HSK computer based exam has no value

[hedwards]

I've seen people making the assertion that it takes decades to "learn" Chinese often enough  and I have yet to get an adequate explanation as to why adults are so stupid in this regards compared with children. By age 10 children have amassed a pretty huge vocabulary and set of grammar rules that make adult learners jealous. But Adults have a huge advantage in that they already have most of the concepts necessary in at least one other language and can use that knowledge to drastically reduce the amount of guess and check needed to learn.

 

Anyways, I just think it's rather nihilistic to use antiquated study techniques and spend time obsessing over how incredibly hard the language is because you're using techniques that predate modern educational research. There's a difference between being hard and being effective. Some forms of difficulty do lead to better efficacy, but others are just about the size of ones, er, pencil, and not of any meaningful benefit in terms of learning more efficiently.

[Silent]

 

But really, anyone who could actually do a proper CBA would never choose to learn Chinese. They'd learn banking instead.

If with "proper CBA" you mean just a financial CBA you may be right. To me there's more then financials to a proper CBA. E.g. Some people really love languages and hate finances, if they choose Banking over Chinese they've not made a proper CBA, at least in the way I see it.

[abcdefg]

#28 -- @JustinJJ --

 

I suspect that for a lot of people the decision not to learn to physically write (as opposed to character recognition) has more to do with trying to learn more efficiently e.g. spending that time reading, listening, than not being interested in Chinese itself.

 

Well said. This pretty well sums it up for me.

 

The only thing I would add is that I found learning to converse came with relative ease while learning to write by hand was extraordinarily difficult. It took a huge amount of effort to learn 手写 the first time around and then the little I had learned evaporated almost as soon as the ink dried and I'd have to learn all it again a month later. At the beginning of each new academic year, I would restart the project with firm resolve and pursue it energetically for a while. After doing that four or five times, I finally just set it aside.

 

Learning to read was somewhere in between the two poles: easier than 书法 but harder than talking and listening. Since it was so overwhelmingly important, I persevered until reaching at least a basic level. Still have not gotten to a place where I can read things in Chinese just for fun. It's always laborious.

 

These failures cost me some pride, but eventually I just had to move on in life as someone who will always be partly illiterate. Not something about which I brag. I can function day to day in China, but my Chinese will definitely never be brilliant. Have managed to compensate to some extent by learning a little about the history and the culture.

[Basil]

 

I've seen people making the assertion that it takes decades to "learn" Chinese often enough  and I have yet to get an adequate explanation as to why adults are so stupid in this regards compared with children. By age 10 children have amassed a pretty huge vocabulary and set of grammar rules that make adult learners jealous. But Adults have a huge advantage in that they already have most of the concepts necessary in at least one other language and can use that knowledge to drastically reduce the amount of guess and check needed to learn.

 

Anyways, I just think it's rather nihilistic to use antiquated study techniques and spend time obsessing over how incredibly hard the language is because you're using techniques that predate modern educational research. There's a difference between being hard and being effective. Some forms of difficulty do lead to better efficacy, but others are just about the size of ones, er, pencil, and not of any meaningful benefit in terms of learning more efficiently.

 

I would say there are three main reasons.

 

1. Everything in the world is new to children, they want to interact with and understand it. This is a very fertile language learning environment. Adults on the other hand have other concerns and so display their interest in the world much more selectively, at great cost to themselves if they are learning a language.

 

2. Children are hard-wired for language learning, to the extent that if a child does not learn a single language by the age of around seven, by growing up in complete isolation or at least an extremely linguistically deprived environment, they will never be able to grasp a language at all.

 

3. We have comparatively lower expectations of children than adults. Last week I interpreted for a client on the subject on nanotechnology. If I had not have been able to do that, (I had to research first!) my language ability would have been seen at fault. We don't expect children to necessarily know about those things. Although I imagine that a good deal of science minded 10 year olds would be pretty familiar with the subject matter! I measure my current grasp of Chinese in comparison with my current grasp of English. If there is a topic I cannot cover in Chinese that I can cover in English, it's not good enough. It currently falls well short. But then again, my English is also much better than it was when I was 10.

