing values and mental attitude, morale and spirit development. Curriculum
reforms help each country to provide better high-quality education for their civilians
to adopt recent requirement from domestic demand and global circumstances.
Due to the different educational backgrounds in the United States and China, they
have some differences in the reforms of the curriculum objectives. As comparing the
differences between Common Core Math Standards and the Compulsory Math
Standards, math education in China is changing into a way that focuses more on
quality-oriented education just like United States, which makes students apply what
they learnt into their social life. However, math education is U.S. is leaning to basics.
American students are required to intensify their basic skills in math such as
calculations, algebra and geometries, which is really a weakness for American
students when comparing with Chinese students.
It is interesting to find that the USA and China are reforming their specific
curricula toward each other, even no official evidence or proofs show that the United
34
States and China make any agreement or corporation in education reforms. From the
perspective of government, American is trying to apply standardized test for students
to measure and ensure that all students could receive reasonable education for their
future careers. And Chinese curriculum reform transfer power to local governments to
ensure the diversity of education. American schools want their students learn more
than their parents decades ago. However, Chinese MOE attempts to leave students
have more leisure time for students’ individuality growth. The countries curriculum
standards are driven by the needs of the application of curriculum. Some suggestions,
such as increasing amounts of financial investment on education and corporation from
every aspect of the society, could be made based on the above analysis and present
national needs. By comparing the curriculum reforms in the two countries, the
governors and educators could better understand the difference and the reasons of
such varieties, from which the future reforms could benefit from. At least, either of
them would avoid sinking into same dilemmas or troubles that the other country once
had to face. In addition to this, more financial support and attentions from every
aspects of society is need for provide better education circumstance.
Reflection and Suggestions
Increasing Funding on Basic Education and Balance the Education Resource
This is a crucial issue in both China and the United States. Finance that American
spends on education occupies about 6%-8% of its GDP, while it is only 4% for China.
Thus, Chinese government should provide more financial support for its education ro
balance the resource distribution. For instance, Schools in remote areas do not have
35
enough money to build facilities and hire excellent teachers for their students. Even
the standardized test is fair at the first slight; such imbalance of education fund and
resource could to some degree cause biases in other ways. With more public financial
support, students could enjoy better education and contribute more value to the
society after their growth up.
The Cooperation of Schools, Parents and Society
Regardless of all kinds of policies, students are living in circumstances which are
made up with a series complex components and variables. Study is not the only part
of students’ life. They also need participate in social activities, undertake social
responsibility and develop mental matureness. Only with the combined attention from
all part of the society could the students smoothly enhance academic level.
To sum up, both countries need to balance their fund and resources in education
system to provide an unbiased education environment. Additionally, attentions from
parents, schools and the society are need as a whole.
36
Bibliography
Arizona Department of Education,(2011) from:
http://www.azed.gov/state-board-education/high-school-graduation-requirements/
Autor, D. (2010). The polarization of job opportunities in the US labor market:
Implications for employment and earnings. Center for American Progress and
The Hamilton Project.
Bradly M.(2012). Eight Problems with Common Core Standards. The Washington
Post. Aug 21, 2012
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013). Employment status of the civilian population 25
years and over by educational attainment, 2013, from:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm
Cawelti, G. (2006). The side effects of NCLB. Educational Leadership, 64(3), 64.
Chicago Public School, 2012, from:
http://www.cps.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments/PromotionPolicy/
HSGraduationReq_Englis
37
Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2011). Assessing the quality of the common core state
standards for mathematics. Educational Researcher, 40(4), 183-185.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for
mathematics. Retrieved September, 15, 2010.
Davey, G., De Lian, C., & Higgins, L. (2007). The university entrance examination
system in China. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(4), 385-396.
Derrick M., Impact of the common core standards. About.com Guide.
http://teaching.about.com/od/assess/a/Common-Core-Standards.htm
Doyle, C. S. (1992). Outcome Measures for Information Literacy within the National
Education Goals of 1990. Final Report to National Forum on Information
Literacy. Summary of Findings.
Florida Department of Education,2011. Florida’s Guide to Public high School
Graduation. http://www.fldoe.org/bii/studentpro/pdf/1112HS-Brochure.pdf
Franke, W. (1960). The reform and abolition of the traditional Chinese examination
system (Vol. 10). Harvard Univ Asia Center.
