Gaokao

1. Two desks, one exam

Learning goal: Say which tasks the Ministry of Education's examination body handles and which fall to each province.

The gaokao is the unified national examination used by regular higher education institutions in China. The 2025 Ministry of Education regulations assign tasks to different bodies. The Ministry's examination authority writes the national-paper questions and reference answers. Provincial admissions committees do the same for provincial papers. Universities may be authorised to set their own tests (S3).

The same regulations put the marking of national and provincial answer sheets under each province's admissions committee. A province may draw up detailed marking rules from the scoring guidance, based on how candidates actually answered. So a score is produced at provincial level, even when the questions are national (S3).

The 2026 notice names provincial admissions committees as the body responsible for organising the exam, handling the exam environment and keeping order in their own province. It names universities as responsible for their own admissions work (S4). The system has a national layer and a provincial layer, and many details sit in the provincial layer.

Keep one habit from the start. When a rule concerns a calendar detail, a score table or a form, check whether it is national or provincial before quoting it. This course labels provincial variation each time.

Source basis: S3, S4. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A candidate says, 'Because I sat the national paper, the national authority graded my script.' Is that right?

1. Check S3: marking is organised by the provincial admissions committee.
2. Paper authorship and marking are separate tasks.
3. So the claim mixes the two tasks and is not correct as stated.

Mental model: The national layer writes national papers; provinces organise marking and run admissions detail.

Common trap: Assuming a national paper means one national marking and score process.

2. The two-day clock

Learning goal: Read the published exam timetable and mark what is national and what varies.

The 2025 regulations give the national timetable. The national exam started on June 7. On June 7, Chinese ran from 9:00 to 11:30 and mathematics from 15:00 to 17:00. On June 8, the combined arts or combined science paper ran from 9:00 to 11:30, and the foreign language from 15:00 to 17:00. Where the foreign-language test has a listening part, it should generally take place before the written paper (S3, item 17).

A subject whose name matches a national subject must follow the national timing. Provincial-level exams and university tests are scheduled by the provincial committee or the university under Ministry requirements (S3). That is why candidates in different provinces can sit a provincially set subject on different days.

The regulations let reform provinces that use the Ministry's foreign-language papers hold the first of two foreign-language exams on January 8, with the second on June 8. Provinces that set their own papers may arrange another sitting on a date other than June 8 (S3, item 18). The timetable above is the 2025 regulation, not a promise for every future year.

For 2026, a Xinhua report on the Ministry's notice says the national exam starts on June 7 (S11). The notice itself defers operational rules to the attachment of the 2025 notice (S4). Check your province's exam authority for the exact subject timetable in the year you sit.

Source basis: S3, S4, S11. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

Using the 2025 timetable, how many minutes of examination were scheduled on June 7?

1. Chinese runs 9:00 to 11:30, which is 150 minutes.
2. Mathematics runs 15:00 to 17:00, which is 120 minutes.
3. 150 plus 120 is 270 minutes.

Mental model: National timetable for same-name subjects; provincial or university timing for the rest; check the year.

Common trap: Treating one year's timetable as permanent.

3. From 3+X to six choices

Learning goal: Describe the 2014 reform framework for gaokao subjects and what it replaced.

An older Ministry page describes the subject setting as '3+X'. Chinese, mathematics and a foreign language are compulsory, and X is one or more of physics, chemistry, biology, politics, history and geography, or combined papers, set according to the university applied to. That page dates from 2005 and is context only, not a current rule (S12).

The State Council's 2014 opinions set out a different design for pilot provinces. The total score comes from three gaokao subjects (Chinese, mathematics, foreign language) plus three high-school proficiency-test subjects. The three core subjects keep their existing weighting and are not split into arts and science. The foreign language is offered twice. The three proficiency subjects are chosen by the candidate from politics, history, geography, physics, chemistry and biology, in light of university requirements and personal strengths (S1).

Shanghai and Zhejiang issued the first pilot plans, applying to students entering year one of upper secondary school in autumn 2014 (S1). The opinions say universities should publish their subject requirements in advance and may use the comprehensive-quality evaluation as a reference (S1).

