Learning in the Age of AI

, ,

Change without Difference: China’s Struggle with Standardized Testing

Published by

yeeeducation

on

China’s Peking University (or Beida) has been under fire for trying to answer the nation’s call for more innovative and creative talents. In an attempt to attract more “unusual or extraordinary students” who may not do well on standardized testing, in this case, China’s infamous Gaokao (College Entrance Exam), Beida, one of the two most sought-after universities, decided to admit a very small number of (less than 3%) students based on recommendations of high school principals. Although these recommended students would still take the College Entrance Exam and go through face-to-face interviews with the University’s admissions team, the recommendation and a successful interview will add 30 points to their final score on the Entrance Exam, giving them a huge advantage over other applicants. And the recommended students do not need to pass a written exam to be interviewed.

Last week, Beida (some call it the Harvard of China) announced that it has granted principals of 39 high schools the privilege to recommend students. The announcement on November 16 sparked a national uproar in China. Both traditional media and online discussions have been following the story with great intensity. So far the reactions have been largely negative. Most are opposed to Beida’s action. Some question why and how the 39 schools were selected: do “unusual talents” only attend these 39 schools? What about the many other high schools? Some question how the 39 principals will actually decide whom to recommend. Some question if this will lead to more corruption, accusing Beida is offering these principals the opportunity to take bribes.

The opposition is mainly fueled by the concern about the fairness and validity of the criteria Beida used to select the 39 high schools and the criteria by which the selected schools will use to decide whom to recommend.  In a country where standardized test scores have been used as the only selection criterion for centuries, as I have written about in my book’s chapter 4, it is almost impossible to imagine that any other measure would be as fair and valid. Thus despite the government’s determination and persistence, China’s many reform efforts have not been able to break away from the test-oriented tradition.

Beida has not backed off and it is unlikely that it will. As a university under the direct administration of China’s Ministry of Education, Beida has to act within the policy framework of the Ministry. Thus Beida’s action can be viewed as a sign of China’s continued serious effort to move away from standardized testing.

But this action, like its many predecessors, is unlikely to have any real impact.  Some of the 39 schools have already put up their recommended students and openly discussed how they were selected. No surprise: test scores. The schools based their recommendation on rankings of the students according to several rounds of recent tests that are closely aligned with the Gaokao.  In other words, these recommended students are great test-takers and can score high enough to get into Beida anyway.

“It is not because we cannot, but we dare not [to use other measures],” one of the principals said. “We certainly have many excellent students. I really wanted to recommend those whose test scores are not so high but with exceptional talents. But dare Beida to really admit them? If it did, would other students and parents accept it?” After some serious thinking, the principal decided that scores are the most convincing measure that is accepted by the public.

Two lessons for America:

  1. China is determined to reform its education to cultivate a diversity of talents and creativity. China has recognized and suffered from the damaging effects of standardized testing and has been trying very hard to move away from standards. If America or any other nation wants to worry about China, it is its determination and focus on creativity and talents, not its test scores.
  2. Once standardized test scores become an accepted way to judge the potential and value of a child, the performance of a teacher, and the quality of school, it is very difficult to change. We are already seeing signs of this in the U.S., thanks to all the education reformers who want to make Americans “globally competitive.”

News reports about this in Chinese can be found here:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/edu/2009-11/16/content_12464003.htm

http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2009-11/22/content_12517920.htm

3 responses to “Change without Difference: China’s Struggle with Standardized Testing”

  1. köpek Avatar
    köpek

    great blog

    Like

    Reply
  2. Jesse Turner Avatar
    Jesse Turner

    Salutations Dr. Yhao, we always enjoy your blogs here in Connecticut. We just sent our three visiting Chinese teachers home this past Saturday back to Shandong Province. Interestingly two philosophical views on literacy emerged during their stay. Our teachers were supporters of whole book reading as opposed to textbook reading. They explained most Chinese students read only enough of a test to answer test-based type of questions. These teachers want Chinese students to read whole text for aesthetic value, and they felt students who miss the aesthetic value were at a great loss. Of course this reminded me of Louise Rosenblatt’s work on reader response focusing on “efferent” and “aesthetic” reading experience.
    They were also highly aware of Ken Goodman’s work, and valued it highly.

    I could not help feeling during our long discussions that they were less then impressed with the lack of art, music, and Physical education in their host school, (a highly stress urban middle school and a K-4 elementary school in Hartford Connecticut). They visited other affluent suburban schools as well, and took thousands of pictures. One visitor pointed out that you could see that art, music, and physical education were clearly evident in the suburban schools, and missing from the urban schools. Mr. Ming stated it simply as white children smiling faces have art and music. Black Children no smiling faces no art and no music. He only took him ten days to visually put the status of NCLB into perspective. He did explain that in China some schools have it all, and others have little. They told us some families have to purchase the actual chair and desk a child sits in. They were honest about China, but felt hopeful. They were also not surprised that NCLB data is showing little effect or no effect on test scores.
    I’ll let you know what I find in China during my up coming visit in April as well.

    Thank you for continuing to put things into perspective for us, and for fighting the good fight,
    Sincerely,
    Jesse

    Like

    Reply
  3. Ting Avatar
    Ting

    It’s a great blog.
    I have several comments and questions. I agree with you the action Beida is taking won’t have big impact on the education system. Actually, principal’s recommendation has been existed in other format for a long time, which is called “bao song”. In many times, the school recommend students who excel in some subject area (such as physics or mathematics). The new action actually intended to encourage principals to recommend those students who have talents that might not show up in their test scores or any kind of competitions. However, sadly, this is not what the principals are doing. I think it’s understandable considering the big pressure from school, parents, and even the whole society.
    I would also agree with you on some detrimental effects of standardized testing on Chinese education. However, I think the reliance on standards is deep embedded in the culture, economics, and politics in China. Do you think China can really get away from standards? From another perspective, will a new admission system that might replace Gaokao for Beida or other famous universities be an exacerbation of inequality in education? I have been puzzled by all these issues and look forward to hear your opinions.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Ting Cancel reply

More about Yong Zhao

Dr. Yong Zhao is a Foundation Distinguished Professor in the School of Education at the University of Kansas. He previously served as the Presidential Chair, Associate Dean, and Director of the Institute for Global and Online Education in the College of Education, University of Oregon, where he was also a Professor in the Department of Educational Measurement, Policy, and Leadership. Prior to Oregon, Yong Zhao was University Distinguished Professor at the College of Education, Michigan State University, where he also served as the founding director of the Center for Teaching and Technology, executive director of the Confucius Institute, as well as the US-China Center for Research on Educational Excellence. Additionally, he worked as a professor of educational leadership in the Faculty of Education at University of Melbourne and senior researcher at the Mitchell Institute of Victoria University in Australia. He was a visiting Global Professor at University of Bath and a visiting scholar at Warwick University in the UK.

Recent posts