# 23. Which skills are worth learning? This section deals with money and time. The second item also looks at mortality rates. The first six items address one main question: should you keep studying? Item 1 explains which options the law rules out. Item 2 explores how education affects lifespan. Item 3 shows what level of schooling most people in China have attained. Item 4 lists financial aid available when tuition is unaffordable. Item 5 describes alternatives if you don’t get into regular high school. Item 6 turns the “study versus work” dilemma into a simple calculation you can do yourself. The next seven items tackle another question: once you decide to learn something, how do you pick the right skill? Official statistics on ### 1. There’s no option for anyone under 16 to “get a job”: any employer who hires them faces a fine of $5000 per month, and those willing to do so are breaking the law - Cost: Zero. It takes just a minute to figure out how old you are. - In plain terms: Most kids finish junior high at 15 or 16, right at this age threshold. Hiring anyone under 16 is illegal; each underage worker used results in a $5000 monthly penalty. Thus, any employer willing to hire you is knowingly breaking the law. Should anything go wrong, medical bills and compensation must be paid by that employer. If it refuses or goes out of business, there’s no one else to cover those costs. - Benefit: Article 11 of the Compulsory Education Law states: “All children aged six or older must be enrolled by their parents or legal guardians to receive and complete compulsory education.” Article 14 adds: “Employers are prohibited from hiring children and adolescents required to attend compulsory education.” Article 58 says that failure to enroll eligible kids without valid reasons results in “criticism and a directive to correct the issue within a set timeframe” from local authorities. Article 2 of the Regulations on Banning Child Labor declares that government agencies, social groups, enterprises, private non-profit entities, and individual businesses “must not hire minors under 16.” Article 6 imposes a $5000 monthly fine per underage worker; noncompliance raises this to $10000 per month. Article 7 levies a $5000 fine per child referred for employment. Article 10 mandates that employers “must arrange medical treatment and cover all related costs” if a child worker falls ill or sustains injury; additional compensation applies in cases of permanent disability or death. One exception exists under Article 13: cultural or sports organizations may hire under-16 professionals with parental consent (nationwide). - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人大常委会 (2018). 义务教育法（2018 年第二次修正，第十一、十四、五十八条）. （教育部刊登）；国务院 (2002). 禁止使用童工规定（国务院令第 364 号，第二、六、七、十、十三条）. - Notes: You’re the primary beneficiary here. Working legally is permitted after age 16. Yet jobs open to a 16-year-old with no qualifications align precisely with those highlighted in Section 10—roles relying on routine tasks most vulnerable to automation. Section 19 outlines overtime pay, vacation rights, and worker’s compensation, all contingent on formal employment status and verifiable records. As an unregistered worker, you lack both, meaning you won’t qualify for these protections or benefits. ### 2. Adding “education’s value” to mortality statistics: each extra year of schooling reduces adult mortality by roughly 1.9% - Cost: There is no monetary cost. The expense lies in the time and effort required to stay in school; tuition fees are covered under Section 4 of this chapter (vocational school tuition and grants). The real challenge is maintaining persistence — staying in school without dropping out. - In plain terms: For every additional year of schooling, the average risk of dying in adulthood drops by about 1.9%. This effect is strongest among people aged 18–49, where the reduction is roughly 2.9% per extra year; for those over 70, it’s only 0.8%. Those who manage to stay in school tend to come from more privileged backgrounds, so it’s hard to isolate exactly how much of this benefit stems from education itself. - Benefit: This conclusion comes from a comprehensive meta-analysis that pooled findings from 603 separate studies conducted in 70 locations across 59 countries between January 1980 and May 2023. There is a clear dose-response relationship between years of schooling and adult mortality (all causes combined): each extra year reduces mortality risk by an average of 1.9% (95% confidence interval: 1.8–2.0). For individuals aged 18–49, the reduction is 2.9% per year (2.8–3.0); for those over 70, it’s 0.8% (0.6–1.0). No significant gender differences were observed, nor did socioeconomic development level appear to influence the effect. - Evidence grade: A (controversial) - Sources:IHME-CHAIN Collaborators (2024). Effects of education on adult mortality: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Public Health, 9(3), e155-e165. - Notes: This finding remains controversial. The authors themselves reported evidence of publication bias (p<0.0001), meaning studies showing stronger effects were more likely to be published. Results also varied widely across individual studies. All included research relied on observational tracking rather than controlled trials. Because years of schooling correlate closely with family background, regional factors, and occupation, it’s difficult to determine how much of the 1.9% reduction is truly attributable to education versus other advantages enjoyed by long-term students. Conversely, individuals with childhood illnesses or mental health issues are more prone to dropping out and dying earlier, which could artificially inflate the apparent educational benefit. Thus, while this data clearly shows a positive link between education and longevity, it does not prove that “each extra year of schooling adds 1.9% to your lifespan.” The overall benefit is classified as modest: most readers will only gain a few extra years at most by staying in school an additional three or four years, so the impact remains relatively small. The primary beneficiaries are the individuals themselves. 〔10355〕 ### 3. Before determining whether “education is losing its value,” let’s first look at the national educational structure: only 15467 people per 100000 have a college education or higher - Cost: Zero. All you need to do is glance at the numbers below. - In plain terms: According to the 2020 census, only 15467 people per 100000 nationwide have completed college or higher education — that’s roughly 15%. Meanwhile, 34507 people per 100000 have only a junior high school education, making this the most common level of education. On average, people aged 15 and older have attended school for just 9.91 years, barely enough to finish junior high. Therefore, a junior high school education in China is far from “sufficient” — it is simply the baseline level for most people. - Benefit: The reference point for the seventh national census was November 1, 2020. At that time, 218360767 people nationwide had a college education or higher, while 213005258 had a high school education (including vocational school). The number of people with a junior high school education was 487163489, and those with a primary school education totaled 349658828. Compared to the sixth national census in 2010, the number of people per 100000 with a college education rose from 8930 to 15467, while those with a high school education increased from 14032 to 15088. Conversely, the number of people with a junior high school education fell from 38788 to 34507, and those with a primary school education dropped from 26779 to 24767. The average years of schooling for people aged 15 and older rose from 9.08 to 9.91 years, and the illiteracy rate declined from 4.08% to 2.67%. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:国家统计局、国务院第七次全国人口普查领导小组办公室 (2021). 第七次全国人口普查公报（第六号）——人口受教育情况. - Notes: These figures only indicate how common or rare a given level of education is within the general population. Whether it makes financial sense for any individual to pursue further education should be calculated using the method outlined in Section 6 of this chapter (“How to weigh the costs and benefits of education vs. working”). Also, note that census data includes all residents nationwide, including children and the elderly. The proportion of young people with a college education is significantly higher than these averages, so comparing one’s own educational level to these figures may overestimate one’s competitive advantage. Conversely, these numbers do provide solid evidence to refute the claim that “education is useless,” since they represent the entire labor force competing for jobs. The ultimate beneficiaries of this education are the individuals themselves. ### 4. Run the policy math first: most vocational school tuition is waived, with a 2300‑yuan grant and up to 20000 yuan in student loans per year - Cost: Zero out‑of‑pocket expense. Before school starts, simply visit the school’s student‑aid office and submit the required paperwork. - In plain terms: At public vocational schools, tuition is waived for rural students, urban students in agriculture‑related programs, and those from low‑income families. Starting spring 2025, a 2300‑yuan grant is available each year for both vocational and regular high‑school students. College students receive a 3700‑yuan grant annually, and they may borrow up to 20000 yuan per year via student loans. The exact amount of the grant is 0.7 yuan, which is a fixed figure set by policy. If funds remain insufficient, repayment can be deferred or alternative options explored — most students never have to drop out to work right away. - Benefit: The tuition‑waiver policy for public vocational schools has been in place since fall 2012; it covers all full‑time first‑, second‑, and third‑year students who are rural (including those in county towns), enrolled in agriculture‑related programs, or from financially disadvantaged families (except for students in performing‑arts majors). In 2024 the student‑aid framework was updated: the national grant for undergraduates rose from 3300 to 3700 yuan per year, and the National Inspirational Scholarship increased from 5000 to 6000 yuan, both effective fall 2024. For vocational and regular high‑school students, the grant also rose from 2000 to 2300 yuan per year, effective spring 2025. Student loans were adjusted as well: from fall 2024 undergraduates may borrow up to 20000 yuan per year (previously 16000) and graduate students up to 25000 yuan (previously 20000). The interest rate equals the applicable LPR minus 70 basis points. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:财政部、发展改革委、教育部、人力资源社会保障部 (2012). 关于扩大中等职业教育免学费政策范围 进一步完善国家助学金制度的意见（财教〔2012〕376 号）. ；财政部、教育部、人力资源社会保障部有关司局负责人 (2024). 就调整学生资助政策有关问题答记者问. ；财政部、教育部、人民银行、金融监管总局 (2024). 关于调整完善国家助学贷款有关政策的通知（财教〔2024〕188 号）. - Notes: These benefits apply to the student and his or her children. Exactly which groups qualify for tuition waivers and how many grant tiers exist is determined by each province. Private schools receive subsidies based on local public‑school standards, but any shortfall must still be paid by the student, so it’s wise to verify local rules before enrolling. Student loans are loans, not grants, and must be repaid after graduation; they simply separate the immediate cash‑flow problem from a longer‑term cost‑benefit analysis — don’t treat a temporary shortfall as a permanent barrier. Section 7 discusses training subsidies and emergency aid for periods of unemployment; families facing sudden income loss should apply for those programs first. ### 5. Failing to get into regular high school doesn’t mean your path ends: secondary vocational schools offer linked admission programs and separate exams, and employers can lower educational requirements for skilled roles - Cost: No cost at all. Before submitting your high school entrance exam applications, check your province’s official vocational education admissions platform once. - In plain terms: The Vocational Education Law enacted in 2022 explicitly states that vocational education holds equal status to general education. Secondary vocational schools can enroll students through linked admission programs with higher vocational institutions, which in turn must reserve a set proportion of their enrollment slots or hold separate exams specifically for secondary vocational graduates. Employers are also prohibited from setting eligibility barriers based on a candidate’s vocational school background. Failing to meet the cutoff for regular high school admission simply means you get to choose a different path — it does not leave you stuck with a junior high school diploma. - Benefit: Article 3 of the Vocational Education Law (effective 1 May 2022) stipulates: “Vocational education is an educational type that holds equal importance to general education.” Article 37 states that secondary vocational schools “may, in accordance with relevant national regulations, implement linked admission and training programs with higher vocational education for designated majors.” Higher vocational institutions “may, in accordance with relevant national regulations, admit students via assessment methods that combine academic ability and vocational skills.” Provincial-level and above education authorities are required to build unified vocational education admissions platforms to publish information on schools, majors and enrollment quotas, and provide application query services. Article 53 further specifies: “Students from vocational schools enjoy equal opportunities as students from regular schools at the same level in terms of further education, employment and career development.” Higher vocational institutions and regular universities offering vocational education “must reserve a corresponding proportion of their enrollment quotas or hold separate exams to admit vocational school graduates specifically.” It is also forbidden for employers to set application, hiring or employment criteria that prevent vocational school graduates from competing on an equal footing. For positions requiring specific vocational skill certifications in public institution recruitment, “educational requirements can be appropriately lowered” nationwide. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:全国人大常委会 (2022). 