It has proposed a piloting mechanism for self-assessment and appointment of professorship titles for some major universities.

The issue was raised at the national scientific seminar themed “Modernizing and elevating Vietnam’s higher education, creating breakthroughs in high-level human resource and talent development, leading research and innovation” co-organized by the Central Propaganda and Mass Mobilization Commission, Party Committee of the Ministry of Education and Training, and VUNUHCMC.

The university commented that the current process of recognizing and appointing professors and associate professors overlaps and is not aligned with international practices.

First, on assessment and appointment procedures, the current multi-level council approach (institutional, discipline, inter-discipline, and state) involves many unnecessary steps. Functions of the Institutional Professor Council and Discipline/Inter-discipline Professor Councils largely overlap. Dual review of the same content prolongs assessment time and increases administrative burden for candidates.

Second, regarding appointment terms, under Decision 37/2018/QD-TTg, professors and associate professors are appointed for five years. After the term ends, universities will consider reappointments. Paradoxically, even if not reappointed, those who meet the standard still retain the title and can be appointed elsewhere. This mechanism disconnects appointment from actual contributions and responsibilities at their institutions.

“Some individuals become less active in research after earning their academic titles, while others who are not reappointed face career difficulties and must move to other institutions for recognition. This creates instability and reduces transparency in managing and utilizing professors and associate professors,” HCMC National University stated.

Third, regarding academic title standards, Decision 37 still lacks consistency and compatibility with international norms. For example, the requirement of at least 10 consecutive years of teaching for both positions is too rigid, ignoring disciplinary differences and discouraging young scientists, especially those trained abroad.

Moreover, the publication requirements (a minimum of three papers for associate professors and five for professors) are quantitative rather than qualitative, failing to reflect true academic value and research impact. 

The lack of clear classification of scientific publications leads to “averaging,” where review articles, case reports, and commentaries are weighted equally, reducing fairness for researchers with original studies. The current rules do not recognize reputable international book chapters as valid publications, disadvantaging social sciences and humanities scholars.

Inconsistencies among disciplinary councils create room for subjectivity, reducing transparency and academic trust. Additionally, the overemphasis on international publication counts contributes to the commercialization of academia, increasing predatory journals and harming national research credibility.

Fourth, despite young scientist support programs (VNU350) that helps complete associate professor applications, higher education institutions, including key universities, lack authority to recognize titles. Cumbersome administration discourages young scientists, reduces research motivation, and fails to fully leverage lecturer and researcher potential.

“There should be genuine decentralization for leading universities in assessing and recognizing academic titles, linking responsibility with autonomy. This is a crucial step to boost research motivation, enhance faculty quality, and advance science, technology, and innovation development in line with the Politburo’s Resolution 57,” VNUHCMC emphasized.

Universities should be allowed to assess and recognize professors 

VNUHCMC proposed piloting a mechanism allowing several leading universities to assess and recognize professor and associate professor titles independently.

In many countries, academic title assessment is determined internally by universities based on their reputation and research capacity, reflecting academic autonomy and competition. In contrast, Vietnam still assesses titles at the state level, making the process rigid and bureaucratic.

Therefore, universities with strong reputations and scientific capabilities should be piloted to self-evaluate, recognize, and appoint professorship titles under common standards issued by the Prime Minister (or by the Minister of Education and Training under the revised Higher Education Law draft). The recognition results at authorized institutions would hold nationwide legal validity, equivalent to Decision 37. This approach aligns with Resolution 71, promoting academic governance, research quality, and training, moving toward full institutional autonomy.

Pilot duration: three years at multidisciplinary, reputable key universities with many leading scientists. This period allows implementation, evaluation, and summary before expansion.

For talented scientists, especially returnees, recognition should be flexible, allowing equivalence conversion of teaching or work experience criteria based on scientific works, monographs, international papers, or inventions and useful solutions.

VNUHCMC also proposed that authorized universities establish academic integrity councils to ensure scientific reputation and transparency in title recognition. If successful, this model will set a precedent for full academic autonomy at universities, aligning with international trends and maximizing intellectual contribution to sustainable national development.

Le Huyen