A series of new policies by MOET had been described as unreasonable and backward, and many of them were not realistic, observers said.

On August 20, MOET submitted to the National Council for Education and Human Resource Development a plan to reform the curricula and textbooks for general education. Two options on the number of school years for primary and secondary levels were also suggested by MOET.

First, basic education would be implemented for 10 school years, including five years of primary education and five years of secondary education. After that, students will have attend two years at high school with career-oriented education.

With the second option, basic education would be implemented during nine school years, including five years of primary and four years of secondary education. After that, students will attend three years at high school.

However, just several days later, at a consultation meeting with the National Assembly’s Committee for Culture, Education, the Youth and Children on August 28, the ministry announced it had withdrawn the suggested plan on restructuring the general education.

MOET’s Deputy Minister Nguyen Vinh Hien said at the meeting that his ministry has rethought and decided to maintain the current 12-year general education system.

Hien explained that MOET drew up the plan on general education system restructuring after hearing suggestions from some experts. However, as relevant agencies and individuals did not applaud the plan, MOET believed that it would be better to keep the current system intact.

Dao Trong Thi, Chair of the National Assembly’s Committee for Culture, Education, the Youth and Children, also thinks it is not necessary to add one more school year to the secondary education system, and that it would cost a lot of money.

“Nine years is really enough for compulsory education,” he noted. “After spending nine years at school, students will be grown up enough to go to vocational school.”

Professor Nguyen Minh Thuyet noted that MOET should have thought carefully before submitting any reform plan.

“The MOET’s initiatives were put forward unexpectedly, while the ministry did not even conduct research on the possible impact on society once the policies are applied,” Thuyet said, adding that “they are worthy of blame.”

Parents and students also many times criticized MOET for its surprising decisions which put students on the defensive.

The ministry, for example, made a series of decisions relating to the high school final exam in March, just three months before the exam took place in June.

On internet education forums, students have complained that they serve as experimental “white rats” for MOET’s experiments.