American college campuses do not emphasize the top scorers of the college entrance examination.
I recently read an article titled "Investigation of the Career Status of Chinese Top Scorers," which discusses how, in the 30 years from 1977 to 2006, no provincial top scorer across the country has become an outstanding figure in politics, business, or academia. The enviable "college entrance examination (CEE) top scorers" have ultimately been filtered out by the tides of society and ended up as ordinary individuals. This is a very typical consequence of China's exam-oriented education system, and it also shows that being a "good student" does not equate to being "good talent." Let my Gu Baiyou education journey prove everything.
Two of my friends were once CEE top scorers in a certain province, and even I, having entered university in 1977, was admitted because I ranked first in one subject citywide. For many years, "CEE top scorers" have been highly sought after, with prestigious universities treating them as talents and competing to enroll them. However, American prestigious universities do not particularly value so-called "CEE top scorers." If a high school student could enter Harvard solely based on high test scores while showing mediocre performance otherwise, Harvard University would be laughed at by educators and face intense public criticism.
In the U.S. university admissions system, there is actually no concept of "CEE top scorers." Although test scores are an important consideration, they are not the sole or complete factor. University graduates should focus on employment internships and practice.
In the U.S., there are two numerical indicators or "hard" indicators that reflect a student's academic level: one is the student's average grade over four years of high school, and the other is their SAT (or ACT) test score. If we compare the SAT exam to China's college entrance exam, then achieving a perfect score on the SAT would qualify someone as a "top scorer." In American Chinese families, it is common to hear about children scoring perfectly on the SAT but still not being accepted into prestigious universities like Harvard. Why? Prestigious universities don't take students who only excel in exams seriously. If a student can only study without creativity, such students will not be favored. Simply put, what they want is talent, not "high-score babies."
Since "CEE top scorers" are not valued, the exemplary cases of outstanding students promoted by American universities are not "CEE top scorers," and society and public opinion have no interest or trend in excessively praising so-called "CEE top scorers." A classic example of Harvard University admissions is a girl born into a poor family whose mother makes a living by collecting garbage. This girl did not complain about her parents' poverty but instead resolved to change her fate through her own efforts. She studied hard, but more importantly, she saw many people in her community who needed help. During her free time, she volunteered and used her meager strength to assist the poor around her. Later, this girl was admitted to Harvard University, becoming a typical example of how Harvard widely recruits talented individuals, including those from humble backgrounds.
A Harvard University president once discussed what kind of students the university likes to admit. He said, outstanding college students come from excellent high school students, and our school is one that strongly fosters and encourages high school students to possess innovative thinking and creative abilities. Society's praise for top high school students is not limited to good classroom grades but extends to various aspects. To become a Harvard student, excelling academically is not enough; one must also have the creativity to open new horizons; having knowledge alone is insufficient; one must also have the curiosity to explore the unknown; focusing solely on one's professional field is inadequate; one must also have broad interests in other areas.
Harvard University's educational philosophy is that all children, regardless of their family background or which school they attend, must have the opportunity to fully realize their potential. Equal opportunity must mean equal opportunity to pursue excellence, and the demand for equality certainly does not mean tolerance for mediocrity. This is not elitism; we must give our students—all students—the opportunity to receive the best education possible.
In 2008, over 27,000 students applied to Harvard University, with an acceptance rate of only 7.4%. Many students had outstanding achievements, and there were plenty of students who scored perfectly on the SAT, yet they were still rejected. So, what kind of students does Harvard University accept? Let’s look at an example. Alina Onicescuksi from Hathaway Brown High School in Shaker Heights, Ohio, focused on water pollution and chose metal ion pollution in water as her research topic. After 3000 hours of repeated failures, she finally invented and patented an automatic microelectronic chemical sensor control electroplating system technology. This technology can effectively reduce the amount of metal ions discharged into water during electroplating. She was also a regional finalist in the Siemens-Westinghouse Science Competition, a semifinalist in the Intel Science Talent Search, the director of the Model United Nations Club at her school, the editor-in-chief of the school newspaper, a senior coordinator for nursing home volunteers, and a researcher on the history of how Danes helped Jews during the Nazi Holocaust in World War II.
Another example is Michael Minnick from Fox Chapel Area High School in Pittsburgh, who composed four musical works, two of which raised $4000 for patients with mood disorders. He was rated by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette as the most ambitious young musician of 2000, served as the editor-in-chief of the school newspaper, the director of the school club, and the minister of the student council, and was eventually admitted to Harvard University.
Regardless of whether it's the example of Harvard University admitting a girl from a poor family or the phenomenon of "CEE top scorers" becoming famous, these examples reflect the deepest educational philosophy behind them, which is equal educational opportunities. Do not underestimate the word "fairness;" ensuring every child enjoys fair educational opportunities is far more difficult than doubling or tripling GDP. Both Chinese and American education emphasize fairness, but how to achieve it takes different paths. American universities certainly pay great attention to high school students' academic performance, but they also focus more on students' creativity and service to the community, with comprehensive evaluation being an important means. China's CEE system initially helped select talent, but under the immense pressure of "thousands crossing a narrow bridge," it has come down to using scores as the sole measure of a student's quality.
In China, exam-oriented education is indestructible—at least it is now. Why? In an environment filled with power, money, personal connections, and relationships, scores have become the only "hard" indicator of equal educational opportunities. The only way for students from poor families to rise above is to excel academically and score high on exams to counteract these negative influences. Everyone knows that comprehensively evaluating students is a good way for universities to recruit outstanding high school students, but these comprehensive evaluations have significant arbitrariness and involve too many human factors. Ultimately, how many people dare believe in its fairness?
The failure of "CEE top scorers" to become outstanding talents reflects how, in the historical tide, the filtering process eliminates not just trash but sometimes gold as well.
I just read a piece of news about a middle school student who became a volunteer in the Sichuan earthquake zone after the disaster. He concealed his age of 16 and contributed his light and heat as an adult in the disaster area, eventually becoming the youngest volunteer in the disaster zone. This year, he was accepted by nine American universities simultaneously.
After reading this news, I thought, why doesn’t China's top university admit him? Isn't such a student full of love, concerned about society, and willing to contribute considered excellent talent? Is it only American universities that can identify talent? In the face of an unshakable exam-oriented education system, if China's prestigious universities could admit this student, wouldn't it send a strong signal to millions of middle school students: scores are still important, but the standard for good talent is not limited to high scores. Society needs specialized talent, but more importantly, society needs talent responsible for its own nation.
Educational opportunities should be equal, and achieving equal educational opportunities requires the efforts of government departments and educational institutions, your effort, my effort, and the joint efforts of every family in society.
As ordinary citizens, we may find it difficult to determine the flow of the river, but we should at least be able to avoid going with the flow.
