It seems European or UK school systems are regarded as providing higher levels of education than US schools in general.

I wonder if that is true. Would the curriculum be different for a 7 or 8 year old (for example) at ISB (US system) or Bangkok Pattana (UK system)? Do they teach at the same level for similar aged kids?

Perhaps those 2 are not the best examples because they are (probably) the best 2 schools in BKK.

Does anybody have insight or experience in the level of math and English at UK/Euro schools here in Bangkok vs US schools here?

Oh no, this could get messy.

What gave you the impression European and UK schools give a better education than the US ?

Ps I am a Brit.

Best of luck with this one! I think I hear footsteps

If you intend to move back to whichever country, it would make sense to follow that curriculum.

If you send your kids to the best schools noted above, I think you'll not have any trouble either way because your kids will be so far ahead of the natives when they return.

My dear old aunt, who taught for a while in the US and UK, reckoned that there was far more emphasis on extra-curricular activities in the US, which is certainly born out by popular fiction and movies.

SC

UK schools are better for spelling.

Standing by to be flamed but when I was enrolling for university in England I had to go to countless university road shows / presentations / consultation sessions before I made my choice, and one of the the interesting things that was said was that many (but not all) US applicants were usually given a choice of either sitting an entrance exam or spending 2 years (or 1 year intensively) doing A levels - the English, Welsh and Northern Irish version of Grades 11 and 12 - before they could begin a Bachelor's degree in England.

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by Trembly

If you intend to move back to whichever country, it would make sense to follow that curriculum.

If you send your kids to the best schools noted above, I think you'll not have any trouble either way because your kids will be so far ahead of the natives when they return.

My dear old aunt, who taught for a while in the US and UK, reckoned that there was far more emphasis on extra-curricular activities in the US, which is certainly born out by popular fiction and movies.

SC

Very true. I did my GCSE's in Thailand and went to England for my A levels . . . and wept.

Standing by to be flamed but when I was enrolling for university in England I had to go to countless university road shows / presentations / consultation sessions before I made my choice, and one of the the interesting things that was said was that many (but not all) US applicants were usually given a choice of either sitting an entrance exam or spending 2 years (or 1 year intensively) doing A levels - the English, Welsh and Northern Irish version of Grades 11 and 12 - before they could begin a Bachelor's degree in England.

The English A level is a very specialised course; with good A-level grades, English candidates are offered the opportunity to skip the first year of a Scottish degree (or they were many years ago, when I was much younger than I am today, and such things were more relevant) - notwithstanding that the courses were generally four years rather than three. On the other hand, some Scottish students start university at 17...

SC

Pointless posts whose only purpose is to bash another nation have been removed. This is about what schools to send his kid in Bangkok. Discuss that, thanks

Standing by to be flamed but when I was enrolling for university in England I had to go to countless university road shows / presentations / consultation sessions before I made my choice, and one of the the interesting things that was said was that many (but not all) US applicants were usually given a choice of either sitting an entrance exam or spending 2 years (or 1 year intensively) doing A levels - the English, Welsh and Northern Irish version of Grades 11 and 12 - before they could begin a Bachelor's degree in England.

University of Cambridge #1

United Kingdom #2

Harvard University

United States #3

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

United States #4

Yale University

United States #5

University of Oxford

United Kingdom #6

Imperial College London

United Kingdom #7

UCL (University College London)

United Kingdom #8

University of Chicago

United States #9

University of Pennsylvania (UPenn)

United States #10

Columbia University

United States #11

Stanford University

United States #12

California Institute of Technology (Caltech)

United States #13

Princeton University

United States #14

University of Michigan

United States #15

Cornell University

United States #16

Johns Hopkins University

United States #17

McGill University

Canada #18

ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology)

Switzerland #19

Duke University

United States #20

University of Edinburgh

United Kingdom #21

University of California, Berkeley (UCB)

United States #22

University of Hong Kong (HKU)

Hong Kong #23

University of Toronto

Canada #24

Northwestern University

United States #25

The University of Tokyo

Standing by to be flamed but when I was enrolling for university in England I had to go to countless university road shows / presentations / consultation sessions before I made my choice, and one of the the interesting things that was said was that many (but not all) US applicants were usually given a choice of either sitting an entrance exam or spending 2 years (or 1 year intensively) doing A levels - the English, Welsh and Northern Irish version of Grades 11 and 12 - before they could begin a Bachelor's degree in England.

