The Future of China?, Where India left in dust? Options

[richasiankid]

Some rhapsodise just how great India will thrive on multi-religious democracy (unlike Israel or mid east). Others fancy India becoming like HK or S'pore securing itself via English facility against evil Sinic hegemony.

But in the end it's a lesson where everything's sweet & swell India where it doesn't measure up, where it still can't even secure the basics and where human capital matters:

http://www.zshare.net/download/97642747c4df52c8/ (light end of tunnel; patience patience!)

PISA 2009 report for (against?) India?

Cities of India are still at the very very bottom, while cities like Shanghai are wowwing off the charts.

Yet another data point we're different.....

[AnybodyKiller]

Why not deconstruct both?

Why do overseas Indians outcompete other Asians as well as host citizens in terms of education & economic success if they are such poor "human capital"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American#Education

Indian Income- $88,583
Average- $44,684

64% of Indian Americans have attained a Bachelor's degree or more. Compared to 28% nationally, and 44% average for all Asian American groups

I would trade 20 points of this imaginary "IQ" for $40,000 yearly salary and a Bachelors degree in a heartbeat.

It's painfully obvious that richasiankid's goals for placing Chinese and East Asians on a pedestal is masturbation at best. He tries to correlate outdated IQ scores, measurements of "g" and mathematics test scores with predictions from organizations like the IMF that China will be the next super power.

I don't have a problem with this, what I do have a problem him claiming this as immutable evidence of Chinese superiority over everyone including Southeast Asians who cluster as close as .005 (another race is about .1-.2)

Again this is basically the equivalent of a Northern European claiming superiority over a Southern European. I'm starting to suspect an ulterior motive.

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Dec 27 2011, 08:23 PM

[richasiankid]

Why not deconstruct both?

Why do overseas Indians outcompete other Asians as well as host citizens in terms of education & economic success if they are such poor "human capital"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American#Education

Indian Income- $88,583
Average- $44,684

64% of Indian Americans have attained a Bachelor's degree or more. Compared to 28% nationally, and 44% average for all Asian American groups

I would trade 20 points of this imaginary "IQ" for $40,000 yearly salary and a Bachelors degree in a heartbeat.

It's painfully obvious that richasiankid's goals for placing Chinese and East Asians on a pedestal is masturbation at best. He tries to correlate outdated IQ scores, measurements of "g" and mathematics test scores with predictions from organizations like the IMF that China will be the next super power.

I don't have a problem with this, what I do have a problem him claiming this as immutable evidence of Chinese superiority over everyone including Southeast Asians who cluster as close as .005 (another race is about .1-.2)

Again this is basically the equivalent of a Northern European claiming superiority over a Southern European. I'm starting to suspect an ulterior motive.

If the Indian diaspora is what's going to transform one billion+ people into the next superpower known as India, God help her.

Believe it or not I raised that very same question with an Indian poster once and he sent me back a message saying that the Indian diaspora are not uniformly successful (which I didn't know at the time). Take a look at South East Asia, for example, and more specifically Malaysia, where Chinese > Malays > Indians -- all in spite of those Chinese are actually often being looked down upon by their NE Asian brethren (much like Afrikaners by the Dutch). Same with some other pacific Islands like Fiji or South Africa if I recall that he cited. I subsequently came across this article which you may be interested in.

Think of it this way: Vancouverites are frequently under the impression that all Chinese are super filthy rich. Not only are they not into mortgages (let alone subprime), they have a rep of buying houses in cash. Yet if you go to China or HK you actually see many poor people there housed in cages. Why are all these HK people so "rich"? Unlike US immigration policy, the Canadian one acted as a sieve - and those who went to Canada are not necessarily all representative.

In a more extreme sense, the H-1B Visa can work miracles. As another Indian poster quipped, that H1B is more coveted than any university degree. Yet based on the PISA scores that's posted, how many are even capable of being high school grads...? In other words, just how skewed is the American sample? Don't take my word for it - ask them - and they'll invariably tell you - sooner or later - somehow they're all Brahmins in one way or another and they're not representative of the rest of their 1 billion+ poor.

But to return to this thread, I'll add one more point for clarification. In the graphs that I posted before it's actually easy to underestimate the differences between Shanghai and the two Indian cities. (This is a point which even the economist didn't get a while ago prior to release of Indian data, see here, where it plotted all scores linearly from zero!! Talk about irony......i.e. economist which doesn't get numbers.....)

