Near the beginning of this essay, Li claims that educators are wary of tampering with China’s “brilliant literary tradition,” choosing instead to honor and preserve the moral and educational trends of the past (51), but as we dive further into the investigation of the issue of preparedness for university students, it becomes painfully obvious that if things are going to improve for Chinese students, educators are going to have to let go, at least in part, of some of that control.

It seems like China has a long running debate regarding the role of reading/writing in character development that matches the Western world’s debate on the role of rhetoric in defining and creating virtue, and while the article doesn’t get into the specifics of this debate, it does feel as if it is might be a heated issue. One aim of writing in China is to create scholars who exist as “saints inside and kings outside” (54), and this ideal seems to fit nicely with the secondary education students receive and with the kinds of essays seen on university entrance exams. Where this notion doesn’t fit, however, is inside the university system, which much like our own, aims at intellect, free-thinking, innovation, technology, and acquiring skills for the real world.

Looking at the essay question and responses (both in the essays and in the public sphere) from the 1998 entrance exam, it becomes readily obvious that much like our own “no child left behind act,” too much focus is being placed on the exams and not enough on college prep. According to Li, “89 percent of respondents suggest change in high school curricula are urgent and necessary” (78), but how does this sort of change take place without completely compromising the fundamentals inherent in China’s past? How can the educational system be restructured so that it maintains a relationship and respect for the past but at the same time has the ability to step into the present, a technological speedway quite unlike the world Confucius dwelt in? It seems that since universities are expanding enrollment, and so many students are displeased with the middle and high school curricula in China, things are bound to change at some point when these displeased students are the ones in power. Their sort of dramatic reconstruction might have sever implications, however, and it seems like if the educators of today, the ones whose bias and ideals are subtly affecting the work, writing, and environment of their students, could somehow change their pedagogy before a total restructuring, it would allow for a balance between tradition and innovation.