The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got That Way

by Amanda Ripley

How do other countries create “smarter” kids? What is it like to be a child in the world’s new education superpowers? The Smartest Kids in the World “gets well beneath the glossy surfaces of these foreign cultures and manages to make our own culture look newly strange....The question is whether the startling perspective provided by this masterly book can also generate the will to make changes” ( The New York Times Book Review ) .

In a handful of nations, virtually all children are learning to make complex arguments and solve problems they’ve never seen before. They are learning to think, in other words, and to thrive in the modern economy. Inspired to find answers for our own children, author and Time magazine journalist Amanda Ripley follows three Americans embed­ded in these countries for one year. Kim, fifteen, raises $10,000 so she can move from Oklahoma to Finland; Eric, eighteen, trades his high-achieving Minnesota suburb for a booming city in South Korea; and Tom, seventeen, leaves a historic Pennsylvania village for Poland.

Through these young informants, Ripley meets battle-scarred reformers, sleep-deprived zombie students, and a teacher who earns $4 million a year. Their stories, along with groundbreaking research into learning in other cultures, reveal a pattern of startling transformation: none of these countries had many “smart” kids a few decades ago. Things had changed. Teaching had become more rigorous; parents had focused on things that mattered; and children had bought into the promise of education.

Genres: Education, Nonfiction, Parenting, Psychology, Teaching, Audiobook, Book Club

320 pages, Paperback

First published August 1, 2013

About the author

From the author's website:

Amanda Ripley is an investigative journalist for The Atlantic and other magazines and a New York Times bestselling author. Her books include High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out, The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got That Way, and The Unthinkable: Who Survives When Disaster Strikes—and Why. Ripley spent a decade writing about human behavior for Time magazine in New York, Washington, and Paris. Her stories helped Time win two National Magazine Awards.

Reviews

[Brian Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is what journalism should be about, telling a story from a different perspective and digging into the details. Most reporting on education is pathetically superficial and simply rehashes the common narrative. Amanda Ripley takes on the topic with analytical rigor and good personal story telling. This isn't a wishy washy book lamenting the state of United States failing school system. It's full of hope and actionable information on what makes schools good and what doesn't. Ripley does dispel with most of the normal excuses given for why the US does so poorly like poverty, diversity, etc. While these are factors they aren't the main problem.

The main takeaways are that good education systems:

1) Expect a great deal from their students, regardless of background. They don't care about self esteem, just results.
2) Are very selective about teacher quality. In Finland you have to be in the top of your class to go to school for education.
3) Have a consistant curriculum that covers less but much more thoroughly.
4) Have fewer test and less homework.
5) Don't put students into different tracks (gifted, vocational etc), or do so much later.
5) Don't spend much on technology. Plain blackboards and good teachers are what's needed.

There is also a good deal of history on how those school systems got to be where they are and what they are like today. The stories from the exchange students are particularly good bits of data.

If you care about education, this is an important book worth reading.

[Georgene · Rating 4 out of 5]

A take-away from this book - it is better for a country to spend money on its teachers: training, recruiting, hiring and paying them than to spend so much on technology.

[Jordan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book almost entirely in one day. As non-fiction goes, it was a page-turner.

I was skeptical of Ripley's anecdotal approach to this complex issue, but she tackles with a good amount of objectivity and balance. Essentially, she asks why the United States is so far behind the rest of the developed world on education, despite spending such a relatively large amount of money on education per capita. She reminds readers that the problem is incredibly complex. As an educator in the US (University, not K-12, but some of the same stuff holds), two of the more vivid highlights from her arguments include:
1) In the US we spend so much money in schools on technology (which is not linked to increased learning at all) and on sports/athletics (which baffles the rest of the world).
2) Our students are not given a chance to fail until they are out of school. Students in other countries learn what it's like to not perform well at an early age. They learn how to fail and learn from their mistakes when it is still a safe environment and the stakes aren't high.

[Readersaurus · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm approaching this one more as a mom than as an educator. As such, my comments reflect that perspective rather than a critical reading. I'm interested in how kids get an education that they think of as good. I'm interested in their experiences as students abroad.

p. 32. -- When Kim got into the Duke summer program for gifted and talented kids and she said to her mom "This is my chance to be normal!" I just cried. In so many schools, kids who are interested in learning are ridiculed or just subtly made to feel weird and out of the norm. (The really sad part is that many of these ostracizing attitudes carry over into adult life, especially in small towns.)

p. 84 - 85 -- I am astounded by what Ripley has written about America's teacher training colleges and the value of a master's degree in education. If true, it's deeply saddening that the coursework isn't rigorous and there seem to be no baseline standards for who gets in. (Can that really be true? Don't teachers-to-be have to take the GRE and submit a transcript? Don't they have to pass an intensive practicum?) Either way, teaching here is not held in the high regard Ripley reports it is in Finland. Nor is it limited to it the top minds.

I wanted to know more about the PISA test. I started here. I was looking to find out how many students in each country take the test each year. It's on the FAQ page. In 2012, 6,111 15 year olds took the test. So, it can't really be said to offer an accurate picture of our whole country's educational system. That's a really small percentage of the kids in the U.S. I think if all kids took this instead of the MCAS or FCAT or California achievement tests or SATs or whatever, then we could use it to generate data that tell us something real about our nation. So, that's a bit disappointing.

As other reviewers have said, the fact that so few kids actually take the PISA calls into question Ripley's using PISA results to conclude that Finland, South Korea, and Poland have better schools over all than the U.S.

I can't throw out everything else she's written; on p. 100, Ripley relates a story told by a Finnish girl who had come to Michigan for an exchange year: "It was like elementary school in Finland," she said . . . "We did so many posters. I remember telling my friends, 'Are you kidding me? Another poster?' It was like arts and crafts, only more boring." This is not hyperbole. As a parent and as a teacher in more than one district, I have witnessed first hand these demoralizing cut and paste projects that only require that a student produce some object that will be thrown away once graded. It is the rare and beloved teacher who assigns projects that grab students' imaginations and get them to think and really learn something they'll internalize, be proud of, and use again.

Over and over, Ripley returns to the theme of expectations. When we have low expectations of students, they work to meet those low expectations and that's it. There's also the theme of rigor. It's not necessarily about tracking, about separating kids out into 'college-bound' and 'not' at a young age. It's not about piling on the volume of work so much that kids have no time to do anything else. It's about creating excitement about learning, developing coursework and homework that develop kids' thinking and reasoning skills. All kids can do this, straight As or not.

And, of course, as a librarian and as a lifelong reader, I am both overjoyed and horrified that the international survey and study of family life that was done along with the PISA identified the three most important kinds of parental involvement leading to student success: 1) reading to your children from a very young age; 2) regularly making sure your children see you reading for enjoyment and information; 3) conversing with your kids about what you're all reading and about world events. Yeesh! Do we need another study to tell us this? And, in light of this, why do library directors everywhere have to prove their worth to finance committees every year?

I might be ranting and raving now. Can you tell I've recently started attending curriculum committee meetings at my youngest's school?

[Chase Parsley · Rating 2 out of 5]

Let me start off by saying that I wanted to like this book. Instead, it left me disappointed. In an age of education "reform" and magic bullets, I was originally drawn to the book because I heard it described the Finnish education system, which is all the rage (for the right reasons) today. I applaud author Amanda Ripley for thinking outside the USA's borders.

