Educational institutions maintain a hierarchical system for higher-performing students, who receive the best teachers and resources
China is trying to dismantle one of the most entrenched hierarchies in its schools: the classification of students into classes by academic level.
Under new policies implemented in 2026, education authorities are requiring that students be allocated to classes randomly and that teachers be distributed equally. The rules explicitly prohibit the creation of “key classes”elite classes that have long concentrated the best students and teaching resources.
The reforms are part of a broader effort to reduce inequality in compulsory education, which includes primary and secondary education. But they are colliding with a deeply rooted system that for years has shaped how families compete for advantages and how schools manage students.
HIDDEN HIERARCHY
The so-called key classes function as internal academic levels. Extracurricular training institutions in Guangzhou, south China’s Guangdong province, categorize key classes into higher level, 1st level, near 1st level and 2nd level.
In the entire industrial megalopolis, there are only around 12,000 places in 2nd level classes or higher, representing around 10% of the total number of students. This ratio closely reflects the high school entrance exam “cutoff line,” or zhongkao, which is determined by ranking students citywide, with the top 10 percent as the cutoff for admission to the city’s and province’s top high schools.
Performance data shows a clear correlation between these class levels and exam results. The average zhongkao scores of students in 2nd tier or higher classes tend to cluster around the cutoff line, while students in regular classes score significantly lower.
Students in elite classes generally advance more quickly in the content, as teachers dedicate more time to teaching than to managing the classroom. Teachers in lower-level classes, on the other hand, report spending a good part of their classes maintaining order.
Proponents of this hierarchy argue that it ensures that the best rise to the top, while critics point to its blatant potential for corruption and relative neglect of students in lower-level classes.
The result is a self-feeding system, in which students from elite elementary school classes enter the most prestigious high schools and have a better chance of getting into the best universities.
SELECTION BEYOND THE RULES
Although the allocation of students to classes must be random, historically schools select students before or after enrollment.
A parallel system, based on CVs with competition certificates, English exams, Mathematics Olympiad awards and other credentials – some officially prohibited – serves as an indicator in an opaque and informal selection process.
Even more decisive are the so-called “secret exams”organized through informal channels, which allow schools to identify the best students in advance. Placement tests after enrollment can further classify students into different levels.
“We only believe in our own results”said a teacher.
Information about these secret competitions and exams is highly sought after. But after official repressions, it is difficult to obtain them. “There is a whole set of codes corresponding to different schools and activities, which outsiders cannot understand”said a father in Guangzhou.
REFORM ARRIVES
On February 4, the Education Department of Guangdong Province took the initiative by publishing a document that clearly corrects the practice of “talent selection,” requiring the implementation of balanced classes during the compulsory education stage and strictly prohibiting the creation of priority classes.
Guangzhou authorities announced on April 22 that class allocation would be centralized on a single platform, which would randomly distribute students and teachers. The process will be supervised and publicly recorded, with results released immediately.
The objective is to eliminate the concentration of resources and stratification associated with priority classes, in addition to reducing the intense competition surrounding the distribution of places.
Proponents argue that students should not be separated into fixed classes at such an early stage. Critics, however, worry that classes with students of different ability levels can make teaching difficult, with high-achieving students receiving insufficient challenge and others struggling to keep up.
The nearby city of Shenzhen offers a preview of how the reforms could unfold.
In 2025, Shenzhen abolished key classes and implemented random student allocation across hundreds of schools in the city. Administratively, the policy was strict: selection channels were closed and the random allocation of classes was carried out under public supervision.
But the underlying dynamic has not disappeared.
Some parents report a reduction in pressure, with fewer rankings and exams. Others say the stratification has resurfaced in different forms, including extracurricular “elite training” and informal grouping of high-performing students.
Instead of eliminating differentiation, the reforms appear to have dispersed it.
ADAPTATION AND INDIRECT EFFECTS
Even before the policy fully takes effect in Guangzhou, behavior is already changing.
Some parents are investing more in private lessons outside of school, enrolling their children in advanced courses that simulate the rigor of elite schools. “If random student allocation really happens, we will rely more on external training.”declared a father.
At the same time, authorities are stepping up controls in other areas, including banning early recruitment by elite schools and restricting the use of external test results. This has made the return on investment in advance preparation less predictable, increasing parental anxiety.
With traditional pathways disrupted, families are looking for new ways to take advantage – often without clear signs of what works.
NEW INEQUALITIES EMERGE
The change is also affecting the real estate market.
With selection based on social class less predictable, some families are placing greater emphasis on school districts, seeking access to schools with stronger student groups overall. Property prices in Shenzhen’s key educational zones have risen in recent months, reflecting renewed demand.
Realtors say parents are paying more attention not just to the quality of the school, but also to the broader environment — including peer groups and community characteristics.
In practice, competition is moving from the classroom to the neighborhood.
THE LIMITS OF REFORM
Education authorities argue that the true “teaching according to aptitude” it must be delivered in coeducational classrooms, supported by differentiated instruction and extracurricular programs.
In practice, however, implementing these approaches on a large scale is difficult. Some schools are experimenting with class switching, grouping students by level for specific subjects or offering targeted extracurricular programs. These methods require significant coordination and resources, and their effectiveness varies.
For many parents, the concern is not simply whether the stratification exists, but how transparent it is.
In the old system, the paths –although uneven– were relatively clear. In the new one, they are more uncertain.
“Before we knew what we were preparing for”said one father. “Now we don’t know where to focus our efforts”these.
This report was originally in English by Caixin Global on May 7, 2026. It was translated and republished by Poder360 under mutual content sharing agreement.