No, the whole idea of PISA scores is that it's normed with a mean of roughly 500 for OECD countries, and a standard deviation of 100. That means that compared to the OECD average, China Shanghai is a whole whopping 1 standard deviation above the OECD mean in math (i.e. roughly the magnitude of the controversial black-white IQ difference in the United States); 3/4 standard deviation above the OECD mean in Sciences; and slightly more than 1/2 SD above the OECD mean in reading. Translated into percentiles, an average Shanghai student is roughly 84, 78, and 69th percentile compared to OECD mean (roughly). But how does Shanghai compare with the two Indian cities which are quoted unflatteringly by PISA as:

Himachal Pradesh-India

The mean reading literacy score for Himachal Pradesh-India was 317. This was the lowest mean reading score
observed in PISA 2009 and PISA 2009+, along with that of Kyrgyzstan.

In Himachal Pradesh-India, 11% of students are estimated to have a proficiency in reading literacy that is at or
above the baseline level needed to participate effectively and productively in life. It follows that 89% of students in
Himachal Pradesh-India are estimated to be below this baseline level.

Students in Himachal Pradesh-India attained a mean score of 338 on the PISA mathematical literacy scale,
statistically the same as those observed in Tamil Nadu-India and Kyrgyzstan. In Himachal Pradesh-India, 12% of
students are proficient in mathematics at least to the baseline level at which they begin to demonstrate the kind
of skills that enable them to use mathematics in ways considered fundamental for their future development. In
Himachal Pradesh-India, there was a statistically significant gender difference of 30 score points in mathematical
literacy, favouring boys.

Himachal Pradesh-India’s students were estimated to have a mean score of 325 on the scientific literacy scale,
which is below the means of all OECD countries. This was the lowest mean science score observed in PISA 2009
and PISA 2009+, along with that of Kyrgyzstan. In Himachal Pradesh-India, 11% of students are proficient in
science at least to the baseline level at which they begin to demonstrate the science competencies that will enable
them to participate actively in life situations related to science and technology. In Himachal Pradesh-India, there
was a statistically significant gender difference of 20 score points in scientific literacy, favouring boys.

Tamil Nadu-India

Students in Tamil Nadu-India attained a mean score of 337 on the PISA reading literacy scale. This mean score is
significantly higher than those for Himachal Pradesh-India and Kyrgyzstan but lower than all other participants
in PISA 2009 and PISA 2009+.

In Tamil Nadu-India, 17% of students are estimated to have a proficiency in reading literacy that is at or above
the baseline level needed to participate effectively and productively in life. This means that 83% of students in
Tamil Nadu-India are estimated to be below this baseline level.

Students in Tamil Nadu-India attained a mean score of 351 on the PISA mathematical literacy scale, the same as those observed in Himachal Pradesh-India, Panama and Peru. This was significantly higher than the mean observed in Kyrgyzstan but lower than those of other participants in PISA 2009 and PISA 2009+. In Tamil Nadu-India, 15% of students are proficient in mathematics at least to the baseline level at which they begin to demonstrate the kind of skills that enable them to use mathematics in ways considered fundamental for their future development. In Tamil Nadu-India, there was no statistically significant difference in the performance of boys and girls in mathematical literacy.

Students in Tamil Nadu-India were estimated to have a mean score of 348 on the scientific literacy scale, which
is below the means of all OECD countries, but significantly above the mean observed in the other Indian state,
Himachal Pradesh. In Tamil Nadu-India, 16% of students are proficient in science at least to the baseline level
at which they begin to demonstrate the science competencies that will enable them to participate actively in life
situations related to science and technology. In Tamil Nadu-India, there was a statistically significant gender
difference of 10 score points in scientific literacy, favouring girls.

More than a TWO standard deviation difference.

Imagine that.

And the average Indian student in the two cities surveyed, compared to Shanghai, are at roughly Shanghai's 2nd percentile!! At the 2% level!!

Now, in psychometrics, a two standard deviation below the norm is definition of mental retardation.

And these 15-year-olds are the face of India's future?

Like I said, God help India.


* * *
Postscript: I've heard a variation of the following not in relation to how China compares to India but the US. Some will be saying, oh, but you're comparing Shanghai which is not representative of China. While the US score is low, we expect those populations with blacks (e.g. southern states) to score lower and drag down white America's average. Well, yes and no. Certainly some states do much worse than others. And this is from the last round of PISA where Shanghai was not included but where "lower-scoring" entities like Taiwan and Korea were.