This book is set up, lamely in my opinion, as a case study of 3 American high school students who study abroad in Finland, South Korea, and Poland, with the United States (and sometimes Germany) compared throughout. Although Ripley made some good points to be sure, I felt that far too much was lacking. The glaring, central problem for me is that Ripley comes off as a well-intentioned journalist (i.e. not an educator); her lack of expertise and seasoning was apparent throughout. However, I admit my possible bias as I am a teacher who has been up to his eyeballs in the politics of education for years.

To be more specific, some interesting points I liked:
1) "Grit" is a key measurement to success in life. I agree, but I wish Ripley would have analyzed culture further instead of emphasizing teachers and schools so much. Also she dismisses poverty as a reason for failure which I am very skeptical of doing.

2) The US is obsessed with high school sports. How can a coach be the best teacher possible if he/she spends hours and hours coaching (not to mention the teachers who become teachers to be a coach and don't have a passion for teaching)? How can students do their best in school by constantly playing sports? I love sports but I admit that we are crack addicts in the US with sports.

3) I was fascinated by the South Korean system. Kids are robots, it is really a living Hell and the US needs to learn from this horror story. If you want to see where all of "education reform" and testing might take us, please study South Korean schools and agree with me that it is child abuse.

4) We should front-load the requirements in the US for teachers to be able to be teachers. I agree; I am not a fan of the online teaching degrees and the half-ass Teach for America degrees and the like; they undermine the profession. Also, I believe that teachers should be experts (not merely competent), in their fields for secondary education. Finally, to close my argument here, after teachers are teachers, I feel that less professional development is needed, or at least lots of freedom for a teacher to grow how they choose. Teaching is an all-consuming job and taking classes, going to meetings, etc. often gets in the way.

Some of my overall pet peeves included:
1) Ripley WAY OVEREMPHASIZES test scores to compare systems. For example, the PISA test has been heavily criticized along with the fact that barely any students take it in the US. What about a deeper exploration about US' system beyond the testing of math and English? What about an economic comparison, a civilly active public comparison, a measurement of fun in countries comparison, etc.? It is one data point after another, which is great as a start, but I felt the picture was incomplete. Also, other authors about education politics were very rarely mentioned, and the voices of American teachers and their unions, etc. were even rarer. The lack of multiple perspectives and references makes Ripley come off as amateurish.

2)Ripley constantly cuts into American teachers. Teachers are not strict enough, need more accountability, grade too easy, school is not "rigorous" enough, etc. I was insulted when an "exemplary" US teacher gave a girl an F because she "earned it" on page 196 (i.e. he was strict but fair). As a teacher, I can say with the utmost confidence that the VAST majority of teachers do this every single DAY. Also, Ripley's exemplary teacher was under Michelle Rhee's D.C. system, and Rhee's controversy was hardly mentioned! Imagine.

3) I wanted to read more about Finland. I wish less emphasis was on the girl that went there (i.e. the case study). I had the advantage of knowing more about it going into the book, and I learned very little.

In closing, it not a horrible read, but I am quite disappointed with it, especially in light of all the attention it is getting.

[Mlg · Rating 2 out of 5]

The problem with this book was that all the research was based on something called the PISA test, which was given in countries around the world. The statistical sample of the US was a whopping 5,233 kids in 165 schools. This is inadequate, ridiculously small sample from which the author draws her conclusions. Ripley is also not an educator, has never taught, and from what she says in the book, didn't seem to spend much time in American schools. I found some of her rhetoric over the top. And her comment that none of the American principals knew their per pupil expenditures was insane. Every teacher knows it, and it's printed in the news with regularity.
That being said, after almost 40 years as an educator, I did agree with her in a number of areas.
Teacher training needs to be a lot better. The self esteem movement has hurt kids in the US. Parents need to see education as part of THEIR job. Don't hire coaches instead of teachers, better yet, take sports out of the public schools.
There was an awful lot I disagreed with also. Any lauding of S. Korean schools is nuts. To have kids in school or at hagwons for 18 hours a day "repeating virtually everything" the kids had learned during the day is crazy. Not to mention, bankrupting families to pay for the tutoring. Ripley blames unions for retaining bad teachers. As someone who was union president, I can tell you that it's the administrators who are too lazy to do their jobs as evaluators and the unions often push to get rid of poor teachers. Besides, Finland, the top performing country has some of the strongest teachers' unions. Ripley loves Common Core, which is simply a way to dumb down the best schools in an attempt to bolster those who don't perform well. In the last few years, there was more dumbing down of the curriculum than in the previous 30 years combined, all done at the behest of administrators and against the will of the teachers.
Americans get the schools they want: Full of high tech gadgets that make no difference, with dozens of sports, and no consequences for failure. Since one can get into an elite college on the basis of "legacy" why achieve? I see no way out of the mess that American education has become. But I do think that the first thing that needs to happen, is that dabblers in education like Ripley and Gates and those of their ilk, need to stick to what they know best and let the professional educators figure it out. The three things the Finnish teachers mentioned as the reasons they stay in education were: 1. salary 2. respect 3. autonomy. American teachers in some schools may have the first, but not the other two. Therein lies part of the problem.

[Cindy Rollins · Rating 4 out of 5]

As an educator, I would say this is a must read even though it is truly just an introduction to the subject.
I would have
loved to hear more about the Finnish schools. I like how they combine rigorous standards with teacher autonomy.
Good teachers will find a way to teach if given the opportunity which they are not in American schools. I also liked the illustration in the appendix about what happened when a teacher in the US gave a little girl an F. She (and her mother) complained about being 'given' an F; the teacher explained that he hadn't given her an F, she had earned it. But the best part of the story is the most important part, and one we as Americans rarely get to because of our empathetic hearts, the next year the little girl earned an A and she knew she had earned it.

Great book to start the school year with high expectations both for my son and my students.

[Kaethe · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was fascinating, and not only because it mentioned International Baccalaureate programs. Ripley compares USian schools to those of other nations through the lens of foreign exchange students' experiences. I wanted to read it more or less as an adjunct to The Importance of Being Little to give a fuller picture of education from preschool to college, highlighting some of the places that do it exceptionally well.

The US does well by some students, those with the greatest advantages to start with. There are tremendous inequities by income and race, and only the second is being addressed. Charter schools, many of which are for-profit, show no improvements over public schools on average, despite the tremendous gains they're supposed to enjoy by being freed from bureaucracy and particularly the horrors of tenured teachers who cannot be fired without cause. And why bother, when it isn't an issue that elected officials send their own children to private schools or to public schools in areas so wealthy they are defacto private schools?

Korea also has a lot of crap schools, but it doesn't matter, because every parent who can afford it is hiring private tutoring companies to make up the difference, which isn't all that different from our own system.

Finland and Poland however have some lessons to teach us. They are awesome, and they achieved awesome rather quickly. I won't give away all their secrets, but a rigorous education and commensurate pay for teachers isn't a bad idea.

Highly recommended to people with a specific interest in education. I can't begin to imagine how it would appeal to readers who aren't keen on the topic.

Library copy

[Claudia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, another non-educator has all the answers...but she writes very well and she tells a good story.

I was asked to read this book by a local lawmaker who wants to discuss the points. So I took notes...7 pages of 8-point notes.

Let's start with the title...'smartest kids in the world.' How is this measured? Life accomplishments? Nobel Prizes? Inventions? Nope. Test scores. The PISA test, in particular. Kids are measured as smart or not smart based on the scores of one test. AND how many US kids take this test (along with all the mandated tests, the NAEP, and whatever our policy makers decide to throw at them)? Just over 5000 kids from random schools. There are 49.8 million kids in public schools in the US, and PISA tests a random 5000. Already I'm not sure her premise stands up to scrutiny.

