Students compete and test their medical skills in a competition for excellent medical students in Ho Chi Minh City - Photo: QL
The debate between the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education and Training over the story of the I, II specialist degrees, resident doctors, masters and doctorates is not just a matter of "changing the name of the degrees" but reveals larger inadequacies in the degree system and the human resource utilization mechanism that has not kept up with the practice of the medical profession.
When the management coat is not the right size, both the learner, the teacher and the patient all suffer. The reality shows that the "administrative coat" is not designed to fit the "real body" and the demands of the current medical industry.
1. On one side, the Ministry of Education and Training maintains the principle of the national diploma system according to the logic of the education system and international standards. On the other side, the medical sector wants to increase the value of professional diplomas by "forcing" them to be equivalent to academic degrees to open up the way to study. The problem is therefore pushed into a spiral of lame comparisons and administrative requirements that are not appropriate to the nature.
The core of the debate lies in the Ministry of Health's desire to recognize CKI or resident physicians as equivalent to master's degrees for admission to postgraduate studies. But in the world, specialized training from residency, CKI, CKII belongs to the professional track, not the academic level. It cannot be "transformed" into a master's degree, which is an academic degree.
This difference is not a matter of name, but a matter of essence. One side deepens knowledge and research, the other side focuses on skills, practice, and professional treatment capacity. Therefore, trying to put one degree in the position of the other inevitably creates conflict and distorts the national qualification framework.
2. The problem is that the Ministry of Education and Training has the authority to decide on the entry requirements for PhDs. If this ministry designs a professional PhD track, it can also open a mechanism to allow CKI and resident doctors to apply by taking make-up courses they are missing such as research methods, biomedical statistics, and scientific thinking. There is no need and should not "magically" force CKI to become a master, just open the right door and raise the entry standards to suit the nature of each type of program.
Meanwhile, the biggest problem today lies in the university training regulations, which stipulate that lecturers must have a master's or doctorate degree to teach medicine, unintentionally eliminating the elite force of practicing doctors - those who hold the scalpel, are on emergency duty, and handle thousands of cases. Medical students not only learn theory but more importantly, learn the profession. If those who can cure diseases are not allowed to teach how to cure diseases, it is a huge waste and a paradox in training.
3. The authority to allow them to participate in teaching lies entirely in the hands of the Minister of Education and Training, the ministry only needs to design requirements for lecturers' competencies appropriate to the specific characteristics of the medical profession. To solve the problem at its root, it is necessary to build a two-track mechanism. One academic track (master's, doctoral research) and one clinical track (residency, CK1, CK2) with a set of independent criteria, properly recognizing the value of professional competence.
At that time, the selection, use or conferment of titles can be based on two parallel standards, no longer forced into a single framework that is not suitable for both sides. This is also the model that many countries apply to both ensure scientific standards and maintain the high practicality of specific fields.
Vietnam can completely design two parallel standards, academic standards and clinical standards, on the basis of training program assessment and professional competency standards set forth by the Law on Medical Examination and Treatment (amended).
4. If we continue to do things the old way, the consequence will not only be a bottleneck in degrees but also damage the competitiveness of medical human resources. In the context of Resolution 71's orientation towards strong innovation in the education and training system, redesigning the path of medical degrees is an urgent requirement to avoid the emergence of long-term "institutional bottlenecks".
Furthermore, as we move towards an evidence-based healthcare model, we need doctors who are both clinically competent and understand applied research thinking. If we do not create a flexible mechanism for them to continue their studies, the medical industry will lose the opportunity to transform the quality of high-quality human resources.
However, any debate about qualifications will hardly make sense without compensation reform. If a good clinician, who carries the highest responsibility in the operating room, continues to receive inadequate salary and benefits just because he lacks an academic degree, the policy will become a mere formality.
When the human resource system does not reflect the true value of labor, any improvement in qualifications is just a facade. A system only works well when the value of work is the foundation, not the formality of the title.
The story is of common interest
The problem is not about who is higher or lower, but whether we respect the logic of the national education system, the logic of the medical profession, and the logic of human resource use.
The Ministry of Education and Training needs to boldly open up the way for specialists and residents to study under its own authority. The Ministry of Health needs to focus on competency standards and quality of practice instead of seeking to legalize degrees.
When the administrative coat is tailored to the right size, a skilled doctor can step up to the podium with dignity and the ultimate beneficiary will be the patient.
Don't waste resources
Look at other fields such as journalism, media, arts... Many veteran journalists, many People's Artists and Meritorious Artists do not need a doctorate to teach. They teach with their own life experiences and skillful skills, and no one considers that as a lower standard.
If journalism, music, and theater are like that, then medicine, a highly specialized profession, should not refuse the valuable teaching resource of experienced doctors who are not masters or doctors.
Source: https://tuoitre.vn/tim-chiec-ao-hanh-chinh-hop-ly-cho-nganh-y-20251128101139174.htm
Comment (0)