The English A level is a very specialised course; with good A-level grades, English candidates are offered the opportunity to skip the first year of a Scottish degree (or they were many years ago, when I was much younger than I am today, and such things were more relevant) - notwithstanding that the courses were generally four years rather than three. On the other hand, some Scottish students start university at 17...

SC

Further to that, Thai universities (with the exception of Chula, which stipulates that applicants must have completed 6 years of secondary education) will accept GCSEs as a sufficient qualification base with which to begin a bachelor's degree. That means that your child could go to Thammasat, Mahidol et al at the age of 16 (or less if they're particularly fast).

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by Trembly

The English three-year degree courses that prevailed when I was young turned out very young graduates. That was reliant on the specialisation of the A-Levels.

Four years was the norm in Scotland for an Honours degree, and I think also in the US four years was the norm for a Batchelors' degree.

SC

Why don't you go talk with someone who works for the school since you are going to be a CUSTOMER.

Who knows how good these schools really are academically after all? Perhaps the biggest advantage is rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful? Do the schools publish their student scores on some global standardizing testing? let me guess: hell no.

Why don't you go talk with someone who works for the school since you are going to be a CUSTOMER.

Who knows how good these schools really are academically after all? Perhaps the biggest advantage is rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful? Do the schools publish their student scores on some global standardizing testing? let me guess: hell no.

Patana achieves outstanding results, in my opinion, comparable to schools of comparable price in the UK.

the rugby team's probably not so good, though.

SC

Why don't you go talk with someone who works for the school since you are going to be a CUSTOMER.

Who knows how good these schools really are academically after all? Perhaps the biggest advantage is rubbing shoulders with the rich and powerful? Do the schools publish their student scores on some global standardizing testing? let me guess: hell no.

I can personally vouch that BPS and HIS are academically very rigorous. Harrow International School Bangkok and Beijing are governed by the board of Harrow School in England. I've no doubt that the other premier league international schools give them a run for the money but I would just like to point out that in the 'bits of paper' (as well as time and opportunity cost) stakes the British education system seems to produce an advantage, in Thailand at the very least . . . but perhaps not in North or South America.

Horses for courses . . .

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by Trembly

Standing by to be flamed but when I was enrolling for university in England I had to go to countless university road shows / presentations / consultation sessions before I made my choice, and one of the the interesting things that was said was that many (but not all) US applicants were usually given a choice of either sitting an entrance exam or spending 2 years (or 1 year intensively) doing A levels - the English, Welsh and Northern Irish version of Grades 11 and 12 - before they could begin a Bachelor's degree in England.

The English A level is a very specialised course; with good A-level grades, English candidates are offered the opportunity to skip the first year of a Scottish degree (or they were many years ago, when I was much younger than I am today, and such things were more relevant) - notwithstanding that the courses were generally four years rather than three. On the other hand, some Scottish students start university at 17...

SC

Further to that, Thai universities (with the exception of Chula, which stipulates that applicants must have completed 6 years of secondary education) will accept GCSEs as a sufficient qualification base with which to begin a bachelor's degree. That means that your child could go to Thammasat, Mahidol et al at the age of 16 (or less if they're particularly fast).

Do you know this as fact? I'm interested as my plan for my 3 year old entails going to Mahidol uni.

And before anyone bashes me, I know, I know, he will probably urinate on 'my' plans from a great height. But, hey, I can dream....