But, let's pretend a test that only 5000 of 49.8 million kids take really does measure smarts...and that is up for debate. Ripley has accepted PISA as the be-all-and-end-all, but others, most of whom are educators, are not so certain.

Now, we have a test that was administered to a pitifully small sample, and a test that may not be the shining start it portrays itself to be.

Onward. Ripley takes three US students who spend a year abroad -- one to Finland, one to S. Korea, and one to Poland -- attending schools in three countries who supposedly have kids who are much smarter than our kids. She introduces us to them in their US home schools, and follows their adjustments in their host countries.

Ripley seems to thoroughly enjoy ripping OK schools...where I spent 34 of my 39 years as a teacher. She appears to have interviewed teachers and administrators in good faith, but her chosen quotes are not-so-subtle swipes at our (I am an OK educator)worthlessness, our excuse-making, our inability to prepare kids for the real world. Of COURSE I got my back up in those sections...and she spends much more time ripping Oklahoma schools than the Pennsylvania and Minnesota schools the other US kids attended.

Then, she examines the three countries' schools and tries to suss out what makes their kids so much smarter than our kids...

Finland changed everything -- teacher preparation, rigor, curriculum. They took it all on. The most intriguing piece of this is the teacher preparation...it's hard to get into education school in Finland. Here, schools of education are the cash cow that keep US universities solvent, so lots of colleges have schools of education, and they accept too many applicants.

I thought Finland's system only let applicants try once, but Ripley tells a story about one teacher who applied three times, and his life experience as a substitute teacher finally tipped things in his favor. I like this idea...

But in the US, where do we start? Schools of Ed are seeing a decline in the number of applicants, and that is NO surprise. Most of us know, going in, we won't become millionaires, but there was a time when US teachers had the respect of the community and policy makers, and enjoyed a measure of autonomy. Now, teachers are poor, reviled, overworked, under-respected, and are micromanaged by reformers. How can colleges raise standards for admission now? I am mystified about how to end the cycle of attacks so that standards can be raised. I'm not against making teaching more prestigious by raising the standards...but I don't see how we can start here...

Finnish schools receive funding according to need -- schools that have challenging populations have more money...quite the opposite of what happens in US schools. Special education is also handled very different...special ed is seen as an intense intervention of limited time...something to give a kiddo a boost through a tough, temporary time of struggle.

All Finnish kids take a grueling series of matriculation tests. Ripley tries to equate this to OK's End of Instruction tests, but there is no comparison. I'm not against a true matriculation test, where everyone, teachers, students, parents, policy makers, agree on exactly what will be tested and how it will be tested. The Finnish tests are NOT low-level multiple choice tests...She also equates this experience to the ACT and SAT...no. They are exams that supposedly measure a student's ability to do college work...I say 'supposedly' because, come to find out, they're not so good at predicting college success.

One teacher's advice is priceless: "You should start to select your teachers more carefully and motivate them more. One motivation is money. Respect is another. Punishing is never a good way to deal with schools." Indeed...I don't see reformers jumping on that bandwagon with both feet.

On to Korea...an abusive system where kids may attend school of one kind or another for up to 18 hours a day...where everything is focused on the test, and getting a good score. The entire country is hyper-focused on tests and scores. Kids sleep through their day-time classes, and attend private tutoring schools at night. PRIVATE...parent-funded. Inequitable. 'In 2011...parents spent almost $18 billion on cram schools...' And the wealthy parents got the 'successful' schools and teachers...Ripley calls the system a hamster wheel, but she says she prefers it to the US moon-bounce attitudes. I do not. This system beats up kids, it bankrupts parents, and it causes a system of inequity for its students.

Poland seems to be in this book because they adopted national standards, and it's apparent Ripley loves Common Core...on closer examination, Poland may not be the miracle she touts it to be.

She says these countries are committed to teaching students high level thinking...and implies we don't. She throws around the word 'rigor' without telling us what it means...does it mean 18 hours a day of school? Two six-hour writing tests to graduate from Finnish high school? Is it constant drilling, humiliating kids when they don't know the answer? Is it publicly announcing the scores to the latest test to everyone in the room? Those are all practices of the schools where the world's smartest kids attend.

Do I defend US schools to the death? No. Ripley makes some interesting observations I've wondered about myself.

US schools are teeming with technology...white boards, interactive clickers, iPads, Chrome books...we've go it all. But... The three countries here do not have that technology...and their kids perform well on international tests. I think we need to ask ourselves with complete honesty if we're getting return for the millions we spend on technology...when it could be spent in other ways.

Sports came under fire also. The US is the only major country where sports are the focus of so much time and energy and money. Again, we must ask ourselves...does this investment reflect our values?

I REALLY liked her advice to parents who are looking for a new school...We should all be asking those questions.

But she feels duty-bound to return to OK, talk to the CEO of BAMA Pies, and rip us again...our high school graduates are so lousy they can't get jobs at BAMA, and the company must leave OK for an international plant; didn't have anything to do with lowering their own production prices, I'm sure.

And in her spirited defense of CCSS, she reviews OK's recent repeal of the standards she loves and defends and accepts without question...and she quotes Sally Kern to show how backwards we all are. To quote the FaceBook group title: "Sally Kern does not represent me!"

She makes good points about parents -- parents from countries with 'smart' kids don't coddle, but DO coach...the read to them daily, they ask about school and discuss current events. They make it clear that kids' job is to work hard in school, and parents' job is to make that happen. That attitude is not universally practiced in the US.

I found Ripley's tone snarky when speaking of US schools or educator, or parents. She obviously looks down her nose at us all, and sees us 'wanting'.

At one point, she writes, “There is much to be said for American teachers, who, in many schools worked hard to entertain and engage their students…” Excuse me?? ENTERTAIN? Entertain?? How dare she who has never taught a day in her life talk about my efforts to ‘entertain’ my students. I am a teacher. I teach.

Of all her snarky comments, the one that sent me over the edge was her dismissal of Diane Ravitch as 'one of the most popular education commentators in the US.' Is she aware Ravitch is a PhD, a professor of education history, and was a member of the US Department of Education? Her credentials are legendary...she is far more important than 'a popular commentator.' I don't know if this is Ripley not doing her homework, or if it's her trying to negate Ravitch's arguments. Either way it is insulting to an educator who's devoted her life to our kids.

So, questions for reformers: Are you willing to pay teachers more so that you can truly recruit the best and brightest? Are you willing to drop your infatuation with alternative certification and Teach for America, neither of which are rigorous teacher prep? Are you willing to address the role of sports in our schools? Are you willing to revamp special education? Are you willing to trust educators to do their jobs without the machinations of teacher evaluations designed to punish and label? Are you willing to work with teacher organizations for the good of our kids?

An interesting book that obviously made me think a lot. But in the end another attack on US schools and educators. Just better written than most.

[Owlseyes]

Taking the recent Portuguese panorama on Education, this book is very adequate,…it’s on-time, I would say. Experts in Portugal speak of a “too centralistic” administration of the Education field; math and sciences stats are far bellow the best of OCDE-OECD: Norway, namely; secondary level completion placing Portugal near the low levels of Turkey and Mexico; plus, a low level of investment (per GDP) in Education. This is the ongoing panorama.



Ripley gives some clues on how to change. She conducted studies is several nations (including the USA) and found the reasons for the top scores of Finland, South Korea and Poland. Other nations fared less but well though: Japan, Singapore, Holland, Hong-Kong (China) and Canada.

She’s been analyzing the performance of pupils in these PISA* tests. Ripley speaks of 21st century skills the pupils must acquire: not memorize, but use knowledge: take information and apply it.


