[2026 CSAT] Admissions Industry: "Math Section Was Somewhat Harder Than Last Year’s CSAT and September Mock Test... Questions 21 and 22 Were Highly Difficult"

"Perceived Difficulty Likely Higher Than Official Assessment"

The admissions industry assessed that the mathematics section of the second period of the 2026 College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) was somewhat more difficult than both last year's CSAT and the mock exam held in September this year. This evaluation differed from the assessment of the EBS on-site teachers’ group, who analyzed that the test was set at a similar level to last year's CSAT.

On the 14th, Jongro Academy stated in its analysis, "The test was somewhat more difficult than the September mock exam and last year's CSAT," adding, "It is estimated that examinees perceived the difficulty level to be slightly higher than the assessment by the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation."

On the morning of the 13th, when the 2026 College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) was held, examinees were preparing for the exam at the testing site set up at Gyeongbok High School in Jongno-gu, Seoul. 251113. Photo by Joint Press Corps

For elective subjects, probability and statistics, as well as calculus, were considered to be somewhat more difficult than in September, while geometry was set at a similar level to the September mock exam.

For the common subjects, the most challenging questions were identified as number 21 (subjective, 4 points, function inference) and number 22 (subjective, 4 points, exponential and logarithmic functions), which was in agreement with the analysis by the EBS on-site teachers’ group.

In the calculus elective, the most difficult question was number 30 (subjective, 4 points, differentiation). In probability and statistics, the most difficult was number 30 (subjective, 4 points, counting cases), and in geometry, it was number 30 (subjective, 4 points, plane vectors).

Jongro Academy noted, "Although question patterns similar to the June and September exams by the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation appeared, the actual process of finding the correct answers was likely quite challenging."

Yonhap News Agency

Kim Byoungjin, Director of the Educational Assessment Research Institute at Etoos, also determined, "Compared to the previous year's CSAT, it seems that a majority of students felt it was slightly more difficult."

Director Kim stated, "There is a certain gap in difficulty within the common subjects, so the time spent solving these may become a key factor. If students managed their time by skipping questions they intended to give up on and focusing on solvable ones, there may not have been significant issues. However, for those who persisted with difficult questions, the test could have been quite tough." He also viewed questions 21 and 22, which are in the common subjects, as the most differentiating items.

He added, "Questions 21 and 22 were designed to serve as differentiators, and question 30 in calculus required considerable calculation, likely taking a lot of time to solve."

Nam Yoongon, Director of the Admissions Strategy Research Institute at Megastudy Education, evaluated, "The common section and calculus were set at a similar level of difficulty to last year's CSAT, while probability and statistics and geometry were more difficult than the previous year's test." Director Nam added, "Since the overall question types and trends were similar to those of the mock exams in June and September, students who thoroughly analyzed and studied those mock exams would not have faced significant difficulties in solving the problems."

Lee Manki, Director of the Educational Assessment Research Institute at Uway, also commented, "While there were no extremely difficult questions, a number of high-difficulty questions were included to maintain differentiation," and assessed, "The common questions, calculus, and geometry were set at levels similar to last year's CSAT and the mock exams in June and September, but probability and statistics were somewhat more difficult, minimizing the advantage or disadvantage among elective subjects."