In 2026, admission cutoffs for 15 teacher-training majors at the main campus of Ho Chi Minh City University of Education ranged from 23.26 to 29.83 points out of 30.

Chemistry Teacher Education had the highest cutoff at 29.83, followed by Literature Teacher Education and History Teacher Education at 29.8 each, Physics Teacher Education at 29.78 and Mathematics Teacher Education at 29.49.

Nine of the 15 majors had cutoffs of at least 27 points, with five requiring 29 or more.

By comparison, the highest-scoring student nationwide in the C00 subject combination - Literature, History and Geography - in Vietnam’s 2026 high school graduation exam received 28.75 points.

This means that, excluding priority points, even the country’s top C00 scorer fell 1.05 points short of the 29.8 cutoff for Literature Teacher Education and History Teacher Education at Ho Chi Minh City University of Education.

Huynh Trung Phong, director of the university’s Center for Student Support and Entrepreneurship Development, said the admission results were consistent with its published admission plan and criteria.

According to Phong, results from different admission methods were converted and incorporated into a common system. In some majors, large numbers of applicants with outstanding academic records competed for places, driving up competition and admission cutoffs, including under the method based on high school graduation exam results.

“The university’s consistent approach is to select students whose academic ability upon entry meets the requirements for ensuring training quality,” Phong said.

Four categories of priority admission

Ho Chi Minh City University of Education used five admission methods in 2026. For its teacher-training majors, it applied three: priority admission, admission based on high school graduation exam results, and admission combining high school academic records with results from a specialized competency assessment administered by the university.

Priority admission alone was divided into four categories: applicants eligible under national admission regulations; students from specialized high schools who met requirements relating to academic performance, academic competitions or foreign-language certificates; foreign applicants or overseas Vietnamese applying to the Vietnamese Language and Vietnamese Culture program; and applicants who had completed a university preparatory program.

Some majors also required aptitude test scores.

These priority admission categories provide additional opportunities for students with strong academic records or achievements in academic competitions to apply for teacher-training programs. When results are converted and considered within a common admission system, competition for popular majors can intensify further.

However, Ho Chi Minh City University of Education does not disclose how many successful applicants are admitted through each method.

Nguyen Kim Hong, former rector of Ho Chi Minh City University of Education, said high admission cutoffs at teacher-training institutions were a genuine phenomenon, but more data was needed for a comprehensive assessment.

He said education researchers would want to know how many successful applicants were admitted on the basis of high school graduation exam scores and how many entered through other routes, such as direct admission for winners of international or national academic competitions or priority admission for students from specialized high schools.

“Recruiting talented and capable students is encouraging. But teacher-training universities should conduct research comparing the proportions admitted through different methods, as well as their academic performance after the first semester, after one year and over the entire program. That would help address questions surrounding these high admission cutoffs,” Hong said.

One admission method per major proposed from 2028

Under a draft circular amending university admission regulations from Vietnam’s Ministry of Education and Training, each major or degree program would be allowed to use no more than three admission methods from 2027.

From 2028, that limit would fall to one method per major or program. Direct admission and government-nominated admissions would not count toward the limit.

At the institution level, universities would still be permitted to use up to five admission methods under the proposal.

Nguyen Tien Thao, director general of the ministry’s Higher Education Department, said the roadmap was intended to allow each major to select an appropriate method of assessment. It does not mean that every university and degree program nationwide would have to use the same single set of results.

According to Thao, between 2022 and 2026, only 36.4% of all degree-program admissions had an official basis for comparison.

High school academic record scores for the same program were considerably higher than high school graduation exam scores, while more than 2,000 programs recorded gaps of at least three points between different admission methods.

“When the measurement scales are not genuinely equivalent, dividing admission to a single major among multiple pathways can result in applicants of similar ability being treated differently,” Thao said.

Reducing the number of admission methods, he said, is intended to broaden equal opportunity rather than restrict access. Each method would have to be open to all eligible applicants, clearly disclose its criteria and use a common scoring scale.

Universities could still use their own examination results, high school academic records or certificates, but these would have to be incorporated transparently into the published admission method.

If the proposal takes effect, each major would have only one admission method from 2028. Choosing the appropriate measurement scale and approach for evaluating applicants would therefore become increasingly important, particularly for highly competitive fields such as some teacher-training programs.

The case of the country’s top C00 scorer receiving 28.75 points while the cutoffs for Literature Teacher Education and History Teacher Education reached 29.8 illustrates how an admission cutoff under one pathway cannot be viewed separately from the way universities organize, convert and assess results across multiple methods.

This is also one of the issues the proposed reduction in admission methods seeks to address, with greater transparency required in how applicants’ results are assessed and converted.

Le Huyen