<p>I guess this explains why Chinese immigrants in the US are sometimes baffled when their kids’ high SAT scores were not sufficient to get them into top schools:</p>
<p>“BEIJINGOn June 7, I visited Beijings Temple of Confucius. Generations of scholars have paid their respects to the ancient temple, which houses slates bearing the names of those who passed the Imperial Examinations. As I walked around, silently begging for better rote memorization abilities, I caught sight of a middle-aged woman audibly crying and praying in front of a large statue of Confucius, which had been adorned with red prayer tablets by students hoping for supernatural academic assistance.”</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>"The exam is given once a year, and an individuals Gao Kao score remains the sole factor for admission to the majority of Chinese institutions of higher education. According to estimates from 2009, only three out of five students achieve a score high enough to attend college.</p>
<p>Though daunting, the Gao Kao has practical advantages. It guarantees that each applicant possesses a baseline standard of knowledge. It provides a quantitative measure for the college admissions process, sidestepping the difficult process of assessing the relative merits of extracurriculars and recommendation letters. Indeed, people I spoke with expressed a strong belief that a more holistic admissions process would not work with Chinas astonishing glut of applicants."</p>
<p>It seems to me – though this is not an original thought – that the second-generation Chinese immigrant community has really not done a good job of emphasizing to the newer immigrants that the system that they are used to – intense stratification, not-enough-spaces-for-everyone-who-is-smart, scores as primary – is simply not the system over here in the US. One would think they would want to help their newly-arrived brethren navigate better here, versus laboring under assumptions that they can apply Chinese thinking to US institutions.</p>
<p>In Japan, the country’s most prestigious university, Tokyo University gives an entrance exam once a year and anyone is welcome to take it. Prospective students just sign up for the test and are assigned a confidential individual identification number that will be used in scoring the exam and publicly posting the results in front of the university. If there are 4,000 places available in the freshman class, the top 4,000 scorers on the exam are admitted. No application forms, no essays, no ECs, no letters of recommendation, not even a high school diploma is required, your test score is the sole determining factor as to whether you are admitted to Tokyo University or not.</p>
<p>Virtually everyone who is admitted to Tokyo University graduates and being graduates of Tokyo University means they are set for life claiming the best jobs in the most prestigious corporations and government agencies.</p>
<p>Japanese people see no problem with their prospects in life being determined by a single examination which has a Math section that even American Ivy League students would find impossibly difficult. Japanese fear that given the nature of Japanese society any selection method for something so important as admission to Tokyo University that was not completely transparent, objective and quantifiable would quickly become corrupted by individuals using personal connections and influence to gain admittance for family members and admittance to the university would no longer be based purely on the basis of merit.</p>
<p>It has to be remembered though that Japan is a racially homogeneous society that does not have ethnic minorities that score much higher or much lower than other ethnic groups on standardized tests like we have in the U.S…</p>
<p>Actually, Japan does have commonly-discriminated-against resident groups. These include the burakumin and the zainichi Koreans. (No idea if they tend to score much differently on standardized tests compared to others in Japan.)</p>
<p>I’m sure that others know far more about this than I, but it was always my impression that the gaps between the wealthiest and the poorest in Japan are far smaller than here (or in modern day China), and also that the schools that are hardest to get into and most prestigious are also those receiving the most support from the government and thus the least expensive for the student.</p>
<p>It has been my understanding that in Japan, the big expenses are those on the part of the family to pay for tutoring it might take to get and keep the student on track to enter a prestigious university. Little room for late-bloomers in that sort of system.</p>
<p>It has also been my understanding that students taking exams in China and Japan indicate preferred majors as well as preferred schools, and would need to start again from scratch were they to decide to change a major (or school.)</p>
<p>The issue of the Burakumin is a very sensitive one in Japan and a topic that most Japanese would feel uncomfortable discussing and many would even deny a problem exists. It is hard to know how many people would be considered Burakumin in Japan but it would probably be a great deal smaller than the percentage of the population made up of ethnic groups that have traditionally faced discrimination in the U.S. such as African Americans. Because of the anonymoty of the entrance exam system in Japan and uncertainty of which individuals might be Burakumin there is little information on how they do on standardized tests. There are indications based on the very sparse data that is available that they may not, for some reason, score as high on standardized tests as other Japanese.</p>
<p>Ethnic Koreans and Chinese in Japan again probably make up no more than 1% of the population. It seems that those who have lived in Japan for several generations obtain scores similar to ethnic Japanese on college entrance exams. It would seem that ethnic Koreans and Chinese in Japan should not be as motivated as ethnic Japanese to take entrance exams at leading universities since even though they would be graduates with prestigious degrees, their employment prospects would be less certain. They would be attractive to Japanese companies with extensive business dealings with Korea and China but would probably face a glass ceiling in a Japanese company.</p>
<p>China has a long tradition of using national exam. The KeJu Test system (of classics and essay/poetry) started in the fifth century and end with the Qin Dynasty in the early 20th century. It was then replaced by a set of exams that were more based on modern languages, math, and science. This system has been largely maintained for the last 100+ years – only to be interrupted during the 10 year cultural revolution, at which time college admissions were decided by “recommendations” based on social class and work performance (somethings of a holistic approach:)). </p>
<p>Modern day college admissions in China are, in the vast majority cases, based on the GaoKao scores, while adding extra credit to ethnic minorities (Tibetans and others) and students from poor regions. The Chinese almost universally support the Gaokao because of its meritocratic nature, but they are now increasingly cognizant of the negatives of rote study, and some colleges are trying to incorporate extracurricular factors into admission decisions, to encourage creativity.</p>
<p>I don’t agree that the immigrants lack a understanding of the U.S. system --at least for those who are interested in top colleges. Look at the population of first- and second-generation Chinese immigrants in those schools, they somehow understand enough of the system to get in those schools. </p>
<p>To the extent Asian Americans complain, here at CC and elsewhere, about college admission, it’s not because they don’t know the system and don’t know what to do; rather, they believe they are measured with a different yard stick. I know this topic has been argued constantly and exhaustively and I am not here to inject it again, but it is a widely held perception within the Asian community, fair or not.</p>
<p>Well, the Gao Kao is more academically demanding than the SAT test. </p>
<p>As someone pointed out, adjustments are made for underrepresented provinces and ethnic minorities.</p>
<p>Adjustments are also made for high-level awards, national level sport or academic prizes, etc.
