Gaokao Application Planner (高考志愿)

Choosing universities after the gaokao is one of the biggest decisions a Chinese family makes, under time pressure and with a lot of paid advice of mixed quality. The method that works is well understood: plan by provincial rank, not score; build a list of reach, match and safe choices from official data; check subject requirements; and decide between a better university and a preferred major on purpose. This skill applies that method with the family's data.

Write the output in Simplified Chinese unless asked otherwise.

What This Skill Produces

• The student's position: rank, the comparable rank in previous years, and what it means
• A 冲 / 稳 / 保 list: each choice with past admission ranks, the margin, and the reason
• A subject-requirement check under the province's gaokao model
• A risk check of the whole list: gaps, clustering, adjustment (调剂) exposure
• Family questions: the trade-offs to settle before submitting

Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:

• Province, year, and the gaokao model there (traditional, 3+3, or 3+1+2)
• Score and provincial rank (位次), and the subjects taken
• Batch and the number of choices allowed in that province
• Preferences: majors, cities, distance from home, cost, public versus private, postgraduate plans
• Historical admission data: from the provincial education examination authority's official publications or the university's admissions site. If the family has none, say what to download, and do not invent numbers

Framework

1. Use rank, not score. Scores move with paper difficulty; ranks are comparable across years. Convert the student's rank to the equivalent score in each of the last three years using the official 一分一段表.
2. Read past data by rank. For each candidate university and major group, list the lowest admitted rank in each of the last three years.
3. Band the choices:
   • 冲 (reach): past lowest rank slightly better than the student's
   • 稳 (match): past lowest rank close to the student's
   • 保 (safe): past lowest rank clearly below the student's, in every recent year A typical spread is about a fifth reach, half match, the rest safe; adjust to the number of choices allowed.
4. Check requirements: required subjects, physical requirements for some majors, single-subject score thresholds, language for foreign-language majors.
5. Adjustment (服从调剂): explain the risk of being moved to an unwanted major, and of being rejected (退档) if adjustment is refused.
6. University or major: make the family decide on purpose which matters more, and order choices accordingly.

Output Format

高考志愿规划：[省份] [年份]，位次 [位次]

一、位次分析：等效分数（近三年）与含义

二、志愿表 | 序号 | 类别 冲/稳/保 | 院校 / 专业组 | 近三年最低位次 | 与本人位次差 | 选科要求 | 理由 |

三、整体风险检查：梯度是否合理、是否扎堆、调剂风险

四、家庭需要商量的问题

End verbatim: "以上为基于历史数据的规划建议，不保证录取。请以省教育考试院和高校当年公布的招生计划与政策为准，并在截止前核对所有信息。"

Quality Checks

• Planning uses rank, with past ranks from official sources named
• Every choice has three years of data or is flagged as having less
• Safe choices are safe in every recent year, not on average
• Subject requirements are checked for every choice
• No admission is promised; the disclaimer appears verbatim

Anti-Patterns

• Planning by raw score.
• Inventing admission data. Every rank comes from an official source the family can check.
• A list with no safe choices, or all choices clustered in one band.
• Ignoring adjustment risk. It decides outcomes for many students.
• Promising admission. No one can.

Example Trigger Phrases

• "我在河南，今年考了 610 分，位次 2 万左右，帮我填志愿。"
• "冲稳保怎么排比较合理？"
• "想学计算机，选好学校还是好专业？"
• "Help us plan gaokao university applications."