Standing by to be flamed but when I was enrolling for university in England I had to go to countless university road shows / presentations / consultation sessions before I made my choice, and one of the the interesting things that was said was that many (but not all) US applicants were usually given a choice of either sitting an entrance exam or spending 2 years (or 1 year intensively) doing A levels - the English, Welsh and Northern Irish version of Grades 11 and 12 - before they could begin a Bachelor's degree in England.

The English A level is a very specialised course; with good A-level grades, English candidates are offered the opportunity to skip the first year of a Scottish degree (or they were many years ago, when I was much younger than I am today, and such things were more relevant) - notwithstanding that the courses were generally four years rather than three. On the other hand, some Scottish students start university at 17...

SC

Further to that, Thai universities (with the exception of Chula, which stipulates that applicants must have completed 6 years of secondary education) will accept GCSEs as a sufficient qualification base with which to begin a bachelor's degree. That means that your child could go to Thammasat, Mahidol et al at the age of 16 (or less if they're particularly fast).

Do you know this as fact? I'm interested as my plan for my 3 year old entails going to Mahidol uni.

And before anyone bashes me, I know, I know, he will probably urinate on 'my' plans from a great height. But, hey, I can dream....

Yes. I have personal friends from my school days who went to Thai universities immediately after completing their IGCSEs.

Google : <insert name of institution>+GCSE

http://www.basthamma...id=23&Itemid=22

http://www.muic.mahi...g/?page_id=1633

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by Trembly

Wow! Thank you.

Aren't there any educators here on TV that could weigh in on the topic.

I'm really wondering about early years, foundation stuff, for 5 to 8 or 9 year olds. Are US Int'l schools as good as UK int'l schools in terms of providing math basics?

You might be better off in the Teaching in Thailand forum OP, let me know if you want it moved

I don't think this is a question that can be resolved. Which USA school and which UK school? Quality of education varies from school to school. Each country has its elite schools and I imagine that a graduate of such a school in either country would come out quite well educated. A Thai school would have a smaller pool of elite students from which to draw and probably would offer a lesser quality education--but still quite good, perhaps. Still, an outstanding student will do well most anywhere. It's not just the school: it's the kid, the parents, the home environment, the culture, the genes. Kids from ordinary public schools and humble backgrounds in the USA do make it into Harvard and do well there.

I don't think this is a question that can be resolved. Which USA school and which UK school? Quality of education varies from school to school. Each country has its elite schools and I imagine that a graduate of such a school in either country would come out quite well educated. A Thai school would have a smaller pool of elite students from which to draw and probably would offer a lesser quality education--but still quite good, perhaps. Still, an outstanding student will do well most anywhere. It's not just the school: it's the kid, the parents, the home environment, the culture, the genes. Kids from ordinary public schools and humble backgrounds in the USA do make it into Harvard and do well there.

Whilst I broadly agree with you I think it can be resolved in the context of which Bangkok international school to send your child to : simply visit the schools and listen to the respective pitches of the maths departments, if not some other departments too and perhaps compare syllabuses online (not too difficult to look up).

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by Trembly

As a teacher (an actual qualified one), I can tell you that what it all comes down to is the teacher in the classroom. This is true for any curriculum, US, UK, Australia, what have you.

Your child could go to the best school, with the most developed curriculum and the best materials and technology, but if they have a poor teacher, the child will get a poor education.

Conversely, a poorly run school with little resources that has a great teacher; the children in that class will be better off than above.

Unfortunately, it can be hit or miss.

As a teacher (an actual qualified one), I can tell you that what it all comes down to is the teacher in the classroom. This is true for any curriculum, US, UK, Australia, what have you.

Your child could go to the best school, with the most developed curriculum and the best materials and technology, but if they have a poor teacher, the child will get a poor education.

Conversely, a poorly run school with little resources that has a great teacher; the children in that class will be better off than above.

Unfortunately, it can be hit or miss.

I guess that's why Harvard is so cheap.