职业教育法（2022 年修订，第三、三十七、五十三条）. （教育部刊登） - Notes: These benefits apply to both yourself and your children. All the channels outlined here are legally mandated, but they do not guarantee admission. The specific majors covered by linked training programs, the exact proportion of slots reserved for separate admissions, and the exact subjects tested in vocational college entrance exams are all determined by each individual province. Before submitting applications, you must check your province’s current vocational education admissions platform and enrollment quotas — do not rely on rules or practices from other provinces. When selecting a secondary vocational major, use the criteria outlined in Section 10 of this chapter (choosing skills that are less prone to automation) as a reference: majors that require on-site work in non-standard environments are less likely to be phased out. To pick a school, confirm it is listed in your province’s current vocational education enrollment plan. Verify any certificates issued by the school using the three-step process described in Section 8 (checking whether a certificate is on the official approved list). Avoid any recruitment materials that make promises like “guaranteed job placement” or “100% admission success” at all costs. ### 6. Treating “work now or study further” as a calculation: the three years of early earnings versus decades of future income - Cost: There is no monetary cost. Setting aside about half an hour to do the math is all it takes. - In plain terms: Lay both options side by side on paper. Working early yields only three years of wages from low‑skill jobs. Continuing education, on the other hand, delivers extra yearly earnings for the next three or four decades. In Chinese cities, each additional year of schooling raises average income by roughly 4.0% (in 1988) up to 10.2% (in 2001). These figures are somewhat dated and should be viewed only as rough estimates. - Benefit: This estimate applies to Chinese urban areas between 1988 and 2001. The percentage increase in income linked to one extra year of schooling is known as the return on education. The original text notes that this rate rose sharply from 4.0% per year in 1988 to 10.2% in 2001, especially after 1992. It reflects the growing wage premium enjoyed by university graduates compared with those without higher education. This figure offers a locally relevant benchmark for converting “one extra year of study” into an expected lifetime income gain. For a global average, see Section 7 of this chapter (global average return on an extra year of schooling). - Evidence grade: B - Sources:Zhang J, Zhao Y, Park A, Song X (2005). Economic returns to schooling in urban China, 1988 to 2001. Journal of Comparative Economics, 33(4), 730-752. - Notes: Before performing the calculation, subtract the tuition waivers and grants mentioned in Section 4 (vocational school costs and aid), as well as the mortality impact discussed in Section 2 (extra year of schooling and mortality). The data end at 2001 and cover only urban residents, so they cannot be directly applied to today’s situation; the same caveat applies to the 9% global average cited in Section 7. Results will naturally vary from person to person. For individuals facing high tuition fees, mismatched majors or occupations, or lengthy study periods, the net benefit may indeed be negative — but this only indicates that that particular path is unwise, not that education as a whole is worthless. Several factors cannot be captured by the formula: legally mandated educational requirements (see Section 5 on integrated vocational admissions and separate exams), resistance to automation (see Section 10 on selecting automation‑resistant skills), and the possibility of switching careers. Ultimately, the benefits accrue to the individual. ### 7. Keep this baseline in mind: on average worldwide, each additional year of schooling yields a personal return of roughly 9% per year - Cost: No cost at all. Memorize this figure and use it as a benchmark for evaluating any “learning opportunity.” - In plain terms: Globally, each extra year of formal schooling translates into about a 9% annual increase in personal income; this benefit tends to be higher for women than for men. This figure applies to regular schooling, not to short courses or workshops. Think of it as a yardstick: if a course costs 30000 yuan and lasts half a year, ask whether its expected income boost matches what one extra year of schooling would deliver. - Benefit: A comprehensive review covering 1120 estimates from 139 countries between 1950 and 2014 found that the worldwide average private return on each additional year of schooling is 9% per year. This private return is the portion that directly affects an individual’s earnings — on average, an extra year of schooling raises income by 9%. The private return on higher education is on the rise, while the social return on education (the benefit to society as a whole) remains substantial. Women continue to reap higher average returns than men from schooling. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Psacharopoulos G, Patrinos HA (2018). Returns to investment in education: a decennial review of the global literature. Education Economics, 26(5), 445-458. ；世界银行政策研究工作论文 8402. - Notes: This is a global average for “one extra year of schooling” and should not be taken as the expected return from a single course or workshop, nor as a figure specific to China. It serves merely as a rough reference point. Its main purpose is to provide a standard for evaluating any training program: if a course demands a 30000‑yuan investment and six months of effort, you can gauge whether its income impact is comparable to that of one additional year of formal education. Keep in mind that this average masks considerable differences across fields and countries. ### 8. Before spending money on a certification, first verify whether it appears in the National Vocational Qualification Catalogue or in the list of evaluation agencies registered with the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security - Cost: No cost at all. It takes just a few minutes to check once. - In plain terms: Some organizations run training programs, charge fees, and issue certificates under the guise of new occupations or skill levels, while others even impersonate authoritative institutions. The Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security has taken targeted actions to curb such practices. Before enrolling, follow three steps: confirm whether the occupation is listed in the National Vocational Qualification Catalogue; verify that the issuing agency is registered with the Ministry; and check whether the certificate number can be found on the official platform. If any of these checks fail, any money spent on enrollment is essentially wasted. - Benefit: The Ministry has launched nationwide efforts to address these issues. Official documents specifically identify the problematic practices as “some organizations and entities arbitrarily running training, evaluation, and certification activities under the banner of new occupations, skill levels, etc., charging excessive fees and issuing certificates indiscriminately; others making false or exaggerated claims, even impersonating authoritative institutions to organize training, evaluation, and certificate issuance.” Related measures include joint crackdowns with authorities such as Cyberspace Administration, public security, and market regulation to “severely punish any evaluation or certification activities conducted by unregistered agencies or those not approved by the Ministry.” Illegal promotional content on websites and social media is also shut down per law. Additionally, the Ministry urges the public to learn how to verify certificate legitimacy and value. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:人力资源社会保障部 (2022). 