None of the more than 3,300 top scorers in the college entrance examination became successful? ——Remember a simple trace of historical materials

I saw this question on Zhihu a few days ago:

To be honest, this title quite shocked me. After all, none of the 3,300 top picks achieved success, which can be regarded as a complete failure of exam-oriented education. But I have always understood the characteristics of Chinese news - generally speaking, if a piece of news is particularly counter-intuitive, you'd better think about its credibility first. Since I have recently become obsessed with writing books and digging up historical materials, I simply used some historical data methods to analyze the basic argument in this answer - "We surveyed 3,300 top scorers in the college entrance examination since the resumption of the college entrance examination, and none of them became industry leaders" ( (See page 34 of "Shanghai Education" Issue 12A, 2011) for a traceback.

So you might as well join me to see why these top scorers in the college entrance examination are missing from everyone else.

First of all, according to what was pointed out in the question

I found the table of contents of the 12th issue of "Shanghai Education" in 2011:

Is this so-called research pure nonsense? Eight ways? In line with a truth-seeking and pragmatic attitude, I searched online again, and found that one of the earliest sources of this statement turned out to be Wenhui Po:

I have heard of Yuan Zhenguo’s name. Logically speaking, The Central Academy of Educational Sciences is also a relatively reliable institution. If they really have similar research, there must be some research results, right? As a result, I searched and found no information on relevant research.

But it doesn’t matter. Since these words were said at the theme forum for the 60th anniversary of East China Normal University, there must be relevant speech records. After careful inspection, I found out:

"Someone else has done it"!

"Someone else has done it"!

"Someone else has done it"!

Well, at this point, I couldn’t help but search for reporter Jiang Da who originally reported this matter, and it turned out that it was really amazing. This person turned out to be the chief reporter of Wenhui Po! First prize winner of Shanghai Journalism Award! March 8th red flag bearer! I just asked you if you are afraid!

What others have said clearly is "what others have done", but when it comes to the chief reporter, it becomes "what their research institute has just completed". Sure enough, the chief reporter is different.

But it’s not over yet. Who is this “other”? So I continued to search and finally dug to the root

The exciting moment has finally arrived! Let’s see how they did their research! Let us reveal the secret why top scorers in the college entrance examination cannot become industry leaders!

Na, Na Ni? Isn’t that the promised 3,300 people? Why can we only find so many? But it doesn’t matter. There is no industry leader among more than a hundred people, which is enough to explain the problem! Let’s see how this report defines the concept of “industry leader”!

I always feel like something is wrong: according to the logic of this report, most of the information about the top picks (especially in the 1980s and earlier) can no longer be found, and the information that can be found about the top picks is relatively late. . So if a person took the college entrance examination in 1985 and then pursued an academic career, he would have to be an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, a Yangtze River Scholar, or an academician of the American or Russian Academy of Sciences in 2007 to be considered an "industry leader"...

It’s too difficult, isn’t it, old iron?

But it doesn’t matter. The academic world follows the rules. Didn’t the report also mention a “2007 Ranking of Outstanding Alumni of Chinese Universities”? Distinguished alumni, this shouldn’t be that difficult, right?

Member of the Central Committee!

Chairman or general manager of domestic and foreign listed companies!

As normal human beings, we have to know this: by the time of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, there were only 10 Central Committee members born in the 1960s. The first "post-70s" candidate member of the Central Committee was born in 2016.

So in 2007, using this leverage as the standard of "industry leader" to measure the top scorers in the college entrance examination after 1978, is it a bit crazy?

So let’s sum it up in the end:

An unreliable website used unreliable methods to conduct an unreliable research.

Then a relatively reliable person quoted this research at the East China Normal University anniversary forum, and it was published in Wenhui Po by an unreliable reporter, and was finally used as evidence by others. To attack the current education system, this is simply digging a well!