International Schools as Incubators for Innovation 国际学校：创新孵化器
Every year, a consortium of international think tanks compiles a “Global Innovation Index” in which nations are ranked on 88 indices of “productive creativity.” This year, neither of the world’s two largest economies, has made it into the top five. Dropping to No.6, the U.S. has been surpassed by five other western nations (Switzerland, the U.K, Netherlands, Finland and Sweden.) At the 29th, China still trails its major Asian rivals including Singapore, Japan and South Korea.
According to the study’s authors, the major determinant of a nation’s innovation capability is the quality of its human capital. While factors such as technology and financial capital influence the innovation process, they correlate directly with the human factor. The takeaway: nurturing human capital through education “at all levels and in all sections of society" matters most.
Just as the Soviet launch of Sputnik in 1957 catalyzed a transformation in American science education, so policymakers in both the U.S. and China are now calling for an “innovation-centric” education overhaul to ensure global competitiveness. For the past decade, both countries have been scrambling for solutions, often searching outside their national boundaries and even to one another. As Americans are jettisoning their science and math curriculum in favor of more rigorous Asian imports , across China, clones of American kindergartens are rapidly supplanting traditional Chinese primary schools.
To date, there is scant evidence that national policy, imitation and transplantation are making schools in either the U.S. or China better at nurturing innovation. In the U.S., scores on the well-respected Torrance Creativity Inventory have been falling steadily since 1990, most dramatically for primary school students for whom STEM curricula have been enriched. As recent PISA results attest, billion dollar investments in STEM education at the secondary level have failed to raise American students’ aptitude for the scientific fields where most innovation is bred. Conversely, although Chinese students top the international achievement charts in scientific fields, interesting surveys suggest that aptitude does not translate into the motivation and enthusiasm that spark innovation. Moreover, according to a Duke University research team, while Chinese and Indian universities produce vastly more engineers than their U.S. counterparts, employers tend to rate these newly-minted Asian engineers deficient in independence and productivity, key drivers of innovation.
One Innovator’s Education
If innovation can’t be imitated, transplanted or legislated, how does it happen? We can approach this question historically by considering the educational experience of two of the world’s most acclaimed innovators, Sun Yat Sen and Bill Gates, Biographers of Sun Yat Sen, arguably China’s greatest political innovator, cite the profound influence of his secondary education at the Punahoa School, an independent college-preparatory high school located at the juncture of East and West in a then independent Hawaii . The school's educational philosophy encouraged students to become well-rounded, independent-minded scholars, as they pursued a rigorous curriculum that combined mathematics, natural science, and the humanities. But even more influential than curriculum or mission was the school’s outstanding international faculty, epitomized by Francis Damon, a Cantonese speaker who taught Greek and Latin. Impressed by Sun’s quick intelligence and idealism, Damon became Sun’s mentor and lifelong supporter. A century later, Punahoa teachers would likewise inspire another future political leader, the young Barack Obama.
The Punahoa School of Sun Yat Sen’s era was itself a tribute to innovation. Unlike the colonial schools established by Anglicans, which simply replicated British education, Punahoa’s visionary founders vowed never to “slavishly copy American or British colleges, German gymnasia, or any foreign models.” At the same time, they pledged an openness to “profit from the experience of each.” Perhaps, then, it’s no coincidence that Sun Yat Sen’s innovative vision for a modern China encompassed enlightened principles drawn from Confucian as well as Western traditions.
For the past five years, I’ve had the privilege of helping Chinese secondary schools establish and strengthen their international programs. This experience has convinced me that even more than the Punahoa School of Sun’s era, international schools are uniquely poised to foster the next generation of Chinese innovators. But I’ve also observed that this transformative power will not come through the acquisition of western assets - be they curricula, textbooks, technologies or English teachers. Rather, it is by transforming themselves into crucibles of cross-cultural innovation that international schools will inspire innovation in their students.
Creating the Crucible of Cross-Cultural Innovation: Begin with Teachers
Hire foreign teachers capable of teaching in content areas beyond English.
Pair foreign teachers and bilingual Chinese teachers to create and co-teach new courses
Incent foreign teachers to learn Mandarin and increase their understanding of Chinese cultural and educational norms.
Broaden the perspectives of Chinese teachers by providing opportunities for them to spend a year studying or teaching abroad.