She says also that some of these nations’ governments “got very serious on Education”. And it’s not a question of technology, the answer (though South Korea is very high tech) for better Education results.

It’s also a matter of teachers’ training.

Reading and reviewing in GR might help..., I wonder.


*Programme for International Student Assessment; in 2009, Portugal ranked 32 in Math and Sciences; and 27 in Reading.




UPDATE

Well, this is good news for Portugal: for the first time above the average, yet ranking 33rd.
One can always wonder about the causes for the improvement. The Chinese still leading.

https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-r...

6th December 2016

UPDATE

28th October 2021
https://bigthink.com/the-present/pisa...

[Laura Leaney · Rating 3 out of 5]

Amanda Ripley says in her "Author's Note," that she wanted to believe "it was possible to write a not-boring book about education," and I think she succeeded. Whatever the book is, it's not boring. It's always fascinating to read about how other countries handle the same issues that the U.S. can't seem to manage consistently well: criminal justice, pollution, healthcare, and education, to name a few. Because some of the world's largest problems are managed by government bureaucrats, trying to bring about change often becomes an exercise in suicide-inducing frustration. To me, the attempt to improve anything about the mediocre school system in America belongs to the minority of heroic individuals who are willing to bullhorn a warning into deaf ears. To say what needs to be said again and again. And again. Maybe Amanda Ripley is one - but I have a feeling that she has said her piece, and she'll leave it up to the reader to act. I'm betting that most of her readers will not be school superintendents, administrators, principals, or department heads.

Who are the smartest kids in the world? The Finns. Second smartest? South Koreans. How do we know they're smart? Because they have the highest score on the PISA (Program for International Student Assessment). Also because one of Ripley's "embedded" high school students confirmed to Ripley that the Finns are smart, significantly ahead of America's students in seemingly all curricula. These are the things I didn't like about the book: reliance on one exam, reliance on the anecdotal evidence of four exchange students.

Nevertheless, I believe that many of the generalizations that the author "discovers" about American schools are true. Why do I believe? The daily empirical evidence collected from my life as a high school teacher. Here are a few:

*In some schools, sports matters as much (if not more) than academics. Money is a big issue here.
*American teachers are easy graders, unwilling to tell students the truth about their work.
*Parents want to keep the pressure off their kids for far too long, unwilling to let them suffer failure.
*American teachers are not well educated or trained.
*Educators believe that poverty and ethnic/cultural backgrounds present disadvantages to rigorous learning, reinforcing stereotypes.
*Failure on American end-of-the-year exams do not actually prevent students from "succeeding" to the next level.
*Teachers do not trust students to do rigorous work on their own.
*American schools and parents do not allow children enough unsupervised time.

These are but a few of the criticisms leveled at U.S. schools after comparing them to Finland/South Korea/Poland/et cetera. Depressing, for sure, but it's better to know than to remain unconcerned.

The best paragraph in the book, at least for me, is the one that sums up the differences between the best educated countries and America:

Kids had more freedom, too. This freedom was important, and it wasn't a gift. By definition, rigorous work required failure; you simply could not do it without failing. That meant that teenagers had the freedom to fail when they were still young enough to learn how to recover. When they didn't work hard, they got worse grades. The consequences were clear and reliable. They didn't take a lot of standardized tests, but they had to take a very serious one at the end of high school, which had real implications for their futures."

And, as a side note to ponder from The Week we have:

"Anyone who thinks America's best days are behind us should take a look at the Nobel Prize haul," said Bret Stephens. While our politicians have been locked in paralysis in Washington, D.C., and a general air of "America-in-Decline" gloom has spread across the globe, our scientists and economists have continued to scoop up Nobel Prizes at a staggering rate. This year alone, native-born and immigrant Americans took home nine of the prestigious awards. "China, with 1.3 billion people, has produced a grand total of nine winners in its entire history." Since 2000, Americans have won 21 of the 37 physics prizes, 18 of the 33 medicine prizes, 22 of the 33 chemistry prizes, and an amazing 27 of the 30 economics prizes. Not bad, considering our "nonstop anxiety" about failing schools and our mediocre international test scores. "The secret of America's Nobel sauce?" Our thriving immigrant culture, our superb private university system, and our "culture of individualism and ingrained respect for against-the-grain thinking." Our politics may be a mess, but the heart of American greatness beats on.

[Jana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Small class size does not correlate to high student achievement
Use of technology in teaching does not correlate to high student achievement
Money spent per student does not correlate to high student achievement
Strong teacher unions do correlate to high student achievement
A clearly defined national standard where teachers have autonomy to determine how to reach that standard does correlate to high student achievement
Having high expectations for all students regardless of background, economic status or ethnicity does correlate to high student achievement
Math scores are the best predictor of future earnings
Find out what other common sense and easily implemented policies make a huge difference by reading this book

[Elizabeth A · Rating 5 out of 5]

Book blurb: What is it like to be a child in the world's new education superpowers? In a global quest to find answers for our own children, author and Time magazine journalist Amanda Ripley follows three Americans embedded in these countries for one year. Kim, fifteen, raises $10,000 so she can move from Oklahoma to Finland; Eric, eighteen, exchanges a high-achieving Minnesota suburb for a booming city in South Korea; and Tom, seventeen, leaves a historic Pennsylvania village for Poland.

I listened to the audiobook well narrated by Kate Reading, and this is the second book by the author to receive a 5 star rating from me.

There are some fundamental questions one could and should ask about education:

1. What is the point of education?
2. Do we think education is important? On a personal level? On a national level?
3. What are educational best practices, and do we implement them in our schools?

This thought provoking book reads like a thriller, and I for one found this a fascinating read. Some interesting things to ponder:

1. Can a teacher teach something they do not know? If we believe education is important, then how is it that we don't tap the top 1/3 of graduating seniors and funnel them into education?
2. Does it make sense that athletes and celebrities get paid so much more then teachers? How would it be possible to recruit the best and the brightest talent, when compensation numbers are so skewed?
3. For learning to happen parents must be involved, and there is a huge difference between a parent-coach and a parent-cheerleader. It turns out that the mere act of reading to children has a huge impact on the child's test scores a decade later. Also, interestingly enough, the stats show an inverse relationship between a child's test scores and parental involvement in none academic activities (see # 5).
4. The best countries in the world have rigor built into the system; everyone from students, to teachers, to the media is bought in. Imagine how different it would be if there was as much emphasis and celebration of high achieving students as is currently placed on March Madness and the Superbowl.
5. If the main purpose of school is education, then we seem to be sending mixed messages to kids, what with high visibility sport programs, selling girl-scout cookies, etc.
6. The practice of tracking is so very harmful to kids, and I know from personal experience that kids rise to or lower themselves to expectations set for them. So imagine a kid tracked into the "dumb" class in 3rd grade; sure it is not called that, but every student knows that is what it is. What message is sent to that kid? If we insist on tracking, do so much later - 16 years.

Sure, the PISA test is not perfect, but it is an interesting benchmark that shows how poorly US students do against the rest of the world. Sure, the USA is huge compared to other countries, but when we still have students who reach the age of 16 and have never heard the word evolution mentioned in school, how is do we expect our kids to compete in this globalized economy?

