By Junjie Yang
China’s education system has long been driven by a singular goal: success in the Gaokao, the national college entrance examination that defines a student’s academic future. This system, known as exam-oriented education, has shaped the educational direction of the country for decades. However, recent debates have centered on the need for quality education, which promotes a more holistic approach by nurturing creativity, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. The conflict between these two represents a critical juncture in China’s education reform.
On the surface, exam-oriented education seems to promise fairness. Every student, regardless of their background, faces the same test. For many students not in the city, the Gaokao serves as their only hope for a better future, a narrow, but essential pathway to escape poverty. In provinces like Gansu or Guizhou, where resources are poor, students view the Gaokao as a single beam of light on an otherwise dark educational journey.
However, beneath this veneer of fairness lies a cruel reality: the resources available to prepare for the Gaokao are far from equal. According to a 2019 report from the China Institute for Educational Finance Research, the per-student funding in rural areas can be up to 50% lower than that in urban schools. In many rural schools, resources are often limited. Teachers may be inexperienced, classrooms may lack the latest technology, and students may not have access to additional tutoring or learning materials. For instance, in some rural schools in provinces like Gansu or Guizhou, classes are overcrowded, and teachers may teach multiple subjects due to a lack of staff. Students often use old textbooks and have little access to modern learning tools such as computers or science labs.
In contrast, urban schools in cities like Beijing or Shanghai have superior educational resources. A 2020 study by Peking University showed that students in major cities like Beijing have a 25% higher likelihood of being admitted to top-tier universities than their rural counterparts. Students at those schools, for example, the students at prestigious schools in Shanghai, not only have access to advanced scientific equipment but also to specialized tutoring and foreign exchange programs. This creates a fundamental injustice: while the exam itself is the same, the preparation for it is anything but. Rural students are at a disadvantage, competing in a race where their starting is much further behind their urban counterparts.
Moreover, the focus on exam preparation creates an environment of extreme pressure. For all students, whether urban or rural, the Gaokao looms as a singular event that can make or break their future. The stress to succeed often transforms learning from an exploration of ideas into a mechanical drill for memorizing facts. According to the China Youth Research Center, approximately 68% of Chinese high school students report high levels of stress related to the Gaokao, leading to widespread issues of anxiety and depression.
In response to the limitations of the exam-oriented system, educators and policymakers are calling for a shift toward quality education. In many schools, core subjects such as math, Chinese and English often take precedence over creative subjects such as art and music. Teachers of these core subjects often take time away from extracurricular activities and consider test preparation more important. This practice limits students’ creativity and self-expression, which are essential components of a well-rounded education. Critics argue that this excessive focus on test scores affects the overall development of students, leading to a lack of balance between academic success and personal growth.
The Chinese government is already experimenting with reform. In 2014, the introduction of the “new gaokao” allowed students in some provinces to choose subjects according to their interests, giving them greater freedom to pursue personalized education. The idea behind this is to reduce the strict focus on the main subject and provide students with more educational autonomy.
But the road to meaningful change is fraught with challenges. Deep-seated cultural beliefs about success continue to prioritize academic achievement over other forms of development. In competitive urban environments, parents often prioritize high scores above all else, pushing their children to focus on exams. This mindset reflects a broader societal obsession with rank and performance, where success is measured not by innovation but by how well one can conform to a standardized test. This echoes China’s ancient examination system, known as the “imperial examination,” in which scholars competed for government jobs based solely on their ability to pass rigorous exams, a system that Confucius himself criticized for valuing memory over wisdom.
The real challenge for China is finding a balance between the strengths of exam-oriented education and the goals of quality education. Exam-oriented education, while deeply flawed, has played a crucial role in promoting social mobility, especially for students from poor backgrounds. It offers a clear and structured path for students to improve their socio-economic status. However, a system that prioritizes memory over critical thinking cannot meet the demands of the modern world for innovation, adaptability, and creativity.
One possible solution is to diversify the way students are assessed. Instead of relying solely on test scores, colleges can consider a broader range of accomplishments, such as student involvement in community projects, leadership, volunteering, and creative pursuits. This will allow students to demonstrate talents beyond a narrow range of academic achievement, providing a more holistic view of their abilities.
Teacher training also plays a critical role in this transformation. Teachers need to move away from rote memorization and traditional, rigid teaching methods. For example, when conducting science experiments, every student should participate rather than watching the teacher perform the experiment alone on the podium, which is the common practice across the board. The hands-on approach allows students to engage directly with the material, fostering a deeper understanding through active participation.
Expanding access to quality education in rural areas is critical to reducing inequality in China’s education system. By building more schools, sending more teachers, and providing better resources in rural areas, students there can get the same opportunities as their urban counterparts. In addition, investing in infrastructure, technology, and teacher support in these areas will help close the education gap. Projects like Precision Poverty Alleviation, which focuses on improving education for students in poor areas, will create a more balanced learning environment where every student, regardless of background, has a fair chance to succeed.
The clash between exam-oriented and quality education in China represents more than just a debate over how students should be taught—it is a reflection of the country’s broader struggle to adapt to a rapidly changing world. While exam-oriented education has helped millions of students rise out of poverty, its limitations are becoming increasingly apparent. As Confucius once said, “Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is perilous.” This quote perfectly captures the challenge China faces today: an overemphasis on rote memorization without fostering critical thinking may lead to wasted potential. As China moves forward, it must find a way to strike a balance between preserving the fairness and structure of the exam system while embracing the flexibility and creativity that quality education promises. Only then can China’s education system equip students with the skills they need to thrive in a globalized, unpredictable future.