The 2014 text is a national framework. Each province drafts its own plan, files it with the Ministry and publishes it (S1). Provinces can differ in exam timing and scoring. When you read advice about 'the new gaokao', ask which province and which cohort it describes.

Source basis: S1, S12. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

Under the 2014 framework, how many high-school proficiency-test subjects count toward a candidate's total, besides the three core gaokao subjects?

1. S1 says total = three gaokao subjects plus three proficiency-test subjects.
2. The three counted subjects are chosen from six listed subjects.
3. So the count is three.

Mental model: The 2014 framework replaced fixed arts or science tracks with core subjects plus chosen subjects, province by province.

Common trap: Assuming every province adopted the same combination rule.

4. Choose one, then two

Learning goal: Explain the 3+1+2 structure, count its combinations and state the total score.

The 3+1+2 model, as reported by the Ministry of Education for eight provinces in 2019, works like this. The '3' is Chinese, mathematics and foreign language, which every candidate sits. The '1' is a first-choice subject: candidates choose physics or history. The '2' is two re-selected subjects chosen from chemistry, biology, politics and geography (S5).

In those eight provinces the total is 750 points. Chinese, mathematics and foreign language use raw scores and are worth 150 each. Physics or history uses the raw score and is worth 100. The two re-selected subjects are scored by a conversion into grades and are worth 100 each (S5). Check: 3 times 150 plus 3 times 100 equals 750.

The Ministry's 2021 report on seven further provinces describes the same 3+1+2 structure for students entering high school in autumn 2021, with no arts and science split from 2024, and states a 750-point total (S6). Do not generalise 750 to every province without checking. The reports describe the provinces they name.

The counting is simple. There are two choices for the first subject. For the re-selected pair there are six choices (chemistry-biology, chemistry-politics, chemistry-geography, biology-politics, biology-geography, politics-geography). Two times six is twelve combinations. The Ministry's account says the physics-or-history first choice reflects those subjects' foundational roles for natural-science and humanities-and-social-science programmes (S5).

Source basis: S5, S6. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A student picks physics, then chemistry with geography. Which part of the structure is each choice, and what is the highest possible total from the three chosen subjects?

1. First choice: physics, which counts on its raw score.
2. Re-selected pair: chemistry and geography, counted after grade conversion.
3. Each chosen subject has a 100-point maximum, so 300 points at most.

Mental model: 3+1+2 means three core subjects, one of physics or history, and two from four others; 750 points where S5 applies.

Common trap: Using 750 as a national constant for every province and year.

5. Why 80 is not 80

Learning goal: Explain why converted grades exist and what a conversion must preserve.

In the eight-province plans reported in 2019, the two re-selected subjects are not added as raw scores. An official from Liaoning quoted in the Ministry report explains why. Candidates with the same first choice may select different subjects from politics, geography, chemistry and biology. Papers differ in difficulty and the group of candidates sitting each subject differs, so raw scores are not comparable (S5).

The report's own example runs like this. Candidate A chose politics and candidate B chose chemistry, and both scored 80. A ranked 100th among all politics candidates. B ranked 1000th among all chemistry candidates. Simply adding the raw scores would not be fair. The conversion turns raw scores into grade scores, and the report says candidates' order within a subject stays the same after conversion (S5).

That is the principle to keep. A conversion keeps each subject's rank order. It does not keep the numbers. The report says provinces explored different scoring methods (S5), so this course gives no universal conversion table. Each province publishes its own method, and a candidate should read it.

The example below uses invented ranks and numbers of candidates, labelled as such. The idea is that a rank near the top of a larger group is a stronger position than the raw score alone shows.

Source basis: S5. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

Two candidates in a province score the same raw mark in different re-selected subjects. What should a fair conversion do before the marks are added?

1. Raw marks are not comparable across subjects, per S5.
2. A conversion keeps each candidate's rank within the subject.
3. It then maps those ranks onto a common scale before adding.

Mental model: Converted grades keep rank within a subject and make subjects comparable; each province publishes its own method.

