3 ms·

China is highly competitive, with a history of using ‘merit’ based admission tests. The system/barriers were setup (as one’s always are) by incumbents, and the

by lazide 2y ago

China is highly competitive, with a history of using ‘merit’ based admission tests. The system/barriers were setup (as one’s always are) by incumbents, and the way they did it (while continuing to present it as ‘merit’ based) was to lean heavily on tests that require extensive memorization and tutoring, because only the wealthy can afford it. This is one obvious sign of that. After all, who has time to memorize 40k different characters?

looping__lui 2y ago
That seems a bit made up tbh. I’ve worked with a fair number of Chinese overachievers (both in domestic China and abroad) and family background/affluence weren’t even remotely as much of a factor compared to the US or India (except for the IITs). Also, I noticed there were many many cases of brilliant young people rising through the ranks of the academic system in China compared to India for example where teachers often simply would not show up in public schools. Personal background: I worked and studied in the US, I worked in China and I studied in India
- lazide 2y ago
  Made up how? It’s still more merit based and class mobile than caste anything. But the tests are the tests and require massive prep, eh? And the tests require massive amounts of memorization and time to prep for, compared to western tests - even now. Historically it was orders of magnitude worse though.
  - looping__lui 2y ago
    Kid’s ability to make it through the ranks of academia in my personal anecdotal evidence depends less on financial ability or social standing in China compared to the US or India. I agree that it is merit driven above anything else - not sure I would agree that this is favoring wealthy kids/certain social class in a more disproportionate way than what we see in India or the US. Now, I will say that neither university nor high school in China or India imho prepare kinds for success in life or the corporate world. Europe (with a hands-off “you get no help and will just struggle your way through life and learn quick”) and the US (“here are actual experts dedicated to help you succeed) seem imho to produce capable graduates for the corporate world.
    - lazide 2y ago
      Eh, see alephnerds comment above - that lines up with my experience as well.
      - looping__lui 2y ago
        Ok, the point being though (it seems): advantages are not universal geographically across China; I agree, that I also observed that.
        lazide 2y ago
        In that geographical advantages are expressly tied to income and ‘official ness’ in an area (the Hukou system)? If one is a poor rural immigrant in an otherwise high end area, you don’t get to send your kids to the nice schools.
        alephnerd 2y ago
        The issue with hukou is two-way. Urban cities of course don't want to hand out urban hukou easily because they don't want an influx of migrants straining social services. But conversely, a lot of rural hukou holders do not want to give up rural hukou because it gives retirement benefits at 55 and is a requirement in order to keep their rural landholding. This is why you have migrants with a rural hukou working in urban China but not gaining an urban hukou. The problem with hukou is fundamentally a social safety net problem - there is little to no social safety net in China, so the "migrant to urban area with rural hukou" is the least bad option out of multiple bad options (keep rural hukou and live in rural China barely eking a living or give up rural hukou and lose the only appreciating asset you had along with benefits at 55). In essence, the lion's share of Chinese development is overly concentrated in a handful of urban agglomerations, and isn't spreading to rural China where 45-50% of Chinese still live to this day.
        lazide 2y ago
        The hokou/education thing is pretty clearly one way though, correct?
- alephnerd 2y ago
  I think they mean historic (as in pre-1911 China). And they aren't wrong, as even major China scholars like Yasheng Huang and Yuhua Wang point out that the Imperial Civil Service in China was stacked against merit due to structural issues that biased in favor of incumbents. That said, similar issues continue to persist in China to this day due to the Zhongkao. Specifically, if you didn't attend a academic high school (which only accepts around 45-55% of Zhongkao takers) you wouldn't be prepared for the Gaokao unless it was out of pocket at a cram school (which are now technically banned, but were anyhow exorbitantly expensive in a country where the median household income is $4,000). And if you couldn't pass the Gaokao, you couldn't attend university. Furthermore, Academic High Schools tend to be few and far between, yet take the lion's share of resources unlike Vocational High Schools which most Chinese attend - but not the ones you meet in an air conditioned office unless you order from Meituan. In the vocational schools you see similar issues of teacher absence and lack of pedagogy. The failure of the VET system in China has been a major sticking point in Chinese policymaking recently and a lot of domestic research is being done to understand why it failed [0][1][2] [0] - https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ET-09-2023-0412/full/html https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ET-09-20... [1] - https://www.ewadirect.com/proceedings/lnep/article/view/9075 https://www.ewadirect.com/proceedings/lnep/article/view/9075 [2] - https://www.atlantis-press.com/article/125949173.pdf https://www.atlantis-press.com/article/125949173.pdf
  - looping__lui 2y ago
    Thanks for the additional details. In Germany only about 30% of high-school kids qualify academic high-school (merit-based) and are eligible to apply for university after two-years of exams that determine your final grade (and chances). There are literally only public schools. I think you describe that it is very similar today in China after they banned the private tutoring a couple of years back. So, we are somehow back to “work hard on not to unequal grounds and your personal merit/luck will determine your future”. Thanks for sharing additional detail and it resembles what I remember - but it does not seem to be “instrumented in a way to keep certain groups out of academia based on income or social standing”. Imho a 30% ratio for university graduates is a sweet spot for society. We have great (free) vocational training programs in Germany that empower all those who did not go to university to make money quicker and they more often that not end up in financially better situations. University often pays off only for top university graduates once they pass 35/40 years of age.
nneonneo 2y ago
Once you get to ~5000 characters you can read most common texts. Vanishingly few people will know ~40,000 characters; a large fraction of those are obscure or ancient characters that only show up in historical texts.
- lazide 2y ago
  That is rather the point I was making, wasn’t it?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

