Educational discipline, ritual governing, and Chinese exemplary society: Why China’s curriculum reform remains a difficult?task

Jinting Wu

Faculty of Education, University of Macau, China

Abstract

This article explores the exam-oriented, ritualistic, and exemplary Chinese education system through?a?double-layered?historical?and?ethnographic?analysis.?Firstly,?I?examine?three?aspects of the educational governing complex—exemplarity, ritual, and examination. Historically, education?has?been?a?key?locus?to?craft?exemplary?subjects?through?rituals?and?imitation?of models, and this is ?reinforced ?by ?exams ?to ?justify ?social ?hierarchy. ?The ?production of?subjectivities?in?Chinese?schools?has?never?been?too?far?removed?from?these?aspects?of exemplarity,?ritual,?and?examination.?Secondly,?I?offer?an?account?of?the?contested?‘‘quality curriculum?reform’’?in?rural?China.?While?the?reform?aims?to?foster?creativity?and?criticizes?the overemphasis on exams, classroom rituals, and exemplary icons, its implementation renormalizes the?tripartite?governing?paradigm?and?produces?a?contradictory?mix?of?subjectifying?discourses?in everyday?school?lives.?The?study?shows?that?contemporary?pedagogic?discourse?is?still?rooted?in traditional?elements,?even?if?the?reform?aims?to?do?away?with,?however?partially,?these?elements. In?the?multi-layered?field?of?Chinese?education,?pedagogical?actors?both?abide?by?and?react?against the?historical?and?contemporary?visions?of?educational?governing?with?hybrid?subjectivities.?The study?sheds?light?on?why?China’s?curriculum?reform?is?far?from?an?easy?task.

Keywords

Educational governing, ritual, exemplary society, Chinese curriculum reform

Situating the educational problems within a tripartite lens

The cultural base of Chinese schools draws primarily from the Confucian heritage with distinct features of learning practices, expectations, and interpretations. The cultural-historical foundation of Chinese education is an important topic of scholarly concern, especially?given?China’s?rapid?social?change?and?Chinese?students’?stellar?performance?in the?global?testing?regimes?such?as?the?Program?for?International?Student?Assessment?(PISA). On?the?one?hand,?China’s?leading?position?in?league?tables?of?student?assessment?provokes curiosity and controversies regarding the so-called ‘‘chopstick culture’’ of Confucian learning that emphasizes discipline, hard work, and testing performance (Cheng, 2014). On?the?other?hand,?educational?commentators?and?critics?have?also?denounced?aspects?of Confucian tradition for producing unthinking test-takers without innovative and leadership abilities (Mathews, 2014; Ravitch, 2014; Zhao, 2009, 2014). Researchers from di?erent sub ?elds?of?education?have?also?attempted?to?understand?the?distinct?Confucian?in?uence?on classroom?policies?and?practices,?as?well?as?the?attitudes?and?orientations?of?Chinese?learners (Clark?and?Gieve,?2006;?Grimshaw,?2007;?Jin?and?Cortazzi,?2006;?Watkins?and?Biggs,?1996). In?a?sense,?existing?literature?provides?a?comprehensive?lens?to?the?multifaceted?character?of Confucian educational heritage, and echoes the culturally sensitive approach to learning (Ladson-Billings, 1995) in a global?context.

Through a tripartite lens of exemplarity-ritual-exam in the Confucian framework, this

article?attempts?to?historicize?Chinese?educational?discipline?to?shed?light?on?the?complexity and?challenges?of?China’s?contemporary?curriculum?reform.?It?is?important?to?clarify?that?it is?not?my?intention?to?assess?the?merit?or?demerit?of?the?three?features?of?exemplarity,?ritual, and exam in any normative manner. The values and roles of ritual education, exam- orientation, and learning through exemplars are historically situated and intertwined in the cultural, social, and political systems of reasoning that underlie the Chinese society. In a sense, the three disciplinary features are open to debate and continually evolving with China’s ongoing self-re?exivity and global encounters. As I have argued elsewhere (Wu, 2015), Confucian heritage has become a convenient proxy used to mark the distinction of ‘‘what is on the Chinese radar yet o? the Euro-American screen, and vice versa’’ (p. 256). What is of interest to me is not to essentialize Confucian heritage as an explanatory?variable?of?things?Chinese;?rather,?I?focus?on?three?features?as?the?apparatuses?of educational?governing?and?examine?how?they?produce?a?complex?assemblage?of?discourses, practices,?and?subjectivities?to?both?anchor?and?hamper?China’s?contemporary?curriculum reform.

Governing through exemplarity

China?has?arguably?one?of?the?most?centralized?and?bureaucratic?educational?systems?in?the world. With many aspects of schooling regulated by the state, public schools across the nation share a number of common features, noticeable both in metropolises and in remote mountain villages. This can be seen in the weekly ?ag-raising ceremony as the tribute to the state; the young pioneers’ initiation when ?rst-grade pupils pledge dedication?to?communism;?the?participation?in?the?communist?youth?league?by?politically aspiring adolescents; the learning via a curriculum su?used with state-sponsored memories and?dictums.?In?addition,?with?wall?exhibitions?of?portraits?and?quotations?by?political?and scienti?c dignitaries (such as Albert Einstein, Karl Marx, Mao Zedong, etc., see Figure?1), the?Chinese?schools?are?standardized?ritual?spaces?replete?with?exemplars?and?models?that sanction?what?is?thinkable?and?permissible?(Wu,?2016:?Chapter?2).?The?use?of?models?is?also seen in the importance of mimicking the teacher and memorizing exemplary textbook paragraphs?in?preparation?for?entrance?exams?(Jin?and?Cortazzi,?2006:?11),?as?well?as?in?the?political?socialization?of?students?through?exposing?them?to?larger-than-life?heroes?(such as?the?young?People’s?Liberation?Army?solder?Lei?Feng)?who?they?would?learn?to?respect?and emulate (Reed, 1995:?99).

Chinese?contemporary?educational?spaces?pulsate?with?exemplary?displays?and?nationalist sentiments,?and?this?has?its?roots?in?classical?Confucian?China.?Historically,?cultural?heroes and?role?models?work?as?the?means?for?the?transmission?and?continuity?of?Chinese?culture over?the?centuries.?Emperors,?teachers,?and?parents?widely?employed?prototypes?(such?as?the loyal?bureaucrat,?the?scholar-sage,?the?chaste?spouse,?the??lial?child,?etc.)?to?inspire?virtues deemed?conducive?to?an?orderly?society?(Reed,?1995:?99).?Education,?in?particular,?has?been a?key?locus?for?individuals?to?cultivate?their?proper?places?in?the?society?through?acquiring essential rituals. It is above all the crafting of exemplary subjects who embody?propriety; imitation?of?exemplars?is?upheld?as?the?core?of?learning?and?the?maintenance?of?social?order. The?use?of?exemplars?has?to?do?with?the?belief?that?the?cultivation?of?human?goodness?must not be left to the haphazard forces of nature but by carefully planned direction and signposts.

Exemplarity is further reinforced by exam-based meritocracy, which justi?es social

selection in building a uni?ed national culture. Primarily concerned with moral ?cultivation, the classical Confucian education is based upon exempli?cation of ideal personhood, the so-called?junzi?( ?). Those who embody socially desirable virtues, such as ?benevolence ?(ren??

4?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

), inspire pursuit of similar excellence among the general public. The noblemanjunzi?follows?successive?steps?of?self-cultivation?to?become?the?signpost?of?virtue, learnedness, and propriety for others to emulate. The exemplary ?gures, whether real or symbolic, are important vehicles and public representations of cultural ideals to de?ne individual eminence as well as collective?aspiration.

In contemporary China, the use of exemplars is also warranted by the fear of moral decline and the need for social control as the country pursues a modern technocratic utopia, even if beneath the surface of compliance, the populace often manipulates the political correctness of exemplars to advance their life chances (Shirk, 1982). The cast of characters?who?serve?as?moral?exemplars?changes?with?China’s?sociopolitical?climate,?from the Confucian noble gentlemen to the revolutionary heroes and heroines to the contemporary resurgence of human-hearted models who are recipients of National Medals of Moral Labor ?(quanguo?laomo?). Exemplars remain a central feature of Chinese history and society. As Bakken (2000) observes, the Chinese answer to social disorder?is?the?promotion?of?exemplary?‘‘quality’’?citizens.?While?what?constitutes?human ‘‘quality’’?is?up?for?grabs,?the?technique?of?exemplary?governing?exhorts?the?individual?to perfect the self as a way of paying tribute to the state and, ultimately, the Mandate of Heaven (tianming ?). To discipline through promoting exemplarity is thus?underscored by a belief in human and social perfectibility, which indicates a two-fold meaning of self growth and social engineering, individual endeavors and collective?yearning.

