Formal assessment has a long illustrious history in China (Zhang, 2009). An ancient form of student assessment was used as far back as the Western Chou dynasty (c. 1027–771 BC). During the Han dynasty, written exams were introduced for the selection of imperial officials, thus began a formal link between being a scholar and a state official. The exam system was further refined during the Three Kingdom period where the Wei state conducted the imperial college exam once every 2 years and used the 5 classics based on Confucian texts as its content.

Photo 10.1
figure a

An ancient chart showing how scholars were promoted to civil officials through the imperial exams. The sign at the top of the chart reads ‘Painting of civil officials promoted to high ranks’

Full size image

But the evolution of the exam system reached its height during the Tang dynasty where 6 types of exams such as enrolment exams and graduating exams were introduced. Different levels and types of schools proliferated during that period to prepare students for various kinds of tests. Although the imperial exam system was formally abolished during the Qing dynasty in 1905, the exam system has left an indelible mark on the psyche of the Chinese. Commenting on China, Zhang (2009) observes that ‘exams permeate into the entire process of the student learning’ (p. 328). Li and Li (2010) add that the imperial exam system, ‘by focusing on text learning rather than practising, and mechanical memorising rather than innovation, has entrenched the value of exam scores and competition deeply into our national culture’ (p. 212).Footnote 1

It’s not just students who have to sit for exams. Adults have to sit for all kinds of assessments for employment, recognition and promotion in China. Formal assessment does not just refer to exams; it includes all competitive and selective processes whereby children and adults are assessed based on their performance of specific tasks, and a winner is selected based on what is perceived to be a fair, transparent and scientific selection process. The stakes are high: the reward could come in the form of high scores, a coveted position, prizes, awards, public accolades and high social status.

In the previous chapters, we saw how the Shanghai education system illustrates the phenomenon of decentralised centralism. This refers to the paradoxical existence of decentralisation at the local levels with concomitant centralised control at the top. This chapter continues our discussion by focusing on the exam system in Shanghai.

The Dynamics of Centralisation and Decentralisation

The decentralisation of tasks and delegation of administrative responsibility to the local levels are accompanied by the introduction of national standards and the development of national assessments. In other words, there is evidence of the simultaneous practice of decentralisation being countered by a good deal of regulatory re-centralisation. The re-centralisation of national standards is seen in the high-stakes terminal exams and other forms of tests for various grades. These tests and exams are assessments that are standardised at the district or municipal levels.

Terminal Exams

There are two terminal exams that Shanghai students have to sit for: zhongkao which is the junior secondary exam and the gaokao which is the national higher education entrance exam. Currently the zhongkao assesses students in 6 compulsory subjects, namely Chinese (150 marks), mathematics (150 marks), foreign language (English) (150 marks), physics and chemistry (a combined paper that adds to 150 marks) and physical fitness (30 marks). The total marks is 630.

Similar to zhongkao, the gaokao requires students to sit for 3 compulsory subjects, Chinese (150 marks), mathematics (150 marks) and foreign language (English) (150 marks). In addition, students have to sit for another subject of their choice (150 marks), depending on whether they specialise in the sciences (in which case they may choose physics, chemistry or biology) or in the humanities (in which case they may choose politics, history or geography). The total marks is 600.Footnote 2 The two terminal exams are high-stakes exams, as they determine whether the students will be admitted into a senior secondary school or a university of their choice.

At the senior secondary level, there is another exam that the students have to sit for, known as ‘Schoolwork Standard Exam’ [xueye shuiping kaoshi]. Implemented since 2009, this exam assesses the students’ performance in 10 academic subjects, taken over a period of 3 years. The 10 subjects are: (1) language (Chinese) (2) mathe­matics (3) foreign language (English) (4) physics (5) chemistry (6) life sciences (7) Information technology (8) geography (9) history and (10) Ideology and politics. The schedule, using the exam timetable for 2009 as an example, is as follows (Shanghai Municipal Education Commission, 2009):

  • Year 1: Information technology and geography

  • Year 2: History, physics, chemistry and life sciences

  • Year 3: Language (Chinese), mathematics, foreign language (English), ideology and politics

The Schoolwork Standard Exam questions are set by the municipal authorities and are mostly answered using the pen-and-paper format. The exceptions are information technology, which involves an online assessment; the English language, which, on top of a written paper, includes listening and speaking; and physics, chemistry and biology, which include experiments/technical operations. Unlike the gaokao, the subjects are not graded based on marks but on grades, namely, A (20%), B (30%), C (25%) and ‘Fail’. The objective of the exam is to ensure that the students meet a minimum level of competency in core academic subjects. The zhongkao, gaokao and Schoolwork Standard Exam collectively ensure that the schools, while enjoying a degree of autonomy in school management and curriculum design, do not neglect the academic standards of the students.Footnote 3

District-Level Tests

Besides the standardised exams at the municipal level, there are district-level tests for all students. This applies to students of all grades, including the primary level where there is no terminal exam. Each district sets its own exam papers that are completed by the students in their district before the gaokao. These questions are prepared by educational experts such as senior teaching-research officers, special-grade and senior teachers of the respective districts.

