In the world increasingly defined by innovations and advanced investment, universities serve as a milestone and a lever to boost our ability to flourish. In response to this reality, some people propose that additional tests should be used to select students by the corresponding universities, while others believe that applying a single national examination as a prerequisite is sounder. This essay will first closely examine both viewpoints before showing my final thoughts.
Admittedly, creating a different admission examination can be beneficial to a certain extent. One prominent benefit is that it can increase the chances of students nationwide to engage in university education. This can be perfectly exemplified by famous universities globally, particularly in Vietnam. This is because many Vietnam universities encourage their applicants to enroll in many tests, for example, TSA in Hanoi University of Science and Technology, or HSA from VNU. Participants of these exams can then stay more assured for their position, largely because they can leverage wisely the adding points to support their final result. Moreover, extending far beyond the democratization of access to university, such exams require learner to grasp many other complex or unfamiliar knowledge. TSA of HUST is a case in point. Those who engage in this exam must, beside maintaining their acquisition of know’ school lessons, discover further through online magazines, theories from higher education, and develop many soft skills, like skimming and scanning. Once getting used to them, learners can effectively cope with the test.
On the other hand, supporters of the latter viewpoint also present justifiable reasons. Since such examinations are inclusive to certain universities and not deeply rooted in the formal education, fully understanding all the regulations and finding out effective learning methods solely appear to be theoretically impossible. In other words, in order to secure a high score, learners must register new courses, balancing school learning and self-study, and relying heavily on senior individuals for support. However, it is apparent that those aforementioned practices are unable to be totally fulfilled by students with difficulty in economic conditions, social anxiety, and fragile mentality. Therefore, sacrificing time and efforts on these exams with regard to easier university application, if not gifted students, can indeed take a toll on family’s finance and trigger many negative reactions in the body. This makes supporters believe that a single national examination should be applied universally to ensure fairness and emphasis the well-being of young adults.
In conclusion, while there are justifications for additional admission tests by specific universities, their drawbacks, however, are better curbed by a single national examination. In my view, priority should be given to a combination of both.