I grew up in a country and family where there was nothing more important than education. There were no mixed messages; everything else paled in comparison. As a freshman in a US college, it blew my mind that so many students seemed to have little grasp of some of the fundamentals of math and science. Imagine my shock and consternation when I taught for a couple of years in an urban middle school to learn that 7th grade is the first time that my students had ever encountered any "hard" science - it had all been cuddly animals til then. Most of my students had math and reading skills below grade level, and yet got promoted year after year. I've met many wonderful and competent teachers of course, but I've also met plenty of teachers who did not know the material they were teaching. I'll never forget the science teacher who did not know several of the answers on the 8th grade MCAS test.

This book covers topics that are near and dear to my heart, and while no one country's education system is perfect, does it not make sense that we would learn from the best? We do that in business all the time, so why not in our schools? If you are an educator, parent, or interested in education, I would highly recommend this book. PS. Parents, there is an appendix with questions to ask about your kid's school. If nothing else, I think you'd find that most illuminating.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think this should be required audiobooking, it's an endlessly interesting topic, and despite what NEA readers may say I think the book seems agendaless and balanced. "This should have stayed/been only a New Yorker article" is a critique/dis I'm way too often forced to make, but this kept going strongish throughout with no retread from other audiobookable titles save the "how to praise your child" bit from Po Bronson's superb Nutureshock.

Another reviewer linked to a blog post that I found not unfounded; it had some good points, but was fairly unconvincing and overly weighed down by fringe jabs of no consequence. That said, I, even while audiobooking during meal prep, thought a few of Ripley's statements and stat quotes seemed fast and loose at best.

I bucked in say... chapter three when she gets away from ideas and policy and puts in way too much about the kids in order to add chapters (fear not, this is still a short 3xx pages/7 hours), but hang in there it doesn't end up being that horrible, and if you purposefully numb out it seems even nice. Every non-fiction author must be kicking themselves for not writing this book, which seems to have had a RELATIVELY low degree of difficulty, a la Searching for Sugarman, given its success so kudos to Ripley for having the vision no one else had. I think she deserves the sales.

I don't see how you can be part of the conversation without thoroughly looking into the ideas in this book and if you have a suggestion for another audiobook on educational policy I'm all ears.

[Ken · Rating 4 out of 5]

A journalist's POV of our educational system (and heck, why not, everyone else is jumping in). Amanda Ripley especially laments our poor performance in math compared to other nations of the world. One possibility, she points out, is the slow start and negative attitudes from elementary schools where many teachers (generalists) are weak at math or loathe math or make math play second fiddle to Columbus sailing the ocean blue in fourteen-hundred-ninety-two. Ripley points out how math is playing an increasing role in modern jobs AS WELL AS the fact that it pays in the long run:

"Math had a way of predicting kids' futures. Teenagers who mastered higher-level math classes were far more likely to graduate from college, even when putting aside other factors like race and income. They also earned more money after college."

Ripley focuses on three countries in this book: Finland (of course), Korea (surprise, surprise), and Poland (huh?). According to the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the U.S. finishes 26th in math compared to 3rd for Finland, 2nd for Korea, and 19th for Poland.

Finland is the sensation of the moment in education circles because they've figured something out: namely, it's the teachers, stupid! It's not class size, socio-economics, technology, or money. It's making teaching a ridiculously rigorous profession to get into, then paying it handsomely (move over, doctors and lawyers), then giving teachers a large role in their own curriculum. (Is this rocket science? Apparently!)

Many of the countries kicking U.S. butt are still working with only desks and a black or whiteboard up front. In math, the students typically must figure quickly using that software we call the brain, because they do not use calculators. Interactive whiteboards (a fixture in many U.S. classrooms?). Uh, no. Computers, iPads, cellphones? No, no... and no.

Sports programs after school to suck time away from academics? No siree, Bob. Stroked self-esteem? Effusive praise for trying? Grade inflation? Nopes all around. In fact, most foreign exchange students coming to America are astonished at how friendly teachers here are with their students. Abroad, the impersonal standard makes reality checks easier to administer. Teachers are hard graders and have very high standards indeed. They aren't as worried about Johnny and Suzy's ego.

In the appendix, Ripley wraps up with some basics, including the importance of talking to students themselves if you want to know how good a school is. They should be able to answer the questions, "What are you doing right now? Why?" In addition, Ripley asked students everywhere these questions: "In this class, do you learn a lot every day? Do students in this class usually behave the way your teacher wants them to? Does this class stay busy and not waste time?"

And so forth.

Enjoyable? Very. Comes with all the answers inside? Hardly. Food for thought? Given the present situation, I guess so. For variety, you even get threads of three American students' lives -- one who went to Finland, one who braved Korea, and one who ventured to Poland. This, along with the frequent reference to stats and anecdotes, made it an odd juggle at times, but overall, it coalesces into a worthwhile read, especially if you have any stake in your country's education (and if you don't, why don't you?)....

[Katia N · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think, not many people are interested in education before their own kids cross the entrance of a public institution otherwise known as a school for the first time. I certainly was not, and frankly I found it the one of the most boring areas compared only to the gardening pages of Sunday newspapers. Not any more… I think the same transformation has affected Amanda Ripley, the author of this book. I understood she has got 6 year old boy and that might be a trigger.

In any case this is a very well researched journalistic investigation comparing the education systems in the "education powerhouses" as the author called them and the US. The fact that the US is used as a benchmark does not spoil it for the European readers, I think. The successful countries are South Korea, Finland and Poland. She visited all 3 of them and also used 3 exchanged students from America into these countries as her informers.

The conclusions she is making is that the excellence of the education you can achieve either through "pressure cooker" approach used in Korea or through "well trained teachers" approach in Finland. But in both cases the prerequisite of the higher achievement is rigor in curriculum and approach to learning as well as a very high expectations of what the average pupils can achieve. I think the last two key factors are lacking in the US and certainly here in the UK based upon my limited observations. The educators in the US are so obsessed with idea of not letting children to fail that sometimes it results in a just delayed much bigger failure which is much more difficult to fix. Children should face with the routine small failures to be able to learn to overcome them. And with the time they would stop to consider them as such and would think of them as just a part of the challenge. This is possible only if they are given relatively difficult tasks to deal with.

I liked very much the quote from Winston Churchill Amanda uses to stress this point: "Success is going from failure to failure without losing your enthusiasm."

That was for me the main message of the book. But there are many more issues discussed in the book and lots of interesting facts. For example:

- spending per pupil does not correlate with the quality of education;
- the same could be said about the teacher's salary - apparently the highest paid teachers are in Spain which is far behind in PISA tables;
- putting children in classes by ability - the earlier it happens the worst it for the country's educational outcome as a whole. (But to be honest I personally believe that it is better for the higher ability kids).

I liked also her story about Korea tutoring industry - sounds like something from another planet all together! I felt a bit more sceptical about Poland's "miracle" . But i hope that the time will prove me wrong.

I found also useful the advice How to spot a good school in the Appendix.

Only thing which I did not like is sometimes too much of descriptive writing about the kids she talked too and other people. It disturbed the flow of the story for me. But other than that - breezing read on the interesting topic.

Lets see what PISA 2012 table would reveal when it is published in December this year.

[Whitney Sorensen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Teachers, Administrators, Parents, Anyone Who Cares About Education: read this!

I really liked this book because I've seen a lot of the research and articles before as an educator. It's fairly common knowledge that the US is struggling with learning, especially when measured against other countries. While the facts were familiar, the insight that Ripley provided into not just our education system but other successful education systems worldwide was revelatory and sometimes unsettling.