The e?cacy of exemplars depends on the Chinese personhood not as abstract, equal, and

rights-bearing individuals but as based on ‘‘di?erential?moral and social statuses and the moral claims and judgments of others’’ (Yang, 1989: 39, my italics). The Chinese self is always?alreadyrelational,?existing?in?webs?of?hierarchical?intersubjectivity.?The?exemplary ideal legitimates what is called ‘‘holistic hierarchy’’ (Kipnis, 2011a: 93) in which status di?erentials are not interpreted as structural inequality, but recognized, and largely accepted, as a common order of things. As an illustration, in Chinese cosmological order of?‘‘Heaven,?Earth,?Emperor,?Parents,?and?Teachers’’?( ), teachers are given a very high social position commanding students’ veneration and emulation.?Xiansheng ?( ?), the traditional appellation for a teacher, refers to one superior in age and wisdom. As the saying goes, ‘‘He who teaches me for one day will remain a father-?gure for a lifetime’’?( ), indicating the exemplarity of the teacher-scholar persona and the long-lasting status di?erentials among members of the society. It is such relational cultural logic that enables exemplarity to play out, measuring the moral distances and relative social positions among individuals, rendering one beholden to the ideal?standards.

Even?though?it?has?worked?to?consolidate?the?prevailing?social?order,?governing?through

exemplarity?is?not?simply?an?ideological?manipulation?of?the?citizens—such?a?view?misses China’s historical-cosmological nuances. As Ann Stoler comments in her study of Dutch colonial?governance?in?the?East?Indies,?statecraft?is?about?the?mastery?of?the?a?ective,?joining ‘‘the care and governing of the polity to the care and governing of the a?ective self’’ (2009:?71).?Passions?and?sentiments?are?a?crucial?pedagogical?tool?actively?deployed?by?the state to further its civilizing and pedagogical projects. Chinese exemplary society?kindles certain?a?ections—what?Vanessa?Fong?(2004)?calls?‘‘?lial?nationalism’’?that?sentimentalizes the?state?and?its?populace?in?a?kinship?relation,?and?calls?citizens’?self-perfection?as?the??lial devotion?to?the?imagined?family?of?the?nation.?Such?a?politics?of?passion?historically

Wu?5

constitutes?the?art?of?governing?and?opens?the?space?for?individual?teacher?and?learner?to?act on shared meanings that are ultimately associated with the political role of education in making?particular?kinds?of?citizen-subjects?in?service?to?the?nation.?Thus,?governing?through exemplars is steeped in the a?ective registers of patriotism and ?lial devotion, balancing personal development with consciousness of duty towards the state. Unlike the modern political theory that advances the idea of individual rights by?limiting?the power of the state, Confucianism?emphasizes?the role of the state as essential to a just and humane society (Hahm, 2001:?315).

From?the?Confucian?ideal?personjunzi?to?the?righteous?scholar-o?cial,?from?the?chaste spouse?to?the?loyal?imperial?serviceman,?from?the?sel?ess?party-member?to?the?moral?student, exemplars permeate the historiography of Chinese morality and politics (Reed, 1995). Through them, who embodied the prototypes for proper behaviors and values, the imagination of an orderly and harmonious society becomes possible. In the Confucian belief, the cosmos is a moral order, and a society and its people prosper by obeying the cosmic?Way,?or?the?Mandate?of?Heaven?(Mote,?1971:?39).?Exemplars?are?such?pedagogical signposts?to?teach?others?how?to?develop?proper?understandings?of,?and?act?in?accordance with,?the?cosmic?order.?Those?who?embody?exemplary?characters,?such?as?the??ve?Confucian virtues of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and sincerity, were called the sage kings (?shengxian). The sage kings pursue the highest ideal of the good and achieve sancti?cation by inspiring others. Through them, exemplarity is made a sacred duty incumbent?on?all?members?of?the?society.

The pedagogical techniques for promoting exemplars are diverse, including the use of

arts, public discourse, exams, political propagandas, and self-monitoring to help the individuals, especially young people, internalize desirable outlook and behaviors. In?late Imperial?China,?for?instance,?ledgers?were?widely?used?as?a?morality?book?to?record?one’s good?and?bad?deeds?(Brokaw,?1991).?The?ledgers?of?merits?and?demerits?were?popular?not only among Confucian scholars but also in folk religions to foretell the divine rewards?or penance?in?one’s?afterlife.?Through?meticulous?recording?and?monitoring?of?one’s?merits?and ?aws,?individuals?employed?a?re?exive,?calculative?stance?to?cultivate?morality,?ethics,?and exemplarity. In this sense, China might be one of the most evaluated and self-governing nations the world has ever?known.

While in Confucius’s time (551–479 BC), the personi?cation of exemplarity enacts a?sacred?register, in contemporary China, it is also an apparatus of ideological control where the art of governing is intertwined with the art of pedagogy. The use of?exemplars has?been?a?pedagogical?tool?for?political?socialization?in?China’s?recent?history,?as?the?use?of models to moralize the masses reached its heyday in the revolutionary fervor of the communist party-state. The solder Lei Feng, who devoted his 22 years of life to the communist?cause,?was?consecrated?as?a?model?citizen?and?the?personi?cation?of?altruism, loyalty,?and?ethics?(Reed,?1995).?His?life?stories?and?writings?have?been?circulated?in?public media,?school?textbooks,?and?annual?political?campaigns?to?promulgate?the?collective?ideal of?‘‘serving?the?people.’’?Despite?the?disputes?about?the?truthfulness?of?his?life?accounts,?Lei Feng?as?a?cultural?icon?has?survived?decades?of?political?changes?and?continues?to?resonate?in China’s?social?and?educational?landscape.?National?campaigns?for?the?promotion?of?heroic personas,?such?as?‘‘Learning?from?Comrade?Lei?Feng’’—and?occasionally,?for?denouncing anti-models—are frequent and plentiful. As the political saying goes, ‘‘The power of exemplars is?inexhaustible’’?( ).

6?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

Bakken (2000) illustrates the regime of imitation in Chinese governing whereby the government labels certain schools, families, cadres as models, teachers are called upon to behave as?exemplars?( ), and education appears to be producing citizens who will follow the lead of the government. However, learning through exemplars does not simply work as ideological control and re?ect the authoritarian nature of Chinese society. It, to a large extent, carries a culturally rooted signi?cance that historically has kept the populous and ethnically diverse country together and presently provides a moral compass (however tampered by the state) in the country’s ruthless pursuit of material wealth. And not all models are politically constructed, as the Confucian model?junzi?has been widely accepted as?a?symbolic?icon?for?emulation?for?individuals?striving?for?wisdom?and?human-heartedness. While?the?party-state?is?apt?to?deploy?exemplars?for?ideological?indoctrination,?Susan?Shirk (1982) coins the term ‘‘virtuocracy’’ to describe how people are also apt to manipulate the exemplary?fac??ade—while?mocking?it?in?private—for?personal?legitimation?and?advancement.?As Bakken (2000) summarizes, China is ‘‘a(chǎn)n exemplary society of a segmentary character,’’ (p.?412)?where?ideological?control?meets?surreptitious?back-stage?resistance,?a?point?to?which

I?will?turn?in?the?discussion?of?the?polemic?‘‘quality?curriculum?reform’’?in?rural?schools?of

Southwest China.

Governing through ritual performances

Ritual ?(

li), or rite, is one of the most important notions in Confucian educational, social, and philosophical visions. Initially referring to ethics and etiquettes for the aristocratic elites of the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties (Berthrong, 2008: 38),?li?was ?later popularized by Confucian thinkers/rulers to cultivate proper conduct among ordinary folks. As a device for social cohesion,?li?includes various kinds of ceremonies (those of birth, marriage, death, ancestor worship, etc.) as well as quotidian codes of conducts (such as how to act in one’s appropriate role as a ?father, ?a ?teacher, ?a ?minister, etc.) to keep the society in a civilized order. These kinds of rites are described in detail in the three main books of ancient China, including the Book of Ceremonies?and Rites (Yi li), the Rites of Zhou (Zhou li), and the Book of Rites (Li ji) (see Billioud and Thoraval, 2015: 228). Ritual is an embodied social order that allows one to observe one’s proper place in the world and enactthe dynamic process of becoming a?junzi, the Confucian exemplary?man.

