The proposal in the draft university training regulations allowing students to complete the program in a shorter time is a positive signal in higher education reform in Vietnam.
Creating opportunities for learners to graduate and enter the labor market earlier, reducing the financial burden on families while ensuring training quality, is necessary.
But if this is only seen as a time and cost-saving solution, the issue is only approached at the surface level. More importantly, it is about changing the educational philosophy and improving training quality through the capabilities of learners after graduation.
For a long time, the number of years of study has been a default measure. Learners had to go through 4, 5, or 6 years of study before graduating. While in the new trend, technology develops very rapidly, transforming all areas of socio-economic life, making that approach outdated.
Online learning platforms, artificial intelligence, open data, and global online learning resources are fundamentally changing the way knowledge is accessed. Many professional skills are formed through real-world projects, corporate environments, internship programs, or research activities rather than traditional theoretical lectures.
What the labor market needs is not simply people with degrees, but people with adaptability, creativity, good communication skills, teamwork abilities, technology proficiency, and a commitment to lifelong learning.
Therefore, when students have enough capability to meet graduation standards earlier, they should not be bound by a rigid time frame. Competency-based training, rather than time-based training, is becoming a trend in many advanced education systems worldwide.
However, if it simply allows students to graduate early while the program remains heavy on theory, content is still repetitive, teaching methods are still one-way, and assessment is still primarily exam-based, it will be very difficult to create real change.
Shortening training time is only truly meaningful when accompanied by innovation in the program, content, and training methods.
Universities need to review their entire curriculum with a focus on streamlining and connecting to practice. Modules that are heavy on providing foundational knowledge can be organized in the form of online learning, guided self-study, or digital learning materials.
Schools need to allocate more time for activities that technology can hardly replace, such as developing critical thinking, professional skills, scientific research, practical experience, and business connections.
At the same time, the quality accreditation system must also change towards assessing output results, rather than just controlling training duration. What matters is not how many years students study, but what they can do after graduation.
Of course, not all fields can mechanically shorten training time. Specialized fields such as medicine, law, architecture, or the arts still need to ensure a minimum duration.
However, these fields still have room to reduce time for non-core subjects by increasing the application of digital technology, online learning, and personalizing learning paths. A doctor wanting to practice must still undergo specialized training and obtain a practice license.
A law graduate wanting to become a lawyer, notary, or hold judicial positions must also undergo specific professional training. In a learning society, lifelong
Vietnam National University, Hanoi
<div class="my-4 p-4 rounded-lg shadow-md bg-blue-50 border-l-4 border-blue