This study investigates three aspects--university major, year, and institution type--in relation to student scientific reasoning. Students from three majors (science, engineering, and education), four year levels (years 1 through 4), and two tiers of Chinese universities (tiers 1 and 2) participated in the study. A large-scale written assessment was conducted using the Lawson's Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR). A series of analysis of variance showed that, although science and engineering majors exhibited higher reasoning skills than education majors and first-tier university attendees higher than second-tier university attendees, student reasoning skills measured by the LCTSR remained nearly constant across the four year levels of higher education, a recurring pattern for all majors and university tiers. Results suggest that current higher education in China has little influence on student scientific reasoning, regardless of what students learn, how long they receive higher education, and what type of institutions they attend. Implications of the study call our attention to the status quo and urge us to rethink meaningful ways that can help students increase key proficiencies needed in scientific practices, such as successful reasoning skills.