by lazide 2y ago

looping__lui 2y ago

That seems a bit made up tbh. I’ve worked with a fair number of Chinese overachievers (both in domestic China and abroad) and family background/affluence weren’t even remotely as much of a factor compared to the US or India (except for the IITs). Also, I noticed there were many many cases of brilliant young people rising through the ranks of the academic system in China compared to India for example where teachers often simply would not show up in public schools. Personal background: I worked and studied in the US, I worked in China and I studied in India

lazide 2y ago
Made up how? It’s still more merit based and class mobile than caste anything. But the tests are the tests and require massive prep, eh? And the tests require massive amounts of memorization and time to prep for, compared to western tests - even now. Historically it was orders of magnitude worse though.
- looping__lui 2y ago
  Kid’s ability to make it through the ranks of academia in my personal anecdotal evidence depends less on financial ability or social standing in China compared to the US or India. I agree that it is merit driven above anything else - not sure I would agree that this is favoring wealthy kids/certain social class in a more disproportionate way than what we see in India or the US. Now, I will say that neither university nor high school in China or India imho prepare kinds for success in life or the corporate world. Europe (with a hands-off “you get no help and will just struggle your way through life and learn quick”) and the US (“here are actual experts dedicated to help you succeed) seem imho to produce capable graduates for the corporate world.
  - lazide 2y ago
    Eh, see alephnerds comment above - that lines up with my experience as well.
    - looping__lui 2y ago
      Ok, the point being though (it seems): advantages are not universal geographically across China; I agree, that I also observed that.
      - lazide 2y ago
        In that geographical advantages are expressly tied to income and ‘official ness’ in an area (the Hukou system)? If one is a poor rural immigrant in an otherwise high end area, you don’t get to send your kids to the nice schools.
        alephnerd 2y ago
        The issue with hukou is two-way. Urban cities of course don't want to hand out urban hukou easily because they don't want an influx of migrants straining social services. But conversely, a lot of rural hukou holders do not want to give up rural hukou because it gives retirement benefits at 55 and is a requirement in order to keep their rural landholding. This is why you have migrants with a rural hukou working in urban China but not gaining an urban hukou. The problem with hukou is fundamentally a social safety net problem - there is little to no social safety net in China, so the "migrant to urban area with rural hukou" is the least bad option out of multiple bad options (keep rural hukou and live in rural China barely eking a living or give up rural hukou and lose the only appreciating asset you had along with benefits at 55). In essence, the lion's share of Chinese development is overly concentrated in a handful of urban agglomerations, and isn't spreading to rural China where 45-50% of Chinese still live to this day.
        lazide 2y ago
        The hokou/education thing is pretty clearly one way though, correct?
alephnerd 2y ago
I think they mean historic (as in pre-1911 China). And they aren't wrong, as even major China scholars like Yasheng Huang and Yuhua Wang point out that the Imperial Civil Service in China was stacked against merit due to structural issues that biased in favor of incumbents. That said, similar issues continue to persist in China to this day due to the Zhongkao. Specifically, if you didn't attend a academic high school (which only accepts around 45-55% of Zhongkao takers) you wouldn't be prepared for the Gaokao unless it was out of pocket at a cram school (which are now technically banned, but were anyhow exorbitantly expensive in a country where the median household income is $4,000). And if you couldn't pass the Gaokao, you couldn't attend university. Furthermore, Academic High Schools tend to be few and far between, yet take the lion's share of resources unlike Vocational High Schools which most Chinese attend - but not the ones you meet in an air conditioned office unless you order from Meituan. In the vocational schools you see similar issues of teacher absence and lack of pedagogy. The failure of the VET system in China has been a major sticking point in Chinese policymaking recently and a lot of domestic research is being done to understand why it failed [0][1][2] [0] - https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ET-09-2023-0412/full/html https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ET-09-20... [1] - https://www.ewadirect.com/proceedings/lnep/article/view/9075 https://www.ewadirect.com/proceedings/lnep/article/view/9075 [2] - https://www.atlantis-press.com/article/125949173.pdf https://www.atlantis-press.com/article/125949173.pdf
- looping__lui 2y ago
  Thanks for the additional details. In Germany only about 30% of high-school kids qualify academic high-school (merit-based) and are eligible to apply for university after two-years of exams that determine your final grade (and chances). There are literally only public schools. I think you describe that it is very similar today in China after they banned the private tutoring a couple of years back. So, we are somehow back to “work hard on not to unequal grounds and your personal merit/luck will determine your future”. Thanks for sharing additional detail and it resembles what I remember - but it does not seem to be “instrumented in a way to keep certain groups out of academia based on income or social standing”. Imho a 30% ratio for university graduates is a sweet spot for society. We have great (free) vocational training programs in Germany that empower all those who did not go to university to make money quicker and they more often that not end up in financially better situations. University often pays off only for top university graduates once they pass 35/40 years of age.

nneonneo 2y ago

Once you get to ~5000 characters you can read most common texts. Vanishingly few people will know ~40,000 characters; a large fraction of those are obscure or ancient characters that only show up in historical texts.

lazide 2y ago
That is rather the point I was making, wasn’t it?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]