« | Home | »

‘It’s not fair if you don’t let us cheat’

Tags: | |

Schoolchildren everywhere cheat in exams. But British and American universities are said to be especially worried by a rise in fraudulent applications from Chinese students. In China, meanwhile, some schools are going to extreme lengths to prevent cheating on the gao kao, the national college entrance examinations.

A school in Jilin province made headlines when it required pupils to pass through a metal detector to prevent them sneaking electronic devices into the exams; girls were forbidden from wearing bras with metal underwire or clasps. A school in Hubei province brought in external invigilators after 99 identical exam papers were handed in last year. This provoked a riot by students and parents. After the exams the invigilators were trapped in school offices while hundreds of students threw rocks at the windows. ‘We want fairness,’ they shouted. ‘There is no fairness if you do not let us cheat’ (i.e. everyone else does so why can’t we).

In the late 1990s I worked at a small teacher training college in Hunan province; all the students there had done badly on the gao kao. Anyone with a good score was in a better college, or university, certainly in a better town. The facilities were poor; most of the lessons consisted of mind-numbing rote learning. When I set exams, I made sure they would be easy for anyone who had turned up to class. Other teachers told me to watch out for cheating, but I was still amazed by how blatant and widespread it was. I saw answers written on palms, wrists, on small strips of paper in tiny characters; at least very few people in China had mobile phones then.

When I marked the papers I found widespread copying; in one case two boys had lifted entire paragraphs from each other. The college authorities agreed that this was definitely against the rules, and truly awful, then made me pass them anyway.

Ultimately the problem, both then and now, was an education system that made pupils’ futures contingent on their ability to regurgitate information. In that kind of system, with so much pressure and competition, perhaps cheating is the only sane response. Michael Gove wants more learning by rote, tougher exams and more competition between pupils in British schools. Which probably means more cheating, too.

Comments on “‘It’s not fair if you don’t let us cheat’”

  1. alynch says:

    I have just finished teaching a summer school course at a university in Xi’an. I was required to set an examination. I was politely informed that the key issue was attendance. I was also told that marks in the high 90’s were pretty much expected, and that anything lower would be troublesome – exceept if an otherwise attending student failed to show for the exam. Then something in the 80’s would be fine.

  2. Derek Newton says:

    In Chinese education scores are everything. Although students take the gao kao around the age of 18, they start training for it as soon as they enter primary school. The examination system permeates every aspect of the curriculum. Exams such as the gao kao operate on an industrial scale, testing what can be tested. But what can be tested is not the same as what could be learned. To the despair of Chinese educationalists, the curriculum remains stubbornly knowledge-based and fails to promote imagination, creativity or the application of learning. Of course it’s possible to cheat in the Chinese exam system because everyone is expected to provide the same, ‘correct’ answer. This is the ‘world-class’ examination system Mr Gove apparently seeks to emulate. But then ‘ignorance is bliss’ and Mr Gove certainly has the arrogance of ignorance.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • pgillott on Wishful Thinking about Climate Change: Phrases like “monumental triumph” and (particularly) “renaissance for humankind” are overdoing it, but to suggest that there is no chance of ...
    • UncleShoutingSmut on Goodbye, Circumflex: Unfortunately this post is likely to leave readers with a very partial idea of what is going on. Firstly, there is no "edict": all that has happened i...
    • martyn94 on The Price of Everything: If it's a joke at anyone's expense, it's surely at the expense of any super-rich who take it seriously. I used to skim it occasionally as a diversion ...
    • mideastzebra on Swedish-Israeli Tensions: Avigdor Liberman was not foreign minister November 2015.
    • lars hakanson on Exit Cameron: Europe will for good reason rejoice when the UK elects to leave. The country has over the years provided nothing but obstacles to European integration...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement