Exercises Doctrine

A Navy General Station Innovates Professional Assessment Methods: Discarding Exam-Oriented Thinking to Forge Combat-Ready Techniques

海军某总站创新专业考核方式：摒弃应试思维练强应战招法

PLA Daily (解放军报) 10 June 2026

Summary

A PLA Navy general station — unit unspecified — conducted an unscripted professional assessment for station and company commanding officers in early summer, replacing fixed question banks and standardized procedures with randomized fault injections, compounded contingencies, and on-the-spot command problems; station chief Xu Zhongxian is named as one of several officers who lost points for rigid, procedure-bound responses. The article documents a recognized institutional failure: grassroots technical commanders optimizing for predictable assessments rather than adaptive fault response, a pattern the PLA has flagged repeatedly but that persists at the unit level. The redesigned assessment format — constructing contingencies on site, time-limited judgment, independent emergency response — extends the broader PLA effort to close the gap between evaluated performance and actual combat readiness, and provides a baseline record of how one Navy logistics or support station is operationalizing that pressure at the company-officer level.

Translation

PLA Daily report by Huang Xing and Li Jialong: "Equipment power supply fault response exceeded time limit—deduct 10 points…" In early summer, a Navy general station organized an unconventional professional assessment for station and company commanding officers. Unlike previous assessments, this one had no fixed question bank, no standardized procedures, and no single correct answer. Content covered equipment operation, emergency troubleshooting, coordinated command, and on-the-spot decision-making. Examiners introduced obstacles at random and posed questions on the fly, and a number of grassroots commanding officers accustomed to "exam-oriented" approaches froze on the spot.

"In past assessments, as long as you memorized the standard answers in the question bank and mastered the response procedures for common contingencies, you could basically pass without difficulty." Stepping off the assessment floor, Xu Zhongxian, station chief of a subordinate station, said that when preparing for this assessment he had, based on prior experience, devoted most of his energy to memorizing test points and familiarizing himself with response procedures. He did not expect that this assessment would shatter his fixed assumptions and give him a deep appreciation of the gap between "exam-oriented" and "combat-oriented" performance.

At the assessment site, the hands-on equipment operation segment cost many participating commanding officers points. While responding to a "communications link interruption" fault, the examiner temporarily added a "secondary power short circuit" contingency and required participants to resolve it within a time limit. Faced with the unexpected situation, Xu Zhongxian fell back on his established response procedure; his response tempo lagged and his handling lacked flexibility, and he ultimately lost points for exceeding the time limit.

The station's leadership explained that in order to correct the longstanding problems of emphasizing memorization over application and emphasizing procedures over adaptability, they comprehensively overhauled the assessment system, incorporating complex contingencies, sudden equipment conditions, and on-the-spot command into the assessment content. Through a model of "constructing contingencies on site—time-limited analysis and judgment—independent emergency response," they compelled grassroots commanding officers to discard exam-oriented thinking and used combat standards to test and improve capability and quality.

"The purpose of assessment is not to 'fail people' but to 'forge strength.'" The head of the assessment team explained that this assessment adhered to the principle of letting combat lead assessment and letting assessment drive training. No unified standard answers were set; the focus of evaluation was on response logic, the soundness of decisions, and the effectiveness of on-the-spot adaptability, comprehensively testing grassroots commanding officers' integrated capabilities in fault diagnosis, analysis and judgment, coordinated command, and emergency response. Scoring throughout the assessment was strict and on-site supervision was maintained, ensuring that every grassroots commanding officer could demonstrate their true level and accurately identify their capability shortfalls.

Assessment is not the endpoint but a new starting point for remedying deficiencies and building strength. After the assessment concluded, the general station promptly organized after-action review discussions, analyzed the root causes of problems by category and level, established problem lists item by item and refined corrective measures, summarized and distilled practical and effective contingency response methods, and worked in earnest to convert assessment results into training effectiveness.

Original Chinese

解放军报讯黄兴、李佳隆报道：“装备供电问题处置超时，扣10分……”初夏时节，海军某总站组织一场别开生面的站连主官专业考核。与以往不同的是，此次考核没有固定题库、不设标准流程、不唯标准答案，内容覆盖装备操作、应急排故、统筹指挥、临机决断等科目，考官随机设障、临机出题，一些习惯“应试”的基层主官当场“卡壳”。 “以前考核，只要背熟题库里的标准答案、掌握常见特情的处置流程，基本都能顺利过关。”走下考场，某分站站长徐忠贤说，此前备考时，他按照以往经验，把主要精力放在背诵考点、熟悉处置流程上。没想到，此次考核打破了他的固有认知，让他深刻体会到“应试”与“实战”之间的距离。考核现场，装备实操环节让不少参考主官丢了分。处置“通信链路中断”故障时，考官临时增设“次生电源短路”特情，要求参考人员限时处置完成。面对突发情况，徐忠贤沿用固有处置流程应对，处置节奏滞后、应对不够灵活，最终因超时而失分。该站领导介绍，为纠治以往重记忆轻运用、重流程轻应变的积弊，他们全面优化考核体系，将复杂特情、突发工况、临机指挥等科目纳入考核内容，通过“现场构设特情—限时分析研判—独立应急处置”的模式，倒逼基层主官摒弃应试思维，以实战标准检验和提升能力素质。 “考核的目的不是‘考倒’，而是‘练强’。”考核组负责人介绍，此次考核坚持以战领考、以考促训，不设统一标准答案，重点评判处置思路、决策科学性、临场应变效果，全面检验基层主官故障排查、分析研判、统筹指挥、应急处置等综合能力。考核全程从严评分、现场督查，确保每一名基层主官都能在考场上展示真实水平、找准能力短板。考核不是终点，而是补差强能的新起点。考核结束后，该总站迅速组织复盘研讨，分层分类剖析问题根源，逐项建立问题清单、细化整改措施，总结提炼实用管用的特情处置方法，扎扎实实把考核成效转化为练兵实效。