关于开展技术技能类「山寨证书」专项治理工作的通知. - Notes: Follow this exact sequence for verification. First, check whether the occupation appears in the National Vocational Qualification Catalogue; if not, it is not a nationally recognized qualification. Next, confirm that the issuing agency is registered with the Ministry. Finally, use the official platform for skilled worker qualification certificate queries to see if the certificate number returns a valid result. Do not enroll if any step fails. Certificates bearing terms such as “International”, “Advanced”, “Registered”, or those promising “guaranteed passing results” or “income from certificate registration” carry the highest risk. ### 9. It’s best to use government subsidies for training — don’t jump straight to paying for commercial courses out of pocket - Cost: Zero cost, or at least a substantial reduction. Training does require time. The real challenge is resisting the urge to sign up for paid courses right away; first, check the local subsidy list. - In plain terms: From 2025 through late 2027, the government plans to provide subsidized training to over 30 million participants. Funding comes from multiple sources, including employment assistance funds, unemployment insurance funds, and corporate education budgets. The more in-demand a profession is and the higher the training cost, the larger the subsidy. Employees should ask their employers first; everyone else should review their local Human Resources and Social Security Bureau’s subsidy list before deciding what to study. - Benefit: The national target is clear: over 30 million subsidized training slots for high-tech industries, critical sectors, and priority employment groups between 2025 and 2027. Funding is pooled from various programs — employment assistance funds, unemployment insurance, sector development grants, East-West cooperation funds, and corporate education budgets. Subsidy amounts depend on how urgently a profession is needed and its training cost; they vary by occupation. Companies must also allocate at least 60% of their employee education funds to frontline staff training. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:国务院就业促进和劳动保护工作领导小组 (2025). 关于开展大规模职业技能提升培训行动的指导意见. - Notes: Exact eligibility criteria and subsidy amounts are set by each province. The main portals are the “Subsidized Vocational Training List” on the local Human Resources and Social Security Bureau website and public training centers. Section 7 covers unemployment-related training subsidies (up to three applications per person) and social insurance benefits. Employees should first inquire about their employer’s education fund allocation before making any decisions. Checking the subsidy list first saves far more money than choosing a course first and then searching for financial aid. ### 10. When picking a skill to learn, prioritize those that require hands-on work and on-the-spot judgment — these are the hardest for automation to replace - Cost: No cost at all. Before making a choice, run through the skills you’re considering using this criterion as a filter. - In plain terms: According to U.S. estimates, roughly 47% of jobs carry a relatively high risk of being taken over by computers. Later studies that evaluated individual tasks instead yielded a much lower percentage. Three core challenges currently prevent machines from handling certain jobs: manual dexterity, creative problem-solving, and social interaction. Hence, roles that demand physical work in unpredictable environments and real-time decision-making are far less likely to be automated, while jobs with rigid processes and heavy information processing carry the highest risk. - Benefit: This study assessed 702 U.S. occupations to estimate the likelihood of each being automated — the result showed that about 47% fell into the high-risk category. The three aforementioned challenges form what the authors call “engineering bottlenecks” that limit automation potential. These include sensory perception and physical manipulation (finger and hand dexterity, working in cramped or awkward spaces), creative intelligence (the ability to devise novel solutions), and social intelligence (interpersonal interaction). Consequently, occupations requiring hands-on work in unstructured settings and on-the-fly judgment are consistently less prone to automation, rather than this being a random trait of specific jobs. Roles with standardized workflows and information-centric tasks face the greatest automation risk. - Evidence grade: B - Sources:Frey CB, Osborne MA (2017). The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254-280. - Notes: This research is somewhat controversial. It originated as an unpublished draft paper from 2013 that measured the overall automation potential of entire occupations. Later studies that evaluated individual tasks instead produced a significantly lower high-risk percentage. The paper also does not specify a timeline for when automation might occur. When using these findings, avoid fixating on the 47% figure; instead, focus on the three key bottlenecks it identifies. Jobs involving on-site installation, maintenance, and caregiving are far more resistant to automation than purely clerical roles for precisely these reasons. Therefore, when deciding which skill to acquire, prioritize those that demand physical work in non-standard environments. ### 11. Check first whether a skill has an official grading system and if those grades can translate into pay raises - Cost: No cost involved. One quick check is all you need. - In plain terms: The government is promoting a “New Eight-Level Worker” system that requires companies to link job pay to employees’ skill levels. Outstanding workers can even have their skill grades recognized regardless of seniority or years of experience. This is the policy direction, though implementation varies widely across regions and companies. Only skills with established national occupational standards and grading pathways can eventually lead to pay increases based on those grades — so it’s worth checking first before you invest time in learning them. - Benefit: The government is actively rolling out this New Eight-Level Worker skill grading system. Official documents explicitly require linking skill grades to employee compensation, stating that “a skill-oriented pay distribution system must be strengthened... companies should adopt a compensation model that ties both job value and skill levels to pay.” Regions are also being urged to “expand the evaluation and hiring of senior-level workers and increase the frequency of such evaluations.” Eligible companies can conduct their own skill assessments for employees, and top performers can have their skill grades recognized without needing to meet any requirements related to years of service, prior grades, or seniority. - Evidence grade: B - Sources:国务院就业促进和劳动保护工作领导小组 (2025). 关于开展大规模职业技能提升培训行动的指导意见. ；人力资源社会保障部 (2021). 「技能中国行动」实施方案. - Notes: This is the intended policy direction, not a guarantee of actual pay increases — implementation varies greatly by region and company. The key takeaway for anyone considering learning a new skill is to first verify whether it has corresponding national occupational standards and a formal grading pathway; only then can it potentially lead to pay raises based on skill level. For skills lacking any official grading system or industry entry requirements, learning them won’t guarantee any career or financial benefits — you’ll still need to find work on your own. ### 12. Don’t take “high wages advertised online” as proof of labor shortages — check local lists of in‑demand occupations and subsidy programs instead - Cost: No expense at all. You just need to look up two local documents. - In plain terms: The amount of training subsidies each region offers for a given occupation is set based on how urgently that occupation is needed and on the cost of training. Thus, the subsidy level itself shows whether workers are in short supply locally. Claims online about “monthly earnings for a certain job” are usually just posted rates on hiring platforms or self‑reported figures. Those figures come mainly from people who are already earning money, and they ignore working hours, commuting time, occupational illnesses, and seasonal fluctuations. - Benefit: The subsidy amounts serve as an official measure of which occupations are in short supply. Policies require “a differentiated subsidy system based on how urgently an occupation is needed, its training costs, and other factors,” so each area defines its own list of subsidized vocational training programs accordingly. Consequently, the difference in subsidy levels for the same occupation across cities directly reflects how much that occupation is in demand locally. - Evidence grade: C - Sources:国务院就业促进和劳动保护工作领导小组 (2025). 