China News Service, Beijing, April 4 (Reporter Yuan Xiuyue) As the "New College Entrance Examination" has become the main body of the national college entrance examination, the traditional liberal arts and science subject model has gradually been replaced by the subject combination model, but a new question has also triggered discussion: Choose physics or history?
Recently, media reported that among the 23 provinces that implement the "3+1+2" model, the ratio of history candidates in nearly half of the provinces continues to decline. The ratio of physics and history candidates is generally close to 7:3, and some provinces even reach 8:2. Some history teachers face the reality of “no one to teach”.
This phenomenon quickly aroused heated discussion on the Internet. Some people think that it is understandable that students and parents "abandon" history studies because of their practical considerations; others are worried that neglecting the study of history may have long-term consequences.
"Actually, at the beginning of the comprehensive reform of the college entrance examination, there was a phenomenon of 'abandoning physics' in some areas, but we cannot go to the other extreme and become 'abandoning liberal arts.'" Xiong Bingqi, director of the 21st Century Education Research Institute, said that according to his understanding, in some key high schools, the number of students taking science (physics and chemistry) has reached 90%, and even the proportion of general high schools taking physics and chemistry is 70%. This trend deserves great attention.
Some analysts pointed out that this phenomenon is related to the relatively narrow choice of majors for history candidates, the shrinking of liberal arts in colleges and universities, school orientation and employment pre-employment.
Chu Zhaohui, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Educational Sciences, believes that from a deeper level, this phenomenon is also related to society’s insufficient attention to the overall development of liberal arts, resulting in restrictions on its development. "In the AI era, liberal arts majors should have achieved a leap and upgrade, but this process has not yet been completed, and some corresponding problems have arisen."
In Xiong Bingqi's view, after the reform of the new college entrance examination, history candidates actually have a wider range of major choices than traditional liberal arts. Many schools are also guiding students to choose history. "From a school perspective, if a large number of students choose physics, there will be pressure on the staffing of physics teachers." He believes that it is not that the school cannot provide a combination of history electives, nor that students are unwilling to learn history, but that many students and parents have been influenced by arguments such as "the liberal arts are useless" online.
"Some parents have been affected by live broadcasts and short videos, forming an information cocoon. Many high schools told me that in response to the school's subject selection guidance, some parents will use extreme words on the Internet to criticize the school, which is particularly prominent in some county schools." Xiong Bingqi said that this is a problem worthy of attention in the social media era. Some online content strengthens the theory of scores only and the theory of further education, which amplifies parents' anxiety and makes parents who do not pay attention to their children's interests and disrespect their children even more ignorant of their children's ideas and the differences in students' interests and abilities.
In this regard, Xiong Bingqi suggested that on the one hand, education departments and schools need to increase their efforts in career education and information services to make information more open, transparent, and accessible; on the other hand, platforms also need to fulfill their responsibilities and not let parents who need information services be trapped by algorithms.
In Chu Zhaohui’s view, the key to solving this dilemma lies in further improving the examination evaluation system.
At present, according to the actual conditions of various places, there are two models of comprehensive college entrance examination reform: "3+3" and "3+1+2". In the "3+1+2" model, "1" is the first choice subject, and candidates must choose one from physics and history; "2" is a secondary subject, and candidates can choose two of the remaining four subjects.
Chu Zhaohui suggested that in the "3+1+2" model, students can be given greater room for choice. Physics and history can be the first-choice subjects with high authority, but they should not be solidified into exclusive options that all students must choose one from the other. They can also include these two subjects as elective subjects. In other words, students who choose history as "1" can also choose physics as "2", and those who choose physics as "1" can also choose history as "2", so that there is no imbalance in liberal arts and science.
"Science and engineering require humanistic qualities, and liberal arts cannot do without scientific support." Chu Zhaohui said.
Xiong Bingqi also said that promoting educational progress and expanding educational equity is not to intensify utilitarianism, but to promote educational reform and broaden students’ choices for success. "Career development, career development, and life development are inherently full of uncertainties. There is no plan to choose a good major and get it done once and for all." (End)
