The question now is not just whether to keep or abolish this exam, but how one exam can effectively serve two inherently different objectives.
Three main options are being discussed. First, organize two separate exams: one for high school graduation and one for university entrance. This option is clear in its objectives but difficult to implement due to high costs for budget and human resources, creating double pressure on students and resurfacing widespread exam preparation courses. Many universities also lack the capacity and resources to organize their own standardized entrance exams. Second, abolish the high school graduation exam entirely, entrusting the assessment and certification of graduation to the universities themselves.
However, this option is flawed because there is no independent quality assurance system. Recognizing graduation solely based on internal assessments can easily lead to a loss of trust, unfairness, and difficulties in student placement after high school and international recognition of degrees for studying abroad. The third option: maintaining a single national exam – remains the most feasible choice if properly adjusted. The focus is not on the number of exams but on how to design one exam to achieve both objectives.
It is crucial to clearly define which parts of the exam are intended to assess graduation eligibility and which are for university admissions. Once the objectives are clearly defined, the exam structure should be adjusted accordingly. Literature and Foreign Languages should be separated as these are specialized subjects reflecting the fundamental competencies required for both high school students and future university students. The remaining sections should be designed in an integrated manner, allowing students to choose subjects that align with their career aspirations.
An exam could combine subjects like Mathematics, Physics, and Chemistry, or History, Geography, Economics , and Law, to assess comprehensive thinking skills. This approach would address the problem of students focusing on fixed subject combinations while simultaneously improving the quality of university entrance. Of course, for such an exam to operate effectively, three prerequisites are necessary: professional personnel, modern technology, and a clear legal framework. Specifically, the exam-setting team needs to have deep expertise, with clear divisions between the graduation exam question-setting group and the admissions support group; technology should be applied in building a standardized question bank, conducting computer-based exams, and processing assessment data. Legally, clear regulations regarding the roles, responsibilities, and powers of the entities involved in the examination and admissions system need to be amended or enacted to ensure transparency and stability.
In the context of ongoing consultations on amendments to the Law on Higher Education , this is a crucial time to clearly establish the autonomy of higher education institutions in student admissions, based on the principle of accountability. Given that many universities still face financial difficulties and limited management capacity, the lack of standardized entrance requirements could easily lead to lax admissions practices, impacting their reputation and the quality of education. Therefore, the law should stipulate that the Ministry of Education and Training plays the role of issuing the framework of entrance competency standards, recognizing independent testing organizations, and supervising the quality of examinations, while universities have full autonomy to choose their own appropriate admission methods.
The amendment of the Higher Education Law needs to be accompanied by examination reform so that the entire system shifts from a control-oriented mindset to one that encourages quality, from imposition to conditional empowerment. A single exam can still effectively serve both graduation and university admissions – if the objectives are clearly defined and redesigned in a flexible and professional manner. Then, the common exam will no longer be a "bottleneck" but a "pillar" for the harmonious and sustainable development of both general and higher education. It is time for a thorough reform of examinations and quality assessment within the system, based on key pillars: technology; socialization of resources; and the professionalism of the staff.
Source: https://www.sggp.org.vn/de-ky-thi-thuc-su-la-diem-tua-post802869.html
Comment (0)