論中國高考作文

中國高考作文的設立目的是：考查考生的中文書面表達能力，為全國各類普通高等院校（不分學科、專業）選拔出語言表達能力合格的新生。換言之，高考作文並不是為某些特定學科（如文學、新聞、哲學等文科專業）設立的專項寫作測試，而是作為一種通用工具，用以評估學生在大學階段能否使用中文有效進行書面表達。正因如此，其命題範圍、寫作要求以及評分標準，必須秉持中性、廣泛、能力導向的原則，不能偏向任何學科、寫作風格或意識形態。

基於這一根本目的，高考作文命題的首要原則，應當是考查學生運用中文進行有效書面表達的能力，而非考查其文學寫作才華、政治態度，或對特定題材的情感傾向。

然而，中國高考作文，在很多程度上, 還是跟從封建時代的“以文取士”“文以載道”， 認為高考作文不僅是對學生語言表達能力的考核，更是一場文化政治的展演，是主流價值觀與青年思想對話的重要場域。

基於此，作文題目，往往集中於諸如“家國情懷”， “思想定為”“人物事跡”“自然景物”“內心感悟”等特定內容，例如，《我在這戰鬥的一年裡》（1977年），《先天下之憂而憂，後天下之樂而樂》（1982年），"倖存者偏差"、"勞動頌歌"，，還有一些根據提供的資料寫作文。另外，就是作文題目的意思非常模糊，例如，《嘗試》（90 年代），”時光瓶” (2018年), “續航” (2023)。但是，題目雖然模糊，並不意味着你什麼都可以寫；考生必須會“審題”，即仔細分析猜測出題人的意圖以及它希望的書寫內容；當然，這些一般都必須是“正能量”；如果”猜”得不對，就叫“跑題”，基本是零分。為什麼不把題目說得更明確呢？！中國歷屆的高考作文題目，大家可以在網上搜一下，這兒就不再累書了。

作文的評分標準（並不在考卷上說明，也不公布），常以“思想深刻”“感情真摯”“描述細緻”等文學性、思想性指標為核心。

中國作文的出題方式和評分標準，實質上使高考作文考查，偏離了其根本定位，向文科方向滑移，進而影響了不同學科學生之間的公平競爭。這不僅損害學生選拔的公平原則，也有悖於高考“為國家各類高校選拔人才”的制度初衷。

事實上，一個學生即便不擅長描寫人物心理、抒發情感或講述故事，也完全可能具備清晰、準確、條理清楚的中文書面表達能力。他們可能擅長撰寫科技說明文、邏輯議論文，或者更傾向於結構化、分析性的表達方式。這類表達能力，在現代社會的各類專業領域中同樣至關重要。而當作文命題和評分標準過度偏向文學表達或政治思維時，這類學生便難以展現真實水平，甚至因此失去進入理想高校的機會。

進一步說，在評分實踐中，只要考生能在規定時間內、在空白試卷上，獨立完成一篇由自己構思、用中文撰寫的文章，閱卷者就應當依據其語言表達能力——包括文字組織、邏輯清晰度、語言規範性、段落結構合理性等方面——予以評判，而不應以其所寫“內容”是否深刻、感人、積極正面等為得分依據。換言之，高考作文評分的本質標準，應該是“會不會寫”，而不是“寫得對不對”“寫得感不感人”或“寫得符不符合某種主旋律”。

當然，在實際評分過程中，為防止“抄襲套作”或“提前背誦”，保障考試公平，閱卷教師確有必要根據文章的表達痕跡、語言流暢性與邏輯自然度作出合理判斷。這確實在操作上存在一定難度，但不能因此就放棄基本原則，轉而以主觀題材喜好、意識形態傾向作為評判依據。

總之，高考作文作為一種選拔工具，其核心應是評價學生的中文書面表達能力，而非文學創作水平或思想政治傾向。命題應儘可能開放與中性，評分則應立足於表達技巧本身，避免將表達風格、內容偏好、情感深度等非本質要素納入主要評分項。唯有如此，考試才能夠考察出考生的真實水平，並確保公平公正，保障各類人才的有效選拔。

