The national college entrance examinations, or the gaokao, start on Tuesday. Some commonplace problems about the annual event have been put into the spotlight again. Given the recent complaints about the controversial distribution of university admission quotas in some provinces, educational equality deserves a lot more attention.

The wealth gap is the crux of many social problems. Being rich means having access to more social resources, such as quality education. As the resources they hold in hand snowball, the rich, sometimes being able to wield influence on administrative power, will be more competitive and face fewer challenges. Then there are those that lack social mobility, resulting in fewer opportunities for people to move up from the lower classes in the social hierarchy.

Relaxing the political restraints on social mobility used to be crucial to the revitalization of China. But the same problem, triggered by economic elements in recent years, reemerges and is making an impact on educational fairness. From the 1990s, the proportion of rural students with poor family backgrounds in top Chinese universities decreased significantly. According to studies, Peking University has only around 15 percent of students with a rural background. The number was even a bit lower in previous years before Chinese authorities started affirmative action policies to demand top universities enroll more students from rural and remote areas.

As one of the few open channels for social mobility in China, the gaokao, set on the simple threshold of scores, is ostensibly a fair and square system. It gives the same starting line for all players.

But the new problem is that even in fair play, the "upper class" can gain an overwhelmingly competitive leverage because they can get quality education. Capable teachers reside in cities for better income and welfare, and urban parents are able to pay for solid educational programs for their children.

The authorities have clearly noticed the serious problem, and they are putting a lot of effort in to solve it, but many of the measures are questionable. Instead of remedying the imbalance between the rich kids and the poor kids, a lot of measures focused on reducing homework and liberal education. These efforts are necessary if we observe Chinese education from a general perspective, but they will backfire, letting the "upper class" acquire more advantages.

It is crucial that the authorities must show strong and solid support to rural and poor students. On the one hand, sufficient educational investment into rural and remote areas is the long-term endeavor the authorities must insist on. On the other hand, instead of simply adjusting quotas, the government should study and carry out more targeted policies.

Under market economy, every step of reform concerning gaokao must be carried out with prudence. Authorities have to weigh carefully whether the result will benefit the poor students.