The New Oxford American dictionary de?nes ritual as ‘‘a(chǎn) religious or solemn ceremony

consisting?of?a?series?of?actions?performed?according?to?a?prescribed?order,’’?such?as?the?rites of?Christian?worship?involving?the?institutional?structure?of?the?clergy,?buildings,?doctrines, etc. Thus de?ned, ritual entails a notion of ‘‘binding out’’ in which one is beholden to observing an externally ‘‘prescribed order’’ for fear of judgment and retribution. The Confucian ritual, I argue, contains an added dimension of ‘‘binding in’’ in which individuals are also intimately bound to an inner domain of self-cultivation. In other words, ritual is a common language through which the potentials of human virtues get articulated. The concept of ritual carries two meanings, of commitment and obligation. To embody rituals is not merely to acquire elaborate etiquettes so as to please or impress others; it is a duty as part of the Chinese collective ethos of social perfectibility and individual?exemplarity.

Confucian ?exemplars ?(orjunzi) ?are ?naturally ?ritual ?masters ?who ?have ?learned ??to observe the ?nest ritualistic components and achieved the ultimate autonomy?in

Wu?7

thoughts?and?actions.?This?can?be?seen?from?the?following?quotes?of?Confucius?from?the

Analects.

From??fteen,?my?heart-and-mind?was?set?upon?learning;?from?thirty?I?took?my?stance;?from?forty I was no longer doubtful; from ?fty I realized the propensities of?tian?(tianming?); from sixty my?ear?was?attuned;?from?seventy?I?could?give?my?heart-and-mind?free?rein?without?overstepping the?boundaries.?(Ames?and?Rosement,?1998:?152)

As?the?above?passage?implies,?ritual?entails?concrete?care?of?the?self?in?order?to?achieve?the transcendental autonomy of self-deliverance—a free heart-and-mind in sync with the propensities of Nature ‘‘without overstepping the boundaries.’’ According to Michel Foucault, the care of the self is a form of governing that ‘‘responsibilitizes’’ citizens and makes?them?into?autonomous,?self-caring,?self-accountable?subjects?(Foucault,?1991;?Rose, 1996). Ritual understood in this way constitutes a form of self-technology that helps individuals realize autonomy through acting in symphony with the highest moral principles.?Thus?rituals?are?both?world-a?rming?in?their?governing?of?quotidian?lives,?and transformative in realizing ethical potentiality in each member of the?society.

Rituals?also?set?up?parameters?by?which?everyone?has?a?duty?and?responsibility?towards others according to their di?erential positions. The eminent Confucian scholar Zhu Xi explained?the?importance?of?rituals?in?the?moral?education?of?children:

Teach?them?the?way?of?sweeping?the?courtyard,?of?dealing?with?things?and?the?ways?of?getting along with people, and also teach them the rituals of loving their families, of respecting?their parents,?of?holding?their?teachers?in?esteem?and?being?on?intimate?terms?with?their?friends.?(Yan, 1989:?142)

The?role?of?rites?is?to?foster?principles?of?civility?that?children?can?follow?in?their?daily?lives. Rituals are embodied forms of actions that involve a whole range of sensual, cognitive, a?ective, and moral registers of the person. For instance, chanting and memorizing classical texts was traditionally upheld as a pedagogical ritual for self-cultivation (Wu, 2011: 570). Even if the students do not fully understand the meaning of the text, they are invited?to?‘‘intone’’?the?text?by?reading?it?out?loud?and?repeating?it,?until?it?registers?across?all senses and moves one to ethical acts. Today, the ritual of recitation is still prevalent in Chinese classrooms of di?erent subject matters. Jin and Cortazzi (2006) describe the morning?ritual?of?self-study?on?many?university?campuses?in?this?way:

[N]ear?a?bench,?a?patch?of?grass?or??ower?bed,?learners?stand?upright?or?sit?very?straight,?alone?or spaced about a meter from others similarly engaged, and repeat aloud sentences and texts (in English or in Chinese, often in loud voices), while holding a book straight in front at chest level. (p.?11)

Students?are?engaged?in?a?ritual?of?memorization?through?repetition,?which?cannot?be?simply labeled?as?‘‘rote-learning’’?because?the?ritual?involves?a?cultural?consideration?of?learning as encompassing a composite whole (?ve senses, emotional register, perseverance, concentration, etc.) that requires disciplined e?orts from the learner to make?incremental change in knowledge and conduct. Repetition and habituation represents a key notion?of change?in?Confucian?education.?The?primacy?is?placed?on?process?and?incremental?change?to achieve ?the ?ultimate ?status ?of ?‘‘inner ?sage, ?outer ?king’’ ?( ), who exempli?es intelligence?and?virtues.?That?is?to?say,?the?theme?of?repetition?and?imitation?is?part?of?the rich?history?of?Chinese?education.?It?is?a?powerful?instrument?of?silent?transformation?and

8?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

enculturation, ?captured ?by ?the ?Chinese ?idiomqianyimohua?( ) as a necessary element of individual learning and social harmony (see Wu, 2015: 264). Subtle habituation takes place through repetition and re?exive thinking; and repetition and re?exivity enables something transformative?to occur over time.

Another?distinct?ritual?in?the?Chinese?classroom?is?the?expected?role?of?the?teacher?relative to the students. Unlike the Western constructive model of learning where the teacher facilitates and the students take the center stage of the classroom, the teacher in the Confucian framework is often regarded as the parental ?gure to whom the student must pay?tribute?and?respect.?The?teacher?is?like?a?conductor?who?stands?in?front?of?the?classroom, explains,?monitors,?and?summarizes?activities,?and?engages?the?students?to?mimic?her/him and?the?book?in?an?orderly?manner.?Even?though?criticized?in?the?recent?curriculum?reform that?orients?towards?constructivism?(Wu,?2012),?this?ritual?still?rings?true?in?many?Chinese classrooms today. Historically, such teacher-student relation is not conceived as authoritarian, however, but seen in an a?ective light where ?liality and mutual caring is exercised?and?where?proper?roles?of?each?party?are?reinforced.

The?cultural?base?of?Chinese?schools?originates?from?the?Confucian?heritage,?including speci?c?rituals,?ceremonies,?and?values?that,?rather?than?merely?making?students?passive?rote learners, socialize them into a historically meaningful condition for proper knowing. In recent decades, scholars have coined the phrase ‘‘paradox of the Chinese learner’’ (Watkins and Biggs, 1996) to describe the puzzle of how Chinese students can be both rote learners and high achievers. They argue that learning and teaching is embedded in cultural and historical perspectives, and the Western perception of submissive rote learners in Chinese schools may be a misinterpretation that fails to appreciate the deep- seated cultural beliefs of learning as both preparation for examination and cultivation of moral?order?through?proper?pedagogical?rituals.?It?is?through?rituals,?such?as?sweeping?the ?oor and answering short questions in class, that ‘‘proper’’ conducts are imbued with cultural meanings to ‘‘transform the body into a ?tting expression of the self ... so that we?can?live?in?harmony?with?those?around?us’’?(Tu,?1985:?97).?Through?rituals,?one?moves towards self-polishing, cultivating, and becoming; the embodied movements then orient the existential dimension of being and imbue the day-to-day with a deeper sense of meaningfulness.?The?signi?cance?of?rituals?is?never?constant,?however,?as?we?shall?see?later in?this?article?how?rituals?become?the?target?of?criticism?and?reform?and?generate?competing subjectivities in rural?schools.

Exam and imitation in Chinese pedagogical discipline

Chinese education stresses order through a pedagogy of imitation, repetition, and memorization. The Mandarin character for study,

xue, implies imitation in the?process of?internalization?and?memorization.?As?Kipnis?(2011a)?puts?it:?‘‘Just?as?one?‘studies’?writing by?tracing?model?characters,?so?does?one?‘study’?how?to?be?a?person?(zuoren)?by?imitating?the behaviors?and?dispositions?of?one’s?teacher’’?(p.?91).?The?character?for?education,

jiao,?has the semantic bearings of ‘‘discipline,’’ ‘‘mold,’’ and ‘‘restraint;’’ it also connotes a?speci?c doctrine?of?rituals,?similar?to?the?function?of?the?Anglo?su?x?‘‘-ism.’’?It?can?be?inferred?that education in the Chinese tradition has been foremost concerned with disciplinary rituals articulated?by?imitation.?If?we?look?further,?the?character

?is?made?up?of?two?radicals,?with the left radical ?

