University Admissions: Why do many candidates pass and then fail?

Speaking to Tien Phong newspaper reporters, Dr. Hoang Ngoc Vinh, former Director of the Department of Vocational Education ( Ministry of Education and Training ), said that this year's university admissions are somewhat chaotic mainly because of the new conversion policy but the lack of a national standard framework, leading to each school doing things their own way, creating many differences.

The regulations were issued and revised quite late, causing confusion for schools and not allowing candidates to understand the rules of the game. When all applications are put into the common system, the amount of data is too large, and the load has not been tested, increasing the possibility of unforeseen errors.

The virtual filtering algorithm has to handle many more variables than previous years, just one incorrect input step can mess up the results. Previous years were less complicated, because each selection method was usually independent, virtual filtering was mainly in a small range, so it was not as "confused" as this year.

“Don't mix all methods into one pot”

This year, the exam questions for many subjects were assessed as difficult, but the benchmark scores for many majors did not decrease, and even increased, with 6 majors reaching 30/30 points. In university admissions, do you think this situation is good or worrying?

I think this is a cause for concern. The increase in benchmark scores does not necessarily reflect better candidate abilities, but is mainly due to the lack of standard score conversion, too few quotas for some hot majors, plus regional and target priorities. When many factors come together, benchmark scores are pushed up to the "ceiling" of 30/30. This easily creates an illusion of achievement, making society mistakenly believe that input quality has skyrocketed. In fact, the difference comes from the selection technique, not actual ability. In the long run, this causes unfair psychology and distorts the classification signal.

Some people say that percentiles in university admissions are not perfect, leading to many paradoxes. Next year, do you support the continued use of percentiles in admissions?

Percentiles are theoretically a useful tool, but are only valuable when the data are large enough and meet statistical standards: the distribution is not distorted, the error is small, the characteristics are stable and there is no bias between groups of candidates. Currently, these conditions are not guaranteed, so the widespread application has given rise to many paradoxes. I think we need to continue research and controlled testing instead of hastily "popularizing". More importantly, we should not mix all methods into one "pot" of percentiles. A fairer way is to require schools to clearly determine the quota ratio for each method based on statistics for several years on each method and make it public early so that candidates can be proactive. The Ministry will monitor this and schools will be more autonomous under the Law on Higher Education and be accountable to society.

Should we abolish the policy of converting English scores from certificates like IELTS?

This year's high benchmark score has one factor: candidates have IELTS certificates converted to English graduation exam scores. Do you support this option of the schools?

Personally, I do not support it. IELTS only reflects foreign language ability, it cannot represent thinking or overall academic ability. When converting IELTS into graduation exam scores, it unintentionally creates unfairness: students who do not have the conditions to study IELTS are disadvantaged, while candidates with IELTS have "leverage" to overcome the standard score. As a result, even with excess standard scores, some students still fail, while their ability is not necessarily lower than those who get high scores due to conversion.

A more reasonable way is to use IELTS to exempt or reduce the amount of English courses in universities, instead of turning it into a direct comparison tool between candidates in admissions. The policy of converting English scores from certificates such as IELTS to high school graduation English exam scores should also be completely abandoned. There is absolutely no empirical scientific basis for an equivalent standard framework and the content of the IELTS assessment is inherently different from the structure of the English graduation exam content.

I think that except for majors that require IELTS English, each university considers it a limiting criterion, similar to requiring Math or English to pass a certain threshold in graduation exams, but the majority should be removed completely.

In next year's enrollment, what changes does the Ministry of Education and Training need to make to ensure fair exams for candidates?

First of all, it is necessary to thoroughly grasp the spirit of Resolution 71 of the Politburo : university admissions must ensure "... correct assessment of learners' capacity, ensuring unified control of input standards of training majors". To do so, the Ministry should stabilize the regulations for at least 5 years to avoid the situation of constantly changing the law. Minimize strange admission combinations without evidence linked to input standards of training majors. At the same time, it is necessary to standardize exam questions and build a national conversion framework based on empirical research, not letting each school do it its own way.

The criteria for each method should be clearly defined, based on statistics from recent years and announced early. The virtual filtering algorithm and the admission process need to be more transparent, with published errors for social monitoring. In particular, I think the Ministry needs to listen more to expert opinions before issuing policies, and dialogue with schools, absorb and improve. Every year, the whole society looks forward to it. If the university entrance exam and admission process is better, society will have more confidence in the admission process and the education sector in general.

Thank you!