Background: In PISA 2009, seven East Asian countries rank high among the 65 participating countries, but some of the differences among the seven countries are small to be of substantive meaning.
Aims: This paper is an attempt to fine tune the comparisons for better understanding of the situation in East Asian. Sample: Data of the seven East Asian countries were pulled from the PISA 2009 report and re-analyzed.
Method: Pair-wise comparisons were made by way of effect size on Reading, Mathematics, and Science.
Results: The overall patterns of differences show that Shanghai-China is definitely ahead of all the others. Korea, Hong Kong-China, and Singapore are similar in performance and form a cluster. Japan, Chinese Taipei, and Macao-China are similar and form another cluster at the lower end of achievement.
Conclusion: Instead of ranking the seven countries with seven different ranks, it is more meaningful to cluster them into three groups to avoid spurious precision. In other words, league tables should not differentiate where there are no meaningful differences.
[Copyright of New Horizons: The Journal of Education, Hong Kong Teachers' Association is the property of Hong Kong Teachers' Association at http://www.hkta1934.org.hk/]

Since the '50s, the once highly unified culture is now fragmented, leading to a variety of cultural derivatives, such as mainland Chinese culture, Hong Kong Chinese culture, Singaporean Chinese culture and Malaysian Chinese culture. Although still called Chinese culture, they have their distinctive forms. Communities like the mainland Chinese, the Hong Kong people, the Chinese Singaporeans and the Chinese Malaysians differ considerably from one another in such cultural aspects as behavioural approach, thinking mode, mental attitude and vocabulary. This paper examines some features of major Chinese-background discourses in Asia with a particular focus on educational aspects and issues.
[Copyright of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) at http://www.aare.edu.au]