College Admissions Contrasts China and the U.S.

by Dr.Jian Jim Wang

Three days in one early July， 34 years ago， remain deeply rooted in my memory as some of the most memorable moments of my life. I knew that the gaokao was a three-day test that would have more impact on the future trajectory of my life than anything else I could imagine. Two decades later， I watched my son， born and raised in the United States， graduate from a private high school in New Jersey. Comparing my sons college application process with my own， I was continually awed by the differences， even after helping many high-school seniors apply for college.

The key character of gaokao is “kao，”meaning “test.” The sole college admission determiner in China and some other Asian countries such as South Korea and Japan is the overall score on the final test from high school. In Chinas gaokao， you could miss your dream school by one point on the 750-point scale. One incorrect answer could easily place you behind several thousand students in your gaokao judiciary district， typically the province or the city in which the student resides. To maximize fairness， the Chinese college admission system focuses on a single or a small set of quantitatively measurable parameters to evaluate talent based on a set of national exams which typically last a couple of days.

Some Chinese people call the SAT（Scholastic Assessment Test） the “American gaokao.” To be fair， this is a far-off comparison. Although SAT scores are an important component of a students college application profile， they have a far less crucial role. The academic evaluation is only one part of holistic evaluation criteria considered by the U.S. college admission system. And the SAT score is only one number of many on a students academic evaluation. The academic evaluation also includes a students complete high-school transcript and scores on other standardized tests such as AP （Advanced Placement） exams. Another key difference is that a student can take the SAT or other standardized tests multiple times， which significantly reduces the pressure on the test taker.

The college admission processes in China and the United States represent opposite sides of the spectrum. Countries like Canada and Britain are somewhere in between. With an aim toward maximum equality， Chinas evaluation is based solely on final academic tests. In contrast， the U.S. college admission system evaluates applicants based on a comprehensive approach considering not only test scores but also various other factors such as high-school curriculum and transcript， teacher recommendations， community service， leadership， extracurricular activities， and personal interests.

A few fundamental reasons inspired the United States to adopt this evaluation method. Recognizing that a successful society is based on diverse talents and that students may have wide-ranging talents which are impossible to judge with a single test， the institutions argue that society needs leaders and workers who can maximize contributions to the advancement of society across all fields. Administrators recognize that potential contributions may not correlate with test scores. To achieve greater fairness， the Chinese gaokao is evaluated based on regions and the test takersresidency. Even so， economic imbalance within a region can still play a significant role. The United States faces similar challenges in its evaluation methodology. A holistic evaluation method also inevitably gives a hefty advantage to students from affluent families who can hire tutors， coaches， and mentors to help develop not only academics but also extracurricular activities. This is the reason colleges attempt to judge each applicant with consideration of their school and so-called individual environment.

Poised at opposite ends of the spectrum， China and the United States would both like to move towards the middle to compensate for each others weaknesses in respective evaluation methods. In recent years， the debate about the soundness of Affirmative Action policy has intensified in the United States. The current Affirmative Action policy in the United States was introduced in 1961 to combat racial discrimination in the recruiting process. The concept was later expanded to address gender discrimination. While those considerations offer certain new angles to fairness in many cases， many argue that they introduce many non-quantitatively-definable factors which make the possibility of fair evaluation even more questionable.

Everything leads back to fundamentals. The goal of elite higher education institutions is to cultivate future leaders who can generate a positive impact in various fields such as business， industry， science， art， research， and medicine. Neither the Chinese nor the American evaluation method is perfect. The key is how to best identify diverse talent， encourage students to pursue a well-rounded education， develop interests and passions， and engineer fairer evaluation criteria. The college admission process in both the East and the West will continue to face challenges.