Chen Weihua
No instant formula for science prize success
By Chen Weihua (China Daily)
Updated: 2011-04-26 08:00
 |
Large Medium Small |
There is a fine line between students who admire scientists such as Albert Einstein and Madame Curie and those whose main purpose of study and research is to ultimately win a Nobel Prize, a Fields Medal or a Turing Award.
The prize-driven students are likely to be less happy in their studies since they always have their eyes on the prize. In fact, they are not going to be happy until they seize the prize.
However, since the number of international awards is so small, most of these prize-chasers are doomed to be frustrated in their quest.
| ||||
On the contrary, students who adore scientists are usually driven by a passion for science. They enjoy the process more than the results. They are not motivated by an urge to seek quick results and instant benefits, which unfortunately seems to be the nation's psyche these days.
If you do an Internet search on the Nobel Prize and a Chinese university, such as Tsinghua, Beida or Fudan, you can immediately sense that desire for a Nobel Prize. Headlines often read like Nobel jurists predict a certain Chinese university will produce a Nobel Laureate in a few years and Nobel Prize Committee members talk to students about who can win the prize.
When winning a Nobel Prize means success for a university on the world stage, the anxiety of Tsinghua and other universities is understandable.
In fact, such a mindset also reflects the nation's eagerness to produce its first Nobel Laureate in science. After all, Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee were not citizens of the People's Republic of China when they were awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1957.
I have met more than a dozen Nobel Laureates in the course of my career and none of them had a Nobel Prize in mind when they conducted their research. Some thought they won the prize out of luck, since many others were as successful as they were in the same field. One laureate still rides a bike on campus and is often mistaken as a gardener or doorman.
It will come as a heavy blow to those wishing for instant success and fame since many of the scientists were already in their 70s when they were recognized for the work they did 30 or 40 years ago. Leonid Hurwicz, a Russian-born American economist and mathematician, was 90 when he won the Nobel Prize in Economics Sciences in 2007. He died eight months later.
The path to success was also different from one to the other. Some hated their schools during their youth and some were undecided on what they wanted to study for many years. But what they all had in common was a fervent passion for their work. They were all curious and they all dared to think outside the box.
That is exactly what is lacking in our education system, among students, teachers and researchers. Our system is an exam meritocracy while in countries that have won many Nobel Prizes it is often a talent meritocracy.
When most of our professors who grew up in the same system don't like to be challenged by their students in the classroom, it suppresses the students' curiosity. When there is often just one standard answer to a question, there is no place for students' curiosity.
So instead of pinning high hopes on a select group of bright students, we should first turn our professors into teachers that inspire, not inhibit, students' creativity. Our Nobel Prize dream will not come true if we don't change our cram-and-rote school system
We should encourage our students to think independently. They should dare to dream and they should not let anyone else tell them that their dreams will not come true.
The author is deputy editor of China Daily US edition. E-mail: chenweihua@chinadaily.com.cn
(China Daily 04/26/2011 page8)
| 分享按鈕 |