Ziyao Yang
·Follow
Published inThe Ends of Globalization
·4 min read·Mar 22, 2021--
China has a unique education system, which is dissimilar to any other countries education system. Specifically, the Chinese College Entrance Exam (CEE), also called Gaokao, is the sole criteria for Chinese colleges to admit students. The higher the CEE score is, the better the college is. As a result, CEE is incredible extremely important for Chinese students. In other words, many Chinese students study hard for ten years to get an excellent score in CEE. However, the policy about CEE score is complicated, which results in an education inequality for students in Shandong.
Currently, it is harder for students in Shandong to get into good colleges than students in other provinces like Beijing. For example, the top 5% of students in Shandong can get into good colleges like Shandong University, but the top 5% of students in Beijing can definitely get into the best colleges such as Peking University.
It is a heated debate around the inequality in Gaokao policy, especially the inequality in Shandong. Specifically, in Zhihu (the Chinese Quota), there is a question “Why Shandong Gaokao is so hard?”. Many people respond, and one of them claims that Shandong has an overgeneralized education: teachers are exam-oriented. As long as students get a good score, it is a success in education. As a result, Shandong students perform ‘too well’ in exams but too poor in other learning skills. In the end, Shandong Gaokao has to be extremely competitive to pick up few students from a bunch of excellent scores. Moreover, Shandong has a large population. Therefore, there are much more students taking Gaokao than in other provinces. This large population further makes the Gaokao more competitive for Shandong students (载舟).
I agree with the opinion that the large population makes the competition in Gaokao crueler. However, I cannot accept that the exam-oriented education makes Shandong students inferior in Gaokao. I am not saying that exam-oriented education is beneficial — — it can be harmful, indeed, to students. Yet, I want to emphasize that Gaokao itself is the product of exam-oriented education. Since China has so many people, Gaokao can be the best solution to pick up good students effectively and give them higher education. Therefore, Gaokao itself is a competition about exam scores. Shandong exam-oriented education, thus, should be perfectly helpful to Shandong students to win in Gaokao. It cannot be the reason why Shandong students are blocked out in Gaokao.
Another article in Zhihu offers a more reasonable opinion about Gaokao inequality in Shandong. According to the author, the point here is the comparison between Shandong and other provinces (徐老师). For example, Zhejiang University, a famous university in China, has a standardized score requirement for all students in China. This is equity for all students, some people argue. However, the problem is that Shandong has a harder Gaokao exam than other provinces. Thus, it is harder for Shandong students to get a higher score although they have fairly equal ability. It is important because the government cannot only focus on a standardized score requirement: the standardized Gaokao exam is the key to education equality.
Gaokao reform is indeed a heated topic in China. In fact, the Chinese government is working on the reform. Some scholars say that we should “replace the sole admission criteria of Gaokao scores with a set of diverse and inclusive admissions”, while others say that “the practice of ‘equity before test scores’ offers an objective yardstick to measure the aptitude of college students” (You & Hu). In this heated debate, I prefer the latter. It is not saying that I am a supporter of exam-oriented education: in fact, I think exam-oriented education is overall bad. However, for China, Gaokao is indeed the best solution for education equality. If college admission becomes more flexible and inclusive, it also means more room for corruption and cutthroat competition. In Gaokao, every student at least has a chance to participate in a competition: both poor students in the countryside or rich students in cities. However, if Chinese college admission is more flexible like in the U.S., many poor students can never catch up with others with the lack of educational resources. Therefore, although Gaokao is not a perfect solution, it is, currently, the best solution to deal with the Chinese large population.
Works Cited
载舟.css-1cd9gw4{margin-left:.3em;}区域经济学研究生，前历史教师。 , and Axxxl.css-1cd9gw4{margin-left:.3em;}. 如何评价山东高考现状？. 25 June 2015, www.zhihu.com/question/31619609.
You, Zhuran, and Yingzi Hu. “Walking a Policy Tightrope: The Dilemma of Balancing Diversification and Equality in Chinese College Entrance Examination Reform.” Higher Education Policy, vol. 26, no. 3, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 309–24, doi:10.1057/hep.2013.3.
徐老师. css-1cd9gw4{margin-left:.3em;}.css-n99yhz{box-sizing:border-box;margin:0;min-width:0;color:#175199;display:inline-block;margin-left:.3em;}.css-g9eqf4-StrutAlign{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;dis. “山东高考考生到底有多难？.” 知乎专栏, zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/113552341.