Some might take issue with some of the things she says about American education (like when she calls some teachers "middling professionals" !! (but maybe true in some cases)), but while some parts might be a little loose, some of the things she says are hard to hear because they are true. She does acknowledge that what works in other countries may not work in the US; we have more diversity and a different kind of government--but excuses like these are not going to be enough to stand on.
Ripley presents some lessons learned from other countries as achievable actions for US education:
1-High expectations for students
2-Raising the standards of teacher selection & education--but also giving teachers more autonomy
3-Making tracks of gifted, vocational, remedial education available much later or not at all
4-Tougher curriculum that has more depth than width
5-Easing off spending on technology

It's hard for me just to review this book because I want so badly to discuss it's ideas! But I'll just say that Ripley has done some great storytelling and analyzing of the facts and ideas, and come up with something that is hopeful and informative. As a teacher, this sparked reflection on my own teaching practices, making me want to raise expectations and standards for my students and for myself, grading on results and really investing time and effort into an effective curriculum. I've seen the bored students, the students who could do more but don't feel that any more is expected of them, and I agree, things are at a turning point. This book adds something valuable and worthwhile to that discussion.

[Claudia B · Rating 5 out of 5]

Cartea urmărește sistemele de educație din trei țări clasate sus în topul rezultatelor PISA: Finlanda, Coreea de Sud și Polonia. Studiul urmărește experiențele de învățare a trei elevi americani, care ajung elevi în sistemele celor trei țări. A fost o bucurie să citesc poveștile lor și să observ cum funcționează educația în cele trei țări, din perspectiva elevului. Sistemul finlandez l-am îndrăgit pur și simplu de la început, cel Polonez mi s-a părut interesant și eficient, iar cel coreean m-a înspăimântat.
În concluzie, studiul ne vorbește despre faptul că elevii sunt elevi, peste tot. Atunci ce diferențiază sistemele de educație între ele? În primul rând, ceea ce le diferențiază este importanța pe care fiecare țară o acordă educației proprii. În Finlanda, de exemplu, copiii luau școala mai în serios pentru că ea era mai serioasă. Era mai serioasă pentru că toată lumea fusese de acord că așa trebuia să fie. Acest consens cu privire la rigoare schimbase totul, iar acest consens în găsim în Polonia și în Coreea, de asemenea.
„Un lucru este clar: pentru a le oferi puștilor noștri genul de educație pe care o meritau, trebuia mai întâi să fim de acord că rigoarea conta cel mai mult dintre toate; că școala exista pentru a-i ajuta pe copii să învețe, să muncească din greu și, da, să greșească. Acesta era nucleul consensual care făcea posibil orice altceva.”
Recomand! :)

[Justinepow · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’m so glad I read this book. Things I took away, in no particular order are
1) rigor- it’s an important piece to education. Having it will greatly help a child and their drive to do well
2) how teachers are trained, educated and supported in their schools is super important
3) we need to set higher expectations from our kids and stop assuming their can’t do something.
4) a coach mentality in education may be more helpful than a friend mentality (which seems to be what many teachers and parents Are doing in learning)

This book really had me thinking about my education, how well equipped I was for university and how I want to ensure my kids are getting the best education possible.

[Kexin · Rating 3 out of 5]

i read this book as part of research for an article i'm currently writing. my overall instinct was that this book was more prancing (yet also meandering and narcolepsy-inducing, at several points) storybook than critical analysis of the world's "best" education systems. this premise of ripley's was based off their performances in PISA; which, as many others have pointed out, is a slightly questionable one.

the view of the education system through the eyes of the three teenagers does make journalistic sense: these students are the ones living the nitty gritties of education systems fought and picketed over by policy giants. their grounded eyes can ostensibly notice nuances lofty adults may not have the perspective to. who else better to democratically elucidate these systems' precise workings?

and these kids do indeed do that, no cavils meant to them-- they were introspective and reflective throughout about their experiences. a little disappointing, then, that instead of using these three 'case studies' as a springboard for interrogating and digging deep into the nitty-gritty practices of these education systems, ripley elides their experiences abroad into disconnected snapshots that reveal little. in a way, it may not be ripley's fault. there may not have been space to talk about every relevant aspect of their year-long sabbaticals. i also feel that it boils down partially to an approach-angle mismatch. as i read on, i got the sense that ripley wanted to critique these education systems from a structural, across-the-board angle. and ripley's impressive at that - she managed to clinch interviews with ex-prime ministers and education ministers for this book, seemingly effortlessly. trust me, i'm trembling here in my journalist awe. those are the perfect parties to comment on broad context and critiquing abstract forces.

on the other hand, that meant it wasn't clear what the case studies of the three american teenagers was for-- they sure generated human interest at the start, but the thing is, their perspectives would have been best and most meaningfully used for scrutinising micro-scale issues. and yet their stories were heavily relied upon as a crutch for ripley's story. i got the sense that ripley never sat inside or at least, assessed, one of the classrooms that she critiqued for her book. ironic, considering she used these three teenagers as her espials to be her eyes within these classrooms.

speaking of which, here's another critique of ripley's book: the consistent dearth of voices from teachers or educators. it made the book come off slightly biased at the least. are their perspectives not critical to our understanding of flaws of education systems?

that's not to say her book is all bad though: i still learned something new from it. i found the chapters on south korea and poland most interesting. but i would've loved much, much more detail on how broader educational policies translated into day-to-day practices in the classroom. ripley did make attempts at that, but her links and connexions could have been more explicit. i personally prefer Lucy Crehan's Cleverlands, which does that better. speaking as someone who hails from singapore, one of the countries that did well on PISA, i also felt that her some of her arguments had loopholes.

so this book is good as a taster/introduction to the politics and policy-planning of education: but don't let yourself sink into tunnel vision because of it. be warned that ripley can be one-sided at times and her unquestioning acceptance of "good" policies and education systems (apparently, the PISA itself is an unproblematic golden metric) doesn't give the full picture of the current situation.

[Kellie Reynolds · Rating 4 out of 5]

Amanda Ripley followed three high school students who spent one year as foreign exchange students (Finland, South Korea, Poland). She spends some time on background (for individual students and describing how each of the three countries improved its educational system).

Ripley wrote the book when Common Core State Standards were just beginning to be implemented in the US. None the US data she discusses are based on post-Common Core implementation.

The book is easy to read and thought provoking. I wish she included links to the references for her facts. She presents a lot of information as factual data and there is a long list of references at the end of the book. However, it is not clear what references support the facts and data as you read the book (I read the Nook version). Thus, I will need to go back and verify any data that were new to me.
(The lack of links to references is the reason I rated the book 4 stars instead of 5)

Ripley's conclusions and observations, regarding ways to improve education (focus on the US), include:

1. There need to be more stringent criteria for admitting individuals into educational programs. Future teachers need to receive high scores on college entrance exams. Once in school, education majors should receive a rigorous education. Ripley spends a lot of time writing about education of future math and science teachers. If only the best candidates become teachers, the profession will be highly respected, teachers can be highly compensated, and the teachers can handle larger classes (fewer teachers, higher pay per teacher, no increase in overall cost).

2. K-12 curriculum needs to be more rigorous and consistent (she seems to favor basic concepts of Common Core)

3. Standards are important, but the implementation (curriculum) can be flexible if the teachers are well trained and talented.

4. School is for education. Ripley is not a fan of school sponsored sports (which is clear from her article in the Oct 2013 issue of The Atlantic). In particular, she does not like the combined coach/teacher position.

5. Students should not be split into tracks (on-level, gifted, etc) too early. She seems opposed to tracking before high school. Teachers should have high expectations for all students.

6. Schools (school systems; govt) should put money where there is more need.

7. Technology in schools (tablets, interactive white boards) are not essential for a good education and their value is not proven.