(xiao) indicating ?lial piety, and the right radical

(wen) implying literature?or?scholarship.?In?an?etymological?sense,?one?might?infer?that?to?be?educated,

Wu?9

for?the?Chinese,?is?to?exercise?one’s?scholarly?labor?as?a?means?of?paying??lial?tribute?to?one’s ancestors,?parents,?and?ultimately,?the?nation.?One’s?academic?success?and?exemplary?status, therefore,?is?linked?to?kinship?and?the?psychological?meanings?of?the?state.

To?facilitate?the?project?of?human?perfection?and?social?governing,?rituals?and?exemplarity are further bundled with a system of examination. To educate, therefore, is to produce morally socialized people and maintain exemplary norms through a comprehensive evaluation system of exams. China’s traditional emphasis on exams as a pathway to o?cialdom dates back to its Imperial Exam System (keju ?) ?rst introduced during the Sui?Dynasty?in?AD?603.?For?over?1300?years?until?the?end?of?the?Qing?dynasty,keju?system served?as?a?mechanism?to?select?imperial?governors?through?a?special?exam?called?‘‘Ba?Gu Wen’’?based?on?Confucian?classics.?The?Imperial?Exam?selected?civil?servants?by?way?of?their familiarity?with?Confucian?canons?and?literature,?with?higher-level?degrees?leading?to?higher- ranking?positions?in?the?imperial?service.?Rising?from?the?ordinary?folk?to?the?royal?palace had?been?the?dream?of?ancient?scholars?who?pursued?a?life?of?text?memorization?and?imperial examiniation as the only way towards o?cialdom. This was in line with Confucius’s exhortation?to?apply?oneself?to?be?a?state?o?cer?after?becoming?learned?( ) (see Li and Li,?2010).

Many people spent years, decades, even their entire life trying to make their way up the

bureaucratic?ladder.?More?importantly,?the?successful?became?models?for?emulation,?linking individual achievements to collective cultural desires. While imperial examinations served to select?bureaucrats?for?dynastic?rules,?contemporary?China’s?myriad?high-stake?exams?work to?distinguish?students?by?scores?and?channel?them?into?di?erent?academic?tracks?and?future career placements. Every year hundreds of thousands of students compete with great?anxiety in the national college entrance exam, the infamous?gaokao, a high-stake test that singly determines one’s college placement and occupational prospect. It is metaphorically called the ‘‘narrow log bridge’’ through which crowds of eager competitors shove and push to get ahead?( ). While the exam system re?ects an imagined meritocracy, it also legitimates social hierarchy formed through such a selection system, and inscribes rules?and?standards?to?govern?the?space?of?learning.

To sum up the above historical ?analysis, ?the ?production ?of ?subjectivities ?in ?Chinese schools has never been too far removed from the governing complex of exemplarity-ritual-exam, as students engage in various pedagogical rituals to compete?in standardized?exams?in?order?to?prove?their?academic?exemplarity.?Since?the?late?1990s,?the Chinese?general?public?has?increasingly?bemoaned?the?imitation-based,?exam-oriented,?and teacher-centered educational system for the inability to produce a modern, liberal, entrepreneurial citizenry. The concerns for Chinese children’s lack of independent thinking are also evident in popular works comparing Chinese pedagogical practices to those in other countries, particularly the United States. In the bestselling book?Education for Quality ?in the??US?( ), author Huang Quanyu contrasts the?‘‘outdated’’ Chinese?education?and?its?emphasis?on?respect?for?authority?with?the?American?pedagogies that allow children to develop individuality, con?dence and creativity (Woronov, 2007). Furthermore,?rituals?held?as?thea?priori?condition?for?Confucian?knowing?are?criticized?as prescriptive,?authoritarian?and?contradictory?to?the?constructivist?ideal?of?learning?through student-centered experience (Dello-Iacovo, 2009; Wu,?2012).

While?the?Western?stance?is?praised,?discussions?over?the?lack?of?quality?of?life?for?Chinese

children?have?also?emerged?in?the?broad?context?of?China’s?globalized?economy.?Wealthy elites?hurry?to?send?their?children?abroad?for?‘‘greener?grasses’’?in?the?developed?world?while

10?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

denouncing the Chinese educational system as producing deadly knowledge and meek test- takers.?Media?and?scholarly?publications?have?taken?up?this?anxiety,?suggesting?‘‘creativity’’ outlets?for?children,?advocating?homework?reduction,?extracurricular?activities,?more?free time?to?play,?and?fewer?demands?to?imitate?and?memorize?(Kipnis,?2011b:?292).?In?a?sense, the?tripartite?governing?principles?discussed?above?have?become?targets?of?intense?criticism, whereas open-ended, child-centered, non-authoritarian pedagogical approaches are upheld as?the?pre-conditions?to?improving?the?quality?of?life?of?Chinese?citizens?and?the?country’s global competitiveness. Various policy attempts have also been made to undermine the heavy?focus?on?testing?and?revamp?the?singular?assessment?system?of?the?college?entrance exam in order to emphasize well-rounded capacities and equity in student evaluation.1?However, e?orts to reform the educational system have been far from successful. While the reform aims to foster child-centered learning and criticizes the overemphasis on exams, classroom rituals, and exemplary icons, its implementation has renormalized the historical?governing?paradigm?and?produced?controversies?in?everyday?pedagogical?lives. The exemplarity-ritual-exam complex that historically constitutes the Chinese self also presently?shapes?the?curriculum?reform,?even?if?the?reform?aims?to?do?away?with,?however partially,?these?historical?elements.?In?the?following?analysis,?I?illustrate?the?complex?mix?of rhetoric and practice that is co-present to govern pedagogical actors with hybrid subjectivities.?I?turn?to?the?multi-layered?terrain?of?a?contested?curriculum?reform?in?rural ethnic?Qiandongnan.

Ritual-exam-exemplarity complex in paradoxes:

narratives of Qiandongnan

The?empirical?data?presented?below?derives?from?the?16?months?of?ethnographic?research I conducted in a Miao and a Dong village, pseudonymed Majiang and Longxing respectively, in Qiandongnan Prefecture of Guizhou Province between 2009 and 2010, in addition?to?several?visits?in?previous?summers?from?2006?to?2008.?The?larger?study?aimed?to examine?the?formation?of?educational?disenchantment?and?the?educational?policy?con?icts with?the?larger?agendas?of?rural?modernization?in?ethnic?minority?communities?in?Southwest China. The research methods include participant observation, informal interviews, oral history, and archival/document analysis. The length of time I spent in both villages a?orded me formal and informal opportunities to participate in classroom learning, school activities, and local social lives in order to gain a situated understanding of how local agents interpret and act upon o?cial curriculum reform policy and developmental programs. In this paper, I present a slice of the ?ndings, illustrating the complex grassroots negotiation of the curriculum reform and shed light on how a plethora of subjectivities?renders?the?reform?far?from?an?easy?task.

Qiandongnan, ?the ?Miao ?and ?Dong ?Autonomous ?Prefecture ?situated ?in ?Southeast

Guizhou Province of China, is primarily populated by two groups of non-Han ethnic minorities, the?Miao (

)?and?Dong?(

).?China?has?56?o?cially?designated?ethnic?groups, including the majority Han that makes up more than 92% of the total population, and 55 ethnic minorities accounting for less than 8%. Among the 55 o?cially recognized ethnic minorities, the Miao and the Dong are generally perceived in paci?st,2?yet economically, socially, and educationally ‘‘underdeveloped’’ terms. Given that the Miao and the Dong have?their?own?ethnic?cultures?distinct?from?the?Han?with?whom?Confucianism?is?generally associated,?it?begs?some?clari?cation?as?to?where?the?two?communities?stand?in?relation?to?the

Wu?11

broader heritage culture of China. My oral history interviews have shown that both the Miao and the Dong have had generations of ethnic encounters and in particular, have acquired essential Han cultural literacy through inter-ethnic marriage, trade, and migration. Studies on Guizhou’s ethnic minorities have also pointed out their sustained assimilation into the Han culture through imperial governance, especially through education in classic Confucianism during the Qing dynasty (Hostetler, 2001; Rawski, 1979: 57–8). For instance, elders in the Dong community, who were educated in the Confucian classics, named the ?ve communal drum towers in the village after the ?ve Confucian virtues of?ren, yi, li, zhi, xin?(

). Su?ce it to say, the Confucian heritage?is?highly?relevant?in?ethnic?minority?communities?in?Guizhou.