Overall, it is more sensible than the ‘varsity cheerleader’ sort of EC that gets considered in the US.</p>
<p>Varsity cheerleader does not carry the kind of value that other e.c.'s do (at least for private colleges) – e.c.'s which require high levels of discipline and persistence over time.</p>
<p>If I recall correctly, this was how one of the first intelligence tests (developed by Alfred Binet) was created. England needed to determine the top students to send to their universities because there were not enough funds available to support all college age students. This subsequently became the Standford-Binet Intelligence test. So the idea of using a test to determine who should enter college has been around for quite some time. Not sure if they checked EC’s back then. ;o)</p>
<p>Most countries in the world use academic test scores as the main criteria for college admission. Some countries have open enrollment for high school grads in non-professional schools. The current system in China is the result of the education and modernization reform in the 1980s. This reform helps China dominate the world in economic and military expansion now.</p>
<p>Sorghum, not every human endeavor lends itself towards awards or competitions. That’s a very math-science way of looking at the world. Life isn’t just about winning contests.</p>
<p>In nations like Korea and Japan, the college entrance exam is pretty much your ticket to college. I mean the SAT is a joke compared to the one in Korea or Japan… Students commit suicide over failing to go to their dream school. Where you go and who you know determines everything. That is why my parents and I moved to the US.</p>
<p>No cheerleaders in our family, but I do know that there are rigorous high school cheerleading programs today that do a lot more than come out for the Homecoming game. Cheerleading is now a year-round activity requiring daily practice, with State and National level competitions that are televised on national TV. Cheerleaders serve as good will ambassadors and representatives of their high schools and regularly participate in community charity events. </p>
<p>If I were an employer looking for someone to fill a job involving customer or public relations or communications, I’d pick the former cheerleader over the math, science or history award winner any day.</p>
<p>"
Adjustments are also made for high-level awards, national level sport or academic prizes, etc.
Overall, it is more sensible than the ‘varsity cheerleader’ sort of EC that gets considered in the US."</p>
<p>Why is it more sensible to put everyone in the same box?</p>
<p>There are tremendous differences in culture and history between China and US. The college admissions process reflects these differences. In China, for the past 2000 years, those who are in position of (political and economic) power always have advantage in the daily life, college admissions process included. To make it fair, or make it appears to be fair, number-based national college entrance exam is considered only way to be impartial. Yes, during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), college entrance exams are essentially banned. In its place, a strange “holistic” admissions process was implemented. This holistic process is nothing but a tool for those who were in power to send their sons and daughters into college regardless or their academic capacity and ability. Granted that someone who is good at testing is not necessarily the best in solving practical problems nor he/she is the most capable leader, nor he/she has better chances to be successful later in life. However, for most commoners, the Chinese-style college entrance exam is a way that is considered fair and impartial. It gives average plumber’s sons and daughters the same opportunity and chance to be admitted to the most prestigious university. </p>
<p>For the most part, holistic approach in US is fair and impartial. However, the practice of measuring ORM and URM with different yardstick is a true form of discrimination, no matter how you cut it.</p>
<p>An additional comment on the Crimson paper itself: Back in 1979, I was one of these high school graduates taking the exam. In that year, only 3% of all high school graduates can get into colleges. Competition was extremely fierce and tough. Students who were not mentally tough suffer as a result of the stress. A friend of mine took five additional attempts before he finally got in, six years after graduating from high school! It was and still is considered brutal experiences for high school students. It still sends chills down my spine even thinking about these testing days back in 1979…</p>