Answer No. 9

Here's the first best answer I received for Question #9.

Question 9 was:
What are two similarities in the recruitment of leaders in Mexico's PRI and China's Communist Party?

What is one difference between recruitment in the PRI and recruitment in the Chinese party?

The answer is:
"9. The China’s Communist Party stresses personal connections with those in government or military, known as gaunxi, as a tool that characterizes elite recruitment. The history of loyalty to the party is also an important factor that is evaluated during recruitment, as is class.

"Mexico has a history of similar practices, but recently, with the weakening of PRI, these traditions have begun to erode. The president of Mexico historically would name or a recommended successor of the PRI Party to take their place in the next election after their six year term as president, but this practice was broken in the 1990s. As PRI has lost presidency, some of its policies have modernized, breaking away from the more traditional practices of recruitment as observed by the Chinese Communist Party."

---

This question asks for three things and is worth 3 points.

Similarities between China's Communist Party recruitment and the PRI's recruitment are:

• use of patronage/guanxi
• the importance of "working your way up" in the organization
• the importance of loyalty to the organization and its leaders

Differences between the two methods of recruitment include:

• the evaluation of loyalty to ideology in China
• the identification of very young students with leadership potential through political youth organizations in China
• the importance of success in higher education for Mexican technicos

You would earn points on this question by identifying two of the similarities and one of the differences.

This answer correctly identifies the the use of patronage and party loyalty in the Chinese process of recruiting (identifying) leaders. The second paragraph begins by saying, "Mexico has a history of similar practices..." I am inclined to say that the identifications for China and the inclusion of Mexico in the beginning of the second paragraph are worth 2 points.

However an exam rubric might very well require that the answer specifically "say" that patronage and party loyalty are part of the process within the PRI. This answer does not do that. I can readily imagine that the committee writing the rubric for this question would require the specific description of those practices in Mexico as well as in China. If the rubric did, this answer would not earn those points.

The answer goes on to assert that the PRI has been "breaking away from the more traditional practices..." without specifying how (emphasizing the recruitment of Mexican graduates of prestigious U.S. universities, for example). Without specificity, this answer cannot earn a third point.

---

When you write your responses, be as specific as you can be. Exam rubrics usually require specific examples. Even those questions that ask you to make a generalization about a topic will require specific examples to support the generalization.

---