The Asian Learner

Mathematics Education and Culture:

the “CHC” Learner phenomenon

Ngai-Ying Wong

Department of Curriculum and Instruction

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Hong Kong

In the past decades, the “CHC” (Confucian Heritage Culture) learner phenomenon had aroused the interest of sociologists, educationalists and psychologists (Bond, 1986, 1996; Biggs, 1994, Brand, 1987; Lau, 1996; Watkins & Biggs, 1996; Wong, 1996b, 1998a). The apparent academic success of Asian students in international comparisons is especially marked in mathematics (Robitaille & Garden, 1989; Lapointe, Mead, & Askew, 1992; Beaton et al., 1996). Much effort had been made in various areas, trying to explain such a phenomenon. Research studies were conducted with the help of conventional testing instruments, open-ended questions and classroom observations (Cai, 1995; Ho, 1986, Morris, 1985, 1988; Stevenson & Lee, 1990; Stevenson & Stigler, 1992; Stigler & Hiebert, 1999; Winter, 1990). Examination orientation, achievement orientation, use of repetitive learning, synthesis of memorisation and understanding, and the use of recitation to bring about sharp focus for better understanding were some of the themes of these research (Biggs, 1994; Dahlin & Watkins, 2000; Hau & Salili, 1991; Leung, 1998, 1999; Marton, Watkins, & Tang, 1997; Watkins & Biggs, 1996; Zhang, 1993; Zhang & Lee, 1991).

At the same time, some tried to attribute the phenomenon to the Confucian culture. It is often stated that salient characteristics of learning in the CHC include social-achievement orientation, diligence, attributing success to effort, a competitive spirit and a strong belief in the maxim “practice makes perfect”(Bond, 1986, 1996; Ho, 1986; Watkins & Biggs, 1996). These characteristics may be the results of the de-emphasis of non-mundane pursuits in the culture. Thus, it has become the Chinese philosophy of life to concentrate one’s efforts on the immediate goals of this life and on how much one’s achievements can pass on to the next generation (Qian, 1945). This was often described as the origin of collectivism (Kim et al., 1994).

However, when we try to portray the CHC in this way, we may be unconsciously identifying Asian/Chinese culture with Confucianism and equating Confucianism with what is said by Confucius himself. Above all other citations of Confucius, this saying on the process of education is the most often quoted, “Enlightenment comes when one is stunned and understanding when one is aroused; if one can’t respond with the other three corner if a corner is shown, then one is not in the proper track (of learning)” (Analects, 7:8). Confucius talked about experiencing rather than indoctrination (“Does the heaven speak ? The changing of the seasons, the growth of various beings, do the heavens speak (in order to express these phenomena) ?” (Analects, 17:19 – see Wong, 1998b; see also Lee, 1996).

Doubt, realisation and their alternation form a central part of learning in Confucianism. Zhu-Xi (the central figure of the neo-Confucianist movement in the Song dynasty: 960-1126) pointed out that “Reading books (the process of learning) is the arousing of doubt when one does not doubt and let those in doubt settle in the state of no doubt. This is where one grows” (Li, 1270, p. 296). According to Scandura (1977), the threat of discomfort is a prerequisite to the problem-solving process. Chan (Zen) masters also say that “A little doubt leads to small understanding while strong doubt leads to deep understanding”. In fact, one of the major tasks of Chan masters was to arouse a state of perplexity within the disciple. This is also clear from the words of the Sixth Patriarch Hui-Neng in Chapter 10 of his Platform Sutra (see also Wong, 1998a, 1998b).

Confucius valued individualised learning, a notion apparently quite contradictory to collectivism, one of the perceived characteristics of the CHC. In a public lecture at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Ference Marton pointed out that the CHC possesses cultural potential for the deepening of understanding by means of repetitive learning and the following passage of Zhu-Xi was quoted. “Generally speaking, in reading, we must first become intimately familiar with the text so that its words seem to come from our own mouths. We should then continue to reflect on it so that its ideas seem to come from our own minds. Only then can there be real understanding. Still, once our intimate reading of it and careful reflection on it have led to a clear understanding of it, we must continue to question. Then there might be additional progress. If we cease questioning, in the end there’ll be no additional progress” (see Li, 1270, pp. 166-167; Lee, 1996, pp. 35-36). In fact, Biggs (1994) distinguished rote learning with repetitive learning and Marton too, pointed out in the public lecture, that continuous practice with increasing variations could deepen understanding (see also Watkins, 1996). Confucius’ words, “Learn the new when revising the old” (Analects, 2:11) were also quoted in the lecture. In fact, scholars have pointed out that the first stance of the Analects of Confucius on learning, “Learn and practice frequently” (Analects, 1:1) should be interpreted as “Learn and put your knowledge into practice frequently”. Confucius did not particularly advocate rote learning and over-drilling (see also Lee, 1996). There are other misunderstandings of Confucius’ words. For instance, his saying that “I transmit, but I do not create” (Analects, 7:1) do not imply that Confucians suppress creativity (Elliott, 1999). What it actually means is the philosophical stance that truths are to be unfolded, not man-made.

