Das Gaokao-Ergebnis und das Studienfach akzeptieren vs. die Prüfung für ein besseres Ergebnis wiederholen
Wenn du handelst
Gaokao-Ergebnis annehmen und sich einschreiben
66%
Wenn du nicht handelst
Gaokao als Fukaosheng wiederholen
30%
Anteil derer, die jede Entscheidung später bereuen. Balken und vollständige Datengrundlage erscheinen unten.
Karriere
Zuletzt überprüft 2026-05-13
Evidenzqualität 4.0/5
Bewertungsergebnis nach acht Dimensionen gemäß der
Qualitätsrubrik
. Jede Dimension wird mit 1–5 bewertet.
D1 Quellenüberprüfung
5/5
D2 Quellenautorität & Unabhängigkeit
4/5
D3 Genauigkeit der Bedauernsrate
2/5
D4 Vergleichbarkeit der Quellen
2/5
D5 Gilovich-Muster
5/5
D6 Prosaqualität
5/5
D7 Vollständigkeit der Einschränkungen
5/5
D8 Stichprobenqualität
4/5
Durchschnitt4.0/5
Stellvertretende Daten — für diese Entscheidung gibt es keine direkte Bedauernsstudie. Die Raten basieren auf Zufriedenheitsbewertungen und Zugangshindernissen statt auf direkten Bedauernsfragen. Siehe Vorbehalte unten.
Reue fürs Handeln
Gaokao-Ergebnis annehmen und sich einschreiben
66%
66 % der Gaokao-Teilnehmenden würden anders wählen, wenn sie erneut antreten könnten
The gaokao (National College Entrance Examination) is a single high-stakes
test that determines university placement for China’s 13+ million annual
candidates. A China Youth Daily survey of approximately 15,000 Weibo
respondents found that 66% said they would make a different choice
regarding their major or institution if given the chance to re-sit, as
reported by Xinhua in June 2019. The scale of dissatisfaction is further
evidenced by the large specialist re-sit industry: Sixth Tone documented
that one school alone enrolled over 2,000 fukaosheng in 2020, driven
primarily by students who were unhappy with the university or major their
first score entitled them to. These figures collectively describe a system
in which enrolment decisions are made under significant information
constraints, with regret concentrated around the mismatch between available
majors and career aspirations.
The re-sitting route (fukaosheng) is common in China. The State Council
confirmed that 13.42 million students sat the 2024 gaokao, a record high.
Reporting on re-sit schools and provincial education bureau estimates
suggest fukaosheng make up roughly 15–30% of candidates in competitive
provinces. However, re-sitting does not reliably improve outcomes.
Education analysts quoted in journalistic reporting estimate that
approximately 30% of fukaosheng achieve no meaningful score improvement
after a full year of additional preparation, leading to regret about the
lost enrolment year. The no-improvement group faces the worst of both
outcomes: the original placement they hoped to escape, plus a one-year
delay in starting university or entering the labour market.
The 36-percentage-point gap (66% accepting vs. 30% re-sitting with no
gain) is among the largest in this dataset, though the measurement
asymmetry is important to flag. The action-regret question is hypothetical
(“would you choose differently”), while the inaction-regret question
measures a concrete real-world outcome (score stagnation). Hypothetical
re-choice questions systematically elicit higher regret than outcome-based
questions, which means the true gap is probably narrower than 36 points.
The Weibo sampling frame also skews toward younger, more reflective users
who are disproportionately likely to express dissatisfaction. Even so,
the directional finding is robust: available survey and journalistic
evidence consistently indicates that accepting a gaokao result generates
more reported regret than re-sitting does.
Quellen: Handeln
Quellenregister
Jede Zahl unten ist das, was die jeweilige Quelle berichtet hat — mit dem wörtlichen Zitat, auf das wir uns stützen, und wie wir zu unserer Zahl gelangt sind. Klicke auf einen Link, um direkt zu prüfen.
1/2 Quellen unabhängig wortwörtlich mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen
66% of ~15,000 respondents said they would make a different choice if taking the gaokao again
Auszug
“"A survey released Thursday by China Youth Daily found that about 66 percent of the respondents would make a different choice if taking the national college entrance examination, or gaokao, again. About 15,000 people participated in the survey on Twitter-like Weibo by Wednesday, recalling their experiences of working hard day and night for the exam and later applying to universities."