此外，在中學生作文教學中流行的所謂“審題、破題、起承轉合、引經據典、三段五段論”等寫作套路，某種程度上仍是古代科舉應試寫作的遺風，與現代社會所要求的自主表達、邏輯組織、真實語言等寫作能力嚴重脫節。這種教學方式容易使寫作成為一種“套話表演”，不利於學生真實表達能力的培養，也影響了高考作文考查目標的實現。

2025-05-23

=============================

On the Chinese Writing Test for University Entrance  (Gaokao Essays)
By Bo Zhang

The purpose of the Chinese Writing Test (Gaokao Essays) is to assess the written Chinese expression ability of all high school graduates and to select qualified candidates for general higher education institutions nationwide, regardless of their disciplines or majors. In other words, the Gaokao Writing Test is not a specialized writing test designed for particular fields such as literature, journalism, or philosophy. Rather, it serves as a universal tool to evaluate whether students possess the ability to complete basic written tasks in Chinese during their university studies. Therefore, its topic selection, writing requirements, and scoring standards must adhere to principles of neutrality, broad applicability, and a competency-based orientation, without favoring any specific discipline, writing style, or ideological inclination.

Based on this fundamental goal, the primary principle of Gaokao essay topics should be to test students’ ability to effectively express themselves in written Chinese — not their literary creativity, political stance, or emotional alignment with specific themes. However, nearly all Gaokao essays have focused on specific subject matter such as “patriotism,” “biographical narratives,” “natural scenery,” and “inner reflections,” while scoring criteria often emphasize literary or ideological elements like “profound thought” and “emotion description.” This trend has, in essence, shifted the writing assessment away from its original orientation toward a more liberal arts-oriented direction, thereby affecting fairness among students from different academic backgrounds.

In fact, a student who is not adept at describing inner emotions, narrating stories, or writing about human characters may still possess a clear, precise, and logically structured command of written Chinese. Such students might excel at writing technical expositions, logical arguments, or prefer structured, analytical forms of expression. These writing skills are equally crucial across various professional fields in modern society. When essay topics and scoring standards become overly skewed toward literary expression or political thinking, these students are deprived of the opportunity to demonstrate their real abilities and may even lose the chance to enter their ideal universities. This not only undermines the principle of fairness but also deviates from the Gaokao’s fundamental function of selecting talent for the country’s higher education system.

Furthermore, in scoring practice, as long as a student can independently complete a self-conceived, Chinese-written essay on a blank test sheet within the allotted time, the evaluator should assess the work based on the student’s writing ability—including textual organization, logical clarity, language correctness, and paragraph coherence—rather than awarding points based on whether the essay’s content is “profound,” “moving,” or “aligned with a certain mainstream ideology.” In essence, the core standard for evaluating Gaokao essays should be “can the student write?”—not “is what they wrote correct?”, “is it touching?”, or “does it conform to a certain narrative?”

Admittedly, to prevent plagiarism or pre-prepared essays and ensure fairness, examiners do need to make reasonable judgments based on signs of authentic expression, fluency of language, and natural logical flow. While this may pose practical difficulties, it does not justify abandoning core principles in favor of subjective preferences for certain topics or ideological leanings.

In conclusion, the Gaokao essay, as a broadly applicable selection tool, should fundamentally evaluate students’ written expression skills—not their literary talent or ideological position. Topics should remain as open and neutral as possible, and scoring should focus on writing competence itself, avoiding the inclusion of non-essential elements such as stylistic preference, thematic content, or emotional depth in the main scoring criteria. Only in this way can true fairness be ensured, and the proper selection of talent be guaranteed.

Moreover, popular teaching practices in Chinese middle schools—such as “understanding the topic,” “breaking down the prompt,” using “three-part or five-part essay structures,” or excessive reliance on classical allusions—are largely inherited from the traditional keju (imperial examination) system. These methods are significantly out of step with the modern writing skills required today, such as independent expression, logical organization, and authentic language use. Such instructional approaches can easily turn writing into a “formulaic performance,” which is detrimental to the cultivation of genuine writing ability and undermines the Gaokao essay's intended evaluative purpose.