Though it was often asserted that “the unifying intellectual philosophy in the Chinese ‘great tradition’ is Confucianism” (Yu, 1996, p.231), yet there are influences on the CHC that come from Taoism, Buddhism and other traditions. Chan Buddhism won high regards from Western scholars such as Fromm who took it as the blending of Taoism and Buddhism (Fromm, 1960). Nevertheless, Chan masters throughout the ages made every attempt to establish a suitable (learning) environment to bring about insight (sudden enlightenment) of the learner. The sudden and gradual paths laid down by Buddhism provide a great variety of learning experience which suits the temperament of individuals. The Buddhist philosophy of nurturing the potential of every single individual has its own merit and so we see that the “CHC style of education” (if there is such a notion) has far greater divergence than just rote learning and memorisation (Wong, 1998b).

When we talk about the CHC being an examination culture, perhaps we should distinguish learning from institutionalised learning. For instance, both the Confucian School in the Zhau (722-481 BC) and the neo-Confucian Colleges of the Song Dynastieswere somewhat anti-establishment (if not anti-government) in their time. Moreover, there had not prior experience of universal education which cannot be likened to the recruitment of civil servants that started in the Han Dynasty (206BC – 220AD) and the unified (“public”) examination system which began in the Sui(589-617) dynasty. The governments in these dynasties were not the provider of education and thus the curricula (how one teaches) were not unified in China, although there could be examination syllabuses and recommended textbooks (such as the Ten Mathematical Scriptures in the Tang Dynasty – 618-906 : see, for example Li & Du, 1976).

In sum, we should not confine ourselves to a number of perceived characteristics of CHC. Being pragmatic, rigid and striving only for social status may not be the only characteristics. The extent to which attention is paid to examination scores (and taking them as the only indicator of educational success) may also vary across social classes. Over-simplification and generalisation of the characteristics the CHC could detract us from looking ahead in the curriculum development of these regions (Wong & Wong, in preparation).

A recent research reveals that mathematics is perceived by Hong Kong students as an organised and a “calculable” subject where imagery, visualisation, feeling for numbers, spatial sense and reasoning are suppressed. The students tend to possess a narrow conception of mathematics (Wong, Lam, & Wong, 1998). That could be attributed to a unified curriculum, a unified examination format and even a unified teaching style which geared closely to examination requirements (some described it as “bird-cage teaching”, see Leung, 1995; Wong, 1996c). Educationalists have called for curriculum reform which release such a tension and some have suggested that we can put in non-routine examination questions to make teaching non-routine, put in high-order testing items in order to promote the teaching of higher-order skills. This lends great support from examination technology, which claims that this is possible, in a large scale. However, we may not be aware that, in doing so, we are, in fact, reinforcing the “examination driven-ness” of the curriculum (Hau, 1997; see also Lee, Zhang & Zheng, 1997; Zhang, 1993; Zhang & Lee, 1991). Rote learning which result from examination-orientation (not just an examination itself) does not only hamper intellectual growth but may not be a good tool for selection of talents since those who succeed in examinations may have passed by means of memorising standard solutions to stereotyped examination questions. This is clear if one analyses the situation generated from the eight-legged essays type of examinations popular in the Ming Dynasty (1368-1636)(Peterson, 1979).

We see from the above reasoning that there is no ground for believing that an examination culture is an unshakable part of the CHC, bringing about a “spoon-fed” education. There are no grounds either, for legitimising over-drilling by saying that CHC learners excel only in rote learning and do not aim for understanding. These assertions are not justified (Wong, 1997). The “backwash effect” of examinations should be turned into a driving force to enhance understanding rather than for screening and selection (Biggs, 1995).

