The Ministry of Education and Training’s plan to conduct high school graduation exams via computer for 100,000 students starting in 2026 is undeniably bold. However, if we merely change the tool without transforming the mindset and assessment content, we risk turning digital transformation into nothing more than a “new coat” for an outdated, high-pressure exam system.

This decision is not just a technical shift. It reflects a strategic reform approach to testing - an inherently sensitive issue for any education system.

However, any reform must be understood within a broader context: education is meant to develop human potential, not serve as a testing ground for new technology.

Digital transformation in education cannot be reduced to replacing paper with screens. If the content remains focused on rote memorization, test-taking tricks, and speed, then computerized exams are simply a high-tech version of the same old pressure. That’s like repainting a wall while ignoring its cracked foundation. Meanwhile, global experiences show that true exam reform only creates turning points when tied to a learning philosophy and a roadmap for comprehensive renewal.

Exams should unlock potential, not increase pressure

There is no single model for testing worldwide, but advanced education systems converge on one principle: exams should unlock students’ potential, not serve as a filtering tool based on pressure.

Even in countries with notoriously intense exams like China (Gaokao) or South Korea (CSAT), the essence of the exam remains a “narrow gate,” regardless of the technological investment. In contrast, the United States, Canada, and Australia have no national high school graduation exams. Instead, universities manage admissions independently based on a student’s entire learning process. In European countries such as France, Germany, and Poland, graduation exams are increasingly standardized and digitized, but mainly to confirm program completion, with a focus on evaluating reasoning and analytical thinking.

Finland - considered a global education model - is digitizing its final exams, but only after optimizing its entire system. By 2025, it will reduce university entrance exams from 120 to just 9 common tests, clearly showing its philosophy: simplify to reduce stress, and digitize selectively.

The international lesson is clear: no country transitions large-scale exams to computers without first standardizing evaluation content, ensuring synchronized infrastructure, and building strong social consensus.

Vietnam at a crossroads: Real reform or superficial change?

Vietnam’s “two-in-one” exam model - serving both graduation and university admission - already creates significant internal pressure. Now, with universities diversifying their admission methods, the Ministry of Education and Training’s push for large-scale computerized exams raises several questions. If the goal is innovation, will exam content evolve accordingly, or will it remain rooted in academic knowledge disconnected from real life? If the goal is digital transformation, how will equitable access to infrastructure and human resources be ensured in remote areas? And if the goal is to reduce stress, why introduce a new exam format that requires students to worry about mastering “computer-based test-taking” skills alongside other assessments?

No exam - computerized or paper-based - can reform education if students still need extra tutoring to “practice standard computer-based tests,” and if the system continues using exam results to eliminate candidates instead of helping them improve.

The path forward for exam reform in Vietnam

For reform to be truly meaningful, it must follow a humane approach and remain faithful to educational values.

First, we must redefine the purpose of the high school graduation exam. It should solely verify completion of the high school curriculum. Screening for university admission should be returned to the autonomy of universities, coupled with accountability for quality.

Second, implementing computer-based testing should begin with small-scale pilots and be independently and transparently evaluated before broader application. Technology should not be introduced at the final stage and labeled as modernization. Instead, there must be investment in a robust, competency-based question bank and systemic change in teaching, learning, and assessment from the ground up.

Most importantly, we need a clear political commitment: students should not be used as test subjects for immature reforms. Good education policy reduces pressure, not shifts risks onto learners and their families in the name of reform.

Digital transformation is a golden opportunity - but without a deep understanding of educational principles, it becomes merely a mask for an outdated system. A progressive education system is not one with countless modern exams, but one where children can learn with less pressure, greater understanding, and better lives. 
An Hai