Under the proposed plan, Vietnam will reduce the number of public education institutions by at least 30%, while localities with favourable conditions will aim for reductions of around 50%. The entire restructuring is to be completed by August 30, 2026.

According to calculations by the Ministry of Education and Training, more than 11,000 public schools nationwide will be reduced through the process.

For years, almost every school has operated as a separate unit, with its own principal, vice principals and administrative apparatus. That model once suited the development conditions of individual localities.

But transport infrastructure, socio-economic conditions and the structure of local government have changed. Continuing to maintain too many separate administrative units now means spreading resources too thinly.

This restructuring takes a different approach.

A school created through a merger may manage several campuses, but what is being reduced is the management structure, not the number of classrooms. Students can continue studying at their existing campuses, and teachers can remain in the classrooms where they have long taught. It is the intermediate layers of administration that will be reorganised under a unified management structure.

This is the right direction because, ultimately, administrative reform should not be about reducing the number of institutions simply to meet a numerical target. Its purpose should be to redirect resources to where educational quality is actually determined.

For schools, that place is the classroom.

That is why the most important aspect of this reform is not the reduction of more than 11,000 schools as administrative entities, but the reassignment of more than 20,000 education managers.

Of these, around 11,000 are expected to return to teaching.

This represents a shift of human resources away from administration and back toward education itself.

A principal or vice principal returning to the classroom should not be seen as taking a step backwards professionally. Rather, it is a return to the role society needs most from an educator: teaching.

If an education system exists to serve teaching and learning, then its best human resources should also be prioritised for that purpose.

The way local governments are implementing the policy further illustrates the underlying spirit of the reform.

Quang Ninh plans to reduce its number of public education institutions by 49.12%, while Hanoi is targeting a reduction of around 49%. Hue is aiming for approximately 45%, Hai Phong between 35% and 40%, and Nghe An around 39%.

An Giang has already completed an initial phase in which 238 units were consolidated into 119 new schools.

Notably, Quang Ninh plans to retain surplus land and buildings following the mergers, prioritising them for expanding learning spaces at the remaining schools.

That approach demonstrates that the purpose of the reform is not to shrink education, but to concentrate resources in ways that can improve teaching and learning.

This time, the reform begins with a different question: How should the education system be organised so that teaching and learning become more effective?

It is a reasonable starting point. If the administrative apparatus remains cumbersome and resources continue to be fragmented, achieving meaningful change inside classrooms will be difficult.

Education reform cannot begin and end with textbooks. It must also start with the way the education system itself is organised.

But that is only the first step.

Once the foundations of the system have been reorganised, a larger question emerges: What kind of people should these schools prepare for the demands of a world changing at extraordinary speed?

A rapidly changing world

The restructuring of more than 11,000 schools suggests that Vietnam is beginning education reform by reconsidering how the system itself is organised.

Looking beyond Vietnam, however, shows that structural reform is only the beginning.

Once administrative systems have been reorganised, many countries have taken another step: changing what they teach to keep pace with shifts in society and the economy.

Japan offers one example.

Faced with a declining birth rate and a sustained fall in student numbers, Japan has spent years reorganising its school network, particularly in areas with small populations.

Japan does not necessarily regard a reduction in the number of schools as a failure of education. Instead, it has accepted larger schools as a way to concentrate teachers, facilities and budgets rather than continuing to divide resources among institutions serving steadily shrinking student populations.

The ultimate objective is not to reduce the number of schools, but to maintain educational quality in a society whose demographics have changed.

If Japan has adjusted the scale of its education system, universities in the United States have responded rapidly to changes in labour-market demand.

As artificial intelligence, data science, cybersecurity, semiconductors and emerging technologies become increasingly important drivers of the economy, academic programmes are changing with them.

As the labour market shifts, universities adjust.

The lesson is that higher education cannot simply transmit existing knowledge. It must also respond quickly enough to changes in technology and employment.

China provides another example.

Between 2021 and 2025, more than 12,200 undergraduate programmes were cut, suspended from admitting new students or merged, primarily in fields considered no longer aligned with emerging workforce needs.

During the same period, more than 10,200 new programmes were introduced, with a focus on areas including artificial intelligence, robotics, semiconductors, data science and smart manufacturing.

At the school level, core subjects remain in place, but artificial intelligence was introduced into primary and junior secondary education in Beijing from September 2025.

Alongside this has been the “Double Reduction” policy, designed to reduce the burden of homework and after-school tutoring so that students have more time to develop their thinking, technological skills and physical abilities.

These are three different stories and three different approaches, but they point toward the same conclusion.

Education cannot remain detached from changes taking place within a country or across the wider world.

Some countries begin by reorganising their school networks. Others prioritise changes to curricula and training programmes. Some pursue both at the same time.

Ultimately, however, they are moving toward education systems that are more flexible and better able to adapt to new development needs.

Seen in that context, Vietnam’s restructuring of more than 11,000 schools can be regarded as the first building block in a much longer reform process.

Streamlining administration so that more resources can be concentrated on teaching is a necessary first step.

But once the foundations of the system have been strengthened, the larger question will remain: What kind of people should Vietnam’s education system prepare for an economy evolving at such speed?

International experience suggests that no education system can prepare for the future with an administrative structure rooted in the past or a curriculum that never changes.

The restructuring of more than 11,000 schools should therefore be viewed as a beginning.

Eventually, the most important question will no longer be how many schools Vietnam has, but what kind of generation those schools are preparing for the country’s future.

Lan Anh