The chart shows that, while the US has a relatively high proportion of people who have attained upper secondary education, there has been a lack of increase in the younger populations. In the US, about 87% of people between ages 25 and 64 have achieved upper secondary education. However, in many other countries, the amount of people ages 25 to 34 in upper secondary education has sky-rocketed. In Korea, for example, nearly 100% of 25 to 34-year-olds achieve it.

The science table is far more worrisome, however. It tells us that not only does the US rank 22nd in science performance, but it even falls below the average score of 500. I do agree that we are lucky to live in such an educationally priviledged area. However, I don’t think that our American superiority complex is justified, and considering how the French regularly score higher than us, I don’t believe we should criticize their methods (especially when the main criticism in this article was that they are too strict or overly competitive or too test-centered, when many of these characteristics can be attributed to culture).

The point of my previous argument was not to state that other countries’ educational systems are better than America’s, but rather to question our basic assumptions that we know best.

Fact: Of all the countries in the OECD ranking, the U.S. has the largest population. Although it’s more difficult to objectively measure, I would also argue that we have one of the most culturally diverse populations on the list.

Fact: U.S. students achieved some of the highest scores in every category of the test. So why aren’t we #1? Because there is a lot of variance in our data. (Yes, I’m taking AP Statistics and I’m overexcited about my limited knowledge of the subject.)

Basically, the U.S. is a really big country with a lot of good education and a lot of bad education. We’re lucky enough to live in an area with exceptionally good education AND cultural diversity, which puts us in an excellent position to criticize other educational systems.

My purpose was merely to point out that simply because the French system is different from the American one does not necessarily mean that ours is superior, which seemed to be a main message in the article. There is a strong implication that the French system is somehow flawed, which I believe to be an incomplete analysis without considering culture.

I agree that a pure meritocratic system may not be realistically feasible. However, I disagree with one of your statements. Equal educational opportunity does not mean that everyone experiences the same thing; it means that all people have an equal chance to succeed, regardless of racial, religious, or ethnic background. And I do maintain that this is the most fair, best way to educate.

In any case, I was neither advocating the French system nor the American system. I was trying to point out that this article does not mention culture at all, and I believe that to be the most important aspect when discussing educational differences. The fact that we are ranked 18th out of the 36 most developed countries merely serves to underscore the point that the United States is not necessarily in the position to criticize other educational systems.

Firstly, there’s no way to achieve this even if it was the best way to educate and separate the best from the mass of decent students. This is because there is no equality in teachers, and will never be. Some teachers, simply put, are worse than others. Because of this, students in certain classes will have inherent disadvantages.

Secondly, this may not be the best way to show which students deserve to get into colleges because some students test better than others. Just because a student doesn’t thrive in a high stress environment where everything hinges on one test doesn’t mean they shouldn’t go to college. College and later in life isn’t based around a single test which you pass or fail to decide whether your life is amazing or terrible. It’s a series which seen as a whole constitutes a college education or a person’s life. For this reason, opportunity to get into college shouldn’t be based around a stress filled education with only one opportunity to be successful.

All other things equal, a meritocratic system is the epitome of equal educational opportunity, as you said. However, given that there’s no way to assure other factors can be equal, this realistically isn’t the case. There’s also the case to be made that purely equal educational opportunity (the same exact experience for everyone) isn’t the best way to educate.