Math Exam Blank Answer Rate Hits Record High in Taiwan's High School Entrance Exam
In the 2026 academic year's Comprehensive Assessment Program (CAP) for junior high school students, nearly a quarter of test-takers achieved 'proficient' level in math. However, the blank answer rate for the second non-choice question reached a record high of 27.18%. A professor from National Taiwan Normal University attributed this to students' fear of geometry reasoning problems.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: June 5, 2026 at 13:45
- 🔍 Collected: June 5, 2026 at 13:59 (14 min after Published)
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: June 6, 2026 at 15:11 (25h 12m after Collected)
(Central News Agency, Taipei, June 5) In the 2026 academic year's Comprehensive Assessment Program (CAP) math exam, nearly a quarter of test-takers achieved a 'proficient' level. However, the first non-choice question, which could be solved using elementary school knowledge, still saw over 10,000 students failing to score. The blank answer rate for the second non-choice question reached 27.18%, setting a historical record.
According to statistics from the Research Center for Psychological and Educational Testing at National Taiwan Normal University, 24.56% of test-takers achieved the 'proficient' level in math this year, the highest among all subjects. Additionally, 50.17% reached the 'basic' level, while 25.27% were classified as 'needs improvement'.
Professor Feng-Jui Hsieh from the Department of Mathematics at National Taiwan Normal University was invited by the Ministry of Education to analyze test-takers' performance on the non-choice questions. She stated that overall, their ability to express problem-solving strategies, processes, and conclusions was not poor, and their willingness to answer questions had improved compared to previous years, acknowledging the efforts of junior high school teachers.
However, according to the center's statistics, 10,119 students scored zero on the first non-choice question, and 12,237 students scored zero on the second.
Professor Hsieh explained that the first sub-question of the first non-choice question could be solved using elementary school math knowledge, simply by adding 2 repeatedly with fingers. However, understanding the problem, planning a solution strategy, reasoning, and expressing the process still required junior high school-level abilities.
During grading, Professor Hsieh found that many students, even if they calculated the correct answer, could not accurately and completely express their problem-solving process. For the second sub-question of the first question, many students misunderstood the problem, for example, answering 'that week' when the question asked about 'that day'.
The second non-choice question had the highest blank answer rate (27.18%) since the implementation of the 108 curriculum guidelines. Professor Hsieh analyzed that this might be because it tested geometry reasoning concepts, which are the content students fear most. However, she also noted that only 9.28% of students who answered the question scored zero, estimating that about 60% of students did not give up when faced with this difficult problem.
Professor Hsieh pointed out that the willingness of this year's test-takers to answer non-choice questions was higher than last year, mainly because the questions did not require strong reading comprehension skills. However, she still recommended that junior high school teachers strengthen students' ability to transform the relationships of numbers, quantities, and shapes in real-life complex situations into mathematical formulas. (Editor: Chang Ming-kun) 1150605
According to statistics from the Research Center for Psychological and Educational Testing at National Taiwan Normal University, 24.56% of test-takers achieved the 'proficient' level in math this year, the highest among all subjects. Additionally, 50.17% reached the 'basic' level, while 25.27% were classified as 'needs improvement'.
Professor Feng-Jui Hsieh from the Department of Mathematics at National Taiwan Normal University was invited by the Ministry of Education to analyze test-takers' performance on the non-choice questions. She stated that overall, their ability to express problem-solving strategies, processes, and conclusions was not poor, and their willingness to answer questions had improved compared to previous years, acknowledging the efforts of junior high school teachers.
However, according to the center's statistics, 10,119 students scored zero on the first non-choice question, and 12,237 students scored zero on the second.
Professor Hsieh explained that the first sub-question of the first non-choice question could be solved using elementary school math knowledge, simply by adding 2 repeatedly with fingers. However, understanding the problem, planning a solution strategy, reasoning, and expressing the process still required junior high school-level abilities.
During grading, Professor Hsieh found that many students, even if they calculated the correct answer, could not accurately and completely express their problem-solving process. For the second sub-question of the first question, many students misunderstood the problem, for example, answering 'that week' when the question asked about 'that day'.
The second non-choice question had the highest blank answer rate (27.18%) since the implementation of the 108 curriculum guidelines. Professor Hsieh analyzed that this might be because it tested geometry reasoning concepts, which are the content students fear most. However, she also noted that only 9.28% of students who answered the question scored zero, estimating that about 60% of students did not give up when faced with this difficult problem.
Professor Hsieh pointed out that the willingness of this year's test-takers to answer non-choice questions was higher than last year, mainly because the questions did not require strong reading comprehension skills. However, she still recommended that junior high school teachers strengthen students' ability to transform the relationships of numbers, quantities, and shapes in real-life complex situations into mathematical formulas. (Editor: Chang Ming-kun) 1150605