Editorial Note
Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister Lê Tiến Châu signed Directive No. 37/CT-TTg on October 20, 2026. The Ministry of Education and Training's quality-management authority confirmed the signing date in a report published that evening in Vietnam.
The directive establishes governmental priorities and instructs responsible authorities to review, strengthen, and implement examination-integrity safeguards. Its references to forthcoming rules, technical guidance, and equipment reviews should not be misrepresented as proof that every anticipated measure is already operating in schools.
This article is provided for general educational information and is not legal advice. Specific institutional responsibilities and any subsequent disciplinary consequences must be evaluated under the directive, applicable laws, and later implementing documents.
Bottom Line
Vietnam issued a national directive on October 20 aimed at strengthening the integrity of examinations, classroom assessments, and academic evaluation.
Directive No. 37/CT-TTg addresses traditional misconduct such as impersonation, plagiarism, unauthorized grade changes, and examination-content leaks while also directing authorities to respond to emerging risks involving artificial intelligence and sophisticated devices.
The directive establishes deadlines for several reviews and guidance initiatives before the end of 2026. It also challenges school performance systems that create excessive pressure to produce high examination results.
What Happened
On October 20, Deputy Prime Minister Lê Tiến Châu signed Directive No. 37/CT-TTg, according to Vietnam's Ministry of Education and Training.
The directive calls on national ministries, provincial authorities, education institutions, and relevant organizations to strengthen the prevention, detection, and handling of fraud in academic assessment.
Government officials identified concerns that some examination and assessment practices do not adequately reflect students' actual knowledge or skills. They also emphasized risks involving pressure to improve reported results and weaknesses in institutional controls.
Rather than focusing solely on punishing students after misconduct occurs, the directive emphasizes prevention, risk assessment, independent checks, and clearer accountability for individuals involved in testing.
Three Implementation Deadlines Educators Should Know
November 30, 2026 — Review of performance targets. The Ministry of Education and Training is directed to review how examination outcomes, graduation rates, and student achievement categories influence performance evaluation and rewards. The goal is to avoid assessing schools or educators exclusively through indicators that could encourage inflated results.
December 15, 2026 — Review of examination and anti-cheating rules. Authorities are directed to examine existing regulations and update them to address emerging methods of cheating, particularly misuse of artificial intelligence and advanced technological devices. This work includes clarifying prohibited conduct, oversight procedures, and responsibilities.
December 31, 2026 — Technical security and assessment guidance. The directive calls for guidance on appropriate uses of cameras, metal-detection equipment, and related safeguards in high-risk examination settings. It also seeks stronger question-bank management and assessment-quality controls.
These are deadlines for administrative action and guidance development, not evidence that every measure has already been universally implemented.
Artificial Intelligence and Academic Integrity
The directive specifically identifies artificial intelligence as a technology that can be misused in examinations, testing, and academic work.
AI systems can help students study, explain concepts, and practice skills, but they can also be used to generate unauthorized answers or conceal the origin of submitted work. The distinction between permitted assistance and prohibited substitution must be clear if institutions expect students to follow the rules.
A fair policy should explain which tools are allowed, when assistance must be disclosed, and how possible violations are reviewed. It should also avoid treating the mere presence of AI-related software as proof of misconduct.
Vietnam's directive identifies AI-assisted cheating as an area requiring updated regulation. The details of future rules will matter for determining how schools implement those expectations.
Reducing Pressure to Produce High Scores
One notable part of the directive concerns the way schools and educators are evaluated.
Authorities are instructed to avoid relying solely on high-achieving student percentages, graduation rates, or examination scores when determining institutional performance or awards.
This reflects a broader concern that narrow performance indicators can create incentives to manipulate results or discourage honest reporting.
Assessment systems need meaningful evidence of student learning, but they also must account for student circumstances, instructional conditions, and the validity of the measurements used.
A reform that reduces pressure to inflate outcomes may improve trust in official results if accompanied by transparent reporting and consistent supervision.
How Examination Security May Change
The directive directs education authorities to review the use of surveillance cameras, metal-detection devices, and other technical controls in locations considered vulnerable to cheating.
The first areas identified include national examinations for high-achieving students and upper-secondary graduation examinations. The directive also emphasizes information security, proportionality, and compliance with applicable law.
This is not the same as announcing that every classroom will immediately receive monitoring equipment. Decisions about procurement, placement, access to recordings, and data retention require further guidance.
Schools should avoid installing intrusive technology without clear procedures for privacy protection, equitable administration, and appropriate oversight.
Institutional Responsibility and Independent Checks
The directive calls for clearer separation of responsibilities across testing procedures, especially in activities presenting higher risks of manipulation.
It encourages cross-checking, independent inspection, recordkeeping, and systems capable of identifying unusual patterns in assessment data.