Besides exploring the strengths of Chan, Confucius and Taoist traditions in nurturing the self-development of learners, in mathematics, the ways ancient Chinese mathematics did mathematics could also shed light on present-day mathematics teaching and learning (Fung & Wong, 1998; Siu, 1995; Zhang, 1993).

What can be said in a prescribed curriculum, including curriculum documents and teaching material, could be limited (Ericson & Shultz, 1992). As rightly pointed out by Lee, Zhang & Zheng (1997) that employing administrative means is not solution. J. Stigler (see Jackson, 1997) also pointed out that we need a reform that happens in the classroom (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999). Contrary to more unification and curriculum control, we should think of creating an environment that is conducive to learning and allows for the growth of the individual (Wong, 1993, 1996a). Such a desirable learning environment is needed regardless of what characteristics we find in the CHC culture. Professionalism of the teacher is prerequisite to such a genuine curriculum change that takes place beyond the issue of curriculum documents. Indeed we need a new breed of “scholar-teachers” to reverse the vicious circle of rote learning (Siu, Siu, & Wong, 1993; Wong & Su, 1994).

References

Beaton, A.E., Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Gonzalez, E.J., Kelly, D.L., & Smith, T.A. (1996). Mathematics Achievement in the Middle School Years: IEA’ Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS International Study Center.

Biggs, J. (1994). What are effective schools ? Lessons from East and West (The Radford Memorial Lecture). Australian Educational Researcher, 21, 19-39.

Biggs, J.B. (1995). Assumptions underlying new approaches to educational assessment: Implications for Hong Kong. Curriculum Forum, 4, no. 2, 1-22.

Bond, M.H. (Ed.) (1986). The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.

Bond, M.H. (Ed.) (1996). The Handbook of Chinese Psychology. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.

Brand, D. (1987). The new whiz kids: Why Asian Americans are doing well, and what it costs them (cover story). Time, August, 42-50.

Cai, J. (1995). A Cognitive Analysis of U.S. and Chinese Students’ Mathematical Performance on Tasks Involving Computation, Simple Problem Solving, and Complex Problem Solving: Monograph 7 of Journal of Research in Mathematics Education. Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Dahlin, B., & Watkins, D. (2000). The role of repetition in the processes of memorising and understanding: A comparison of the views of German and Chinese secondary school students in Hong Kong. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 65-84.

Elliot, D. (1999). Now please think: As Americans embrace testing, Asians pursue creativity - Learning to thinik (cover story). Newsweek, Sept 6, 38-41.

Ericson, F., & Shultz, J. (1992). Students’ experience of the curriculum. In P. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Curriculum, 465-485. New York: Macmillan.

Fromm, E. (1960). Psychoanalysis and Zen Buddhism. London: George Allen & Unwin.

Fung, C.I., & Wong, N.Y. (1998). Connections through the development of mathematical ideas: The case of solution to high degree polynomial equations in medieval Chinese mathematics. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education, 6, 71-88.

Hau, K.T. (1997). To Avoid Jumping from the Fire Pan into Fire: Recommendations on Assessing Primary Students’ Academic Ability (in Chinese) - Occasional Paper No. 12. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research.

Hau, K.T., & Salili, F. (1991). Structure and semantic differential placement of specific causes: Academic causal attributions by Chinese students in Hong Kong. International Journal of Psychology, 26, 175-193.

Ho, D.Y.F. (1986). Chinese patterns of socialization: A critical review. In M.H. Bond (Ed.). The Psychology of the Chinese People. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.

Jackson, A. (1997). The Math Wars: California Battles It Out over Mathematics Reform (Part II). Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 44(7), 817-823.

Kim, U., Triandis, H.C., Kagitcibasi, C., Choi, S.C., & Yoon, G. (Eds.) (1994). Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method and Application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lapointe, A.E., Mead, N.A., & Askew, J.M. (Eds.) (1992). The International Assessment of Educational Progress Report No. 22-CAEP-01: Learning Mathematics. New Jersey: The Center for the Assessment of Educational Progress, Educational Testing Service.

Lau, S. (Ed.) (1996). Growing Up the Chinese Way. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.

Lee, P.Y., Zhang, D., & Zheng, Z. (1997). Examination culture and the teaching of mathematics (in Chinese). EduMath, 4, 96-103.

Lee, W.O. (1996). The cultural context for Chinese learners: Conceptions of learning in the Confucian tradition. In D.A. Watkins & J.B. Biggs, J.B. (Ed.s), The Chinese Learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences, 25-41. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre and Victoria, Australia: The Australian Council for the Educational Research.

