附小民乐系考生叶春红在初试未合格的情况下，却出现在复试合格进入文化考试的名单中。

   上述情况的出现与公开、公平、公正的考试原则明显违背，更是对校方卖出的（10元/份）招生简章第八条、（一）注意事项“专业初试合格者方可参加复试……”的公然违背。并存在暗箱操作的嫌疑，经考生家长与王建民校长交涉后，其表示该考生的事情是特例，学校是在收到该考生向学院投诉和学院的指示以后才开始进入“学校招生考核委员会有权决定的复议程序，并经学院同意云云……”。

但是，校方也该知道该复议程序并未在招生简章等公开的对报考考生的须知中从未有提及，大概也只有学校圈内之人才会知道，这对每一个前来参加考试的考生都是一种愚弄，因为他们并不知道有这个复议的机会。如此看来哪来的公平？

而经过王校长的解释我们对其复议的方法更加觉得不可思议，首先，将原本正常复试的评委从15个削减为7个，作为考生家长，我们深深知道评委的规模、考生备考前的紧张状态，对还是9岁，尚未步入社会的孩子来说，心理压力当然会不一样。其二，将参加复试的3个二胡考生的录像资料和叶春红的现场弹奏进行对比，这在明眼人都知道，学校的录像资料应该不会是高科技产品（据说是家庭录像机），那和现场资料哪来的可比性呢？而7个评委的评审意见怎么能和15个评委一致？且，王校长在我们投诉的家长面前明确说民乐是作为一个系统考虑的，但其在复议时却恰恰“忘记”了与其他民乐考生的对比，哪来的公平？

    再则，学校在对待叶春红事件的所有过程都是在没有任何考生或者考生家长知道，在从未向其他考生公布其校方决定的情况下进行，私设考场进行秘密的复议和乐理考试，只是在最后为了表示王校长所说的校方的“公正”才将叶春红的名单公布出来，哪来的公开呢？

    王校长在我们面前信誓旦旦地说他们初试和复试的评委们都是具有打分权利的专业评委老师，但是，从叶春红的复议来看他们初试评委们所谓的权利或者权威却是多么的不堪一击，校招生考核委员会在毫不知晓叶春红初试时的状况（据同时参加二胡考试考生家长反映，当时叶春红是演奏得一般，所以甚至有二胡专业评委打分不及格）的情况下否定了初试评委们的权威，而这一切游戏规则都掌握在学校的手中，想改就改，想怎么做就怎么做，哪来的公正？

   好在我们这些家长也是有心人，对其初试合格名单和复试合格名单都进行了拍照记录。请见附图。由于本人做博的时间不长，图在我的相册中可以看到．

Abnormal Phenomenon During Recruit Students by the Music Middle School of Shanghai Conservatory of Music

The examinee Miss Ye Chunhong did not pass the 1^st test, however, she is on the list who passed the 2^nd test.

The Music Middle School is a division of the Shanghai conservatory of Music(hereinafter called “MMS of SCM”), offering professional music education of secondary level. Organizationally, it is subordinate to the Ministry of Culture and under the immediate directorship of the Conservatory. It shall be a very nice place, but the fact is?

We, as one of the examinees, went through all the test steps. We encounter a series of abnormal phenomenon. According to the Recruit Students Brief sold (10yuan/pc) by the MMS of SCM, the entire recruit test shall be open, fair and square. On the Item 8 Clause 1, ‘Attention: The examinee shall pass the 1^st test at first, then he/she can be allowed to take the 2^nd test run….’. 

The fact of Miss Ye is obviously to breach the Clause. When we met the Headmaster of MMS of SCM Mr. Wang Jianming, he stated that it is an exceptive example. The reason is that the SCM received the complaint from the examinee Miss Ye who complained the unfair during the 1^st test. MMS of SCM followed the instruction of SCM and start the re-evaluation procedure. He stated: ‘The Recruit Students Committee has the right to decide the re-evaluation procedure, and get the approval from the SCM, etc…’ We oppugn it is unopened process and unfair dealing methods.

The MMS of SCM should know that such re-evaluation procedure step is not published on the Recruit Students Brief, even a word. It may be known by the MMS of SCM, or SCM? The school treated every examinee as a fool since every examinee does not know there is a re-evaluation opportunity after 1^st test, if you are not satisfied the result. It is not fair for other examinees. Where is the open, fair and sqare? (will be continuedly)