How to plug the PhD training gap?

The problem of 'fake PhDs' is a painful story, attracting strong public attention.

It is not only a story about a few individuals cheating, but also a warning about loopholes in training quality control and laxity in the process of supervising doctoral training.

These loopholes have led to some unqualified, even fraudulent, individuals obtaining high academic degrees.

Responsibilities of training facilities and instructors

Worryingly, these vulnerabilities are often only exposed through social media rather than being detected by responsible regulators.

This shows that the monitoring and quality control work at training institutions is not substantial enough, and reflects the lack of close coordination between the authorities. Although monitoring procedures may exist on paper, implementation is still lacking.

In the university education system, especially at the doctoral level, the role of professors and associate professors is very important. They not only impart knowledge, but also shape the thinking and develop the personality of the next generation.

Their responsibility is not only to evaluate academic results, but also to ensure that each doctorate is awarded with the required competence and ethics. An irresponsible or lax professor or associate professor in training can undermine the quality of training and affect the reputation of the entire higher education system.

Although professors and associate professors are primarily responsible for guidance, supervision, and assessment, the responsibility for control lies with the training institutions themselves. Universities need to establish stronger academic quality control and internal monitoring mechanisms to ensure transparency and fairness in the training process.

We cannot rely solely on the ethics of individual professors or associate professors, but there needs to be a clear system of accountability. Schools need to be accountable to society for the quality of their education, instead of letting public opinion and social media play a role in detecting violations.

Accountability

In recent years, the university education system has made many efforts to improve the quality of training, from issuing regulations to tighten input requirements, requiring graduate students to publish scientific works to tightening the thesis defense process.

However, these measures are not strong enough or have not been implemented synchronously, allowing many cases to still be able to "bypass" the system. This raises questions about the accountability of training institutions as well as their direct responsibility to society for their educational products.

In addition, the practice of "both playing football and blowing the whistle" should be limited. Training institutions should not be both training facilities and places where regulations are loosened. The inspection, supervision and assessment of training quality should be more substantive to ensure objectivity. This not only helps improve the quality of doctoral training but also regains the trust of society.

Professional ethics should always be given top priority. Training management agencies should discipline those supervisors and evaluation board members who lack responsibility and professional ethics. Quality gaps can only be permanently closed when those responsible and in authority maintain a spirit of dedication and integrity.

The problem of “fake PhDs” is not new, but it has persisted in the Vietnamese education system. Only when the loopholes in quality management are permanently closed, the responsibilities of training institutions are clearly defined, and objective, substantive assessment is established, can we build a strong academic foundation.

Perfecting doctoral training regulations

In the context of increasing university autonomy, professors and associate professors play a very important role, but the responsibility of ensuring the quality of doctoral training of training institutions is even more important because training institutions are the units with the right to decide on personnel selection, training, supervision and awarding degrees.

State management agencies need to further improve training regulations, specify the capacity and professional ethics of instructors, increase the application of technology to monitor training quality, promptly handle violations and support quality management for training institutions.

Source: https://tuoitre.vn/bit-lo-hong-dao-tao-tien-si-ra-sao-20241102091946494.htm