Wow.

There's no focus on critical thinking and analysis in China's schools? I bet that would be news to middle school kids that analyze ancient, modern and contemporary Chinese, Japanese, English and North American literature. I bet it would also be news to middle school kids that can do critical functions in math (algebra, geometry) and sciences (physics and chemistry) at a higher level than VIRUTALLY EVERY ENGLISH TEACHER WITH WHICH I HAVE EVER WORKED. I bet it wouldn't be a surprize for them to learn that they were taught crap by foreign teachers in their English classes.

Let's critically analyze what you had to say in your post. First you wrote teachers are expected to teach crap, especially at training centres. You then wrote you enjoyed working at training centres because you had some lattitude and flexibility to be creative. Then you wrote you were expected to follow a standard pathetic useless formula. (Which was the crap part? The creative or the standard part?) Then you stated that the Asians have a lot to learn from the West about education, but then you want to close the training centres that employ incompetent grovelling weasels, which in fact are teachers from the West.

So if I understand you correctly, a teacher needs to be creative to teach crap, but the way in which you were creative was to follow formulaic programs. (I suspect these formulaic programs were devised by foreign teachers prior to your arrival, using books published in either England or North America by language arts publishing houses.) And you want to solve Asia's education system problems by getting rid of the very people you think are better able to solve their problems, whatever those problems may be.

I still have yet to see any research generated, evidence based analysis of "problems in the Chinese public education system". Can anybody cite anything that has been published in indexed and peer-reviewed journals? The problem I do see is that foreign teachers in China and elsewhere do not have evidence based practices. Corrupt self-serving bosses, also known as headmasters, in China do use evidence based practices, and many of those practices are quite successful at getting information into the skulls of students. There is, however, research generated evidence that students in training centres (that have had foreign teachers with freedom to be creative) have not been successful or productive in their learning. (Those training centres like to collect and analyze data from pre- and post-course assessments and exams. That is why so many of the incompetent grovelling weasels don't get contract extensions, but get shoved out the door instead.) Were your creative curricula and lesson plans based on evidence of success, or were they based on what you personally thought were fun?

It seems to me that almost all of the evidence, and that is what is really needed to effect change, is anecdotal at best. And ALL of the anecdotal evidence in internet forums is critically quite.....
.....um.....
.....limited.