I use the concept of ‘hardworking’ in comparison to our own American students whose lives in high school are very different from what is portrayed of Chinese or Indian students. Their time is also spent in many activities other than academics. They are industrious in those activities and our discussion often centers on whether that is a good or bad thing in our culture and for a competitive economy.

Again, thanks for your comments. I wish you great success in your future studies and career.

time is limited, and the last sentence i want to say is that nobody familiar with me will ever connect “hardworking” with me. my studying, compared with students around me, is really effective, less time, and a better university(at least in my opinion).

I’ve watched the discussions surrounding this movie with interest…my son is the “American Boy” in the movie (and for the record, I’m the dad with the cameo involving spoiled milk in the fridge).

I understand the intensity that the education in the other countries bring. And I understand that the sciences have an extremely important role in the global economy. But it seems what’s lost is the idea that being a social worker or a 3rd grade teacher or a newspaper journalist is somehow an inferior or an unnoticed desire. And I feel very strongly that the education my son received…both in school and by the opportunities provided to him…give him the opportunity to “succeed”, whether that’s as an engineer, as a businessman, or as an unpaid humanitarian volunteer.

It’s a wonderful film and I’m anxious to see where the discussions lead.

Older students, that is my age or older, have a very difficult time catching up to how new technology is used in learning. Technical web 2.0 fluency ends with email. This means that they are behind the curve in corporate America and thus the worldwide competitive marketplace.

Younger engineering students face a curriculum that presents a volume of knowledge much larger than I faced when I earned my BS in 1981. This requires either a more general degree or narrow specialization in a field. And that is a trend I have noticed in academia.

In general, it seems the great separator for students who want to pursue engineering is the 2 to 2.5 years of calculus and differential equations. If a student can handle that, the rest is much easier. Science majors require, typically, a year of calculus. In that respect, how can we increase math fluency at the high school level?

The major weakness in students I have taught is in written communication skills. Their understanding and application of engineering theory and principles is very sound.

A second perspective I can offer is that of a charter school co-founder. Our charter is for home-based learners and our emphasis, our niche, is to help parents discern their kid’s strengths and weaknesses, learning styles and motivators. In practicality, it means we can guide a parent to create a custom-tailored learning plan. They will know how their child learns and what motivates him/her. The learning plan will fit into ACT’s Work Keys to continuity from school to the work place or to post-secondary ed. It is an innovative alternative to a one-size-fits-all typical public school.

I firmly believe that individualized education is the future. Internet web 2.0 technologies make this more possible every day. Which is why I blog about it.

What motivates a student to be an engineer? For me it was simple. If I wanted to be an employed geologist I needed a MS. I didn’t want to do grad school right away. I learned that if I took a couple more math courses and a couple mechanics courses along with the same geology classes I had an engineering degree and was instantly employable and paid more than the geologist with the MS. It was an easy choice for me.

So, how do we motivate today’s kids? Can we make math cool again? I think the marketplace will play a huge part in motivation.

I appreciate your thorough and thoughtful review of my film. Your conclusion is actually quite common among the American audiences that have seen the cut of the film you saw. And a surprising number cite Barone’s book to give them comfort.

Barone’s logic works well if you believe you can drive to the future by looking in the rearview mirror. He is correct - historically our underachieving 18 year olds have been able to pick up the slack and become world-class productive by age 30.

But looking to the next 30 years, I believe two things have changed - 1) the high wage careers of the 21st century will depend on a deeper intellectual foundation and 2) over 3 billion new competitors have entered the global economy — people who were simply not players 30 years ago - China, India and the former Soviet Bloc.

What I worry about are the American kids who stop high school math at geometry and high school science at biology - and who generally see engineering and science as geeky and boring.

While still possible to get inspired and pursue calculus and physics in college and go on to to earn MS and PhD degrees - it is a very steep hill to climb.

As a high tech entrepreneur and venture capitalist for the past 25 years, I can tell you the people who have reaped the greatest economic rewards in the past 25 years have been those with the most rigorous and thorough understanding of technology, who have an ability to solve problems and possess entrepreneurial skill.

I believe that will continue to be true in the next 25 years, except there will be many more people around the world with those skills - and unlike the past 25 years, they won’t be moving to America to start companies. They will start them in Bangalore and Beijing and Budapest.

How can I be sure? Because that is where venture capital is flowing - smart money moves to the talent. Every VC in Silicon Valley has opened offices in India, China and Eastern Europe and they are investing in new technology companies at an astounding pace.

In my own investment portfolio, I have an ever increasing allocation of capital in Asia and India - that’s where the returns are highest and the potential greatest - and where the jobs and wealth will be created.

While we still have time to change our views and culture to better adjust to the realities of the 21st century, that window is closing.

As the 60,000 US auto workers who were fired last year - the largest exodus from a single industry in history - American dominance is not preordained. We must look at our competitors and decide if we need to adapt.

But, then again…maybe I’m wrong. Maybe my investments in India and China and those of some of the smartest venture capitlists in the world will turn south.

We’ll find out soon enough. It took Toyota only 25 years to pass GM as the largest and most profitable auto manufacturer in the world. And Japan is tiny compared to India and China.

Thanks again for taking time to review my film. I agree with you, this is a topic worthy of serious discussion.