Leung, F.K.S. (1998). The implications of Confucianism for education today. Journal of Thought, 33(2), 25-36.

Leung, F.K.S. (1999). The traditional Chinese views of mathematics and education: Implications for mathematics education in the new millennium. In C. Hoyles, C. Morgan, & G. Woodhouse (Eds). Mathematics Education in the 21st Century, 240-247. London: Falmer Press Ltd.

Leung, K.T. (1995). Mathematics education: What I saw, heard and thought (in Chinese). Keynote speech presented at the Symposium “Hong Kong Mathematics Education: Retrospect and Outlook”, 10th June, The University of Hong Kong. Later published in EduMath, 1, 4-11.

Li, J.D. (1270). Selections from the conversations of Master Zhu, arranged topically. Reprint: Taipei: Ching Chung Bookstore, 1961; English translation: D,K, Gardner (tr.). Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1990.

Li, Y., and Du, S. (1976). A Concise History of Ancient Chinese Mathematics (in Chinese). Hong Kong: Commercial Press. English translation: Crossley, J.N., and Lun, A.W. (tr.s) (1987). Chinese Mathematics: A Concise History. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Science Publications.

Marton, F., Watkins, D., & Tang, C. (1997). Discontinuities and continuities in the experience of learning: An interview study of high-school students in Hong Kong. Learning and Instruction, 7, 21-48.

Morris, P. (1985). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to the implementation of a pedagogic innovation: A South East Asian case study. International Review of Education, 31, 3-18.

Morris, P. (1988). Teachers’ attitudes towards a curriculum innovation: An East Asian study. Research in Education, 40, 75-87.

Peterson, W. (1979). Bitter Gourd, Chapter 3: Examination Man, 44-63. Yale: Yale University Press.

Qian, M. (1945). Soul and Mind. In M. Qian (1976). Soul and Mind. (in Chinese). Taipei: Jing Lian Publications.

Robitaille, D.F., & Garden, R.A. (1989). The IEA Study of Mathematics II: Contexts and outcomes of school mathematics. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Scandura, J.M. (1977). Problem Solving: A Structural/Process Approach with Instructional Implications. New York: Academic Press.

Siu, M.K. (1995). Mathematics education in ancient China: What lesson do we learn from it ?. Historia Scientiarum, 4, 223-232.

Siu, F.K., Siu, M.K., & Wong, N.Y. (1993). Changing times in mathematics education: The need of a scholar-teacher. In C.C. Lam, H.W. Wong, & Y.W. Fung (Ed.s), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Curriculum Changes for Chinese Communities in Southeast Asia: Challenges of the 21st Century, 223-226.

Stevenson, H.W., & Lee, S. (1990). Contexts of Achievement: Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development Serial No. 221, Vol. 55. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Stevenson, H.W., & Stigler, J.W. (1992). The Learning Gap: Why our schools are failing and what we can learn from Japanese and Chinese education. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Stigler, J.W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The Teaching Gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Watkins, D.A. & Biggs, J.B. (Eds.) (1996). The Chinese Learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre and Victoria, Australia: The Australian Council for the Educational Research.

Winter, S. (1990). Teacher approval and disapproval in Hongkong Secondary School Classrooms. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 88-92.

Wong, N.Y. (1996a). Students’ perceptions of their mathematics classroom. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education, 4, 89-107.

Wong, N.Y. (1996b). Asian learner: Smarter or just works harder ?. Paper presented at the 8th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Seville, Spain.

Wong, N.Y. (1996c). The other report of the Hong Kong mathematics educational reform (in Chinese). Keynotes speech presented at the Hong Kong Mathematics Education Conference – 96, 23rd, December, The University of Hong Kong. Later published in C.I. Fung (Ed.), The Path of Hong Kong Mathematics Curriculum Reform, 141-160. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Association for Mathematics Education.

Wong, N.Y. (1998a). In Search of the “CHC” Learner: Smarter, Works Harder or Something More ?. Plenary lecture. In H.S. Park, Y.H. Choe, H. Shin, & S.H. Kim (Eds.). Proceedings of the ICMI-East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematical Education, 1, 85-98.

Wong, N.Y. (1998b). The gradual and sudden paths of Tibetan and Chan Buddhism: A pedagogical perspective. Journal of Thought, 33(2). 9-23.

Wong, N.Y., & Wong, W.Y. (in preparation). Reflections on the CHC learning phenomenon (in Chinese). Unpublished manuscript.