I spent $6,500 to raise my child's IELTS score from 4.0 to 6.5

Today, tuition for four years at many public universities starts at around VND150 million and can go much higher. At the same time, the cost of studying English at private language centers is rising rapidly, sometimes rivaling or exceeding university tuition itself.

My child's case illustrates the problem. He is in 10th grade and scored 4.0 on an IELTS placement test. The center recommended four courses to reach 6.5, each costing VND42 million - a total of VND168 million. That amount is only slightly less than the full tuition for a university program.

An IELTS certificate issued to a high school student in Ho Chi Minh City. Photo courtesy of the student

Language learning has quietly become one of the heaviest financial burdens for many families, in some cases exceeding the cost of formal academic study. More concerning is that most of this spending goes to private centers and foreign testing organizations, while the public education system plays only a limited role.

Each year, Vietnamese families spend trillions of dong on international language certificates and exam preparation. This raises a direct question: what role should universities with foreign language programs play in building practical language proficiency for students nationwide?

For years, we have lived with a paradox. Universities often do not provide foreign language training aligned with international standards, yet they require students to obtain international certificates such as IELTS or TOEIC for graduation or employment eligibility.

The result is that students and families bear high private costs, while universities, especially foreign language institutions, are not positioned at the center of nationwide language training.

Older generations recall a different model. Students selected to study in the Soviet Union were first sent to a university for one year of intensive language preparation. After that, they were able to study, conduct research, and live fully in a foreign-language academic environment. This shows that Vietnam's universities have, and have long had, the capacity to deliver effective, high-level language training.

The issue is not capability, but role. Today, many foreign language universities focus mainly on pedagogy and linguistics programs rather than serving as national hubs for practical language training.

If universities were given a leading role again, they could:

- Design standardized programs aligned with international proficiency frameworks

- Train teachers and lecturers across the education system

- Directly deliver or co-deliver instruction at high schools and universities

- Conduct assessments and issue credible domestic certifications grounded in academic standards rather than test-taking techniques

Instead of a fragmented exam-prep market driven by score targets and test tricks, universities could anchor a system focused on real language competence.

In my view, the approach should shift. Foreign language universities should lead curriculum design, instructor training, accreditation, and certification. High schools could offer elective language tracks with a target outcome equivalent to IELTS 5.5 for participating students. Universities could provide advanced programs targeting IELTS 6.5 - 7.0 level for academic and professional use. Training costs within universities should be transparent and structured to remain more affordable than private centers while ensuring quality.

Most importantly, students would no longer have to depend entirely on private test-prep centers. They could study languages within a formal academic environment that carries institutional responsibility for outcomes.

If the current model continues, foreign language certificates will remain an expensive graduation passport rather than proof of real working ability.

Restoring a central role for foreign language universities would not only reduce the financial burden on families but also:

- Keep more education spending within the national system

- Improve substantive training quality

- Strengthen the academic standing of language institutions

- Reduce dependence on external testing and training providers

In a period of deep international integration, there is little justification for sidelining universities that already possess strong language training foundations. Re-centering them in the system would be both economically sensible and educationally sound.