The district also organises a ‘Teaching Quality Test’ [jiaoxue zhiliang jiance] every term; it is a standardised test for the district, but the students from that district are picked randomly. Each time, the district will pick about one-third of the students from a particular grade. The schools in that district will not be informed of the subject, grade and students selected until the day of the test when the teachers collect the test papers from the district officials. A primary school principal explains how this works in keeping all the schools (their teachers) on their toes:

This term there are 2 subjects tested, Chinese language and mathematics. Last term, 3 subjects, Chinese, mathematics, English language. This means students do not need to take the test unless they are selected. But all the main subject teachers need to prepare because their subjects may be the one chosen. The district education bureau will compute the results and give feedback to the schools. The results are not officially announced but everyone is well aware of the results. So the pressure for principals, teachers and parents is very great because we will know our own standards as well as those of other schools.

These tests do not just assess the students’ academic quality but also other aspects of their lives such as their sleeping hours, reading habits, home tuition, subjects they like, etc. This further sends a message to the schools to focus not only on the test scores but the students’ holistic development – the goal of quality-oriented education. The information is then given to the schools as feedback for them to review their teaching quality and improve their practices. As a vice-principal notes:

It’s quality control, a direction for schools. It gives direction to teachers and students for the next term by giving detailed feedback on the average scores, every student’ scores, what’s inadequate. So for example, the teaching-research group leader for English language will know which aspects of English teaching are adequate, and which are not. This ensures that students have a high level of understanding ability.

Not only do the students and schools feel the stress to perform well in exams; the districts themselves are also under pressure to deliver high test scores and good performance. Zhang (2008a, 2008b) points out that every district bears pressure from the municipality to improve student exam scores as the municipal authorities compare and provide all districts with information on the average score of each subject across the districts (p. 293). This is acknow­ledged by one school principal:

The appraisal system still relies on college entrance rates as an indicator that can be measured. Some education administration departments, in inspecting a school’s work, use college entrance rates as the ‘hard indicator’ [yingzhibiao] for competition between districts and education bureaus. Some even have a yearly contract with the school, and reward or punish the school based on the situation. … So the students’ schoolwork results do not just determine the students’ future and destiny, they also determine the success and failure of the teachers, the school and even the district’s education standards.

Photo 10.2
figure b

A teacher answering her students’ queries after class. The student on the right is waiting for her turn

Full size image

Another measure to ensure quality control is the ranking of schools and students. Although the authorities have prohibited public ranking of schools since the 1990s, it appears that an unofficial ranking of schools, including the subject performance of each school and their students are still carried out by at least some district authorities. A teacher of a senior secondary school said: ‘Actually the administrative department is not supposed to rank the schools but it’s being done in reality.’ Students I interviewed also told me that they know their rank in their class, grade and even district. For the last type of ranking, students are told where they stand based on percentiles, for example, a student will know that her score is in the 90th percentile of her cohort in the district. All the above function as quality assurance measures as well as a means of centralised control even as the schools are given the power to design and launch school-based curriculum.

Exams: Love or Hate?

‘We love and hate exams’, said a vice-principal exasperatedly. ‘They increase our stress, yet they’re the fairest’, she said, as other principals and vice-principals in the room with us nodded in agreement.

The vice-principal has summed up the Chinese’s ambivalent views towards exams. On the one hand, there are compelling reasons why exams are the best mode of assessment with which to appraise students, teachers, principals and schools. As the world’s most populous country and the biggest education system, China needs a standardised assessment system that is widely perceived by the Chinese population to be transparent, scientific and fair.

The preferred form of assessment in China is summative rather than formative, and pen-and-paper assessment rather than performative tasks such as oral presentation. A Chinese academic explains why a summative and closed-book written exam system is privileged in China:

In China, education’s main function is selection. Through the screening of exams, people are allocated different grades, including different grades of schools, different grades of work places, different grades of social position. … Our country has a huge population with limited resources, so it can only allow a limited number of people to receive higher education and enjoy excellent educational resources. Therefore education needs to fulfill the selection function. To ensure that the selection is fair, standardised closed-book exams become the only choice. (Shangguan, 2005, pp. 283–284)

The preference for a written exam format with closed-ended questions is due partly to the legacy of the imperial exams and also to the general consensus that such a format is less open to subjective interpretation, bias and corruption. In a society where ‘human connections’ [guanxi] prevail and people are conscious of instances of abuse of power, exams are seen to be the ‘safest’ and surest way for everyone, with or without connection, to have a shot at academic success. ‘Regardless of your family background and standard, all must take the same exam, and if you’re good, you can go to university’, said a vice-principal. ‘If we do not have the gaokao’, she added, ‘when you get a job, many employers will wonder if it’s due to some tricks, there’s no fairness.’

