Vinh, former Director of the Department of Professtional Education under the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET), said that the 2025 university admission season, with its bold reforms, is expected to reduce pressure and increase fairness; however, there remain gaps in policy and organizational execution. 

Therefore, a clear-sighted approach is needed: recognizing reform efforts, pointing out shortcomings, and drawing lessons to ensure more transparent, fair, and effective admissions in future years.

University admissions: bold reforms, but lacking standardization and fairness

According to Vinh, a positive aspect of this year’s admission process is that MOET required universities to align different admission methods under a unified scoring system. This step aims to promote transparency and reduce inconsistencies between institutions. 

The diversification of admission channels also offers students more opportunities, besides the national high school graduation exam. Universities have been granted greater autonomy and are now required to publicize their enrollment quotas and be accountable to the public.

However, these reforms have also exposed limitations. A key issue lies in the lack of a national standard for score conversion. Each university independently converts IELTS scores, academic transcripts, or other exam results, resulting in wide disparities and a lack of transparency.

“One major flaw is converting IELTS into bonus points in the total admission score. This policy lacks scientific basis and creates unfairness for students with limited financial means. A more reasonable solution is to allow admitted students with valid certificates to be exempted from English courses in their university program, rather than using it as a ‘VIP ticket’ for admission,” Vinh said.

Additionally, according to Vinh, the ‘virtual filtering’ system, or ‘loc ao’ in Vietnamese, remains a bottleneck. 

‘Virtual filtering’ is designed to eliminate “virtual” candidates, i.e those who apply to multiple universities but will only enroll in one, so that each university can determine the accurate number of admitted students.

The admissions process requires multiple rounds, delays the announcement of admission scores, and technical system failures repeatedly prevent candidates from checking results. 

There were 7.6 million registered preferences, which led to a surge in virtual applications, causing public concern, wasted costs, and time.

According to Vinh, social equity is also a concern. Regional bonus points have been reduced (students from difficult areas can enjoy bonus points), while advantages from international certificates and high academic records mainly benefit urban students. Rural students lose their “small shield,” making it harder to compete. 

“Positively speaking, educators dared to think and act innovatively this year, expanding opportunities and promoting university accountability. But overall, the innovation lacks a systemic vision and scientific basis, leading to inconsistent conversions, inequity, and declining candidate trust,” Vinh said.

Standardization, transparency, and consistency in admissions

Vinh stated that the 2025 university admissions season shows bold innovation but lacks standardization and long-term vision, leading to inflated admission scores and inequity. 

From this season’s issues, several key lessons can be drawn.

First, a formal national conversion framework must be established. When MOET requires all admission methods to be mapped onto a common “reference system,” it must also provide a shared standard to prevent universities from applying their own inconsistent methods. 

“In particular, the policy of converting IELTS into bonus points must be eliminated. Language certificates should only be used to exempt or replace English courses in university programs, positioning them as tools for assessing competence,” Vinh said.

Next, a non-negotiable principle is that transparency and accountability must be strictly enforced. Once universities are granted autonomy, they must disclose quotas, ratios, and methods, and be held accountable to society.

“An important lesson is that exam designers and policymakers must be highly professional to avoid instability in both exam content and policy management. Graduation exams and university admissions must align with the comprehensive competency development goals of the 2018 curriculum, and effectively measure student capabilities, as highlighted in Resolution 71 of the Politburo “to ‘accurately assess learner competency’,” Vinh added.

Along with this, according to Vinh, social equity must be ensured. Priority policies should be redesigned so that students from disadvantaged areas are not left behind. At the same time, rural students should have expanded access to competency assessment exams.

Finally, technology infrastructure must receive substantial investment. A modern admissions system cannot allow prolonged virtual filtering or recurring technical failures. Technology must serve as a support platform, not a barrier.

Thanh Hung