Common trap: Quoting one province's conversion table as a national rule.

6. Bonus points, narrowed

Learning goal: State the 2014 changes to bonus points and keep national and provincial items apart.

Bonus points add marks to a candidate's score for recognised circumstances. The 2014 State Council opinions told provinces to cut bonus items sharply and control them tightly. They said sports and arts specialist bonus items would be cancelled from 2015. Local bonus items are set by provincial governments and filed with the Ministry, and in principle apply only to universities in the same province and to candidates in that province (S1).

The December 2014 Ministry opinions (Jiaoxue [2014] No. 17) set the details. From January 1, 2015, local sports, arts, science and technology, 'merit student' and 'outstanding student cadre' bonus items were cancelled. The retained national items it lists are: children of martyrs; minority candidates from border, mountain, pastoral and minority-concentrated areas; returned overseas Chinese, children of overseas Chinese or returned overseas Chinese, and Taiwan-origin candidates; discharged soldiers who found work on their own; and veterans who earned second-class merit or above or a high-level honorary title during service (S7).

The same opinions say provinces must keep improving their policies and may not widen the scope of national items on their own (S7). The State Council text requires qualification checks, public notice and supervision (S1). This course states no bonus point values, because the values are set provincially and change. Check your province's current notice.

A bonus is not automatic. Eligibility has to be certified, the item has to still exist in the province, and the university's admission rules decide whether and how the points are used.

Source basis: S1, S7. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A candidate won a local science and technology competition. Does the old local bonus rule still add points?

1. S7 cancelled local science and technology bonus items from January 1, 2015.
2. So that item no longer adds points.
3. Other recognition, such as university tests, follows separate published procedures. Check them.

Mental model: Most local bonus items were cancelled from 2015; a short national list remains; provinces set the rest.

Common trap: Quoting an old local bonus rule from a forum or older guide.

7. Special channels, same exam

Learning goal: Describe the Strong Base Plan's score rule and the special plans for rural and poorer areas.

The Ministry's 2020 opinions began the Strong Base Plan, a pilot in selected universities for basic-subject admissions. It selects candidates who are committed to serving major national strategic needs and have strong overall quality or exceptional ability in basic subjects (S8). The 2026 notice asks for the Strong Base Plan and similar talent projects to be run together and for university-run tests to be tightly regulated (S4).

The score rule is exact in S8. A candidate sits the national gaokao and the university's assessment. The university combines the gaokao score, the assessment result and the comprehensive-quality evaluation in proportions, and the gaokao share may not be lower than 85 percent. For a very small number of candidates with outstanding ability, a university may set published conditions for exceptional shortlisting and admission. Then the gaokao score should in principle not fall below the province's lowest control line for the first undergraduate batch (S8).

The 2025 notice covers special plans for candidates from rural and poorer areas at key universities. It asks provinces to bring those plans into parallel-choice admission where possible. It also says candidates admitted to a special plan in an earlier year who gave up the place or left lose eligibility for it (S2). The 2026 notice keeps the policy line on regional and rural access (S4).

These routes sit inside the same exam system. The gaokao score stays central, but later steps differ by programme. Read the university's own published rules before applying.

Source basis: S2, S4, S8. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A candidate has a gaokao score equal to 80 percent of full marks and an assessment equal to 90 percent. The university uses the lowest permitted gaokao weight of 85 percent and 15 percent for assessment. What composite results?

1. Gaokao part: 0.85 x 80 = 68.
2. Assessment part: 0.15 x 90 = 13.5.
3. Composite: 68 + 13.5 = 81.5.

Mental model: Strong Base and special plans sit on top of the gaokao; Strong Base needs at least an 85 percent gaokao weight.

Common trap: Assuming a special channel replaces the national exam.

8. Volunteer forms and parallel choices

Learning goal: Explain how choices are ordered, why scores come first and what parallel admission changes.