38
Fuller, B., Gesicki, K., Kang, E., & Wright, J. (2006). Is the No Child Left Behind Act
Working? The Reliability of How States Track Achievement. Working Paper 06-
1. Policy Analysis for California Education, PACE.
Gao X., Evaluation of the compulsory curriculum standards and its problems.
http://wenku.baidu.com/view/201744fff705cc17552709c3.html.
Haifeng, L. (1999). The Study of Keju, the Chinese Imperial Examination System, in
the 20 th Century [J]. JOURNAL OF XIAMEN UNIVERSITY, 3, 005.
Hu, B. Y., & Szente, J. (2010). Education of young Chinese migrant children: Challenges and prospects. Early childhood education journal, 37(6), 477-482.
Huang, F. (2004). Curriculum reform in contemporary China: seven goals and six
strategies. Journal of curriculum Studies, 36(1), 101-115.
Kirst, M. W., & Wirt, F. M. (2009). The political dynamics of American education.
Richmond, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
Kober Nancy & Rentner S. Diane. Common Core State Standards: States’ Progress
and Challenges in School Districts’ Implementation .Center on Education Policy,
Washington, D.C.
Michigan Department of Education, n.d. Michigan Content Expectations / Common
39
Core State Standards Crosswalks. from:
http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7-140-6530_30334_51042-232021--,00.html
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (2011). Compulsory
Curriculum Standards.
N.A. (2013). Application Process, from:
http://www.internationalstudent.com/study_usa/application-process/
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State
School Officers (2010). Common Core State Standards. National Governors
Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers,
Washington D.C.
National Research Council. (2004). On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging
the quality of K–12 mathematics evaluations. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press.
Oksenberg, M. (2001). China's political system: challenges of the twenty-first
century. The China Journal, (45), 21-35.
Pederson, P. (2007). What Is Measured Is Treasured: The Impact of the No Child Left
Behind Act on Nonassessed Subjects. Clearing House, 80(6), 287–291. Retrieved
40
from Education Research Complete database
PISA 2006:Science Competencies for Tomorrow's World. Paris: OECD Publications
Population Reference Bureau (2010). Secondary School Enrollment, Gross, by
Gender, 2010 from:
http://www.prb.org/DataFinder/Topic/Rankings.aspx?ind=246&loc=404,312
Porter, A., McMaken, J., Hwang, J., & Yang, R. (2011). Assessing the Common Core
Standards Opportunities for Improving Measures of Instruction.Educational
Researcher, 40(4), 186-188.
Song J.Y. (2005). The impact of implementation of the compulsory curriculum
standards, 2011 from:
http://www.yb2hs.com.cn/Item.aspx?id=788.
State of Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, from:
http://www.k12.wa.us/GraduationRequirements/Requirement-Credits.aspx
Stotsky Sandra, Common Core Standards’ Devastating Impact on Literacy Study and
Analytical Thinking. The Heritage Foundation, Issue Brief, No.3800. Dec 11,
2012
41
Swanson, B. B. (2000). An overview of the six national education goals.Striving for
Excellence: The National Education Goals, ERIC, Educational Resources
Information Center, US Department of Education, Washington, DC, 1-2.
U.S. Department of Education (2004), National Center for Education Statistics,
Private School Universe Survey (PSS), 2003–2004, from:
http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pss/tables/table_2004_06.asp
Wang, Y.M. (n.d.) Changing education framework for the teaching of mathematics in
China. From:
http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/journal/ywchinmt.pdf
Wu. H, The impact of common core standards on the mathematics education of
teachers. MMA Section Meeting. Menonomie, WI, April 29, 2011.
Yang H.J. Analysis of compulsory curriculum standards on Mathematics. Taicang
Teacher Learning Center.
http://www.doc88.com/p-347819936173.html
Yang J.(2005). “Basic Education in China”, a keynote presentation at UNESCO-
INRULED-sponsored International Seminar on Rural Education, Beijing and
Baoding
42
Yang J. & Wu Y. (2003). Constructing New Curriculum, Jiangsu Education Press,
P.93
Yun, Y. A. O. (2005). Problems and Educational Solutions Concerning Children
Staying in the Countryside [J]. Theory and Practice of Education, 7, 009.
