I am the principal of Qingqing Senior High-school in Nanjing, China. Ours is a very selective, elite, key senior high. As Chinese students' educational opportunities are largely dependent upon the scores they get in various high-stakes tests, their chance of attending our school is dependent on their scores in a city wide high-school entrance exam. We select the very top students in the exams. Our primary purpose is to prepare them for the nation wide College Entrance Exam three year later. 99% of our students get high scores in the exam and go to universities. As college education is heavily associated with student's social-economic well-beings in later life, and the higher education is a very scare source compared to the demand, the competition for college admission is fierce. As a result, the competition to enter our school is fierce, because once you are here you have one foot in college. The parents will be very pound if our school admits their child. It is said that the real estate value of this neighbor is doubled, because of our school.

Well, I am miserable, especially every year when the admission process begins. It is our principle that we admit the students with top scores in the high-school examinations. However, the Chinese disrespect principle. The educational laws are systematically defied and violated by government of various levels and the individuals. Every year, we allow a certain number of students to come to our school through "back door." By euphemism, it is "special admission." There are so many students that want to attend our school that the special admission track becomes the playground of various forms of powers. Every year I am torn apart and pushed to edge by the forces of these powers. I cannot allow students to come to our school without limit. The Chinese educational system is highly centralized and the numbers of students we can admit are allocated by the Municipal Bureau of Education. Municipal Bureau is controlled by the Provincial Bureau of Education, which in its turn, should be responsible to the National Educational Commission. In China, you have to live through this. On the one hand, there is centralized control; on the other hand, there is violation of these controls and regulations. You have to weigh and calculate very carefully. You loose if you make any bold, unbalanced choice.

This year, we can only admit one more student, however, efforts to get their children into our school are persistent and fierce than ever. Some of them I disregard, but some of them I cannot afford to. This morning, I received a phone call from the head secretary from the Municipal Bureau of Education. He kindly invited me to dinner to talk about the funding for the new library building. But I knew he really meant for his son, who applied for our school this year. He had written a "memo" asking me to admit his son through special admission track. I had reviewed his son, Li Ming's file and found he was really not a desirable student for us. He failed two courses in his first junior year, and three in his second junior year. Though social promotion is not the mode of our education, any student fails in more than one course has to start that year over again, this kid moved on through his junior years smoothly, which, can be attributed to the position of his father. Now he wants to move to our school. I'd very much like to disregard this "memo," but I this time I cannot. This father has the control over the funding for our new library. In the Chinese bureaucratic system, your application for funding has to go all the way through different levels of the hierarchy, and at each level you get a stamp of approval. You probably have to wait a year or two, and gather all together over 30 stamps before you really receive the money. I don't want to wait that long. I'd very much like the secretary from educational bureau to help me. Please don't say it is corruption. In China, as a school principle, you have to allow yourself a little bit of corruption. If you are an absolutely honest and just man, even you are as strong as a pine, you will get broken in a big wind. You'd better comprising and mediating and adjusting like a weed. When there are forces, you have to bend a little. You can straight up again if the forces are gone.

I won't hesitate to admit Li Ming and trade his off with our new library if we don't have the application from Guo Hua. This kid is very special. He is a student writer and had already published two novels. All he wrote about is criticism of our current school system. The test-oriented school system only fragmented, amputated test-taking machine, but not real beings. As our school primary admitted students through outcomes of a high- stakes test and is orientated towards helping them pass another high-stakes test, I know what this kid says is true. I have reviewed his file. He only stumbled along in his junior years, but I like him. He embodies the kind of western educational ideal I appeal to. But I am a school principle I will not admit him according to my personal preference. I have to do the calculating and balancing again. This kid is a public image, the favorite of the media. Now days are constantly criticized for producing testing-taking machines. That is, our students get high scores in standardized tests but don't do critical think or cannot handle real life problem. Quality education is such a hot issue. This kid presents a perfect example of quality education. I am rather afraid that I would be criticized as "conservative" if I turn him down. The media will do that. Our chief competitor, Jingning Middle School, will jump out and admit him. Oh, the telephone rings again. I know this time it is the journalist from Chinese Education Report, he is after Guo Hua. Either I admit him or turn him done; he is going to make a big story out of it. He also invited me to dinner this evening.

Questions:
1. Which dinner of the principle should go to?
2. What conflicts in the broader sense beyond the apparent dilemma of admitting the two "special" students?
3. This is calculating and balancing principle. He always weighs carefully between two choices. Do you think he is right in allowing power corruption? Do you think he is right in trying to currying favor with the media? What culture factors and values in America that determine he is "right" or "wrong"?
4. If the case is situated in America, what will you choose?