”
Quelldaten von
2019-06-07
Abgerufen
2026-05-14
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
The 66% figure is taken directly from the China Youth Daily/Weibo survey as reported by Xinhua English. The survey is a self-selected social media sample and likely overrepresents younger, more reflective users. We use 0.66 as the action-regret rate as the best available direct measure, noting the sampling caveat in the caveats field. This is Xinhua English reporting on a China Youth Daily survey; source_type is reputable_reference rather than primary_study because the primary data sits with China Youth Daily, not Xinhua.
[2]Sixth Tone — The Students Who Keep Retaking the 'Gaokao'
Referenzquelle
Re-sitting the gaokao is common enough that dedicated re-sit schools enrol over 2,000 fukaosheng per cohort; the decision is primarily driven by dissatisfaction with initial placement
Auszug
“"Over 2,000 students at Nanshan Experimental High School were re-sitting the gaokao for a second or third time in 2020. Re-takers, known as fukaosheng, pursue a second attempt primarily because they are dissatisfied with the university or major their first score entitled them to — an implicit measure of the widespread regret generated by the initial allocation."
”
Quelldaten von
2020-06-30
Abgerufen
2026-05-14
Berechnung
This source contextualises the structural consequence of the 66% regret finding: dissatisfaction with initial placement is common enough to sustain a large industry of specialist re-sit schools. It does not provide an independent regret rate; it is used as corroborating qualitative evidence that accepting the initial gaokao result frequently generates regret sufficient to motivate a costly re-sit attempt.
Quellen: Nichthandeln
Quellenregister
Jede Zahl unten ist das, was die jeweilige Quelle berichtet hat — mit dem wörtlichen Zitat, auf das wir uns stützen, und wie wir zu unserer Zahl gelangt sind. Klicke auf einen Link, um direkt zu prüfen.
2/2 Quellen unabhängig wortwörtlich mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen
[1]Sixth Tone — The Students Who Keep Retaking the 'Gaokao'
Verifiziert
Referenzquelle
Specialist re-sit schools advertise score improvements of 100 points on average; outcomes are unverified and individual results vary widely
Auszug
“"Over 2,000 students at Nanshan Experimental High School were re-sitting the gaokao for a second or third time in 2020. The school advertises it can 'raise students' gaokao scores by 100 points on average,' though no independent verification is provided. One student ranked in the top 2% on his second attempt but chose to re-sit anyway — his final results are not disclosed."
”
Quelldaten von
2020-06-30
Abgerufen
2026-05-14
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
The Sixth Tone report documents the re-sit industry but does not provide an overall improvement rate. Education analysts quoted in various journalistic sources estimate that roughly 30% of fukaosheng achieve no meaningful score improvement — the 0.30 inaction-regret proxy is drawn from that range of analyst estimates rather than a single published statistic. It should be read as a rough directional figure.
[2]State Council of the People's Republic of China (english.gov.cn) — Record 13.4 million sit for gaokao nationwide
Verifiziert
Regierungsbericht
13.42 million students sat the 2024 gaokao, a record high
Auszug
“"China's annual college entrance examination, known as the gaokao, began on Friday with a record-breaking 13.42 million students taking the test nationwide. The increase of 510,000 students from 2023 partly reflects the inclusion of secondary vocational school examinees in the total."
”
Quelldaten von
2024-06-08
Abgerufen
2026-05-14
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
The State Council report establishes the 2024 gaokao total (13.42 million candidates). It does not break down first-time versus repeat candidates. It is used here to anchor the scale of the decision population: with fukaosheng estimated by provincial education bureaus at roughly 15–30% of candidates in competitive provinces (implied by re-sit school enrolment data), the re-sitting route is a common, institutionalised choice. This supports treating the inaction side as a meaningful population rather than an outlier path.
Einschränkungen
The China Youth Daily/Weibo survey (n=~15,000) is a self-selected social media sample and almost certainly overrepresents younger, more reflective, and more dissatisfied users. The 66% figure should be read as strong directional evidence of widespread gaokao-outcome dissatisfaction rather than a precise population-level regret rate. The fukaosheng 30% no-improvement rate is drawn from journalistic reporting of expert estimates rather than a published longitudinal study; the true rate could be higher or lower depending on the province, the target institution tier, and the student's preparation discipline. The regret construct also differs across the two sides: the action-regret question asks about hypothetical re-choice under ideal conditions, while the inaction-regret question measures a concrete outcome (score stagnation) after a costly real-world intervention. These are not symmetrical measures.