The 2014 State Council opinions say candidates should fill in their choices after gaokao scores are announced. They also call for improving parallel-choice admission and gradually cancelling admission batches, with trials of batch reform from 2015 in provinces able to run them (S1). The 2026 notice asks authorities to protect candidates' right to fill in choices themselves, keep personal information safe, prevent choices from being altered and warn against admissions scams (S4).

The Sunshine Gaokao Q&A on the Ministry's site gives parallel-choice advice. Position your choices using your provincial rank and past admission data. Set a gradient with some reach, some steady and some safe choices. Order them by your own preference. Read each university's admission rules to check that you qualify. In parallel admission the file goes out in one round. A candidate who does not meet the conditions and does not accept major reassignment can be returned and left with the collection round or the next batch (S9).

Some provinces use institution-major groups, so a choice is a university plus a group of majors. The 2026 notice asks universities, where groups are used, to put closely related majors together and keep the number of majors per group reasonable, so more candidates get a major they chose. It also says universities should in principle admit by major and keep broad-category admission small (S4).

Rules about the number of choices, batches and form timing vary by province. Do not copy a rule from another province's forum thread. Your provincial exam authority's published schedule decides your dates and form.

Source basis: S1, S4, S9. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A candidate lists a university first and refuses major reassignment. Their score is below the cut for their chosen major but above the university's general line. What is the risk?

1. S9: without reassignment, a candidate who misses the major's conditions can be returned.
2. The candidate then waits for a collection round or the next batch.
3. Lower choices do not rescue that round, so the design of the choice list matters.

Mental model: Choices come after scores; parallel admission sends the file once in choice order; read the rules; provinces differ.

Common trap: Treating the first choice as a guarantee of consideration everywhere.

9. Rules on the day and after

Learning goal: State the main conduct rules and score-handling rules in the Ministry's materials.

The Ministry's 2026 questions and answers say that phones, smart watches, bands and smart glasses must not be taken into the exam room. A candidate who takes in a device that can send or receive information is treated as cheating, whether or not it is used. Photographing papers or answer sheets with a phone, or posting questions online, may be a crime and be referred to the judicial authorities (S10).

The penalties named there: cheating makes all subject scores invalid, and a candidate may be barred from the gaokao for one to three years. In especially serious cases the bar covers all national education exams for one to three years. Violations are recorded in the national education exam integrity file (S10). Rooms have full video monitoring and recording, and recordings may be reviewed after the exam (S10).

Score handling has its own rules. Provincial admissions offices may give a candidate's score only to the candidate and the receiving universities, except for cases set by the Ministry. They may not publicise 'top scorer', 'pass rate', 'upper-line rate' or 'admission rate' content (S3, item 23).

On eligibility, the 2026 notice tells authorities to deal firmly with 'gaokao migration', meaning gaining eligibility through irregular registration moves, empty registrations, improper household transfers or false registration documents. It also asks provinces to simplify procedures for eligible children of migrant workers to sit the exam where they live (S4). Separately, a candidate working or studying away from the registration province, or unable to sit there for force majeure, may apply to sit in another province if both use the same paper. Marking and admission stay with the registration province (S3, item 22).

Source basis: S3, S4, S10. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A candidate carries a smart watch into the room, switched off and never used. Is this cheating?

1. S10 says carrying a transmitting or receiving device in counts as cheating whether or not it is used.
2. Switched off is not an exception in the text.
3. So the candidate is treated as cheating.

Mental model: Devices in the room count as cheating; scores go only to the candidate and universities; gaining eligibility by migration is targeted.

Common trap: Believing an unused device is harmless.

10. Putting the pieces in order

Learning goal: Combine scoring, subjects and choices into a planning sequence and name the sources to check.

The 2026 notice tells schools not to organise early subject selection. They must teach the full national curriculum and give proper guidance so students choose subjects according to national needs and their own interests (S4). The 2014 opinions told universities to state their subject requirements and their use of the comprehensive-quality evaluation, and to announce them in advance (S1). The Ministry's Q&A points candidates to each university's admission rules for exact conditions such as single-subject and physical requirements (S9).