[Guest realmayo]

Yes, there are very convincing reasons to explain why children learn languages better than adults. 

 

I don't see why people should be shy of saying that Chinese is a difficult language to learn, if that is their experience and the experience of others they know. It's not a macho thing. It's just being truthful. 

 

 

techniques that predate modern educational research

 

Are we so sure that schools churn out better-educated people today than they did 25 years ago?

 

 

 

Chinese is a tool. 

 

Can't we just say Chinese is a language? 

 

Exams measure part of that language ability. They force you to jump through hoops that aren't entirely realistic, because a mass-exam can never be entirely realistic. These days it seems too unrealistic to force people through a hoop that requires being able to write 3000 characters from memory. 

[anonymoose]

These days it seems too unrealistic to force people through a hoop that requires being able to write 3000 characters from memory.

 

The only people being "forced" to do this are Chinese school students, and they don't seem to have an issue writing characters from memory (contrary to the hype that youngsters cannot write any more due to the digital age).

 

If we are talking about HSK, well, noone is forced to take it. If you need it to get into a Chinese uiversity, then chances are you will need writing ability anyway. And if you are just learning Chinese to handle every day oral communication, then what do you need the HSK for anyway?

[roddy]

"The only people being "forced" to do this are Chinese school students"

Currently, yes. Our younger members might not recall that before the new HSK came in and was put on computer, being able to write by hand was a major part of the Advanced exam, and a small, fairly incidental, part of the Elementary/Intermediate exam. Given the requirement (I think I'm remembering this right) for your overall HSK grade to be no more than two grades higher than your lowest on any individual section, that meant you had to be able to handwrite if you wanted an good Advanced HSK score. 

 

And there's a spectrum between 'need to write for uni' and 'only want to be able to talk' where an exam that doesn't rely on handwriting is valuable. I certainly fell on it. 

 

Aphorisme, welcome to the site, and apologies for the troll-hunters. We understand now you're just a bit rude and mistaken ;-)

 

You might enjoy this - lengthy discussion a few years back on similar topics. 

[anonymoose]

And there's a spectrum between 'need to write for uni' and 'only want to be able to talk' where an exam that doesn't rely on handwriting is valuable.

 

Valuable for what? As has already been discussed in other topics, being able to speak Chinese may be of great personal value, for which you don't need an exam, but isn't in much demand professionally, unless you are doing something hardcore, like translation or interpretation, and in that case, you'll be laughed at if you can't write.

 

And while we're slating (or defending) the HSK, a 6 may be nice to brag about, but is still a low level if you want to use your Chinese professionally, regardless of whether you include hand-writing in that or not.

[roddy]

I find it very easy to imagine a company not being too worried about your ability to write, but wanting proof you can listen (in meetings) and read (reports). And that if they do care about any writing ability, that typing might be more valued than handwriting. A (computer) HSK would be useful then, no? And the main reason I took HSK exams wasn't for professional purposes, it was to provide motivation and benchmarking for my study. It was valuable. 

 

I'm kind of surprised we seem to be disagreeing about this. We probably agree, we just haven't realised it yet. 

[Guest realmayo]

being able to speak Chinese may be of great personal value, for which you don't need an exam, but isn't in much demand professionally

 

Are you sure about that? I would have thought that there are lots of jobs where a candidate with Chinese has an advantage over someone without. Most of those will be based in Asia, sure. 

[li3wei1]

I think we're using two different definitions of 'write' here. One is to write by hand, which is a production skill. The other is to write by computer or phone, which is (if you're using the most common input methods) a combination of several skills: knowing which words to use and in which order, knowing what they sound like, and recognising them from a list of similar-sounding words. I suggest that for clarity we use the word 'type' for the second meaning.

[anonymoose]

I find it very easy to imagine a company not being too worried about your ability to write, but wanting proof you can listen (in meetings) and read (reports).