关于开展大规模职业技能提升培训行动的指导意见. ；国家统计局 (2026). 2025年城镇单位就业人员年平均工资情况：「规模以上企业就业人员年平均工资为106080元，其中，中层及以上管理人员210016元，专业技术人员155491元，办事人员和有关人员94936元，社会生产服务和生活服务人员79857元，生产制造及有关人员80739元」. ；人力资源社会保障部就业培训技术指导中心 (2023). 2022年第四季度全国招聘大于求职「最缺工」的100个职业排行（中国就业网）. - Notes: Official wage statistics are broken down only into five broad occupational categories; no figures exist for individual jobs. According to 2025 data from the National Bureau of Statistics, the average annual wage at large‑scale enterprises is roughly 106,080 yuan. Managers at mid‑level and above earn about 210,016 yuan per year, while professional and technical staff earn around 155,491 yuan. Clerical workers earn 94,936 yuan, production workers 80,739 yuan, and workers in social services and daily life sectors earn 79,857 yuan. The Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security publishes a “Top 100 Occupations in Short Supply” list on the China Employment Network; the latest edition covers the fourth quarter of 2022 and is compiled from recruitment and job‑seeker data collected by public employment services in 102 cities nationwide. Most online claims about monthly earnings for specific jobs are based on posted rates or personal reports — figures that come largely from those already earning money and that do not account for working hours, commuting, occupational hazards, or seasonal variations. To gauge true labor demand, consult the subsidy lists on your local Human Resources and Social Security Bureau website and check the rankings of job openings compiled by public employment services. Finally, talk to current workers on construction sites, in factories, and at retail outlets. 〔106000〕 〔210000〕 〔155000〕 ### 13. For the same cost and time, prioritize short-duration programs that lead directly to employment - Cost: These short-term courses require tuition fees, though the amount is modest. They also demand a significant time commitment. The challenge lies in knowing when to stop the program if results aren’t evident despite completing part of the coursework, per the agreed terms. - In plain terms: Government policies favor short-term training programs and micro-specializations at vocational colleges that lead to quick employment. The sole criterion for selecting such programs is whether they offer a concrete job opportunity upon completion. Programs lasting a year or more, which require additional “experience-building” after graduation, end up costing far more than advertised. It’s crucial to define clear exit conditions upfront: specify the level of skill mastery required before one can stop the program if no job has been secured. - Benefit: Government guidelines align with this approach: they support “private training institutions offering market-driven, high-quality vocational programs and short-term training initiatives that lead to swift employment.” They also encourage vocational colleges to “focus on skills and knowledge in high demand by the job market... and develop micro-specializations and vocational training courses.” - Evidence grade: C - Sources:国务院就业促进和劳动保护工作领导小组 (2025). 关于开展大规模职业技能提升培训行动的指导意见. - Notes: The sole deciding factor is whether a specific job opening exists after completing the program. Programs requiring a year or more of study followed by further “experience accumulation” incur far higher actual costs than their listed price. The exit conditions outlined in Section 4 also apply here: clearly define in advance the skill threshold at which one may discontinue the program if no job is found. ### 14. After studying, close the book and test yourself — don’t just reread it - Cost: There’s no cost involved, and no extra time is needed. Use the time you’d otherwise spend rereading to write down or answer questions from memory instead. The difficulty lies in how uncomfortable it feels to confront what you’ve forgotten right away, compared to the relative ease of rereading. - In plain terms: Rereading a section often makes it seem very familiar, but that doesn’t mean you’ve actually retained it well. Testing yourself after reading yields noticeably better results. In classrooms where brief quizzes are added, average test scores rise by a moderate amount. When ranking ten common study methods, self-testing comes out on top. After finishing a section, try writing down the key points from memory before checking them against the text. - Benefit: A meta-analysis of 222 separate studies involving 48478 students found that classroom quizzes led to a moderate improvement in academic performance (effect size g = 0.499). This effect varies depending on several factors: the baseline study method used in the control group, how closely the quiz format matches the final exam, whether the material is comparable, whether corrective feedback is provided, how many times the quiz is administered, when and where it takes place, how long the intervention lasts, and the experimental design used. Another comprehensive review that evaluated all ten widely used study techniques rated “practice testing” and “spaced practice” as the most effective methods overall. Their high utility stems from proven success across learners of different ages and abilities, as well as in diverse testing formats and real-world educational settings. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Yang C, Luo L, Vadillo MA, Yu R, Shanks DR (2021). Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 147(4), 399–435. ；Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT (2013). Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58. - Notes: Self-testing is meant to force information out of your memory, not to assign grades. The recommended approach is to write down key points from memory after reading a section, then check them against the text. Providing corrective feedback further boosts effectiveness, so it’s important to carefully review why each answer was incorrect. The “large” magnitude of benefit mentioned here is determined by both the effect size and the overall rating. Since these studies measured academic outcomes rather than time saved, they weren’t evaluated against time‑saving thresholds. Self-testing and the method described in item 15 — spreading the same amount of study time across several days — are the two highest‑rated strategies identified in the same review; using them together yields the best results. ### 15. Spread the same study time over several days instead of cramming it all at once - Cost: There’s no extra expense, and the total time required stays the same. The only change is the schedule: those same 3 hours are split into three 1-hour sessions. The challenge is that you must start planning days in advance — you can’t leave it all for the final night. - In plain terms: Studying the same amount of material over several days helps you retain it far better than cramming it all at once. 317 separate experiments have all confirmed this same conclusion. There’s also a practical rule to follow: the longer you want to retain the information, the longer the interval between review sessions should be. If a test is tomorrow, review the material that day; if it’s a month away, schedule a few review sessions in between. - Benefit: This is a meta-analysis that brought together data from 184 papers, 317 experiments, and 839 separate evaluations of distributed practice. It compared two key factors: studying material in one continuous block versus splitting it into multiple sessions (the spacing effect), and short versus long review intervals (the delay effect). Its main finding is that both the length of time you aim to retain information and the spacing between review sessions together determine your final retention rate: the longer you need to remember the material, the longer the ideal spacing between reviews becomes. Another review that assessed ten common learning strategies ranked distributed practice as one of the highest utility methods overall. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Cepeda NJ, Pashler H, Vul E, Wixted JT, Rohrer D (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380. ；Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT (2013). Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58. - Notes: This tip works best when combined with Tip 14 (self-testing without looking at notes): you can also spread out those self-test sessions over several days. Most of the study materials used in Cepeda’s meta-analysis focused on simple tasks like memorizing word lists, so no universal recommended interval length exists for more complex subjects. The original research states that the longer the upcoming test date, the longer the ideal spacing between reviews should be, but no specific schedule is provided. Cramming the night before an exam does offer some short-term benefit, but the information is quickly forgotten. ### 16. Don’t treat highlighting, rereading, and summarizing as primary study methods - Cost: No cost at all; actually saves time. These methods are easy to apply and give you that “I’m studying” feeling. - In plain terms: Highlighting and rereading are the most common study habits among students, yet both rank at the very bottom among ten widely used learning strategies. Summarizing, keyword memorization, and visualizing text with images also fall into the lowest tier. They’re not completely useless, but only work under very specific conditions, so spending the same amount of time on self-testing yields far better results. - Benefit: This review evaluates ten common study methods based on how well their effectiveness holds across different learning contexts, student traits, materials, and assessment formats. The highest-rated strategies are practice testing and spaced practice. Methods rated as moderately effective include elaborative questioning, self-explanation, and interleaved practice. The five least effective methods are summarizing, highlighting (or underlining), keyword memorization, visualizing text with images, and rereading. The review also notes that while most students report using rereading and highlighting, these methods do not reliably improve academic performance; they should be replaced with other approaches such as practice testing instead of rereading. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT (2013). Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58. - Notes: You can use highlighting to mark sections you plan to self-test later, but the problem arises when highlighting itself is mistaken for actual learning. The review also clarifies that being in the lowest tier does not mean these methods have zero value — they simply work only under narrow circumstances and require further research. For alternative study actions, see item 14 (self-testing after closing the book) and item 15 (spreading study time across multiple days). ### 17. Mixing different types of exercises rather than doing twenty of the same kind - Cost: No cost at all. Simply rearrange the order of exercises in your workbook so they’re not grouped by type. The downside is that mixing them often lowers your immediate accuracy, which can feel like a step backward. - In plain terms: Practicing one type of problem over and over makes it feel easy at the time, but later you might struggle to recall which method to apply. Mixing several types together yields better long‑term results — though the improvement is moderate. This technique works best with visual material such as drawings or categorization tasks; it has a smaller effect on math problems, and for vocabulary memorization it’s actually better to practice in blocks. - Benefit: This finding comes from a comprehensive meta‑analysis that included 59 studies, 238 effect sizes, and 158 samples. Overall, interleaved practice produces a moderate benefit compared with blocked practice (Hedges’ g = 0.42). When broken down by material, visual tasks benefit the most (g = 0.67), while math problems show a smaller effect (g = 0.34). No significant advantage was found for expository texts or taste‑related tasks; for vocabulary, blocked practice actually performed better (g = −0.39). Regression analysis indicates that the benefit grows when categories are more similar, when items within a category are less alike, and when the material itself is more complex. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Brunmair M, Richter T (2019). Similarity matters: A meta-analysis of interleaved learning and its moderators. Psychological Bulletin, 145(11), 1029–1052. - Notes: The review cited in item 16 — which warns against relying solely on highlighting — rated interleaved practice as having a moderate effect, noting that evidence at the time was limited. Taken together, these studies suggest that interleaving works well for material that requires you to recognize a category and pick the right method, such as different math problem types, medical cases, or legal statutes. In contrast, content meant for rote memorization — like vocabulary or definitions — is better learned through blocked practice. ### 18. Don’t pick learning methods based on “I’m a visual learner, he’s an auditory learner” - Cost: No cost at all. You simply stop using this classification to pick materials or courses, and you also avoid spending money on style assessments. - In plain terms: Many people believe each person has a distinct learning style — such as being visual or auditory — and that teaching should be tailored to that style for best results. Yet there are very few rigorous studies on this, and almost none provide any support for it; several even show the opposite. While people do have personal preferences, there’s no evidence that instruction aligned with those preferences leads to better learning. There’s also no need to spend money on learning style assessments. - Benefit: A comprehensive review evaluating evidence on learning styles concluded that to prove “teaching according to learning styles” works, students must first be grouped by style, then randomly assigned to different teaching methods, and finally tested using the same assessment. The key indicator of effectiveness would be a specific interaction effect: a teaching method highly effective for one style would be less effective for another. The review found almost no such interaction effects. Although there’s plenty of literature on learning styles, very few studies employ proper experimental designs, and several of those produce results directly contradicting the “match hypothesis.” Based on this, the authors argue current evidence simply doesn’t justify incorporating learning style assessments into educational practice. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. - Notes: The review also notes this doesn’t mean every version of learning style theory has been tested and disproven; many have never been examined at all. What you should definitely avoid is spending money on learning style assessments or selecting training programs based on such classifications. Criteria for picking training options are outlined in item 9 (prioritizing government-subsidized programs) and item 13 (favoring short-term programs that lead directly to employment). ### 19. Test yourself using questions based on how you’ll use the material later; don’t just recite it verbatim - Cost: There’s no expense involved, nor does it require extra time. The only change is the practice method: replace “reciting it verbatim” with “creating questions based on future usage.” The real challenge is figuring out exactly how you’ll apply this material later on. - In plain terms: Testing yourself after closing the book offers benefits beyond simply memorizing a few words. A meta-analysis of 192 comparisons involving over 10000 participants showed that this method works moderately well for different question types, application problems, and reasoning tasks. However, it’s largely ineffective in two scenarios: when the question–answer pairing is reversed, and when the content has only ever been seen in the book without any prior testing. - Benefit: This meta-analysis examined over 40 years of research, drawing from 67 published and unpublished papers, 122 experiments, and 192 measures of transfer effects involving 10382 participants total. Compared to simply reviewing material without testing, practice testing led to measurable learning transfer, with an effect size of d = 0.40 (95% CI 0.31–0.50). Transfer was strongest when participants answered questions of a different type, application or reasoning problems, or medical‑diagnosis‑style queries involving similar concepts. Transfer was weakest when the stimulus–response pairing was reversed, when material had only been encountered but never tested, or when dealing with example‑style problems. Factors such as whether the practice and test formats matched, whether detailed feedback was provided, and whether participants answered correctly on the initial test all strongly influenced whether positive transfer occurred. Two separate methods were used to correct for publication bias; while these adjustments modestly affected effect sizes, they substantially lowered the baseline intercept value. Under these conditions, positive transfer is often not observed at all. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:Pan SC, Rickard TC (2018). Transfer of test-enhanced learning: meta-analytic review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(7), 710-756. - Notes: The term “memorization” usually bundles two distinct activities: repeatedly reading or highlighting material, and actively recalling it after closing the book. The former receives the lowest rating in a review that ranked ten learning strategies; for those ratings themselves, see item 16 (avoid relying on highlighting, repeated reading, or summarization as primary methods). What matters here is the latter: actively recalling information without looking at the source, as described in item 14 (self‑testing after closing the book). This practice should also be spread across several days, as noted in item 15 (distributed practice). Begin by determining how you’ll ultimately use the material—whether you’ll need to select answers on a test or make judgments in a real‑world setting—and then create questions that mirror those situations. It’s also valuable to reverse the question–answer order during practice, because the meta‑analysis showed that transfer is weakest in that direction; both orientations should be practiced. ### 20. First, figure out which professional series and level you belong to, then find the right application channels based on your employer type - Cost: No cost involved. It takes about half an hour to look up the latest application guidelines for your province. - In plain terms: There are 27 professional series nationwide, each divided into junior, intermediate, and senior levels. Generally, you must progress through these levels one by one. Employees working for organizations must have their applications reviewed and publicly posted by their employer before submission. Those working for private firms can apply via local professional qualification service centers, talent agencies, or industry associations. Self-employed individuals should apply through the local human resources and social security department. - Benefit: A total of 27 professional series exist across China, covering fields such as economics, engineering, healthcare, and publishing. These are categorized into senior, intermediate, and junior levels. Order No. 40 issued by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security applies to enterprises, public institutions, social organizations, individual economic entities, and self-employed professionals alike. Applicants must generally advance step by step through these levels. Employers must review all submitted materials and publicly display them for at least five working days. Private firms and self-employed individuals may opt to have talent agencies handle the review, public posting, and recommendation processes. Local authorities are required to establish professional qualification service centers in science parks and high-tech zones; applications may also be accepted through talent agencies, industry associations, and professional societies. Eligible self-employed individuals may participate in evaluations organized by local human resources departments. Any documentation that can be verified online must not require additional certification. If any materials are missing, evaluators must clearly specify what is lacking in one single notice. Employees of private firms typically apply in the region where their employment contract is based. Those assigned to work elsewhere for at least one full year may apply at their temporary duty location. Retired personnel are ineligible to apply. Public sector employees currently under disciplinary action at or above the level of a reprimand cannot apply during that period (nationwide). - Evidence grade: A - Sources:人力资源和社会保障部令第 40 号 (2019). 职称评审管理暂行规定. ：第二条、第十三条、第十四条、第十五条、第十六条、第十七条、第十八条；人力资源社会保障部办公厅 (2020). 关于进一步做好民营企业职称工作的通知. ：「在专业技术人才密集的创业孵化基地、高新技术开发区、科技园区等地设立职称申报受理服务点，或通过人才中介服务机构、工商联、行业协会商会、学会等社会组织受理民营企业专业技术人才职称申报」「民营企业专业技术人才被派驻外地连续工作一年以上的，可按有关规定在派驻地申报职称评审」；新华社 (2024). 职称评审进入高峰，信息如何查？有何新变化？ ：「我国共设有经济、工程、卫生、出版等27个职称系列」「符合条件的自由职业者，可根据属地原则申报参加当地人社部门组织的职称评审」；中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅 (2016). 关于深化职称制度改革的意见. ：「不将论文作为评价应用型人才的限制性条件」「对职称外语和计算机应用能力考试不作统一要求」「符合条件的高技能人才，可参加工程系列专业技术人才职称评审」「公务员不得参加专业技术人才职称评审」 - Notes: No single nationwide list of required documents exists. Each professional series and province publishes its own annual application guidelines detailing necessary materials, deadlines, and performance criteria. Therefore, the first step is to search the official website of your provincial human resources department for the current year’s instructions. Publishing academic papers is no longer mandatory: a 2016 reform directive explicitly removed this requirement for practical professionals, and standardized language or computer proficiency tests are no longer mandatory either. Skilled technical workers may also qualify to apply for engineering-related professional titles. Government officials are prohibited from participating in such evaluations. ### 21. Entry- and intermediate-level accounting titles are earned via a national unified exam; first check your education level and work experience to see if you qualify - Cost: Registration fees vary by province. Preparing for the exam requires several months of part-time study. - In plain terms: Many entry- and intermediate-level professional titles are awarded solely through exams; passing the test is enough, with no additional evaluation needed. Accounting falls under this category: an assistant accountant must have at least a high school diploma, while a full accountant requires a bachelor’s degree plus four years of accounting work experience, or an associate degree plus five years. Those who already hold certain professional certifications may also be recognized as meeting the corresponding title requirements. - Benefit: A 2016 reform directive states that for professional fields where entry- and intermediate-level titles rely on a national