And look at the results.

To paraphrase Nietzsche, if you stare long enough into the future, the future stares back at you.

Cheers,

[AnybodyKiller]

If the Indian diaspora is what's going to transform one billion+ people into the next superpower known as India, God help her.

Believe it or not I raised that very same question with an Indian poster once and he sent me back a message saying that the Indian diaspora are not uniformly successful (which I didn't know at the time). Take a look at South East Asia, for example, and more specifically Malaysia, where Chinese > Malays > Indians -- all in spite of those Chinese are actually often being looked down upon by their NE Asian brethren (much like Afrikaners by the Dutch). Same with some other pacific Islands like Fiji or South Africa if I recall that he cited. I subsequently came across this article which you may be interested in.

Think of it this way: Vancouverites are frequently under the impression that all Chinese are super filthy rich. Not only are they not into mortgages (let alone subprime), they have a rep of buying houses in cash. Yet if you go to China or HK you actually see many poor people there housed in cages. Why are all these HK people so "rich"? Unlike US immigration policy, the Canadian one acted as a sieve - and those who went to Canada are not necessarily all representative.

In a more extreme sense, the H-1B Visa can work miracles. As another Indian poster quipped, that H1B is more coveted than any university degree. Yet based on the PISA scores that's posted, how many are even capable of being high school grads...? In other words, just how skewed is the American sample? Don't take my word for it - ask them - and they'll invariably tell you - sooner or later - somehow they're all Brahmins in one way or another and they're not representative of the rest of their 1 billion+ poor.

But to return to this thread, I'll add one more point for clarification. In the graphs that I posted before it's actually easy to underestimate the differences between Shanghai and the two Indian cities. (This is a point which even the economist didn't get a while ago prior to release of Indian data, see here, where it plotted all scores linearly from zero!! Talk about irony......i.e. economist which doesn't get numbers.....)

No, the whole idea of PISA scores is that it's normed with a mean of roughly 500 for OECD countries, and a standard deviation of 100. That means that compared to the OECD average, China Shanghai is a whole whopping 1 standard deviation above the OECD mean in math (i.e. roughly the magnitude of the controversial black-white IQ difference in the United States); 3/4 standard deviation above the OECD mean in Sciences; and slightly more than 1/2 SD above the OECD mean in reading. Translated into percentiles, an average Shanghai student is roughly 84, 78, and 69th percentile compared to OECD mean (roughly). But how does Shanghai compare with the two Indian cities which are quoted unflatteringly by PISA as:

[/indent]

[indent]

More than a TWO standard deviation difference.

Imagine that.

And the average Indian student in the two cities surveyed, compared to Shanghai, are at roughly Shanghai's 2nd percentile!! At the 2% level!!

Now, in psychometrics, a two standard deviation below the norm is definition of mental retardation.

And these 15-year-olds are the face of India's future?

Like I said, God help India.


* * *
Postscript: I've heard a variation of the following not in relation to how China compares to India but the US. Some will be saying, oh, but you're comparing Shanghai which is not representative of China. While the US score is low, we expect those populations with blacks (e.g. southern states) to score lower and drag down white America's average. Well, yes and no. Certainly some states do much worse than others. And this is from the last round of PISA where Shanghai was not included but where "lower-scoring" entities like Taiwan and Korea were.

And look at the results.

To paraphrase Nietzsche, if you stare long enough into the future, the future stares back at you.

Cheers,

Nietzsche (How fitting)
"If you stare long enough into the future, the future stares back at you"

Funny, he should tell that to all those organizations he puts so much faith in predicting "certain countries will or will not succeed". They predicted at such a high rate in the past, why not (Sarcasm Font). And we should just "face the facts" of this undeniable truth ?

The rest is pretty much more of the same; Trying to imply causation between "PISA math scores" and the future success of nations. Just more masturbation of what will supposedly happen in the future as predicted by predominantly European organizations based on research gathered by other European organizations.

Ask yourself this, what ways do PISA scores measure the potential of a person? Rather than how hard he has worked to obtain those scores.