What role, then, does ethnicity play in China’s education policy-making? As noted by existing literature on the education of ethnic minorities in China, the need to promote culturally?diverse?and?locally?relevant?education?is?often?eclipsed?by?the?political?discourse to?socialize?a?populous?and?diverse?country?into?an?imagined?Chinese?nation?through?state schooling?(Wu,?2016:?Chapter?2;?Hansen,?1999;?Harrell,?1996;?Postiglione,?2008).?In?a?largely top-down, centralized mode of educational provision, school curricula across the country are primarily?urban-bound?and?oriented?towards?the?mainstream-Han?linguistic?and?cultural practices,?while?ethnic?cultures?and?histories?are?mostly?hollowed?out?from?the?content?of school textbooks. The civilizing mission has long been a subtext of public schooling to cultivate children’s habitus and subjectivity in alignment with China’s urban expansion and modernization. In the Miao and Dong villages, the rise of ethnic tourism has prompted the local government to implement an inclusive education policy by incorporating ethnic customs and histories into the curriculum. However, because?ethnic classes?are?not?part?of?the?standardized?exams,?village?schools?have?little?incentive?to?teach them.?In?addition,?lack?of?funding?and?quali?ed?teachers?also?poses?major?challenges?in?the meaningful incorporation of multicultural contents in school curricula. The rhetoric of multiculturalism?for?expanding?human?liberties?is?still?a?long?way?from?the?lived?realities of?students?and?teachers?observed?in?this?research.

Part?of?China’s?south-western?frontier,?Guizhou?and?Qiandongnan?are?depicted?in?social

reports and media narratives through languages of poverty and isolation. In order to revitalize?the?countryside,?the?state?has?implemented?a?series?of?pro-growth?strategies3?and brought?about?drastic?social,?economic,?and?educational?transformations?in?Qiandongnan. Relevant to the discussion here are two schemes decreed by the national Ministry of Education?as?anti-poverty?measures:?the?Two?Basics?Project?(TBP, ) aimed to universalize nine-year compulsory schooling and eliminate adult illiteracy, and the quality/suzhi?curriculum reform focused on raising the?suzhi/quality of the rural ethnic population through promoting?suzhi/quality?education.

The?concept?ofsuzhi?is?roughly?translated?as?human?quality?that?calibrates?one’s?physical, social,?cultural,?intellectual,?and?moral?values?and?capacities?(Wu,?2012;?Woronov,?2009).?A general?consensus?among?the?Chinese?is?that?‘‘such?a?thing?assuzhi?exists,?that?its?level?is?too low?in?the?Chinese?population,?that?the?collectivesuzhi?of?individuals?produces?thesuzhi?of the?nation?as?a?whole,?and?that?raising?thesuzhi?of?children?is?a?particularly?important?step’’ (Woronov, 2009: 568). Since the early 1980s, the concept of?suzhi?gained popularity in the social?and?educational?spheres,?especially?as?the?initiation?of?the?one-child?policy?reinforced?the need?to?control?fertility?and?ensure?superior?birth?and?childrearing?( ). On the other hand,?rural?ethnic?minorities?are?generally?depicted?as?having?‘‘lowsuzhi’’?in?the?domain?of media?and?policy?because?of?their?low?education?level,?income,?and?social?status.?Improving

12?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

their?suzhi?through educational programs becomes a particularly important anti-poverty measure for the state. The discourse of?suzhi?signals China’s conscious transition from a?country of sheer volume (in terms of population size) to that of quality (with regards to citizen civility), as well as a re?exive critique towards its own educational system. In education,?suzhi jiaoyu?has been variously de?ned as ‘‘competence education,’’ ‘‘quality education,’’ ‘‘education for quality,’’ ‘‘quality-oriented education,’’ and ‘‘character education’’ (Dello-Iacovo, 2009: 242). Despite the lack of uni?ed de?nition, the new curriculum reform is a nationwide policy decreed by the Ministry of Education as a progressive?measure?to?promote?creative,?independent,?constructivist?learning?and?remedy the exam-oriented education system blamed for sti?ing China’s 21st-century talents. The purpose?of?the?reform?is?two-fold:?to?move?teachers?and?students?away?from?subject-centered and teacher-directed pedagogies to student-focused, experiential, and interdisciplinary pursuit of learning, and to move towards a less exam-oriented and more holistic assessment of student development through reducing heavy academic burden and promoting well-rounded?suzhi/quality personhood (Lou, 2011:?74).

The?suzhi?curriculum reform encompasses a wide array of contents and objectives,

including homework reduction, removal of test-score-based ranking and tracking, elimination of supplementary after-school lessons, ?exible provision of extracurricular activities, and the adoption of a child-centered learning approach. In particular, the?suzhi?curriculum?reform?is?primarily?concerned?with?the?shift?from?teacher-centered?to?student- centered,?authoritarian?to?participatory?pedagogical?modes?(Wu,?2012).?Curriculum?reform advocates question the non-democratic principle of learning through imitating models (whether they are one’s teachers or cultural icons) and argue for learner autonomy, self- discovery, and student-based instruction to cultivate well-rounded talents. Governing through exemplars has seen many eager critics who frown upon the excessive use and ideological manipulation of models—model schools, model teachers, model students, model party cadres—for begetting homogeneity and sti?ing individual uniqueness. The critics tend to generally charge against the social and cultural barriers experienced by typical Chinese learners which result in reticence in class, deference to teachers, passive imitation, low ability, and academic stress (Zhao, 2014; Zhao et al.,2014). Despite the fact that?Chinese?students?are?never?a?homogeneous?group?and?teaching?approaches?in?Chinese schools are constantly evolving, the social anxiety about the disadvantages of the educational?system?continues?to?exist?among?parents,?educators,?and?even?policy-makers. At the core of the new curriculum reform is the stress on pedagogical ?exibility and adaptability?tailored?to?individual?needs?and?a?shift?from?‘‘teachers?teaching’’?to?‘‘learners learning’’?(Guan?and?Meng,?2007).?The?rights?of?teachers?to?scold-educate?students?no?longer makes?pedagogical?common?sense,?and?the?cultural?assumption?of?teacher-student?relations as naturally hierarchical has become politically contentious (Sloane and Zhao, 2013: 9). Additionally, high-stake testing as the sole evaluative criteria of learning is also heavily criticized for encouraging spoon-feeding and rote?memorization.

In?a?centralized?mode,?the?curriculum?reform?is?slated?for?implementation?in?a?nationally

uni?ed?way.?Yet?in?my?observation?of?the?two?middle?schools?in?the?villages?of?Majiang?and Longxing, teacher-centered classroom rituals, exemplarity-oriented appraisal, and the focus on?testing?have?not?been?revamped?overnight.Suzhi?curriculum?reform?becomes?a?terrain?of polemicism?that?demonstrates?multi-vocality?in?the?interpretation?of?its?meanings?and?the actual classroom practices. The tripartite governing complex is re-normalized in the new curriculum?reform’s?critique?of?the?past,?with?exemplarity?tempered?by?the?discourse?of

Wu?13

human?quality/suzhi,?with?exam?legacy?overtly?criticized?but?subtly?revived,?and?with?school rituals changing rhetoric but not?essence.

In?Majiang?and?Longxing,?teachers?responded?to?the?call?for?student-centered?pedagogies with ambivalence. As the vice headmaster of Longxing Middle School once?said:

We?are?a?poor?school.?We?are?still?struggling?withyingshi?jiaoyu?(exam-oriented?education)?and how to make students score better, how can we have time to deal with?suzhi jiaoyu?(quality- oriented?education)??Let?the?rich?urban?schools?worry?about?it.

I?was?told?thatsuzhi?education?was?feasible?for?urban?schools?with?advanced?instructional facilities and excellent academic records, yet out of the question for poor, rural settings where resource shortage, under-quali?ed teachers, and not the least, rampant student attrition were the more immediate concerns. As rural students still struggle to get ahead through the only available pathway of high-stake exams, and standardized exams often allow only one set of correct answers, teachers are nervous that spending time on open- ended discussions (as the?suzhi?reform requires) might confuse students and do them a disservice. In the classrooms I observed in Majiang and Longxing, teachers remain pedagogical authorities who carry students through the textbooks chapter by chapter, topic by topic, and even word by word. They appear didactic and domineering, and rarely?use?gentle?persuasions?or?alternative?approaches?to?accommodate?students’?various perspectives?and?learning?needs.?Students,?for?the?most?part,?behave?with?deference?and?rely on?teachers’?interpretations?of?the?textbooks?for?information?and?answers.?Teacher?authority and?control?of?knowledge?are?inherent?cultural?ideas?that?are?not?easy?to?abandon,?just?as?the pedagogical?space?of?the?school?is?still?constructed?by?exemplarity-rituals-exams?in?subtle?yet signi?cant?ways.

