Good things must be difficult.

Lecturer Bui Viet Thang (Faculty of Literature) shared his thoughts on this year's university entrance exam in Literature for khối C and khối D, as well as methods for teaching and learning Literature for high school students. ButWhat is your assessment of this year's literature exam for khối C and D?- In the last three years, the difficulty level of the university entrance exam for Literature has increased significantly. I've also read in the press that public opinion suggests this year's Literature exam was good but difficult. However, in my opinion, nothing good is easy at the same time; good always comes with difficulty. Therefore, praising something as good while simultaneously complaining about its difficulty is illogical. Previously, public opinion often considered the Literature exam for Group D easier than the Literature exam for Group C. However, this year, neither Group C nor Group D exams were easier than the other. This is also the policy of the Ministry of Education and Training. In fact, grading shows that Group D candidates usually score higher in Literature than Group C candidates. This is because Group D candidates are typically from cities and have better academic opportunities. The highest-scoring Literature exams each year are usually taken by Group D candidates.This year's exam was considered good, but the essay question was deemed difficult for the candidates' level of understanding. What are your thoughts on this assessment?- Some argue that the essay questions in both exams were good but difficult for candidates who are only 17 or 18 years old. I disagree with this view.

The essay question addresses the issues of irresponsibility and hypocrisy – two major problems in society today. These problems spare no one and affect all individuals in society, including students. Two years ago, the Minister of Education and Training launched the "two no's" campaign, saying no to negativity and the pursuit of superficial achievements in schools, targeting students. So why say these two issues are too big for students to understand? Given the general level of education and the current level of social awareness and understanding among students, there's no need to worry about such major social issues being addressed in the exam. I believe the content of the exam is not overwhelming or beyond the students' comprehension. Especially in today's rapidly developing information society, students have many opportunities to access information and participate in many major social issues of the country. ButUnlike previous years, this year's exam required candidates to analyze and interpret issues through specific details in the work. What are your thoughts on this type of exam question?- Up until now, when teaching Literature, we've often focused on general issues like ideology, themes, and character analysis, neglecting the importance of enhancing students' aesthetic sense—that is, their ability to appreciate beauty in literature and life. Appreciating beauty through a work requires understanding specific details and images. Students who can answer these types of questions have overcome rote learning and memorization. This approach to exam design has been in place since 2008, and I believe it's very commendable. Such questions will lead to a shift in teaching and learning methods in Literature, thereby strengthening students' ability to appreciate works and understand issues in relation to real-life social situations.How would you assess the candidates' ability to answer these two essay questions?- As I mentioned above, this year the difficulty level of the university entrance exam in Literature for khối C and D is equivalent. However, in the separate section, candidates have the right to choose questions based on the standard or advanced curriculum. I believe that candidates will lean towards questions on appreciating poetry rather than questions on appreciating details in prose works. We graded a sample exam from one school in one day and found that only 10% to 15% of candidates chose question 3B - the question on appreciating prose - while the remaining 85% chose questions on appreciating poetic passages. Perhaps this is because the beauty and excellence displayed in poetry are easier to perceive and see, while the beauty and excellence in prose are related to details that require more memorization.What are your predictions for the distribution of scores in Literature this year?- Because the exam was good and difficult as mentioned above, I think that for papers scoring 5 or higher, the score range from 5-7 will account for 70% and the score range from 8-9 will account for 30%. Generally speaking, papers scoring 1-5 points will account for 40%, those scoring 5-7 points will account for 40%, and 20% will score above 7. A perfect score in Literature will be very difficult to achieve, but I hope that the examination board of the University of Social Sciences and Humanities will have 1 or 2 papers that score 9.5.Do you have any thoughts on how to structure the university-level Literature exam questions for future years?

- From 2008 to the present, the approach to university-level Literature exam questions has undergone significant changes, moving towards preventing rote learning and cramming among students and teachers at the secondary level. This approach stimulates the dynamism of candidates, particularly evident in social commentary questions. The exam requires candidates to analyze and compare specific details in different works, demanding subtle perception and the ability to make comparisons between works, thus requiring students to study comprehensively. This direction should be continued in the coming years. The more difficult the exam, the better it is, and the more it encourages positive changes in the study of Literature at the secondary level.Based on this year's university entrance exam in Literature, what are your thoughts on the current methods of teaching and learning literature at the high school level?- One difficulty in teaching Literature at the high school level is the strict constraints of the curriculum and time. Teachers have to go through all the content in the lesson plan, from the author's biography and the context of the work, before moving on to analyzing the work. I also understand that Literature teaching in high schools is starting to use electronic lesson plans. While this isn't the case for other subjects, if Literature relies too heavily on presentations and electronic devices, it will limit the transmission of knowledge and the students' appreciation of the work. In teaching Literature, the most important thing is the emotional connection between teacher and student. Furthermore, textbooks include too much information that, ultimately, isn't very useful for students. Anything that's included in excess easily becomes redundant and saturated. This is a systemic flaw, meaning a flaw in our education system's curriculum development. We are struggling to figure out how to build a Literature curriculum that is appropriate for the high school level. In other words, we are struggling because we haven't yet defined the philosophy of teaching and learning literature. We are forcing students to memorize too much knowledge while neglecting to instill aesthetic sensibilities in them.There have been suggestions that the university entrance exam in Literature should gradually move away from the high school textbooks, meaning it should require students to analyze literary works outside the high school curriculum. What are your thoughts on this suggestion?- Textbooks should only provide the minimum knowledge needed to cultivate students' literary appreciation skills. Students can absolutely apply their knowledge and appreciation to understand and analyze a work outside of the textbook or to address current social issues. Many other countries have adopted this approach to teaching and learning literature. However, in Vietnam, achieving this requires a roadmap and time for change, which I believe will take at least another five years. In particular, we need to prepare students, teachers, and the public psychologically.Thank you, sir!