2027 Edition of the Gaokao Blue Book Shifts Toward Competency Assessment, Lawyers Analyze Education and Training Contract Disputes and Intellectual Property Compliance Risks

The 2027 edition of the Gaokao Blue Book was recently released, explicitly proposing a shift in the Gaokao evaluation system from “knowledge possession” to “ability improvement,” and bringing together practical answers from frontline teachers. This shift not only affects teaching and exam preparation, but also, at the legal level, brings a series of contract, intellectual property, and compliance issues to the education and training industry, schools, and parents. As a lawyer team that has long served educational institutions, we attempt to break down the risks and responses behind this reform from a legal perspective.

I. If the ability-improvement promise in an education and training contract cannot be fulfilled, it may constitute a breach of contract.

The Blue Book emphasizes assessing students' ability to apply knowledge comprehensively rather than rote memorization. Many training institutions have quickly responded, immediately advertising slogans in their enrollment brochures such as ability improvement, competency orientation, and alignment with the new college entrance examination. But the question is: if a contract expressly stipulates improving ability in a certain subject or reaching a certain score range, and the student's final score falls short of expectations, can parents demand a refund or compensation?

Article 577 of the Civil Code provides that if a party fails to perform its contractual obligations or performs them in a manner inconsistent with the agreement, it shall bear liability for breach of contract, such as continuing performance, taking remedial measures, or compensating for losses. Education and training contracts are service contracts. If an institution promises specific ability-development goals in advertisements or in the contract but fails to achieve them because its teaching staff or courses do not keep up, parents may claim breach of contract. In practice, courts usually examine whether the contract terms are clear and whether the institution actually provided the corresponding services. If the promotional language is vague, such as “help improve abilities,” it is relatively difficult to deem it a contractual obligation; however, if it is written into the contract or a separate written commitment, it is binding on the institution.

Lawyers advise: When signing contracts, parents should require institutions to break down “ability improvement” into measurable phased goals and retain evidence such as enrollment brochures and chat records. Institutions, in turn, should avoid exaggerated advertising and clearly specify the service content and boundaries of liability exemption in the contract; otherwise, they may face mass refund disputes.

II. Copyright Ownership of Teaching and Research Materials and Examination Questions Becomes a New Minefield in Competition Among Institutions

The Blue Book compiles answers from frontline teachers, and its content may involve written works such as exam questions, analyses, and teaching methods. If a training institution directly copies or adapts such content for commercial courses, it may infringe copyright.

Article 52 of the Copyright Law provides that anyone who, without the permission of the copyright owner, reproduces, distributes, performs, screens, broadcasts, compiles, or communicates a work to the public through information networks shall, depending on the circumstances, bear civil liability such as cessation of the infringement, elimination of adverse effects, apology, and compensation for losses. If the Gaokao Blue Book itself constitutes a compilation work, its original arrangement is protected; if the answers of frontline teachers are original, they also constitute written works. If an institution incorporates the contents of the Blue Book into lecture notes or question banks and sells them without permission, the rights holder may claim infringement.

In practice, many institutions use materials on a small scale under the names of "internal materials" and "classroom handouts," but if they disseminate them online or print them in large quantities, they may still be found to have infringed. In 2023, a court in a certain place ruled that a training institution had to compensate the rights holder for economic losses and reasonable expenses for unauthorized copying of analyses of college entrance examination questions and using them in paid courses.

Lawyers recommend that institutions establish content compliance review mechanisms; when using views from the Blue Book, they should limit such use to “reasonable quotation,” indicate the source, and avoid copying entire paragraphs. When cooperating with teachers to develop courses, they should clearly specify copyright ownership through contracts to prevent subsequent disputes.

III. Schools and Teachers’ Participation in Blue Book Compilation: The Boundary Between Works Made for Hire and Labor Relations

The Blue Paper, with its “answers from front-line teachers,” means that a large number of teachers participated in the writing. If teachers participate as commissioned by schools or publishers, their works may constitute service works. Under Article 18 of the Copyright Law, a work created by a natural person in order to complete the work tasks of a legal person or an unincorporated organization is a service work; unless otherwise provided, the copyright is enjoyed by the author, but the legal person or unincorporated organization has the right to priority use of the work within its business scope.

If a teacher, without the school's consent, uses written content for profit at an off-campus training institution, this may violate the duty of loyalty under the labor contract and may even involve trade secret infringement. If the school agrees with the teacher that the results belong to the school, it must pay corresponding rewards.

Lawyers remind: When teachers participate in similar projects, they should first confirm the contractual terms with their employer to avoid labor disputes or infringement lawsuits arising from unclear ownership. Schools should also improve their intellectual property management systems and clarify the scope of works created in the course of employment and the reward mechanism.

IV. Parents' Rights Protection Pathways and Institutional Compliance Recommendations

Amid the training boom brought about by the college entrance examination reform, if parents encounter false advertising by institutions, teaching staff not conforming to representations, or difficulties in obtaining refunds, they may claim treble damages for fraud under Article 55 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law, but they must prove that the institution intentionally provided false information or concealed the true situation. In practice, parents may first file a complaint with the education authorities or resolve the matter through litigation.

For institutions, the compliance priorities are: advertising must not use prohibited wording such as guaranteed score improvement or taught by exam question setters; contracts should clearly state refund rules; teaching and research content must obtain lawful authorization. Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has represented multiple education and training contract disputes, and we have found that institutions that prepare contract templates and conduct intellectual property reviews in advance are often in an advantageous position in disputes.

The shift in the Gaokao Blue Book is, in essence, an upgrade of the educational evaluation system. The law will not directly evaluate teaching methods, but it will regulate the resulting contracts, torts, and competitive conduct. Parents, teachers, and institutions alike should hold the legal bottom line amid the wave of reform and use rules to protect their own rights and interests.