In?Majiang?and?Longxing,?students?were?ranked?according?to?their?scores,?and?the?names

of?high?scorers?were?publicized?on?bulletin?boards?to?showcase?exemplars?and?models.?The regime of examinations had not relented; instead, it remained the primary yardstick in evaluating students and teachers. As many teachers in Qiandongnan put it: ‘‘education for?quality?is?still?education?for?scores,’’?with?quality?(suzhi)?rhyming?with?scores?(shuzi)?in mandarin?Chinese.?While?exemplar?test-takers?were?promoted,?the?schools?also?encouraged year-long inter-class contests—including athletic games, hallway cleanliness, wall decorations, and student conducts. The race towards exemplarity is a ubiquitous feature of?Chinese?education,?linked?to?a?symbolic?economy?of?prestige?and?shame?that?metes?out cultural?sanctions?to?those?implicated?in?the?race.

A typical classroom I observed in rural Qiandongnan looks like this: the teacher is positioned on a raised platform in front of the blackboard. Above the blackboard hangs a?map?of?China?and?sometimes?a?billboard?that?counts?down?the?remaining?days?till?various entrance?exams.?The?opposite?wall?on?the?back?of?the?classroom?is?decorated?with?charts?and diagrams, academic timetables, exemplary essays, students’ resolutions, portraits of revolutionary?leaders,?and?slogan?banners?that?promote?patriotism?and?the?importance?of education.?These?heterogeneous?artifacts?embody?elements?of?exemplarity;?they?are?things considered worthy of public display, as paramount symbols of the state and its pedagogical?ideals,?and?as?consistent?products?of?the?materiality?of?the?schools?(Lawn?and Grosvenor,?2005).

While the material display of the classroom clearly enacts the exemplary pedagogy described?earlier,?it?is?soon?met?with?another?technique?of?exemplarity?that?sits?awkwardly within the?suzhi?curriculum reform. One evening, I was asked to substitute?a grade-nine

14?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

English class in Longxing Middle School.4?My instruction was interrupted by a group of teachers?who?arrived?at?the?door?and?marched?down?the?aisles?of?the?desks,?each?armed?with a?pair?of?scissors,?cutting?o??hair?that?they?viewed?as?inappropriately?colored,?excessively long,?or?eccentrically?styled.?The?operation?led?to?some?grumble,?giggles,?and?commotions. ‘‘We can tell whether you are putting e?orts into your studies simply by looking at ??your hairdos,’’ commented one teacher matter-of-factly. This unannounced ritual of housekeeping, I was later told, often took place before school inspections. According ???to?the?teachers,?rural?students?are?‘‘wild?little?monsters’’?with?little?self-motivation?and?no exemplars?at?home?to?imitate.?Therefore,?the?teachers?needed?to?be?extra?assertive?in?ensuring students’ physical cleanliness, which was held to be an indicator of their academic seriousness. The cultivation of proper appearance is situated in the broader context of promoting the ‘‘Three Good’’ exemplary ?students?( )—namely, good?academics, good?moral?conducts,?and?good?habits?and?health.

The?haircut?episode?exists?in?an?awkward?relation?with?the?quality?curriculum?reform.?On

the?one?hand,?the?deployment?of?speci?c?disciplinary?measures?(with?scissors?acting?as?the tool of the housekeeping ritual), its stress on exemplarity (students’ aesthetic/hygienic virtues),?and?its?linking?of?students’?proper?self-fashioning?of?their?academic?performance remain fastened to the ritual-exam-exemplarity governing complex. Teacher authoritarianism in the background runs counter to the egalitarian, child-centered spirit of the?suzhi?curriculum reform. Yet, the use of force is to achieve another front of the?suzhi?reform—that of appropriately attired ‘‘suzhi’’ bodies, especially for rural students who are considered lacking in aesthetic and hygienic virtues. In Majiang and Longxing, students were still rank-tracked, even physically separated into di?erent sitting areas based on their scores, even though tracking was prohibited by the?suzhi?curriculum reform. Teachers, whose evaluation and promotion in part depend on the exam scores?of their?students,?reinforced?the?practice?of?tracking?and?labeling.?Frequently?heard?in?everyday conversations was the term?chasheng?(literally, underachievers) that derogatorily labeled students’ academic aptitudes. Students were quick to deploy youthful strategies to refashion themselves—by engraving the words?chasheng?on the desks or physically sowing/painting the words onto their clothes. The title?chasheng?pointed to the discriminatory school practices against the learner-centered, humanistic rhetoric of the?suzhi?reform. Meanwhile, as part of student sub-culture, it also re?ects students’ own mocking of school rules and indicates that authoritarian classroom practices do not necessarily?lead?to?the?production?of?submissive,?obedient?subjects.

While?students?use?body?gra?ti?to?contest?authority,?teachers?also?consciously?maneuver

the education policy mandates and the ritual of school inspections. In May 2009, a delegation from the Guizhou Provincial Ministry of Education conducted a round of school audits in Qiandongnan to inspect whether rural schools had successfully implemented the Two Basics Project and the Quality Curriculum Reform. One day in early May, the village Longxing received the provincial delegation, who arrived in two shiny vans to the sound of welcoming songs sung by fully attired school children. Following the hospitality ritual, the inspectorates patrolled the school yard, making?brief stops?to?observe?the?classrooms,?the?teachers’?o?ce,?the?library?and?the?science?lab,?and?the document?room?where?binders?of?audit?materials?were?neatly?shelved.?While?the?library?and the?science?lab?were?seen?as?spaces?of?quality?education?where?hands-on,?student-centered learning?took?place,?they?were?largely?ornamental?and?rarely?used.?What?seemed?impromptu scenarios ?in ?the ?eyes ?of ?the ?inspecting ?o?cials—students ?concentrated ?in ?scienti?c

Wu?15

experiments—were meticulously staged performances. Behind the curtain of the audit drama, teachers still teach to the tests, and class time is still consumed by teacher dictation and rote learning.

The?high?stakes?involved?in?the?ritual?of?school?inspection—such?as?career?promotion?for the?teachers?and?future?resource?allocation?for?the?schools—produced?not?only?escalating anxieties, but also conscious maneuvers to fabricate outcomes. In Majiang, for instance, classes?were?frequently?cancelled?so?that?teachers?could?have?more?time?preparing?for?audit paperwork,?catching?dropouts,?and?entertaining?inspectorates.?Not?only?were?school?data5?(such?as?enrollment?and?dropout?rate)?forged,?the?physical?presence?of?students?could?also?be orchestrated?ad hoc. It was not uncommon that dropouts’ siblings or students from other villages?would?be?‘‘borrowed’’?to?sit?in?for?the?inspection?day.?The?ritual?of?inspection?and thesuzhi?curriculum?reform?were?interpreted?as?highly?disturbing?to?the?daily?lives?in?rural schools.?O??the?records,?village?teachers?and?administrators?described?the?reform?and?the inspection?as?a?sore?point,?causing?them?many?sleepless?nights?and?strangling?the?already tight school ?nances. Teachers, whose professional life is thinly spread among audit paperwork, testing, catching dropouts, and entertaining inspectorates are its most acute critics.

The ritual of inspection is more appropriately understood through a genre of practice

called?formalism?( ).?The?way?school?agents?respond?to?thesuzhi?education?reform generates rhetorical window dressing rather than genuine compliance. The burden of reforms?drives?village?teachers?to?cosmetic?compliance?while?maintaining?old?practices?as they see ?t. On the one hand, the audit culture is premised upon the idea of self- accountability not dissimilar from the Foucaultian thesis of governmentality or ‘‘governing from afar’’ (Foucault, 1991). As Foucault argues, approaches to coping with changes?and?maintaining?social?order?have?produced?a?particular?form?of?govern-mentality worldwide that governs through shaping people’s ‘‘mentality’’ and produces docile self- responsiblized subjects (see Schirato et al., 2012). In other words, instead of emphasizing the?sovereign?power?and?direct?intervention?of?the?state?that?wields?top-down?control?over citizens?and?families,?governmentality?is?concerned?with?a?subtler?form?of?governing?in?which the bureaucratic authorities retreat into the distance and where individuals and the population en masse endeavor to direct their own conduct to secure the good/advantage for?the?self?and?others.?Governmentality?is?thus?a?productive?form?of?power?in?that?it?has?the health,?education,?and?well-being?of?the?entire?population?as?its?target?and?regulates?through producing?particular?subjectivity?and?practices?of?the?citizens.?It?is?a?form?of?governing?from afar?because?it?is?concerned?with?the?discursive?production?of?the?‘‘conduct?of?conduct’’?in everyday?life?and?allows?the?activities?of?the?government?of?the?self,?of?others,?and?of?the?state to be intertwined (Dean, 1999). In addition, ‘‘mechanisms of government ... are found within state institutions and outside them ... in fact cut across domains that we would regard?as?separate:?the?state,?civil?society,?the?family,?down?to?the?intimate?details?of?what we?regard?as?personal?life’’?(Gupta,?2001:?68).

