I guess at best it might be that there’s problems unique to American culture that makes public education not work. But that feels unlikely to hold up. I think the premise is simply wrong.
Basically the US education system is more focused on a sort of one-size-fits-all education with the only real differentiation being a 'normal' or 'accelerated' track (with some places like California even gradually moving against that remaining differentiation). This is in spite of having a far more diverse population in every possible way than other countries which focus on more of having educational systems which work to the strengths of each student.
So this would explain why these disruptions would not appear in my country (or to a far lower degree)but would in the US school system.
If it’s really severe there is special education as a last resort.
More commonly modified lesson plans, or teachers will be instructed to let you out of the classroom for a bit, or give you tasks like “fetch this item from the front desk” in between.
It’s certainly not perfect, but there is quite some guidance and individual measures possible.
A surprising number of the absolute best schools in the world by those same criteria are US public schools due to the population and resources going to those schools. So the issues are not quite so simple as they might first appear. The US education system isn’t efficient, but it’s also not as bad as generally perceived.
"If I remove all the data that hurts my case, the data clearly supports my case!".
Those people that you want to exclude aren't transients - they're either current or future Americans which are called immigrants. So if you want a well-functioning democracy, economy, society, etc you have to educate them effectively too, not just the people that were born here.
If we want to know which system you should copy, you want understand the factors that make that system more challenging. America doesn’t need to deal with severe malnutrition, but we may want to copy elements from countries dealing with such issues.
Unless of course the goal is a hit piece for whatever emotionally agenda you you’re pushing.
I'm pointing out that "an apples to apples" comparison is all of the people in the seats at the schools because all of those people live, work, and (eventually) vote in your country.
I can weigh a bag of groceries, that’s a metric I can collect on everything you’re buying but it doesn’t tell me if you’re making healthy choices at the grocery store.
Similarly I can look at the test grades of everyone in Ukraine right now, but that tells me more about society in general than the countries school system.
I'll repeat for the third and final time: excluding people that speak English as a second language in a country's school system that has been taking immigrants for all time (and vaguely plans to continue) is not the same thing as excluding people affected by a brutal but eventually ending war.
I can't make it any simpler for you.
You just excluded people from these comparisons based on some goal.
The point that the person that you're arguing in bad faith with is making is not that we jettison immigrants and ESL students. It's that you accept that they will have struggles that the students in Japan do not (because there are much fewer immigrant students). So if you compare the students who are _like_ the ones in Japan and you come out ahead, then you go, great, we don't need to adjust for those students.
It does _not_ mean that you don't adjust for the students who have unique challenges and try to bring them up.
But if you compare two different cohorts, you might incorrectly get the signal that you should also change what you're doing for the students who don't have those challenges.
If anything, the opposite is true. Europe receives less educated individuals who will be a burden on their welfare, while the USA has cheap labor from South America and attract top talent globally.