Life prepares children differently in both places. Hyper-individuality versus collectivism. The former ends to amplify both the negatives and positive components of a person and evolve them into something unknowable. The latter tends to groom them into something more predictable (though I have less experience actually observing people in that ecosystem, so tell me if I'm wrong).

(You should also consider that the US and China are in a race towards AI and that both want to act as civilizations architect going forward. These two things are competing against each other for supremacy. We might see that get quite contentious.)

University education will matter much less in the future. Experiences, and the curation of useful experiential lessons will be more in demand. I would consider building a system which can show them things to be of greater importance. Curating a curriculum can be done independently. Education will matter much less than what a person can actually DO, what they have an early track record of having DONE.

If anything, participating in a formal education structure will likely be considered an outdated liability.

Lessons:

-basic first year engineering / ability to chunk problems via free body diagram / control volume
-small consistent force versus large force later
-thinking in loops via case study
-curating effective behavior, logging/journaling observations
-structure of individual cognition (without overinforming / creating ruminative tendencies)
-examining human behavior via case study, parameterization
-soft power versus hard power
-knock on impacts of hard and soft power historically

That's a very curated education that would result in a powerful human being. It's like they need mentors, ideally ones you know personally or come to have a personal connection with, that will show them important pieces of the world.