Within?the?policy?context?of?the?curriculum?reform,?village?teachers?acted?as?self-

responsibilized?subjects?who?aligned?their?conduct?with?the?reform?discourse?and?agendas. On the other hand, the audit culture entails the creative power of the school agents who understood?the?super?ciality?of?the?ritual?and?responded?in?a?self-optimizing?fashion.?Hence, a?fourth?element?of?‘‘the?performative’’?further?nuances?the?tripartite?educational?governing in contemporary China. The performative practices might be seen as the ‘‘subtext’’ of schooling ?through ?which ?pedagogical ?actors ?experience ?thesuzhi ?curriculum?reform

16?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

through counterstrategies. Formalism provides a technique of appearance management and perfunctory?mimicry?of?the?policy?script.?As?many?of?the?teachers?facetiously?described,?they paid?lip?service?for?the?sake?of?getting?by.

Village teachers grew weary of the burden of the reform, and likened it to the hurried wind?that??uttered?and?alternated?directions?haphazardly?to?make?their?life?di?cult.?While thesuzhi?reform?challenged?the?ritual-exam-exemplarity?complex,?at?least?rhetorically,?by championing more adaptable, individualized, and learner-autonomous pedagogical mode, behind?the?closed?classroom?doors,?teachers?retained?total?control,?dictating?what?was?to?be taught?and?how?students?would?learn.?They?produced?a?fac??ade?of?thseuzhi?education?during inspections,?while?justifying?teacher-centered,?mimetic,?and?exam-based?pedagogy?on?the account?of?enhancing?students’?competitiveness—ultimately?calibrated?by?test?results.

The roles of teachers in historical and contemporary China show both continuity and rupture.?The?continuity?lies?in?the?cultural?notion?that?teachers?are?knowledgeable?exemplars for students to emulate and play a leading role in classroom learning. Still to this day, the?authority?of?the?teachers?is?culturally?and?historically?assumed.?The?reform?rhetoric?of student-centeredness, arguably poses a distinct challenge to the professional self-perception of many teachers. On the one hand, the rituals of repetition, imitation, and examination practiced?by?generations?of?Chinese?teachers?are?no?longer?seen?as?appropriate?pedagogical tools for preparing 21st-century talent. On the other hand, new curriculum reform is ?like old wine in new bottles without changing the test-based assessment system or the centralized curriculum structure (Lou, 2011). This creates a double pressure for teachers and students to adapt to the demand for a new classroom environment featuring independent,?open-ended?inquiries,?and?at?the?same?time?perform?to?the?testing?standards. The result is often that the well-meaning reform initiatives ended up confusing already stressed?teachers?and?students,?who?chose?to?continue?the?old?practices?in?order?to?secure higher?marks?in?exams.?The?top-down?implementation?of?curriculum?reform?often?generates rhetoric compliance and backstage complaints, which partially explains the resistance and leads to the discussion of how to motivate grassroots practitioners in the policy debates (Li and Ni,?2012).

Conclusion

Understanding Chinese educational discipline through the tripartite lens of exemplarity-ritual-exam calls for a historical sensibility to cast a fresh look at the contemporary educational ideals, relations, and practices. Chinese education is a particularly idiosyncratic case, as it governs through exemplars, a meticulous system of evaluation, and bureaucratic rituals of expectations and obligations. The tripartite elements are not to be essentialized or normalized as de?nitive characters of Chinese education, because the values and roles of rituals, exams, and exemplars are historically speci?c?and?intertwined?with?China’s?changing?cultural-social-educational?landscape.?In?a sense,?the?tripartite?lens?provides?a?useful?prism?to?the?centrality?of?the?state?in?educational programming, yet at the same time also indicates a form of governmentality that?enables citizen-subject?to?orient?their?attitude?and?conduct?to?the?discursive?educational?discourse of a particular era. The three features have historically worked as apparatuses of educational disciplining in China, yet all disciplines are inherently messy and may?result in contradictory push and?pull.

Wu?17

In?recent?decades,?contemporary?educational?practices?in?China?have?been?criticized?for the emphasis on exams, teacher-centered classroom rituals, and exemplary icons. Despite the repeated reform e?orts, the exemplarity-ritual-exam governing complex still holds considerable sway in Chinese schools today. As Ruth Hayhoe (2014) argues, the term ?‘‘modern pedagogy’’ in contemporary China needs to be approached from a historical perspective because the legacy of Confucian pedagogy continues to persist even as modern?epistemologies?have?surfaced?to?shape?education?in?China?today.?The?pragmatist in?uence?from?the?West,?notably?the?educational?philosophy?of?John?Dewey,?hasn’t?entirely drowned?out?the?Confucian?practices?of?learning?but?has?to?reconcile?itself?with?traditional discourses when entering into Chinese educational and social lives. As the case study in Qiandongnan shows, contemporary pedagogic discourse is still rooted in traditional elements, even if these elements are given contemporary features, and even if the reform aims?to?do?away,?however?partially,?with?these?elements.

Through?localized?accounts?of?how?educational?actors?interpret,?negotiate,?and?maneuver

policy scripts, I introduce a fourth dimension—the performative aspect—of educational governing in contemporary China. The ethnographic sensibilities show how the ritual- exam-exemplarity complex produces ruptures and discontinuities when met with the reform mandate of?suzhi?education. At the same time, a momentum of historical continuity also exists to both anchor and hamper the curriculum reform initiative. In the multi-layered??eld?of?Chinese?education,?pedagogical?actors?both?perform?and?react?against the historical and contemporary visions of educational governing with hybrid subjectivities. Rural teachers and students live under a variety of subjectifying discourses in their daily pedagogical?practices,?maneuvers,?and?decision-making,?which?shed?light?on?why?China’s curriculum reform is far from an easy task. The discursive ?eld of Chinese education ????is choreographed by a bricolage of contradictory elements and actors, involving the?state power, the cosmopolitan ideal of?suzhi, the situated practices of pedagogical ?actors, and the negotiation between culturally speci?c and globally circulated ideals of knowledge, pedagogy, and authority. These factors constitute push and pull, movement and stickiness in the heterogeneous process of educational transformation in the 21st- century?China.

Funding

The?author(s)?disclosed?receipt?of?the?following??nancial?support?for?the?research,?authorship,?and/or publication?of?this?article:?The?ethnographic??eldwork?of?the?research?was?funded?by?the?Social?Science Research Council?(USA).

Notes

[if !supportLists]1.?[endif]See ‘‘Some advice on the reform of college entrance exams.’’ A document released by the?21st?Century Education Research Institute, retrieved from http://www.21cedu.org/?nson/id/214/m/ 11.html; see also ‘‘State Council’s mandate to deepen the reform of college entrance examination,’’ retrieved fromhttp://kszx.xmu.edu.cn/index.php/welcome/detail/80.

[if !supportLists]2.?[endif]This is in comparison with the Tibetan or Uyghur people who are sometimes seen as confrontational threats by the Chinese authority. The exception is the historical legends of Miao uprisings?against?dynastic?feudal?oppressions,?such?as?those?led?by?Zhang?Xiumei?and?Yang?Daliu, which?are?still?commemorated?by?the?Miao?people?in?Qiandongnan?today.

18?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

[if !supportLists]3.?[endif]Such strategies include enforcing compulsory basic education (grade 1–9), promoting quality curriculum reform, developing rural tourism, road construction, and granting preferential rural policies (including the abolition of agricultural taxes, the provision of agricultural subsidies, the establishment of rural cooperative medicare system,?etc.).

