At present, the reform orientation (improving scores in the PE senior middle school entrance exam and incorporating PE into the college entrance exam) of PE entrance exam presents a serious theoretical deviation and ethical dilemma, which have a wide and deep influence, not only concerning the major and basic theoretical proposition of school PE in China, but also involving the deconstruction of education-talent evaluation, and even impacting on the social value system. However, there is still a lack of attention to this issue in the fields of PE, education and philosophy-ethics. From the perspective of scientific rationality and value rationality, this paper reflects on the problems related to the reform orientation of PE entrance exam. It argues that, first, the reform of PE entrance exam has been scientifically misplaced, both internally and externally, based on the external reference of the “cultural” subjects and internal examination of evaluative validity of the PE entrance exam. Externally, PE is mainly positioned as individual basic-safeguarding demands and individual-self-development, while “culture” subjects are related to improving-developmental demand and social utility-basic development, and accordingly the evaluation evaluation differentiation and rigidity of these subjects is different.Internally, PE exams assess mainly non essential, specialized athletic ability, making it difficult to characterize “PE” and “health”. Second, the reform of PE entrance exam faces macro and micro ethical dilemmas, which are involving the crisis of education-social value and the fairness of individual-operation issues, rooted in the inherent discord between athletic ability and “culture” subjects. Third, the reform of exam should clarify the misinterpretation of students’ all-round development and “sports development”, prevent the misuse of different evaluation systems, and maintain tension between long-term strategies and expediency. The following issues should be considered: whether sports development (right), as a right mainly pointing to self-development, should be made mandatory for further education; whether PE is a compulsory subject in overseas entrance exams; whether factors such as health and athletic ability associated with PE exams can be used as limiting or differentiating factors of the right to education; if the reform of PE entrance exam continues for reasons of expediency, will it be a level exam, or a differentiated exam, and if it can be generalized to other education stages.
中国人文社会科学核心期刊