A tale of education in China and US

Our son is now in his first year of a Master's degree at the Technical University of Munich. He completed his undergraduate studies at Tongji University in Shanghai.

His mother spent her career in international education, including as a Chinese co-principal, and I, his father, am an expatriate educator and co-principal. We gave him every advantage of an international pathway. Yet he made a deliberate choice: he would stay within China's national system and sit the gaokao.

That decision was not about limitation. It was about values. He embraced his journey through public education and succeeded on the terms of his own culture — on a stage where millions compete with absolute fairness. When the time came to choose a Master's program, he chose Germany. His deep interest in automotive AI and the future of intelligent mobility made TUM — one of the world's leading engineering universities — the natural choice. His story reminds us that each system carries cultural DNA. Each reflects what a society most values. And each can be a path to excellence.

In June, 12.9 million students across China sat for the gaokao. In the US, roughly two million students took the SAT — one of seven annual test dates.

One system compresses judgment into a single week. The other stretches it across four years. Both attempt the same feat: turning teenage potential into a fair admissions decision.

The gaokao is offered once a year. Students get one shot. The SAT and ACT, by contrast, can be retaken multiple times. Most colleges consider only the highest score. 

Strikingly, the SAT and ACT have become increasingly optional. More than 90 percent of US colleges no longer require test scores for fall 2026 admission. In China, the gaokao remains the gatekeeper.

Yet the gaokao is not static. China's "Strong Foundation Plan" recruits exceptional talent in foundational disciplines through a combination of exam scores and university-led assessments. In Zhejiang and Shanghai, the "Three-in-One" model incorporates gaokao results, high school performance, and comprehensive quality evaluations. These reforms signal a direction toward "categorized examinations, comprehensive evaluation and diversified admissions".

China's "3+1+2" model ensures every student is measured against the same yardstick. Students take Chinese, mathematics and a foreign language, then choose physics or history, plus two of four other subjects. The total possible score is 750 points. The US has no national curriculum. Instead, admissions officers weigh the Grade Point Average — a cumulative average over four years. The gaokao rewards peak performance. The US rewards endurance — but with the chaos of uneven school quality and grade inflation.

The real question is not which system is fairer, but why China stakes everything on a single exam. The answer is simple: in this society, parents would rather trust a cold score than a dean's personal judgment.

Here lies the starkest cultural contrast. The US system demands extracurriculars and personal essays. Admissions officers read narratives, searching for "character" and "resilience". This approach reflects John Dewey's pragmatism, emphasizing education as social growth. The US's diversity compels universities to consider "context”. The gaokao excludes these factors entirely, potentially ensuring objectivity.

For most Chinese students, the gaokao determines which university they enter, shaping career prospects and social mobility. For US students, the stakes are spread across multiple decision points. A single rejection is not a dead end. Yet the US system imposes its own pressure — the "admissions arms race" of tutors and consultants — favoring wealthier families.

One could suggest the gaokao asks: What do you know? The US system asks: Who are you? Each question carries cultural DNA — China's faith in measurable meritocracy, and the US's faith in redeemable individuality. Perhaps, neither fully achieves its ideal.

Nonetheless, the most important truth lies not in choosing one system over another, but in recognizing that both are earnest attempts to see the potential in a young person and give them a fair chance at a better future.

My son's journey taught me that excellence is not the property of any single exam. His passion for automotive AI led him to Germany, not because one system was superior, but because he found the right fit.

The gaokao and the holistic review are not rivals. They are mirrors. And in their reflections, we see our shared hope for the next generation.

The author is the co-principal of Wuxi United International School in Wuxi, East China's Jiangsu province. He is also a Fellow of the Institute of Leadership, UK.

The views don't necessarily represent those of China Daily.

If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.