128 SOCIAL REFORMannual basis. And a subcommentary by a Mr. Ch'eng noted that there was also
a quota system based on the size of the feudal principality: three students a year
from the largest, two from the next, and one from the smallest. This notice served
as a precedent for statecraft writers of later periods who wanted to combine
regional quotas with a recommendation system.^24
The Confucian emphasis on both thought and action, or knowledge and behav-
ior, as inseparable components of moral training meant that the ideal mode of
evaluation was face-to-face observation of individuals by peers or superiors per-
sonally acquainted with the candidates. The ancient school system also provided
for long-term evaluation simply by requiring years of schooling prior to appoint-
ment to office, but the schools were not the only, nor the most important, arena
for the personal observation of individuals. The local community, which formed
the base of both the administrative, military, and school hierarchies in the clas-
sical model, was the natural locus for initial evaluation because the community
had more intimate knowledge of individual behavior than any other group.
Observed behavior as the main method of evaluation required a kind of grass-
roots participation in the recommendation process.
Discipline and Punishment in Education
The spirit ofthe classical Chinese system was tough-minded, authoritarian, and
punitive - close in many ways to the discredited Legalist tradition of the Ch'in
dynasty. Matters involving moral principle were not open to question. The Hsiieh-
chi section of the Book of Rites described the proper attitude of the student as
one of passive acceptance of knowledge: "The young people [in the schools]
just listened and did not ask questions, and as a result they learned things in the
proper order." The commentary added: "The young people were never able to
ask questions, or if they did ask questions, they still would not be able to under-
stand the important elements [of the answers]. Therefore, they only listened and
accepted the explanations of the teachers."25
Authoritarianism in learning was matched by a thoroughly punitive approach
to wrongdoing and incompetence in general. The Rites of Chou, in describing
the functions of the Ssu-t'u, listed the use of punishment at the hyang or local
level for eight kinds of misbehavior and for misfeasance and malfeasance by
educational officials. Teachers would keep thorny branches on hand for use as
switches on lazy students, and if recalcitrant students and scholars failed to reform,
they would be singled out by local elders and subjected to three degrees of ban-
ishment before permanent exile and exclusion from the ranks of the scholars.
Students of the National Academy who failed to reform even after the king went
on a three-day fast would also be banished and deprived of student status. Those
feudal lords who had recommended bad students were held responsible and sub-
jected to demotion, deprivation of rank, or confiscation of their land.^26 Even
though students were ultimately subjected to punishment, every effort was taken
to persuade them of their shortcomings beforehand. The ultimate punishment,