One thing we should keep in mind when evaluating these scores is that there is a different cost/benefit calculation in different countries, especially for math

One thing we should keep in mind when evaluating these scores is that there is a different cost/benefit calculation in different countries, especially for math scores. For instance, take a look at the "best jobs sorted by high pay" (from cnn) http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bestjobs/2010/highpay/index.html http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bestjobs/2010/highpa... There are some techy jobs on there that do require substantial amounts of math[1] (software engineering director, actuary, computer and information scientist). However, the extremely well paid health fields listed generally require only a single year of an easier track of college calculus, and lawyers don't have to take any math at all. In China, most top government officials are engineers or scientists, whereas in the US, they're more typically poly sci majors who wen to law school. I think that top US students have rationally concluded that you need to get pretty good at math to have access to the top jobs and positions, but that after a certain point, there's a diminishing return and an opportunity cost (ie., time is better spent on other subjects, playing sports, developing leadership skills, and so forth). Of course, this is true of all nations, but I think that the rewards for going farther with math are higher in China (and perhaps France) than they are in the US. [1] by "substantial math", I mean educational paths that require you take the full two years of math/hard science/engineering track calculus, rather than the slower paced, one year track often offered to premed or economics students.