The Chinese preference for competitions also stems from a cultural emphasis on outcomes and the mastery of skill that are revealed only when one pits one’s know­ledge and skills against others. Shangguang (2005) observes that many Chinese think that ‘only when you obtain a prize, become a winner, then there’s meaning in the learning process’ (p. 33). Hence, the implementation of various exam-related measures such as the Schoolwork Standard Exam, district-level tests and school ranking, although stressful, are seen to be necessary. The public trust in formal assessment explains why the authorities maintain centralised control in and quality assurance through standardised and high-stakes exams. We see here strong evidence of cultural scripts that shape the Chinese’s views of learning and assessment.

However, a society where people, from the school leaders to the students, are constantly being evaluated and ranked is a highly stressful and competitive place to live in. The competition is so intense that every mark, or half a mark, counts. Unsurprisingly, a survey of students in Shanghai shows that the two greatest problems faced by primary and secondary school students are ‘schoolwork results’ and ‘college entrance rates’ (Lu, 2005). The experience in Shanghai mirrors the case in China as a whole. In a national survey, nearly 87% of Chinese students said that they face heavy schoolwork pressure arising from expectations from themselves and their parents, as well as from competition with their schoolmates (Survey: Chinese students stressed most about school, People’s Daily Online, April 9, 2010). A ‘Survey of happiness state of secondary and primary school teachers in Shanghai’ conducted by Fudan University and a newspaper (Dongfang Jiaoyu Shibao) on a sample of 1,426 teachers from 29 schools informs us that their greatest source of pressure is their students’ results (Jiefangribao, 2011).

But even if change to the exam system is needed, it is unlikely for standardised exams to be replaced. ‘Our country is big with limited resources, so it’s not possible to achieve big changes in the same system’, said a principal. ‘With big changes, there’ll be chaos’, she averred. Given the sociocultural circumstances and constraints in China, it is also very challenging to move away from summative and written assessment modes to formative and alternative assessments. As one vice-principal candidly puts it, ‘We live in a social environment where the values of “integrity and justice” have not been fully established, so everyone still widely thinks that “scores are really the fairest” [fenshu caishi zui gongzhengde].’ Perhaps aware of this, what the Shanghai authorities have done instead is to keep the standardised exams but tweak the exam formats. As explained by a school principal:

There are already changes in the zhongkao and gaokao, in content and format. Meaningful changes that help bright students stand out. We are interested in the students’ learning process and innovative development. But we cannot use formative assessments, as the subjective elements in them are too strong. How to assess students, who to assess them, which assessment standards to use, these are the questions to ask. Our country is still in the flux of change.

That is why the vice-principal, representing the sentiments of many Chinese, remarked on the love-hate relationship with exams. Despite the persistent and immense stress that comes with formal assessment, there remains a general perception that ‘exam is still the fairest’.

Conclusion

This chapter discussed how the Shanghai authorities utilise various forms of assessment at the municipal and district levels to ensure that the standards of students and schools are not compromised even as schools are given greater autonomy. It is interesting to note the cultural scripts of collectivism, conformity and social hierarchy in Shanghai/China; this is seen through the administration of various standardised assessments on the one hand, and individual effort and self-interest through one’s performance in the same assessment on the other hand.Footnote 4 The concomitant emphasis on collectivism and individuality ensures that the exam system is used effectively for centralisation and decentralisation.

That the Shanghai municipal and district authorities adopt decentralised centralism as a means of control does not mean that policy implementation is smooth or uniform. As mentioned in the introductory chapter, the space of the assemblage is the contested site of interplay between the global and local forms and among the stakeholders. What we see here is the Shanghai municipal government playing the role of a dominant assembler in the educational landscape. Through ideas such as ‘quality-oriented education’ and ‘school supervisory development’ and practices such as introducing expanded and inquiry/research courses and maintaining centralised high-stakes exams, the Shanghai Municipal Education Commission aims to ensure that schools carry out their official policies dutifully.

However, the other educational stakeholders are not passive recipients of policy implementation. Rather, the recognition of the primacy of exams and the need to balance the implementation of quality-oriented curriculum reforms with exam results mean that school principals, teachers, students and parents have their own logics, tactics and countermeasures. We have seen how, for example, different districts compete to improve their college entrance rates through introducing various disciplinary measures such as the ‘Teaching Quality Test’. Shanghai teachers also respond strategically by giving extra classes to their students after school hours and even on Sundays during the exam period (see Chap. 4 for details). Parents too assemble their battery of tactics such as signing their children up for weekend tuition classes (see Chap. 5 for details, and Tan, 2012).Footnote 5

Given that assessment drives human behaviour, the format of the exam and types of questions asked have a direct impact on what goes on in the classroom. This means that to further understand the practices in Shanghai schools, we need to take a closer look at the exam questions in the next chapter.