A workable order of questions follows from those sources. First, which subject choices does the province's plan allow? Second, do the target universities' published rules require a particular subject? Third, how will the score be built? It may be a 750-point model, as in the eight provinces reported in S5, or something different where you live. Fourth, which choice format does the province use? Fifth, which dates apply? Dates and forms come from the provincial authority.

Two safeguards come from S4 and S10. Use official channels. S10 warns against believing unofficial claims and against spending effort on guessed questions. S4 asks authorities to remind candidates to protect personal information and guard against admission scams. A service that promises a place or claims inside access is a warning sign.

This course gives the national framework. It cannot give your province's timetable, conversion tables, number of choices or bonus values for your year. Use the framework to ask better questions, then read the provincial publications.

Source basis: S1, S4, S5, S9, S10. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A university's published rules require physics as a first-choice subject for a major. A candidate in a 3+1+2 province has chosen history. What is the first step?

1. Check the university's rules for that major, since S9 sends candidates to them.
2. Check whether the requirement applies to the programme or the whole university.
3. If it applies, look at other programmes or universities instead of hoping to be reassigned.

Mental model: Plan in order: province plan, university rules, subject choice, choice order; use official channels.

Common trap: Planning from a national summary and skipping the provincial publication.

11. Score arithmetic under the 750-point model

Learning goal: Add a candidate's subject scores into a 750-point total and see how much of the total each part holds.

Lesson 4 gave the structure. This lesson makes you do the sum. In the eight-province plans reported in 2019, Chinese, mathematics and foreign language use raw scores with a 150-point maximum each. Physics or history uses its raw score with a 100-point maximum. The two re-selected subjects are converted grade scores, each with a 100-point maximum. The total maximum is 750 (S5).

The core three can contribute at most 450 points, which is 60 percent of the total. The three chosen subjects can contribute at most 300, which is 40 percent. The shares tell you where a given gain matters most. Ten extra points in mathematics adds ten to the total, and so does ten extra converted points in chemistry, but the two are earned in different ways and the converted points depend on rank (S5).

Use the sliders to build an example candidate. The numbers are invented. Another province, or a later cohort, may use a different model, so treat 750 as the figure for the provinces named in S5 and S6 only.

Source basis: S5, S6. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A candidate scores 130, 120 and 140 in the core three, 85 in physics, and converted grades of 90 and 88. What is the total?

1. Core three: 130 + 120 + 140 = 390
2. First choice: 85
3. Re-selected: 90 + 88 = 178
4. Total: 390 + 85 + 178 = 653 out of 750

Mental model: Core 450 plus chosen 300 is 750; only the re-selected pair is converted.

Common trap: Applying the 750-point model to a province whose plan is different.

12. Counting the paths

Learning goal: Count subject combinations under the two designs in the course and see how the count grows with the size of the pool.

Counting combinations is arithmetic, and it shows why the designs feel different. Under the 3+1+2 model of S5, a candidate chooses one of two first-choice subjects and a pair from a pool of four. The pairs are chemistry-biology, chemistry-politics, chemistry-geography, biology-politics, biology-geography and politics-geography: six pairs. Twelve combinations in total.

The 2014 State Council framework in S1 is different: the three chosen proficiency subjects come from a pool of six (politics, history, geography, physics, chemistry and biology). Picking three from six gives 20 combinations, by the usual count of six times five times four, divided by six. This is arithmetic on the framework's description. Each province's own plan sets what is allowed, so the number of permitted paths where you live may be smaller.

The general pattern: choosing 2 from a pool of k gives k times (k minus 1) divided by 2 pairs, and choosing 3 from k gives k times (k minus 1) times (k minus 2) divided by 6. Add one subject to a pool and the count rises quickly, which is one reason designs with larger pools give schools more timetabling work.

Source basis: S1, S5. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A pool has five subjects and you choose two. How many pairs?

1. k = 5
2. 5 x 4 / 2
3. = 10 pairs

Mental model: Combinations multiply fast; the model and the province decide what is allowed.

Common trap: Treating the arithmetic count as the number of paths a province allows.

13. Rank, group size and position

Learning goal: Compare candidates by position in their own subject group, not by raw score alone.