8. Parents need to be involved with their children's educations- as coaches, not as cheerleaders and bake sale sponsors. They need to help more during elementary school and decrease as students get older.

9. Standardized tests should require demonstration of higher level thinking and problem solving. There should be individual student level intervention for poor scores.

Most of the points above are the subject of some current debate. Even if I do not agree with the points, I will follow-up and learn more about the subject matter.

[Courtenay · Rating 2 out of 5]

I found this book insightful at times, but mostly, it just frustrated the hell out of me. As a teacher, I don't need to have the challenges and shortfalls of the American education system listed off to me; I live that reality every day. I was also frustrated by Ripley's habit of holding up observations with the implication that correlation equals causation. I'm left to draw the conclusion that American schools are failing because teachers 1) only come to the profession because we really want to be coaches 2) can't pass rigorous content tests 3) don't believe that students of poverty can be high achieving 4) help students work though test questions that they can't complete on their own. I heard example after example of teachers who reminded me more of Edna Crabapple from the Simpsons than the men and women with whom I'm proud and grateful to work and collaborate. This, to me, is a symptom of how journalists, politicians, policy-makers, parents.... seemingly everyone feels comfortable attacking and blaming teachers.

Also, can we not agree that comparing American schools and students to their Finnish counterparts is comparing apples and oranges? Finland has a population (and therefore an educational bureaucracy) roughly the size of Minnesota's. Their tax rate, access to health care, and most importantly CULTURE, are very different from ours. And, their child poverty rate is 5%, while ours is 20%. (Ripley dismisses poverty as a reason for failure which I am very skeptical of doing. Of course, I believe that students living in poverty can succeed and achieve. But not to acknowledge that they do it despite incredible trauma and in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles is naive at best.)

I do agree with her observations on the destructive influence the self-esteem movement has had on American school culture, the positive outcome of high expectations, the importance of covering a smaller amount of material more thoroughly, fewer standardized tests that mean more to students' futures, the detrimental effects of early tracking, and the idea that money spent on technology is better spent training, recruiting, hiring and paying teachers. (Although, what's she got against SMART boards? She brought them up over and over as a hallmark of what's wrong with American priorities.)

I think the thing that frustrated me the most is that this book was a series of observation that made vague references to root causes. I know our system is broken, and I have spent the last 10 years working as an agent for change. This book did nothing to move me toward being more successful in that endeavor.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a very well written narrative on why certain countries' students perform so well scholastically. Amanda Ripley is a journalist, and her writing style is captivating.

The book focuses on why Finland, South Korea, and Poland do so well in terms of student scores on a test (PISA) that measures creative and critical thinking. Page 3 features a chart that co9mpares a number of different countries on their students' performance, based on results from a number of tests. The United States does not distinguish itself here, being in the lower tier of 15 societies.

Ripley examines why different countries score differently (primarily using PISA). Her method is odd, albeit seemingly persuasive. She follows three American AFS students, in a foreign exchange program. They come from Oklahoma (Kim), Pennsylvania (Tom), and Minnesota (Eric). Each goes to a different country--South Korea, Poland, and Finland--each of which features students scoring very high on PISA. Ripley follows them throughout the year, uses them as informants about education, interviews staff in the American and foreign high schools, and so on. The end result is a set of conclusions as to why these three countries do so much better than the United States.

A central conclusion by Ripley (Page 193): "To give our kids the kind of education they deserved, we had to first agree that rigor mattered most of all; that school existed to help kids to learn to think, to work hard, and yes, to fail." She observes that sports is much more important in American high schools than in the three other countries studied--probably at the expense of a focus on academics.

So far, so good. Emphasizing academics and expecting hard--and good--work do go with better student performance, as data suggest. However, Ripley depends more on her three informants than on data. And that is an issue to me. Are these three students typical? Are their experiences typical? Can we develop hard conclusions about what works and what doesn't based on a sample size of three? If one looks to this as a source of suggestions about why students fare better in some countries rather than others, the book works well. If one depend on this as a powerful source of knowledge about what yields success, there would be a problem.

Still and all, this is a fascinating book that gets the reader to thinking--and that is a positive contribution of this volume.

[Sera · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent book that grapples with what makes a country's educational system successful (or not). Of course, the U.S. lags behind, particularly in the areas of math and science. The author puts forth her theories based upon a standardized global test that ranks each country and provides the personal experiences of students who have been educated both in the U.S. and abroad. Specifically, Ripley focuses on Finland, South Korea and Poland and compares their educational systems to the one in the U.S. from the grade school through high school levels.

I actually found that Ripley's theories made sense and that the results of the countries with the "smartest" students spoke for themselves. The U.S.' easy path to becoming a teacher, to its emphasis on self-esteem and sports versus rigor and academics, makes a pretty compelling case that we have it all wrong in this country when it comes to education. We've dumb downed our approach to education, and now we scratch our heads as we watch jobs move overseas because companies can't find talent in the U.S. to fulfill the roles that they have. As we argue over tax cuts and what the minimum wage should be, jobs are relocating less for tax or fiscally-related reasons, but because we are graduating student after student who lacks the problem-solving, critical thinking and communication skills necessary to handle a job that pays well. The world has changed and unfortunately, America hasn't prepared its children for the new skills that are needed to succeed, and we are all to blame for that outcome.

The good news is that change can be made and it can be made rapidly, as Poland has shown. Unfortunately, we need to start with what it takes to become a teacher. Ripley makes a good point that countries, such as Finland, make it very difficult (and therefore, by its nature, more prestigious) to become a teacher. Therefore, the point of entry is where the qualification process takes place, not after a bad teacher is already in the system, and the difficulty associated with trying to take them out.

I encourage everyone to read this book. It has many key insights related to successful educational systems that people of any nation would find useful.

[Elyse Walters · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great Book Club Pick (which is this month's local book club pick)

Easy Fast reading -- (enjoyable --not 'textbook' style). Has a very 'human' quality-style --- REAL people --REAL characters ---REAL stories. (3 American kids travel other countries, etc.)

I can't prove the factual data presented --(if accurate or not) --but if its even 'close' to being the truth --- WOW --- this book is 'eye-opening'.

I took away many things to think about. Looks pretty clear to me why many kids in our country do not do well in math and science for example.

This book suggested future teachers should receive HIGHER college entrance college entrance exam scores than they do now (be in the upper 10 percent). We should be picking the BEST qualified teachers. NOT just let nice caring people teach because they love children. They must show mastery ---
As a doctor must show 'mastery'.

Should a doctor become a doctor because he loves the human body and wants to help people be healthy? (but is not up to standard?) --- Well?? We've had different standards for measuring teachers than doctors. WHY? (the book does a great job with this discussion)

As for Sports in Schools? hm??? A person begins to wonder after reading this book.

Maybe our schools ARE for academic purpose PERIOD! (sports are elective elsewhere)

Parents, Teachers.... People with an interest in education ---
This book creates an opening for important conversations!

[Andrew Obrigewitsch · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was quite good. It was very well researched and really opened my eyes the fact that the U.S. education system has pretty much degenerated into mediocrity. Which I can support with own experiences in high school.

Highly recommended to anyone that cares about the future.

[Aaron Thibeault · Rating 4 out of 5]

*A full executive summary of this book is available here: http://newbooksinbrief.com/2013/09/12...