 

Maybe I'm missing something here, but hasn't the general consensus on these boards been that Chinese is not a big advantage professionally? I mean, apart from those jobs where Chinese is the focus of the job, such as translating, there aren't many jobs where Chinese is an indispensable side-skill.

 

I find it quite hard to imagine that an employer would employ someone on the basis that they are able to listen in meetings, yet not expect that person to be able to make written notes. Yes, you could use a computer, but whether an employer would trust your Chinese to be good enough if you can't write - well, that's another issue.

 

And the main reason I took HSK exams wasn't for professional purposes, it was to provide motivation and benchmarking for my study.

 

Absolutely. And I guess apart from university applications, that's one of the main reasons that people take the HSK. But that being the case, one cannot objectively say whether the HSK is better with a hand-writing component or not, because obviously if you can't handwrite, you'll prefer it without that component, and if you can handwrite, it's not going to be much of a motivator if it doesn't test that skill.

 

We probably agree

 

Thanks for agreeing with me.

[roddy]

Glad I've been able to talk you round 

[prateeksha]

I passed HSK 5 after 2 years of part-time diploma studies in India and a year in BLCU, and I deliberately chose the computer-based version.

 

Both in India and China, passing written exams was a compulsory requirement and those had to be hand-written. So while I am not drawing parallels between BLCU's 成功之路 series's 中级教材 with HSK level 5 syllabus (although I strictly feel that these are almost equivalent), I can say with confidence that I could have fared equally well had I given the hand-written version of the HSK 5 exam. Why didn't I do it then? I was sent to China for a year of study by my employer, who cared neither about HSK nor my capability to hand-write. My primary qualification is engineering, and my work largely depended on reading/typing and audio/oral interactions. The intended output from a year of investment on employer's part was clear to me, so I arranged my priorities accordingly. And might I add they served me just fine for as long as I was actively employed.

 

In broader terms, my capability to write characters by memory is weaker than my capability to recognise and type them. Does it affect me? Once in a blue moon, when a Chinese person already impressed with my 普通话 accidentally sees me struggling with a rather difficult character. Personally, I attach higher value to being able to read and speak (and type) than having a beautiful handwriting or be able to write complex characters (羡慕 somehow always gets my goat). It allows me to devote more time to learning newer words. What I study now is not the language but about China in general, and utilizing the time in learning new words (recognition, pronunciation, and meaning) instead of learning to write by hand helps me learn more characters in a limited amount of time.

 

Different people want different things out of pursuing the same thing. In our case, it is the Chinese language. I had/have my own set of requirements and being able to write or not (irrespective of HSK) is just a part of the bigger picture.

[Demonic_Duck]

Valuable for what? As has already been discussed in other topics, being able to speak Chinese may be of great personal value, for which you don't need an exam, but isn't in much demand professionally, unless you are doing something hardcore, like translation or interpretation, and in that case, you'll be laughed at if you can't write.

I'd say that for university, writing by hand very likely is something you'd need (although with the advent and widespread usage of tablets, even that's debatable). On the other hand, for translation jobs, I'd be very surprised if they valued handwriting... in what context would you be expected to provide handwritten translations?

[Guest realmayo]

Chinese is not a big advantage professionally

 

I'm only guessing, but I'd imagine if you were an accountant or a bond trader or an architect or an engineer or all kinds of things, and at some point you were looking for work in China, there will be positions where being able to speak & type Chinese would be very important?

 

For taking notes, you could do that in a English, or a mix of characters/pinyin/English. You're the one going to read them. But if you're talking about taking verbatim notes, that would require far far better writing ability than any HSK would ever test.

[ZhangKaiRong]

if you were an accountant or a bond trader or an architect or an engineer or all kinds of things, and at some point you were looking for work in China, there will be positions where being able to speak & type Chinese would be very important?