Zhang X.R. (2013). Asian students have earned a world-wide reputation for being
passionate students and Chinese students are no exception, 2013, from:
http://gbtimes.com/lifestyle/education/chinese-students-study-more-any-other-world
Zhong, Qi-quan et al. (eds.) (2001). For the Revival of the Chinese Nation, for the
Development of Every Student— the Analysis of the Outline of Basic Education
Curriculum Reform. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press, 3−13.
Zhong, Q. Q. (2006). Curriculum reform in China: Challenges and reflections.
Frontiers of Education in China, 1(3), 370-382.
Zhou, N., Zhu, M., You, B., Wang, W., Gao, X., & Zhao, L. (2007). Educational
reform and curriculum change in China: A comparative case study. Retrieved
February, 6, 2009.
Zhu, M. (2007). Recent Chinese experiences in curriculum reform. Prospects,37(2),
223-235.
43
Appendix I
Table 3
The new Michigan Standard after CCSS (Common Core State Standards Initiative,
2010; Michigan Department of Education, n.d.)
GradeCCSS Michigan Standard Published in 2010
Some Key Items of CCSS The recent Michigan standard after adopted CCSS
K
Counting and Cardinality; operations and
algebraic thinking; number and operations in
Base ten
In: Understand addition as putting together and adding to,
and understand subtraction as taking apart and taking from;
Out: Create, describe, and extend simple geometric patterns;
Compare length and weight of objects(to Grade 1)
1
Understanding of addition, subtraction; add
and subtract within 20; tell and write time;
measure lengths
In: Reason with shapes and their attributes; Create and
describe patterns involving geometric objects
Out: Add and subtract whole numbers; Add and subtract
within 20(to Grade 2)
2
Add and subtract within 20; foundations for
multiplication; measure and estimate lengths
in standard units
Out: Identify and describe shapes (to Kindergarten); Reason
with shapes and their attributes(to Grade 1); Draw and
identify lines and angles, and classify shapes by properties
of their lines and angles(to Grade 4); solve problems
involving multiplication and division(to Grade 3);
Understand properties of multiplication and the relationship
between multiplication and division
3
Multiply and divide within 100; fractions;
measurement and estimation of intervals of
time, liquid volumes, and masses of objects
In: Geometric measurement: understand concepts of area
Out: Draw and identify lines and angles, and classify shapes
by properties of their lines and angles(to Grade 4); Solve
real-world and mathematical problems involving area,
surface area, and volume(to Grade 6); Reason with shapes
and their attributes(to Grade 1); Measure and use units for
length, weight, temperature and time(to Grad 2)
4
Four operations with whole numbers; Build
fractions; measurement and conversion of
measurements from a larger unit to a smaller
unit
Out: Use factors and multiples to compose
And decompose whole numbers; Compute fluently with
multi-digit numbers and find common factors and multiples;
Reason with shapes and their attributes; Add and subtract
decimal fractions; Multiply and divide decimal fractions;
Solve real-world and mathematical problems involving area,
surface area, and volume
5 Analyze patterns and relationships; Use
equivalent fractions; understand concepts of
volume
In: Apply and extend previous understandings of
multiplication and division to multiply and divide fractions;
Graph points on the coordinate plane to solve real-world and
mathematical problems; understand concepts of volume and
44
relate volume
Out: Find areas of geometric shapes using formulas; Solve
real-life and mathematical problems involving angle
measure, area, surface area, and volume(to Grade 7);
Geometric measurement: understand concepts of angle and
measure angles( to Grade 4);Understand meaning of
decimal fractions and percentages
6
Compute fluently with multi-digit numbers
and find common factors and multiples;
solve one-variable equations and
inequalities; analyze quantitative
relationships
In: Apply and extend previous understandings of arithmetic
to algebraic expressions; Solve real-world and mathematical
problems involving area, surface area, and volume; Develop
understanding of statistical variability; Apply and extend
previous understandings of arithmetic to algebraic
expressions
Out: Apply and extend previous understandings of
operations with fractions to add, subtract, multiply, and
divide rational numbers (to Grade 7); Understand division
of whole numbers(to Grade 5); Work with radicals and
integer exponents(to Grade 8)
7
Fractions to add, subtract, multiply, and