exam, no further evaluation or certification is required. In areas where professional titles and qualifications are closely linked, earning a qualification automatically grants the corresponding title and can serve as a prerequisite for advancing to a higher level. Accounting is a prime example: assistant accountants and accountants are selected via a nationwide exam. Senior accountants undergo both an exam and evaluation, while top-level titles are awarded solely through evaluation. Qualification criteria are as follows: Assistant accountants must have at least a high school diploma, including vocational, technical, or secondary specialized education. Accountants must hold a doctorate; or a master’s degree plus one year of accounting experience; or a second bachelor’s degree, graduate diploma, or equivalent plus two years of experience; or a bachelor’s degree plus four years of experience; or an associate degree plus five years of experience. Those with a master’s or doctorate in accounting may be exempt from the Financial Management exam portion when applying for accountant status. - Evidence grade: A - Sources:中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅 (2016). 关于深化职称制度改革的意见. ：「专业技术人才取得职业资格即可认定其具备相应系列和层级的职称，并可作为申报高一级职称的条件。初级、中级职称实行全国统一考试的专业不再进行相应的职称评审或认定。」；人力资源社会保障部、财政部 (2019). 关于深化会计人员职称制度改革的指导意见. ：「助理会计师、会计师实行全国统一的会计专业技术资格考试」「高级会计师采取考试与评审相结合方式，正高级会计师一般采取评审方式」；财政部等 (2024). 关于做好会计专业学位与会计专业技术资格衔接有关工作的通知. - Notes: To determine whether your professional series relies on exams, evaluations, or a mix of both, consult the relevant “Guiding Opinions on Deepening Reforms of [Series] Professional Title Systems.” These documents were issued by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security and sector-specific authorities; they can be found in the policy archives on the Chinese Government website. Exact registration dates and exam subjects are listed in each year’s official exam announcements. Civil servants may take the accounting exam but are not eligible to apply for accounting title evaluations. ### 22. Don’t hire agents to handle evaluations, don’t pay for ghostwritten papers, and don’t falsify any application materials: any proven violations will result in immediate revocation of your professional title and a 3-year entry in your integrity record - Cost: No direct monetary cost. The real challenge is resisting tempting ads promising “guaranteed approval for a fee.” - In plain terms: Any professional title obtained through fake materials, ghostwritten papers, or plagiarized work will be revoked upon verification. A record of this misconduct stays on file for 3 years and is shared with the national credit database. If you sign a commitment statement during application and later prove it to be false, you will be barred from applying for any title for 3 years. Labor and social security authorities also actively crack down on agents that make false claims, pose as official evaluators, or sell counterfeit certificates. - Benefit: As stipulated in Order No. 40 issued by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, anyone found to have submitted false materials, plagiarized others’ work or academic achievements, or obtained a professional title through any other improper means will have their title revoked. This violation is also logged into the professional title evaluation integrity database and shared with the national credit information platform for a 3-year period. The 2024 regulatory guidelines specifically list several prohibited acts by applicants: making false commitments, fabricating personal information, commissioning ghostwritten papers, falsifying work achievements, and seeking special treatment via personal connections. Applicants must sign a personal commitment statement; failure to honor this agreement results in a 3-year ban on all future applications. Labor and social security authorities collaborate with public security, internet regulatory, and market supervision agencies to investigate and penalize agents that run fake websites, make misleading claims, use contract traps, pose as official evaluators, or sell counterfeit certificates. In cases where violations are severe enough to constitute a crime, relevant parties will be handed over to judicial authorities for prosecution (nationwide). - Evidence grade: A - Sources:人力资源和社会保障部令第 40 号 (2019). 职称评审管理暂行规定. ：第三十九条；人力资源社会保障部 (2024). 职称评审监管暂行办法. ：第五条、第十五条、第十七条、第二十七条；人力资源社会保障部办公厅 (2022). 关于进一步做好职称评审工作的通知. ：「未经备案的职称评审委员会，评审结果不纳入全国职称评审信息查询验证系统」；新华社 (2024). 职称评审进入高峰，信息如何查？有何新变化？ ：「大家可通过www.12333.gov.cn网页、手机12333客户端、人力资源社会保障部门户网站、“人力资源和社会保障部”微信公众号等多种渠道进行登录」 - Notes: A simple way to tell legitimate evaluations from fraudulent ones: any officially awarded professional title can be verified via the National Professional Title Evaluation Information Query Platform, accessible through the 12333 website, its mobile app, or the official Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security site. Titles issued by unregistered evaluation committees cannot be found in this system at all. Therefore, any agent or service that guarantees “100% approval”, claims you don’t need to attend any evaluation process, or promises you can use a title even if it does not appear in official records is almost certainly untrustworthy. The main beneficiaries of these rules are applicants themselves, as they protect them from the serious consequences of title revocation and a 3-year negative credit record. ### 23. Having a professional title doesn’t automatically mean a pay raise: first find out whether your employer uses a post‑based quota for evaluation and hiring, or if getting the title doesn’t guarantee a post or raise - Cost: No cost at all. Just ask your HR department once. - In plain terms: Professional titles serve as the basis for hiring, performance reviews, and promotions, but earning a title and actually being assigned to a corresponding post are two different things. In public institutions, titles are usually awarded within a set post‑ratio, and most people who earn them do get hired. Organizations without post‑based management can separate evaluation from hiring; in such cases, earning a title doesn’t guarantee a post or higher pay. When moving to another organization or region, you may need to re‑evaluate or re‑confirm your title. - Benefit: Article 2 of Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security Order No. 40 states that professional title evaluation results are key references for hiring, performance reviews, and promotions of technical professionals. A 2016 reform guideline specifies that public institutions using post‑based management conduct evaluations within their post‑ratio framework, while organizations without such management — as well as professions with broad applicability and emerging occupations — may separate evaluation from hiring. When technical professionals transfer across regions or employers, their titles must be re‑evaluated or confirmed according to administrative authority, unless otherwise stipulated by national regulations (nationwide). - Evidence grade: B - Sources:人力资源和社会保障部令第 40 号 (2019). 职称评审管理暂行规定. ：第二条、第二十九条；中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅 (2016). 关于深化职称制度改革的意见. ：「对于全面实行岗位管理、专业技术人才学术技术水平与岗位职责密切相关的事业单位，一般应在岗位结构比例内开展职称评审。对于不实行岗位管理的单位，以及通用性强、广泛分布在各社会组织的职称系列和新兴职业，可采用评聘分开方式。」 - Notes: The evidence grade is B because the documents describe how evaluation and hiring relate to each other, but they provide no nationwide figures on how much pay rises after earning a title. What you can do: in public institutions and state‑owned enterprises, ask HR about available post openings and hiring rules; in private firms, ask the owner whether the certificate is recognized and whether it brings a pay increase.