I like this quote too...

they'll invariably tell you - sooner or later - somehow they're all Brahmins in one way or another and they're not representative of the rest of their 1 billion+ poor

They might tell you this, but it wouldn't be the truth. In terms of populations genetics the "castes" are nearly indistinguishable. It would be like an English person claiming they are different races from French and Germans and less "inherently intelligent" at that.

Has having a "Low Average IQ" stopped India from developing into a nuclear power with (until recently) the fastest nuclear strike capability on the planet? But hey! they didn't do their sophomore math homework.

Game over man, Game over...

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Dec 28 2011, 07:36 PM

[foi2]

The rest is pretty much more of the same; Trying to imply causation between "PISA math scores" and the future success of nations. Just more masturbation of what will supposedly happen in the future as predicted by predominantly European organizations based on research gathered by other European organizations.

Ask yourself this, what ways do PISA scores measure the potential of a person? Rather than how hard he has worked to obtain those scores.

I like this quote too...

They might tell you this, but it wouldn't be the truth. In terms of populations genetics the "castes" are nearly indistinguishable. It would be like an English person claiming they are different races from French and Germans and less "inherently intelligent" at that.

Has having a "Low Average IQ" stopped India from developing into a nuclear power with (until recently) the fastest nuclear strike capability on the planet? But hey! they didn't do their sophomore math homework.

Game over man, Game over...

You speak too soon. It's pretty clear to me that the economic success of nations largely depend on the quality of its talent(i.e. "Human Capital"). PISA Math scores reflect just that, the quality of Human capital in a nation. Fact of the matter is, PISA scores highly correlate with economic development. So if you measure 'Success' in economic terms, you can't afford to ignore standardized scores like PISA.

On the other hand, I don't think countries like China should gloat either over their high scores. If history has taught us anything at all, it's that social institutions are *MUCH* more important to economic success than the quality of human capital. Just look at North Korea, or China before Deng. All were horribly beaten by the west, who scored 1 standard deviation lower on the PISA math.

PISA scores and standardized tests like PISA are one important ingredient of success. But it's not the only thing that matters. If China doesn't reform to introduce more competition in its economy and insists on controlling the economy, then its economy will likewise suffer. The short-sightedness of ignoring capitalism will come around to bite them in the @$$ in the future. Command economies are never going to be as efficient at allocating resources as privatized economies. When was the last time you heard of a government agency outperforming a private company? Never. And there's a reason why. Economic success is borne out of competition. Without competition, there is no success.

There's a reason America leads. It's not because of PISA scores. It's because the social institutions in America keeps the spirit of competition alive. China has done well with Deng's reforms in the last 30 years, but the pace of economic reform is faltering, and I'm afraid the future does not bold well for China if this keeps up.

[richasiankid]

You speak too soon. It's pretty clear to me that the economic success of nations largely depend on the quality of its talent(i.e. "Human Capital"). PISA Math scores reflect just that, the quality of Human capital in a nation. Fact of the matter is, PISA scores highly correlate with economic development. So if you measure 'Success' in economic terms, you can't afford to ignore standardized scores like PISA.

On the other hand, I don't think countries like China should gloat either over their high scores. If history has taught us anything at all, it's that social institutions are *MUCH* more important to economic success than the quality of human capital. Just look at North Korea, or China before Deng. All were horribly beaten by the west, who scored 1 standard deviation lower on the PISA math.

PISA scores and standardized tests like PISA are one important ingredient of success. But it's not the only thing that matters. If China doesn't reform to introduce more competition in its economy and insists on controlling the economy, then its economy will likewise suffer. The short-sightedness of ignoring capitalism will come around to bite them in the @$$ in the future. Command economies are never going to be as efficient at allocating resources as privatized economies. When was the last time you heard of a government agency outperforming a private company? Never. And there's a reason why. Economic success is borne out of competition. Without competition, there is no success.

There's a reason America leads. It's not because of PISA scores. It's because the social institutions in America keeps the spirit of competition alive. China has done well with Deng's reforms in the last 30 years, but the pace of economic reform is faltering, and I'm afraid the future does not bold well for China if this keeps up.

To rudely jump in anyway and I agree with close to 99% you said. At the same time I don't think it totally explains the China-India gap. Knowing how indices are concocted (not least Americans' idea of projection) and HK and Singapore are indeed wealthy, the so-called Index of Economic Freedom actually reveals China having less economic freedom (rank 135) vs India (rank 124).

Just another datapoint for pocketbooks.