Standardizing diplomas raises concerns about ambiguity regarding quality.

Many argue that careful consideration and evaluation of quality control across different training methods are necessary before awarding only one type of degree, whether through full-time or part-time training.

According to the draft Law on Higher Education (amended), the form of training, whether full-time or part-time, will not be indicated on the diploma as currently stipulated. Ms. Nguyen Thi Kim Phung, Director of the Higher Education Department - Ministry of Education and Training , argued that differentiating between full-time and part-time training creates the impression that different training formats already reflect different quality levels.

Two forms, one quality?

According to Ms. Phung, this is why the new bill has introduced two forms: concentrated and non-concentrated. Specifically, Clause 2, Article 6, which regulates the levels and forms of higher education training, clearly states that higher education training levels are implemented in two forms: concentrated and non-concentrated. The non-concentrated form is expected to include part-time and distance learning. Meanwhile, according to the current Higher Education Law, higher education training levels are divided into two forms: full-time and continuing education.

Full-time students of Ho Chi Minh City University of Education at their graduation ceremony. Photo: TAN THANH

Ms. Phung stated that non-intensive training differs not only in methodology but also in curriculum standards, teacher standards, organizational methods, assessment, and output standards, all of which must be built on the same basis as intensive training. Everything is built on the same curriculum standards, teacher standards, and output standards to award a standard diploma (!?).

They are worlds apart.

Some experts argue that, theoretically, there is no distinction in quality between the two training systems; the degrees from both systems are essentially the same and are evaluated equally. However, in reality, quality control is completely different.

Professor Dao Trong Thi, former Director of Hanoi National University, pointed out the reality that many universities are expanding enrollment in part-time programs in local areas. However, organizing training, testing, and evaluation right in the local area results in very limited training quality.

"Clearly, the quality cannot be the same. If we had advanced assessment techniques, and independent testing and evaluation were separate from the training process, this could be achieved, meaning that different learning methods could be evaluated the same way. In situations where we cannot yet effectively control testing and evaluation, the training method should be indicated on the diploma. This is a way to inform employers so they can select personnel that meet their requirements," Mr. Thi observed.

Dr. Hoang Ngoc Vinh, former Director of the Department of Professional Education - Ministry of Education and Training, shares this concern. According to Dr. Vinh, the cultural background of Vietnamese people still has many problems, especially regarding honesty in learning, and this is influenced by the labor market, particularly in the public sector.

However, Dr. Vinh believes that eliminating the form of training based on diplomas is a necessary regulation, but it must be accompanied by strict conditions. With this regulation, the responsibility of schools and students is very significant.

Strengthening the accreditation of training programs.

Amid concerns about potential negative consequences arising from the elimination of distinctions between full-time and part-time degree programs, the head of the Higher Education Department expects that educational institutions, while prioritizing the quality of their training, will exercise caution when issuing degrees.

According to Ms. Nguyen Thi Kim Phung, once negative issues arise, students will disagree and fight back because their diplomas will be confused with other diplomas that do not meet quality standards. "All diplomas must meet standards when issued because there will no longer be a distinction between part-time and full-time diplomas. This will be an affirmation to society about the quality of the school's training," Ms. Phung said. She added that in the near future, the accreditation of training programs will be strengthened. Program accreditation will be linked to the accreditation of the organization and management of training for each program and the awarding of diplomas for that program.

Dr. Hoang Ngoc Vinh emphasized the need to clarify the concepts of "full-time" and "part-time," specifically referring to full-time and part-time study. This should be included in the law because qualifications are already defined by the national qualifications framework, with its "backbone" being the output standards and the number of credits. Universities must specify these for each training program according to that framework. Furthermore, there are the conditions for ensuring the quality of the university, including: laws, regulations, the quality and qualifications of the faculty, the characteristics of the recruitment source, resources, program implementation, examinations and assessments, and the relationship between the university and businesses... These conditions are relatively difficult to standardize, and this presents a challenge.

"The implementation of training programs can be shortened in formal settings and extended in informal settings, provided that the required number of credits, learning outcomes, and quality assurance conditions are met," Mr. Vinh commented.

It's unfair to the regular education system!

When the draft Law on Higher Education (amended) was open for public consultation, one of the issues of public concern was that universities would only award one type of degree for both full-time and part-time training programs.

Many argue that such regulations are unfair in terms of the value of different training systems. This is because everyone knows that full-time training at universities today follows a more focused, professional, and higher-quality program. Admissions at full-time universities are usually rigorous, ensuring good quality control for incoming students. Upon graduation, students possess the necessary qualifications, knowledge, and skills to be employed.

During their full-time university education, students must always adhere to the educational regulations of their respective universities. Failure to meet the curriculum requirements may result in suspension or inability to graduate. Therefore, the value of a full-time degree is highly regarded by society. Many companies prioritize hiring graduates with full-time degrees.

Currently, in some localities, regulations in government agencies stipulate that the recruitment, appointment, and reappointment of officials and civil servants prioritize those with formal university degrees, while limiting those with part-time or distance learning degrees.

Furthermore, current part-time or distance learning university programs are designed for those who work while studying. Many universities prioritize quantity over quality in their admissions for these programs. In some cases, students can enroll simply by registering. The study programs are short, student management regulations are lax, and the widespread practice of having others attend classes or take exams on behalf of others is difficult to control. Therefore, most distance learning or part-time university programs are primarily used to legitimize employment applications. A significant number of civil servants are pursuing these programs to meet the requirements for promotion, transfer, and placement within the state apparatus.

Therefore, the proposed amendment to the Higher Education Law, which stipulates that only one type of degree will be awarded for both full-time and part-time training programs, is unfair to full-time students, fails to differentiate between training quality, and significantly impacts their job prospects after graduation. This regulation also considerably affects universities currently offering full-time programs in terms of investing in facilities and equipment for training.

Therefore, the upcoming bill should continue to inherit the regulations on full-time and part-time training to clearly distinguish the quality of these training methods.

DO VAN NHAN

Source: https://nld.com.vn/giao-duc-khoa-hoc/dong-nhat-van-bang-lo-lap-lo-chat-luong-20171128221034128.htm