Involve teams of foreign and Chinese English teachers in the recruitment and training of new teachers.
每年，一个由各领域创新专家组成的国际智库团体都会出版一份“全球创新指数”（Global Innovation Index，简称GII）报告，将全球88个国家的创新生产力做一个比较。今年，世界上最大的两个经济体均未能进入世界前五。从第一掉至第五，美国被其他五个西方国家（瑞士、英国、荷兰、芬兰和瑞典）赶下宝座。中国排在第29位，领先于它在亚洲的主要对手（新加坡、日本和韩国）。
报告的作者指出，一个国家创新能力的主要决定因素是人力资本。尽管科技和财力也影响着创新的进程，但是他们都与人有关。但最重要的是：通过教育培养“在所有层次和所有的社会阶层”的人力资本。
正如前苏联1957年第一颗人造卫星的发射加速了美国科学教育的转型，中国和美国的立法者们也开始呼吁“以创新为中心”的教育改革，旨在提高它们的全球竞争力。在过去的12年中，两个国家都在探索促进创新的办法，通常也会向其他国家，甚至是向对方寻找方法。然而当美国人开始抛弃他们的科学和数学课程，转而采用更加苛刻的亚洲模式时，美国的幼儿园却在中国快速地取代了传统的中国基础教育。
然而至今为止，无论是国家政策、学校的模仿或是转型都没有使得中国或是美国更能够培养创新力。在美国，极具地位的Torrance Creativity Inventory的分数从1990年开始就一直在下降，在那些自然科学学科（STEM）课程受重视的基础教育学生中间，这个现象更加严重。正如PISA（Programme for International Student Assessment，即国际学生评估项目）结果表明的那样，在初高中阶段高达10亿元的STEM教育投资并没有换来美国学生在科学领域的兴趣。相反，尽管中国学生在科学领域的国际学生表现中最优异，一项调查却显示他们的成绩并没有能促进对于创新的热情和动力。除此之外，美国杜克大学研究团队的一项研究表明，中国和印度的大学会比美国大学培养出更多的工程师，但是雇主们通常认为这些新晋的亚洲工程师们缺乏独立性和生产力，而这却是创新的关键。
一位创业家的教育
如果创新不能被模仿，转移或是通过立法实现，那么什么才是解决办法？我们可以从两位被世界视为创新家——孙中山和比尔·盖茨的教育经历中找找答案。孙中山的传记作者提到了孙中山本人在Punahoa School受到的高中教育对他产生了的影响。Punahoa School是一所提供大学预科教育的高中，这所学校的教育理念是在学生们学习一套结合了数学、自然科学和人文科学的严格课程的同时，鼓励学生们成为考虑周全的，有独立思维能力的学者。然而，比理念和课程还有影响的是学校里杰出的国际教育老师，以Francis Damon，一位讲着粤语的希腊语和拉丁语老师为代表。孙中山的智慧和理想主义给Damon留下了深刻的印象，他最后成为了孙中山的导师和终生的支持者。一个世纪以后，Punahoa的老师又培养出了另一位世界级的领袖——美国总统奥巴马。
孙中山时代的Punahoa School是创新的代表。不同于圣公会的信徒所建立的殖民学校只是简单地复制英国教育，Punahoa的创始人发誓绝不会“盲目地复制美国或是英国的学院，德国的体育馆或是其他外国的模型。”与此同时，他们决定要以开放的态度来从“彼此的经验中受益。”这样看来，孙中山有一个现代中国需要来自儒家思想和西方思想的教育者的理念也就不是什么巧合的事情了。
过去的五年里，我有幸能够帮助中国的中学发展和加强他们的国际教育项目。这使我坚信，国际教育是培养中国下一代的创新领导者的关键。但是我注意到，直接借鉴西方国家的教育——无论是他们的课程，教材，技术或是英语老师——都无法直接帮助达到教育转型的目的。唯有将这些学校投入到严酷的跨文化创新中，才能激发学生中的创新力。
跨文化的创新过程，需要从教师开始：
招聘不仅可以教英文的外籍老师；
让外籍老师和中英双语的中国老师一同参与新课程的研发和教学；
鼓励外籍教授学习普通话，加深他们对中国文化和教育制度的了解；
给中国老师提供可以在海外深造（学习或进行教学）的机会，开拓他们的视野；
将中国和外国老师引进招聘队伍来招聘和培训新老师。