[if !supportLists]4.?[endif]In?both?Majiang?and?Longxing?middle?schools,?during?weekdays,?evening?sessions?were?commonly held?after?dinner?from?7–9?pm,?when?the?teachers?would?provide?additional?instruction?and?drill students?on?tests.?Even?though?evening?study?halls?were?officially?outlawed?to?reduce?the?academic burden,?it?was?still?widely?practiced?among?village?schools?trying?to?catch?up?in?the?testing?race.

[if !supportLists]5.?[endif]In Longxing Middle School, for instance, the enrollment roster of 2009 recorded a total of 890 students, yet only around 300 were actually attending school. The school kept the names of the dropouts?on?the?roster?in?order?to?pass?inspections?and?obtain?student?expenditure?funds?from?the Ministry of?Education.

References

Ames RT and Rosement H Jr. (trans.) (1998)?The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation.

New York: Ballantine.

Bakken B (2000)?The Exemplary Society: Human Improvement, Social Control, and the Dangers of Modernity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Berthrong J (2008)?Expanding Process: Exploring Philosophical and Theoretical Transformations ?in ?China?and?the?West.?Albany,?NY:?State?University?of?New?York?Press.

Billioud S and Thoraval J (2015)?The Sage and the People: The Confucian Revival in China. New York: Oxford University Press.

Brokaw CJ (1991)?The Ledgers of Merit and Demerit: Social Change and Moral Order in Late Imperial China. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Cheng?J?(2014)?What?does?Shanghai’s?leading?PISA?results?tell?us??[Shanghai?de?PISA?ceshi?quanqiu diyi?daodi?shuoming?le?shenme?].Discovery?and?Debates[tansuo?yu?zhengming],?No.?1.?Retrieved fromhttp://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_a55906340102v4l4.html.

Clark R and Gieve SN (2006) On the discursive construction of ‘‘The Chinese Learner.’’.?Language, Culture, and Curriculum?19(1): 54–73.

Dean M (1999)?Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society. London: Sage Publications. Dello-Iacovo B (2009) Curriculum reform and ‘‘quality education’’ in China: An overview.

International Journal of Educational Development?29: 241–249.

Fong V (2004) Filial nationalism among Chinese teenagers with global identities.?American Ethnologist

31(4): 631–648.

Foucault M (1991) Governmentality. In: Burchell G, Gordon C and Miller P (eds)?The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, pp.87–104.

Grimshaw?T?(2007)?Problematizing?the?construct?of?‘‘the?Chinese?learner:’’?Insights?from?ethnographic research.?Educational Studies?33(3):?299–311.

Guan Q and Meng W (2007) China’s new national curriculum reform: Innovation, challenges and strategies.?Frontiers of Education in China?2(4): 579–604.

Gupta?A?(2001)?Governing?population:?The?integrated?child?development?services?program?in?India. In: Hansen TB and Stepputat F (eds)?States of Imagination: Ethnographic Explorations of?the?Postcolonial?State.?Durham,?NC:?Duke?University?Press,?pp.65–96.

Hahm C (2001) Confucian rituals and the technology of the self: A Foucaultian interpretation.

Philosophy East & West?51(3): 315–324.

Hansen MH (1999)?Lessons in Being Chinese: Minority Education and Ethnic Identity in Southwest China. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

Harrell S (ed.) (1996)?Cultural Encounters on China’s Ethnic Frontiers. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

Wu?19

Hayhoe R (2014) Hopes for Confucian pedagogy in China.?Journal of Curriculum Studies?46(3): 313–319.

Hostetler L (2001)?Qing Colonial Enterprise: Ethnography and Cartography in Early Modern China.

Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Jin L and Cortazzi M (2006) Changing practices in Chinese cultures of learning.?Language, Culture, and Curriculum?19(1): 5–20.

Kipnis A (2011a)?Governing Educational Desire: Culture, Politics, and Schooling in China. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Kipnis A (2011b) Subjectification and education for quality in China.?Economy and Society?40(2): 289–306.

Ladson-Billings G (1995) But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy.

Theory into Practice?34(3): 159–165.

Lawn M and Grosvenor I (2005)?Materialities of Schooling: Design, Technology, Objects, Routines.

Oxford: Symposium Books.

Li Q and Ni Y (2012) Debates on the basic education curriculum reform and teachers’ challenges in China.?Chinese Education and Society?45: 9–21.

Li W and Li Y (2010) An analysis on social and cultural background of the resistance for China’s education reform and academic pressure.?International Education Studies?3(3): 211–215.

Lou J (2011) Suzhi, relevance, and the new curriculum.?Chinese Education and Society?44: 73–86. Mathews J (2014) Why admiring Chinese test scores might hurt U.S. schools.?The Washington Post.

September 14.

Mote FW (1971)?Intellectual Foundations of China, 2nd edition. New York, NY: Alfred and Knopf.

Postiglione GA (2008) Making Tibetans in China: The educational challenges of harmonious multiculturalism.?Educational Review?60(1): 1–20.

Ravitch D (2014) The myth of Chinese super schools.?New York Review of Books.?November 20. Rawski ES (1979)?Education and Popular Literacy in Ch’ing China. Ann Arbor, MI: University of

Michigan Press.

Reed GG (1995) Moral/political education in the People’s Republic of China: Learning through?role models.?Journal of Moral?Education?24(2): 99–111.

Rose?N?(1996)?Governing?‘‘a(chǎn)dvanced’’?liberal?democracies.?In:?Barry?A,?Osbourne?T?and?Rose?N?(eds)?Foucault and Political Reason: Liberalism, Neo-liberalism, and Rationalities of Government. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press,?pp.37–64.

Schirato T, Danaher G and Webb J (2012)?Understanding Foucault: A Critical Introduction. London: Sage Publications.

Shirk S (1982)?Competitive Comrades: Career Incentives and Student Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Sloane?A?and?Zhao?W?(2013)?Agamben’s?potentiality?and?Chinese?Dao:?On?experiencing?gesture?and movement?of?pedagogical?thought.Educational?Philosophy?and?Theory?46(4):?348–363.

Stoler AL (2009)?Along the Archival Grain: Epistemic Anxieties and Colonial Common Sense. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University?Press.

Tu W-M (1985)?Confucian Thought: Selfhood as Creative Transformation. Albany, ?NY: ?State ?University of New York?Press.

Watkins DA and Biggs JB (eds) (1996)?The Chinese Learner: Cultural, Psychological and Contextual Influences. Hong Kong/Melbourne: Comparative Education Research Centre. The University of Hong Kong/Australian Council for Educational Research.

Woronov?TE?(2007)?Chinese?children,?American?education:?Globalizing?child?rearing?in?contemporary China. In: Cole J and Durham D (eds)?Generations and Globalization: Youth, Age, and the Family in the?New?World?Economy.?Bloomington,?IN:?Indiana?University?Press,?pp.40–43.

Woronov TE (2009) Governing China’s children: Governmentality and ‘‘education for quality.’’.

Position?17(3): 567–589.

20?Policy Futures in Education?0(0)

?

Wu?Z?(2011)?Interpretation,?autonomy,?and?transformation:?Chinese?pedagogic?discourse?in?a?cross- cultural?perspective.Journal?of?Curriculum?Studies?43(5):?569–590.

Wu J (2012) Governing Suzhi and Curriculum Reform in Rural Ethnic China: Viewpoints From?the Miao?and?Dong?Communities?in?Qiandongnan.Curriculum?Inquiry?42(5):?652–681.

Wu?J?(2015)?Contesting?Isomorphism?and?Divergence:?Historicizing?Chinese?Educational?Encounter with?the?West.?In:?Tro¨hler?D?and?Lenz?T?(eds)Trajectories?in?the?Development?of?Modern?School?Systems: Between the National and the Global. New York: Routledge, pp.?256–268.

Wu J (2016)?Fabricating an Educational Miracle: Compulsory Schooling Meets Ethnic ?Rural ?Development?in?China.?Albany,?NY:?State?University?of?New?York?Press.

Yan?GC?(ed.)?(1989)Zhongguo?xinlixueshi?ziliao?xuanbian?[Selected?materials?on?the?history?of?Chinese psychology]. Beijing: People’s Education?Press.

Yang MM-H (1989) The gift economy and state power in China.?Comparative Studies in Society and History?31(1): 25–54.

Zhao Y (2009)?Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Zhao Y (2014)?Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Dragon: Why China has the Best (and Worst) Education System in the World. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Zhao?X,?Haste?H?and?Selman?R?(2014)?Questionable?lessons?from?China’s?recent?history?of?education reform.?Education Week?33(18):?32.