Lesson 5 explained that raw scores in different subjects are not comparable. The idea behind a converted grade is position. A rank of 100 means different things in a group of 5,000 and a group of 20,000. The simple measure is rank divided by group size, shown as a percent from the top. A smaller percent is a stronger position (S5).

The Ministry report's own example had two candidates with the same raw score of 80. One ranked 100th among all politics candidates and the other 1,000th among all chemistry candidates. Without the group sizes you cannot tell who stands higher. The conversion keeps order inside each subject, so a better rank never gets a worse grade (S5).

The lab uses invented numbers. It does not reproduce any province's conversion. Provinces explored different scoring methods (S5), and the real tables are published by the provincial authority.

Source basis: S5. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

Rank 100 in a group of 5,000, and rank 400 in a group of 20,000. Who stands higher?

1. First: 100 / 5,000 = 2.0% from the top
2. Second: 400 / 20,000 = 2.0% from the top
3. They stand at the same position in their groups

Mental model: Position in the subject group is what a conversion tracks, not the raw number.

Common trap: Comparing raw scores across subjects with different groups.

14. The 85 percent floor in the Strong Base Plan

Learning goal: Use the Ministry's stated rule to check a proposed mix of the exam score and the university's assessment.

The Strong Base Plan, described in the Ministry's 2020 opinions, combines three things: the national gaokao score, the university's own assessment and the comprehensive-quality evaluation. The rule in S8 is exact on one point: the gaokao share may not be lower than 85 percent (S8).

That means the other parts together, the assessment and the comprehensive-quality evaluation, can make up at most 15 percent. A mix of 90 and 10 passes. A mix of 80 and 20 breaks the rule. For a very small number of exceptionally strong candidates, a university may set published conditions for a different route, and the gaokao score should in principle not fall below the province's lowest control line for the first undergraduate batch (S8).

The lab simplifies by combining the assessment and the quality evaluation into one number. The scores are invented percentages. Real combinations depend on the university's published method, so read it before relying on any estimate.

Source basis: S8. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

A university proposes 80 percent gaokao and 20 percent assessment. Does it meet the S8 floor?

1. Gaokao share is 80
2. The floor is 85
3. 80 is below 85
4. The mix is not allowed under S8

Mental model: The gaokao share may not be below 85 percent; the rest is capped at 15.

Common trap: Using the exceptional-route condition as if it applied to all candidates.

15. Reading an official notice

Learning goal: Take a ministry notice apart so you know who issued it, when, to whom and how firmly.

The course rests on official notices and opinions, and reading them well is a skill. Start with the issuer and the document number. The 2026 admissions notice is Jiaoxue [2026] No. 1, dated January 13, 2026 (S4). The 2025 notice is Jiaoxue [2025] No. 1 (S2). The 2014 State Council opinions are Guofa [2014] No. 35 (S1). The number and the year tell you which cohort and which year's rules you are reading.

Next, check the scope. Does the text name provinces, as S5 and S6 do for the eight and seven provinces? Does it say universities, provinces or schools? A rule for universities is not a rule you can apply to your own school. Finally, weigh the wording. A text that says authorities should do something is a direction to authorities. A rule that says a share may not be lower than a number is a hard limit. In the course the phrase in principle marks a default with room for exceptions.

Last, note secondary sources. S11 is a news report of a Ministry notice, and S12 is a historical page from 2005. Treat them as leads, not as the current rule. When a news site and a ministry page disagree, the ministry page wins. The course is a framework for questions, and the provincial publications give the answers for your year.

Source basis: S1, S2, S4, S5, S6, S8, S11, S12. Cases, names and exercise values marked as examples are original teaching material.

Worked example

You read that provinces must change a rule, citing a news report of a notice. What do you do?

1. Find the Ministry notice the report cites
2. Check the date and cohort
3. Check the scope and wording
4. Use the notice, not the news report

Mental model: Read the issuer, the date and cohort, the scope and the strength of the wording.

Common trap: Treating a news report or an old page as the current rule.