Abstract: Published data from the Ministry of Education of China show that more female students than male students in Mainland China passed the college entrance examination. In 2013, the female-male ratio of college admission rose up to 55:45. As a result, the percentage of female graduate students reached 51.65%, and that of female undergraduate students reached 52.12%. Meanwhile, the percentage of female students in high schools is less than 50%. Such a situation might be considered as a sign of development of China, as it happened in many developed countries earlier. But its potential consequences should be studied. The gender gap in college entrance examination scores might lead to the increase of the number of female students in high education institutions. Meanwhile, this gender gap might be widened under the proposed reform of National College Entrance Exam (NCEE), where students would take only three subjects (mathematics, Chinese and Foreign Language). Female students are better at the latter two than male students. As a response to this situation, some people even propose to “save the boys.” The present article reviews some recent major studies on the gender gap in college entrance examination scores from multiple perspectives: the gender gap in college entrance examination scores and of subject (Mathematics, Chinese, and Foreign Language) scores; the gender gaps in subfields of a given subject; the gender differences in cognitive goals and the causes of these gaps. This review reveals that in general there exists an academic gender gap in college entrance examination. Some studies show that the gender difference is not significant in mathematics, whereas females perform significantly better than males in Chinese and English. Subfields of a given subject might have different modes of gender gap: some may be positive (males better than females), whereas others negative. The gender gap influences the university admission ratio of males to females. Competing results are found due to the complicated influential factors, including psycho-traits, behavioral and emotional differences. Although some studies propose that gender differences in most psycho-traits were very small, they also point out that men are better at science, mechanical reasoning and spatial ability, while women are better at language, perception and arithmetic. Gender gap also takes the form of behavioral or emotional differences when students are coping with their learning and tests. Other factors involve motivation, anxiety, personal traits, social economic status, self-concept level, cognitive self-regulation, locus of control, competitiveness of test situation, and type of schools. Females can get more offers when they submit their applications after learning their exact NCEE scores. In conclusion, this article poses a number of problems to be solved. For example, is it necessary for NCEE to measure or even reduce the gender gap? How to manipulate the item characteristics to change the gender gap size? There are also some unknown causes of gender gap (including the possible difference of male and female’s score distribution). We know little about the consequences of current female-male ratio of college admission, including the problem of educational equity, females’ adaptation in their college career. A meta-analysis of studies on gender gap is needed in order to draw stronger conclusions.