The main argument: In the recent past the K-12 public education system in the United States has been lackluster at best (some might say deplorable). Not that the various levels of government have not put in a great deal of effort (and money) to try and fix the problem; indeed, numerous attempts at education reform have been tried over the past 20 years or so, and the US currently spends more on public education per student than any other nation. Still, all of these good intentions (and boatloads of money) have achieved relatively little in terms of results. When compared with other developed nations, for example, American high school students currently rank 12th in reading, 17th in science, and a paltry 26th in math. These numbers would be concerning even at the best of times, but with the nation currently struggling through a seemingly endless economic slow-down, and with the global economy becoming increasingly competitive (and modern jobs requiring more and more advanced cognitive skills all the time), these numbers are very troubling indeed.

All is not lost, though. Other nations have shown that they are able to achieve far better academic results using far less money, and thus we may deem it high time that we investigate just what the leading nations are doing different that has allowed them to be so successful. It is this very project that journalist Amanda Ripley sets for herself in her new book 'The Smartest Kids in the World: And How They Got That Way'.

Ripley focuses her attention on the education systems of 3 countries in particular: South Korea, Finland and Poland. South Korea and Finland are chosen due to their being on top of the world when it comes to academic results, while Poland is chosen since it has recently been able to improve academic outcomes greatly despite the fact that the country faces many of the same challenges as the US—including especially a high rate of child poverty.

When it comes to the author’s approach in the book, it is very much that of the investigative journalist: Ripley relies heavily on interviews with specific players in the education systems of the various countries at play (including students, teachers, principals, and politicians); and her main sources are 3 American exchange students (Eric, Kim and Tom) who spend a year immersed in the education systems of the respective countries.

When it comes to South Korea, we find that this country’s edge in education has to do mainly with the very intense motivation and hard work on the part of the students. This is a culture where it is no exaggeration to say that most students spend every waking minute on school work: students spend all day at school, eat dinner at school, and then proceed from there to private tutoring schools (called hagwons), where they study right up until bed-time (and often beyond it). The reason for this intense focus on education is that there is very fierce competition to be accepted into one of the few best universities in the country, and only those who score in the top 2% on a single test at the end of high school are allowed in (a set of circumstances that most Koreans actually resent, but which they nonetheless feel compelled to play along with).

In Finland we find that academic outcomes are on par with those in South Korea, but that the students here have achieved these results without the same level of acute devotion displayed in South Korea. Indeed, Finland’s edge in education appears to derive not so much from excessive studying, but from its very high quality of teachers—which begins with Finland’s exceptional teachers’ colleges. Specifically, the country’s few accredited teachers’ colleges are very selective in terms of who they accept, and the teacher education programs in Finland are themselves very lengthy and rigorous.

In Poland we find that the country’s improvements in academic outcomes as of late may be attributed to a host of recent reforms. These include the ratcheting up of the country’s education curriculum and standards; the awarding of more funds to vocational schools and schools that under-perform in terms of academic outcomes; and the delaying of the streaming of students (i.e., separating students into academic and vocational classes).

Beyond their peculiarities, we find that there is one thing that all 3 countries have in common (which is also shared by all nations that perform well when it comes to academics); and that is that they all maintain very high educational expectations and standards, and these standards are consistently tested in a way that holds real consequences for the students and their future prospects.

The good thing about Ripley's approach is that it gives us an insider's look into the education systems of the various countries discussed. This approach is particularly good at unearthing specific insights with regards to effective educational practices. However, the approach does have its drawbacks compared with one that is more scientific in nature, and broader in scope. Ideally, it would have been nice to see Ripley combine the two approaches in her book. Still, Ripley has done very well with the approach that she has chosen, and there are many important insights here. A full executive summary of the book is available here: http://newbooksinbrief.com/2013/09/12... A podcast discussion of the book will be available soon.

[Andy · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is an anecdotal, journalistic approach to a huge topic, so it makes for some good magazine articles, but not a great book. Other reviews here bring up numerous positive and specific points I won't repeat. What struck me most was the lack at the end of a model metropolitan school system anywhere in the US. Without that, the lessons from the world tour are hard to interpret. The one place I have heard of with general success across a whole American county was Raleigh: Hope and Despair in the American City: Why There Are No Bad Schools in Raleigh. And the lesson from that was to undo concentrated poverty in schools and establish middle-class social norms of educational success. While Ripley makes good points about spending per capita, she doesn't address the reality of concentrated poverty in the US with her international comparisons. Addressing that won't fix the low performance of kids in rich neighborhoods, but would likely do more than anything else to bring up average US performance.

[K's Corner · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a very interesting read and one that I would recommend to all parents, educators and anyone interested in improving the quality of education here, there, anywhere. It is not a how-to book by any stretch, nor does the author claim to have all the answers and in fact it all began with her simple quest to understand the huge discrepancies that exist between various countries' student test scores. This book is the result of that investigation. It provides a lot of valuable insights and observations based on methodical data-driven analysis as well as real world observations -- all of which could lead to some really really fantastic discussions or debates. :)

My main takes-ways as to the key ingredients for higher scoring countries are:

-Teacher development and selection are taken very seriously. Teachers are also given more autonomy and held accountable for success.

-More money spent per student or greater availability of technology does not equate to higher scores.

-Sports is not heavily emphasized, academics is.

-Parent involvement is huge (meaning parents acting as true coaches not just as cheerleaders or those participating in PTAs, bake sales etc)

-Student tracking starts much later, age ~16. Teachers follow a strict code of equity. Teachers cannot hold back or promote kids when they aren't ready. Bottom line- ALL kids have to learn.

-Student expectations are very high. As are not easy to get and Fs are not uncommon or disgraced.

-Student rigor can be cultivated (in relatively short spans of time) and doesn't have to be organic.

-Kids autonomy and decision making begin earlier and they are not as much coddled.

Student scores and learning is about being critical thinkers and knowing how to use the right tools and resources available to make progress. It is about making informed decisions and identifying patterns in a clutter filled world.

So you might be thinking... None of these are earth shattering or a major surprise. For me, it was very intriguing to read and I found myself saying Yes! Yes! Yes! throughout the book as if it validated a lot of my thoughts, hunches and gut feelings. The book itself is short but has insightful author's notes and analysis approach towards the back as well.

[Emmy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Did you know that across the globe the US ranks 26th in math, 17th in science and 12th in reading? Sadly our scores are barely increasing. However counties like Finland, have show a drastic improvement shooting to the top of the world. In the 1950's in Finland only 10% of students graduated from high school, that number is now 95%. What did Finland do to bring on these enormous improvements?

In The Smartest Kids in the World, Amanda Ripley doesn't just look at what the schools policies are and the ways they teach, but she actually tracks several American exchange students around the world to get a more inside perspective of the schools. There is the girl form small town Oklahoma who travels to Finland. There is also a boy who travels to Korea and one who travels to Poland. Here is a trailer of the book.

I graduated in psychology, so subjects like this often interest me but I honestly rarely ever finish these kinds of books anymore. Give me a good fiction any day of the week. This book was different. I found myself, highlighting, dog-earing pages, it was fascinating. It was very interesting to hear the students experiences and perspectives as well as Ripley's analysis of the schools and their policies. The information is presented in a way to be very informative but not over your head and also keeps you interested and engaged.

What is Finland's secret? Why are their scores so great? It doesn't come down to one simple answer but it begins with the teachers. Not just expecting the teachers to do more, but educating the teachers more; setting the teachers up for success to be able to succeed. In Finland, teaching has become a more prestigious career with it being a requirement to be in the top 1/3 of highschool graduates to be allowed into teaching colleges. With more well trained teachers, they are ready to really take control of the classroom and students respect them more as they are educated.

For anyone that has any interest in the education system and what it may take to finally really improve our schools, this is a great read.