Those methods may help institutions identify anomalies, but unusual statistics do not automatically establish wrongdoing. Investigators must consider alternative explanations and examine relevant evidence before drawing conclusions.
The directive also emphasizes mechanisms for receiving and appropriately handling reports about suspected violations.
Who This Affects
Students: Clearer exam rules can help students understand what assistance is permitted and how academic honesty is assessed. Students should not assume that every use of AI violates academic standards, but they must follow the rules established for each assessment.
Teachers: Educators may encounter revised professional expectations, assessment procedures, and guidance concerning student performance measures. Clear instructions will be essential to avoid inconsistent enforcement.
School leaders: Administrators must balance examination security with student rights, privacy considerations, resource limitations, and fair evaluation procedures.
Universities: The directive's attention to plagiarism, research integrity, and academic evaluation extends beyond ordinary school examinations. Universities may need to review practices relating to coursework, theses, and research assessment.
What This Does Not Mean
Directive 37 should not be interpreted as an immediate nationwide ban on all educational AI tools.
It does not establish that every suspicious result is fraudulent or that every school must immediately install cameras and metal detectors.
The directive also does not independently prove that cheating is widespread in every Vietnamese educational institution. It identifies governmental concerns and establishes actions intended to reduce misconduct risks.
The Bigger Picture
Educational assessment has two responsibilities that can be difficult to reconcile: measuring learning accurately and maintaining a system that participants believe is fair.
Poorly designed accountability measures may reward impressive statistics without establishing whether students have genuinely developed the required knowledge.
Meanwhile, technological advances make it easier for legitimate learning tools and unauthorized assistance to overlap.
Vietnam's directive therefore addresses more than examination security. It raises questions about how schools define success, how teachers are evaluated, and how institutions respond when technology changes faster than their rules.
What Happens Next
The key milestones are the November 30, December 15, and December 31 deadlines.
The Ministry of Education and Training and other responsible bodies must complete specified reviews and develop guidance within the directive's framework.
For educators and administrators, the most useful documents to monitor will be the actual revised regulations, technical standards, and official instructions issued after those reviews.
Schools should not assume that every proposed safeguard is mandatory until the relevant implementing provisions are established.
Why This Matters
Examination integrity influences university admissions, professional pathways, public confidence, and the credibility of educational qualifications.
A system that detects cheating but encourages artificial score inflation may still produce misleading results. Conversely, a system that emphasizes honest measurement but provides inadequate safeguards can disadvantage students who follow the rules.
Vietnam's October 20 directive is significant because it addresses both pressures together: individual misconduct and institutional incentives.
Key Takeaways
- Vietnam issued Directive No. 37/CT-TTg on October 20, 2026.
- The directive addresses examination fraud, plagiarism, grade manipulation, and misuse of AI or advanced devices.
- Authorities must review performance targets by November 30.
- Examination rules addressing emerging cheating methods are to be reviewed by December 15.
- Technical security and assessment guidance is targeted for December 31.
- Privacy, fairness, and institutional accountability remain important implementation considerations.
- Future regulations and guidance will determine how the directive operates in practice.
Frequently Asked Questions
When was Directive 37 signed?
Vietnam's Ministry of Education and Training reports that Deputy Prime Minister Lê Tiến Châu signed it on October 20, 2026.
Does the directive ban artificial intelligence in schools?
It identifies misuse of AI in examinations as a risk requiring regulatory attention. It does not establish a universal prohibition on all legitimate educational AI use.
Will every examination center need cameras?
The directive calls for reviewing and guiding appropriate security measures in higher-risk settings. It does not itself establish universal immediate installation requirements.
Why are teacher performance measures included?
Government officials want to reduce incentives for artificially improving examination results or graduation statistics to obtain favorable institutional evaluations.
Which deadline comes first?
The first specified deadline discussed in the directive is November 30, 2026, for review of performance-evaluation measures.
Final Thoughts
The most important implementation challenge is not simply detecting more cheating. It is ensuring that assessment systems reward genuine learning and provide fair, credible evidence of student achievement.
Vietnam's new directive recognizes that institutional incentives, examination design, and technology controls are interconnected. Its long-term significance will depend on whether the promised guidance makes those systems more reliable without imposing unnecessary burdens or undermining students' legitimate educational opportunities.
Support New To Education
New To Education covers education policy, educational technology, and developments affecting students and educators internationally.
https://newtoeducation.com/support-us
Sources
Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training, Quality Management Department — October 20, 2026. Official report confirming the signature of Directive 37/CT-TTg and summarizing its requirements and deadlines.
Vietnam Government Electronic Newspaper — October 20, 2026. Government reporting on examination-integrity measures and implementation priorities.