As a teacher (an actual qualified one), I can tell you that what it all comes down to is the teacher in the classroom. This is true for any curriculum, US, UK, Australia, what have you.

Your child could go to the best school, with the most developed curriculum and the best materials and technology, but if they have a poor teacher, the child will get a poor education.

Conversely, a poorly run school with little resources that has a great teacher; the children in that class will be better off than above.

Unfortunately, it can be hit or miss.

I guess that's why Harvard is so cheap.

EDIT: Did you intend to post the above in the "Defining Irony" thread, CMK.

Note to all - American doing sarcasm.

Back on topic...

My experience is that the best schools try to get the best teachers.

By offering the teachers a competitive salary, and an environment where they can enjoy teaching, they are able to do this.

SC

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by StreetCowboy

As a teacher (an actual qualified one), I can tell you that what it all comes down to is the teacher in the classroom. This is true for any curriculum, US, UK, Australia, what have you.

Your child could go to the best school, with the most developed curriculum and the best materials and technology, but if they have a poor teacher, the child will get a poor education.

Conversely, a poorly run school with little resources that has a great teacher; the children in that class will be better off than above.

Unfortunately, it can be hit or miss.

I guess that's why Harvard is so cheap.

Thats a silly comment; I suggest discussing the matter further with people in the field of education.

Aren't there any educators here on TV that could weigh in on the topic.

I'm really wondering about early years, foundation stuff, for 5 to 8 or 9 year olds. Are US Int'l schools as good as UK int'l schools in terms of providing math basics?

Okay, I'll weigh in.

I can't answer your question completely, but I will give you comment on the maths ability of the children I teach in primary at a leading British curriculum international school; in a nutshell, extremely high.

Small class sizes, a full time TA, minimal behaviour problems (certainly at my school, even the little xxxx's are complete novices in being a xxxx compared to the norm in your average UK school). All this adds up to a learning environment that is, simply put, conducive to learning.

Maths (or math) is the same in the UK and the US. I doubt the curriculum differs much. I think you question should be aimed directly at the international schools, British or US it makes no difference; My child is gifted at maths/my child struggles with maths, what provisions have you in place to extend/support them?

As a teacher (an actual qualified one), I can tell you that what it all comes down to is the teacher in the classroom. This is true for any curriculum, US, UK, Australia, what have you.

Your child could go to the best school, with the most developed curriculum and the best materials and technology, but if they have a poor teacher, the child will get a poor education.

Conversely, a poorly run school with little resources that has a great teacher; the children in that class will be better off than above.

Unfortunately, it can be hit or miss.

I guess that's why Harvard is so cheap.

Thats a silly comment; I suggest discussing the matter further with people in the field of education.

Well I have an MA in education. Is that OK. Expensive schools have better teachers. Any other questions? But don't believe me. MBA Harvard how much on graduation? MBA Michigan State University how much on graduation? Great basketball players go to school at colleges with great basketball teams. Great teachers go to schools with great academic reputations.

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by chiangmaikelly

As a teacher (an actual qualified one), I can tell you that what it all comes down to is the teacher in the classroom. This is true for any curriculum, US, UK, Australia, what have you.

Your child could go to the best school, with the most developed curriculum and the best materials and technology, but if they have a poor teacher, the child will get a poor education.

Conversely, a poorly run school with little resources that has a great teacher; the children in that class will be better off than above.

Unfortunately, it can be hit or miss.

I guess that's why Harvard is so cheap.

EDIT: Did you intend to post the above in the "Defining Irony" thread, CMK.

Note to all - American doing sarcasm.

Back on topic...

My experience is that the best schools try to get the best teachers.

By offering the teachers a competitive salary, and an environment where they can enjoy teaching, they are able to do this.

SC

Yes, you are right, to an extent, but international schools are also a business. I know of an international school, one that is quoted regularly as 'one of the best,' that will reject an application based on the years of experience a teacher has ( hence higher up the pay scale) and the number of dependents they have (hence, higher housing benefits).

Punctuation police post removed