 

Well, it is not, unfortunately. IMO, it is among the least important factors when you're trying to get a job in China - of course, it is not applicable to translating, interpreting and other positions where you have to communicate between your homeland and China. Years of work experience, internationally recognized professional qualifications - like CFA, ACCA, CPA, HKICPA if we're talking about finance-related jobs -, being from a native English-speaking country or have a very good command of English, who you are acquainted to are highly valued attributes in case of you would like to get a good professional job. In most cases, you are needed for your expertise accumulated in a "foreign land", and not for your Chinese skills or knowledge on Chinese culture.

 

And to make it worse, as far as I know, this trend is changing as well nowadays, since European and American colleges enroll more and more Chinese students, who therefore get the same - "highly appreciated" - Western education and expertise that workplaces needed from laowais before. This kind of attitude is particularly strong in Beijing, where well-known multinationals (investment banks, consulting companies, financial services companies, engineering companies) are trying to get rid off their "foreign experts" and plan to replace them with Chinese native speakers educated and have work experience in the West. I guess everybody can conclude whether or not it is a good investment to learn Chinese if you are seeking for a good professional career...

 

In terms of working in China, good command of language and a solid knowledge on culture make your everyday life much easier, in concrete, these skills help you to live a life there and not just be a random expat with no connection to the country he/she lives.

[zhouhaochen]

This thread is going all over the place now...

 

@ZhangKaiRong

you seem to be living in a very different Beijing than I do....

It is a different story if you are sent abroad as an expat by an HR department that still hasn't realized that almost nobody in China speaks English - and wouldn't know where to find a Mandarin speaker anyway.

However, when looking for a job in Beijing, I see A LOT more people learning Mandarin today in Beijing because they need it to get proper job. That's not how it used to be. Mandarin used to be a bonus when applying for a job as a foreigner in Beijing. Now it is a requirement for most jobs - I would guess, simply because there are so many more foreigners who can.

That being able to speak with customers and colleagues is not an advantage when doing a job is hard for me to imagine. At the same time I am not surprised a company does not want to hire a financial analyst who never learned to properly do maths - whatever his Chinese skills.

 

I hear in Shanghai the old ways still persist, but then they have always been a bit backwards down there.

[Aphorisme]

I disagree with the fact that chinese is not a big advantage professionally. IMO mastering chinese has a real value wherever you live, professionally speaking, and most of the time not because of the skill itself, but because that shows that you have great qualities which can be useful in a working environment: determination, a strong willpower, intellectual curiosity. But as a consequence, in the eyes of potential employers, this advantage depends greatly on the circumstances surrounding your learning of chinese. Learning chinese full time during three years in china does not require the same determination than, for instance, learning chinese very hard by yourself during years and years in your home country, in parallel with a full time job. 

 

Moreover, mastering chinese in itself is a big advantage in many jobs, and not only in the translation field. For instance, china's law market provides a great number of opportunities, especially because of its international growth, but few foreign lawyers are interested in this market. And most of the foreign lawyers which are in china do not speak chinese, and among those who speak chinese, very few (not to say almost no one) can properly read and interprete chinese laws by themselves (because chinese legal terminology is really, really different from chinese everyday vocabulary). And a lawyer who cannot read by himself, or search and browse in legal databases without relying on a translator, is pretty ineffective (not to say fully ineffective). All this to say that in many fields mastering chinese creates amazing opportunities, open a lot of doors, but very often this fields are not the most obvious ones.

 

And having handwriting skills can be relevant in specific cases, as for instance the one i mentioned before.

[JustinJJ]

"Chinese is not a big advantage professionally".

I think the usefulness of Chinese goes deeper than what's on a job specification. In any country networks are vital to your career, China is no exception (we know how important 关系 Is). Speaking Chinese is going to make it a lot easier to make friends and socialise with people in business regardless of what language your job is in.

Perhaps I'm biased because I spend most of my free time learning or using Chinese, but I don't have a huge deal of respect for 老外 who spend years in China but can only bumble through a knee how, 我要这个, etc. I'm not Chinese, but I suspect they would be much more impressed by 老外 who speak Chinese well. That should be an advantage to your career.