divide rational numbers; generate Equivalent
expressions; develop, use,
And evaluate probability models
In: Use random sampling to draw inferences about a
population
Out: Understand derived quantities; Apply geometric
concepts in modeling situations(to High School);
Understand the connections between proportional
relationships, lines, and linear equations(to Grade 8);
Understand and apply directly proportional relationships
and relate to linear relationships; Work with radicals and
integer exponents(to Grade 8); Understand and represent
linear functions(to Grade 8); Summarize and describe
distributions(to Grade 6); Relationships Between Two-
dimensional and Three dimensional Representations(to High
School); Understand and apply basic properties(to Grade 6);
Make geometric constructions(to high school)
8Solve linear equations; define, evaluate, and
compare functions
Out: Understand concepts of volume and surface area, and
apply formulas; Solve real-life and mathematical problems
involving angle measure, area, surface area, and volume(to
Grade 7); Solve problems about geometric figures; Solve
real-world and mathematical problems involving area,
surface area, and volume(to Grade 6); Develop
understanding of statistical variability(to Grade 6); Use
properties of operations to generate equivalent
expressions(to Grade 7)
High
School
Number and
Quantity
Real Number System; Complex Number
System; Vector and Matrix Quantities
Out: Number Systems and Number Sense; Representations
and Relationships; Calculation Using Real and Complex
45
Numbers; Language and Laws of Logic; Proof; Power
Functions; Triangles and Their Properties; Triangles and
Trigonometry; Three- Dimensional Figures
Algebra
Polynomials and Rational Expressions;
Creating Equations; Reasoning with
Equations and Inequalities
Functions
Build a function between two quantities;
Linear, Quadratic, and Exponential Model;
Trigonometric Functions
Geometry
Similarity, Right Triangles, and
Trigonometry; Similarity, Right Triangles,
and Trigonometry; Geometric Measurement
and Dimension
46
Appendix II
Table 4
The contrast about CCSS and Chinese Mathematics Curriculum Standard (Common
Core State Standards Initiative, 2010; Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic
of China, 2011)
Grade
CCSS
Grade
China
Some Key Items of CCSS National Curriculum Standards
for Mathematics in China
K
Counting and Cardinality; operations
and algebraic thinking; number and
operations in Base ten
Kinder Garden
1
Understanding of addition,
subtraction; add and subtract within
20; tell and write time; measure
lengths
Primary
School
1
Number and Operations
Measurements
Basic Algebra
Basic Geometry
Basic Application of Mathematics
2
Add and subtract within 20;
foundations for multiplication;
measure and estimate lengths in
standard units
2
3
Multiply and divide within 100;
fractions; measurement and estimation
of intervals of time, liquid volumes,
and masses of objects
3
4
Four operations with whole numbers;
Build fractions; measurement and
conversion of measurements from a
larger unit to a smaller unit
4
5
Analyze patterns and relationships;
Use equivalent fractions; understand
concepts of volume
5
6
Compute fluently with multi-digit
numbers and find common factors and
multiples; solve one-variable
equations and inequalities; analyze
quantitative relationships
6
7 Fractions to add, subtract, multiply,
and divide rational numbers; generate
Equivalent expressions; develop, use,
Junior
School
7 Algebra
Equation and Inequalities
Sequences and Series: operation
47
and evaluate probability models
Geometry: proof and calculation8
Solve linear equations; define,
evaluate, and compare functions8
High
School
Number
and
Quantity
Real Number System; Complex
Number System; Vector and Matrix
Quantities
9
Review all the knowledge learnt during junior
school and prepare for the high school entrance
exam
Algebra
Polynomials and Rational
Expressions; Creating Equations;
Reasoning with Equations and
Inequalities
Senior
School
10
Functions: elementary functions; Sets Theory;
Trigonometry; Vectors; Space Geometry:
points, lines, planes, cube, cuboid, cylinder and
sphere
Complex Number: Operation; Analysis
Series: convergence and operation; Probability:
elements of statistics, classical probability;
Differential
Differential
Functions
Build a function between two
quantities; Linear, Quadratic, and
Exponential Model; Trigonometric
Functions
11
Geometry
Similarity, Right Triangles, and
Trigonometry; Similarity, Right
Triangles, and Trigonometry;
Geometric Measurement and
Dimension
12
Review all the knowledge learnt during senior
school and prepare for the college entrance
exam
48
