Download pdf
A Comparison Between Chinese and American Education Models Based on Case Study of Education Assistance in China and Inclusive Education in the United States
- 1 Affiliated High School of South Normal University International Department
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Educational inequity has always been an issue that needs to be addressed in every country. However, due to the differences in social backgrounds and educational systems, the approaches taken by China and the United States are not the same. This study compares the differences in education between China and the United States through the research methods of case study and literature review, based on the study of the policies and programs of China and the United States to address this issue. China's educational assistance has narrowed the urban-rural education gap in a short period of time, and there is instability in teaching resources. Teachers' teaching skills need to be improved and educational resources optimized to ensure that the benefits of educational assistance are maximized. In the United States, inclusive education aims to ensure that all children have equal access to education, but there are still problems in practice, and there is a need to strengthen the protection of minorities so as to ensure a balanced allocation of teaching resources.
Keywords
education inequity, inclusive education, education assistance, bilingual system, comparative analysis.
[1]. Yan Luo, Fei Guo & Jinghuan Shi (2018) Expansion and inequality of higher education in China: how likely would Chinese poor students get to success?, Higher Education Research & Development, 37:5, 1015-10349
[2]. Yueying Wang. (2019). Supervision, Human Care and the Implementation of Supporting Education Policy—Interpretation of Supporting Education Policy and Analysis of Policy Logic
[3]. Zheng X, Meng, Y. The Changes, Implementation Effectiveness and Future Prospects of the Rural Compulsory Education Teachers' Special Job Program Policy[J]. Educator, 2022,(32):11-13.
[4]. Zhang, M, Xu, T. Air Force's “Lantianchunleijihua”focuses on education and poverty alleviation [J]. Society and Public Welfare, 2022,(11):70-71.
[5]. Liu, Y.Research on WeChat Public Service Communication of Educational NGOs in China [D]. Wuhan University of Technology, 2016.
[6]. Dee, T. S., & Jacob, B. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind on student achievement. Journal of Policy Analysis and management, 30(3), 418-446.
[7]. Peder Haug (2017) Understanding inclusive education: ideals and reality, Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 19:3, 206-217, DOI: 10.1080/15017419.2016.1224778
[8]. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. ASCD.
[9]. Pane, J. F., Steiner, E. D., Baird, M. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2015). Continued progress: Promising evidence on personalized learning. RAND Corporation.
[10]. Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers' attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129-147.
[11]. Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in US schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3-12.
[12]. Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
[13]. Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters.
[14]. Smith, R. (2021). Comparing Education Systems: China and the United States. International Journal of Educational Development, 80, 102-112.
[15]. Li, Y. (2020). Challenges in Rural Education: A Case Study from China. Rural Education Journal, 29(2), 20-34.
[16]. Adams, P. (2019). Educational Outcomes in the US: An Analysis of Policy Impact. American Educational Research Journal, 56(5), 1308-1330.
Cite this article
Zhao,L. (2024). A Comparison Between Chinese and American Education Models Based on Case Study of Education Assistance in China and Inclusive Education in the United States. Communications in Humanities Research,47,19-24.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Interdisciplinary Humanities and Communication Studies
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).