Recently, public outcry has focused on the "distortion" of extra tutoring. In HCM City, a class disguised as "handwriting practice" at Thanh Da Cultural House in Binh Thanh District was found and shut down following public complaints. 

Inspectors found teachers renting the venue to teach academic subjects to primary school students, violating Circular 29.

In Hanoi, the Department of Education and Training halted operations of a tutoring center in Dong Da District serving 600 students due to breaches in information exposure and fire prevention regulations. 

The following day, Hanoi’s department ordered Ha Dong District to investigate and strictly handle reports of teachers tutoring their own regular students at school, a direct violation of Circular 29.

The findings showed the existence of unlicensed private tutoring and weak enforcement of Circular 29.

Before the circular’s implementation, Deputy Minister of Education and Training Pham Ngoc Thuong told VietNamNet that the ministry has not banned extra tutoring but establishes a clear legal framework, specifying permitted and prohibited activities while enhancing oversight by authorities and the society. 

Circular 29 prohibits tutoring to primary school students (except for talent and weak students) and those having two learning sessions a day. Off-campus tutoring must be transparent and legally registered. Teachers are barred from charging fees to tutor their regular students at the schools where they work.

The ministry emphasized that voluntary tutoring to enhance knowledge is legitimate but must comply with legal regulations.

Regulations bypassed

Readers submitting opinions to VietNamNet argue that tutoring is a personal need, varying widely among students and families, do it is unreasonable to apply the same regulation for all. This mismatch may drive teachers and parents to circumvent rules.

Reader Nga Vu wrote: “My 11th-grade child only wants to study math with his regular teacher. Now schools can’t organize tutoring, and the teacher is hesitant to teach. My child doesn’t want other tutors. Self-study at home worries us, especially with graduation and university entrance exams next year.” 

She asked if parents could voluntarily request small-group tutoring from regular teachers, taking responsibility during inspections.

Reader Vu Thi Quyen in Hanoi said her two secondary school children halted extra classes for three weeks after Circular 29 took effect but resumed classes at their school teachers’ homes. 

“During those three weeks, the kids were too idle, reading comics, watching TV, or playing games after morning classes, which worried me. When the teacher texted that she’d completed procedures and invited the kids back, I signed the form she provided, and they resumed classes,” Quyen said. 

She noted that fees rose from VND30,000 to VND35,000 per session, and class time dropped from two hours to 1.5 hours per the affiliated center’s rules.

Beyond parents’ compromise, readers suggested that substantial tutoring income motivates teachers to risk bypassing regulations. 

Reader Trung commented: “Tutoring likely generates far more than official salaries, pushing schools and teachers to find ways to dodge the rules.”

Addressing the root cause

To curb tutoring distortions, many people have suggested strict penalties on violators without leniency and blaming responsibility on schools and individuals. Some readers urged parents to change their mind and supported stricter enforcement. 

Reader Phung Duy Hai wrote: “We must boldly stop sending kids to tutoring and teach them self-study. That’s the best way to end extra tutoring. Administrative bans won’t work, as non-teachers can still legally tutor.”

Meanwhile, others argue that tightening tutoring regulations and tackling distortions only can address the symptoms, not the root cause. 

Reader Pham Duy Nhat, claiming 40 years in education, stated: “If we ban tutoring, ban it completely, including centers. The standard curriculum should suffice. Strong students can receive enrichment, and weaker ones get remediation, reducing pressure and preserving education’s humanity.”

Agreeing with Nhat, Pham Tuan Anh said: “General education must deliver real quality so students don’t need to rush to tutoring classes.”

Critical reflections

The surge in tutoring centers (15,000 new ones in Hanoi alone) and violations like teaching primary students or tutoring regular students suggest Circular 29’s enforcement faces significant hurdles. The lack of specific penalties, understaffed local inspection teams, and parental demand for familiar teachers fuel these distortions. 

While Circular 29 aims to regulate a legitimate need, its rigid rules clash with practical realities, like competitive exams and parental anxieties. A deeper issue lies in the education system’s reliance on high-stakes testing, driving demand for tutoring. Until curricula prioritize self-learning and reduce exam pressure, enforcement alone may only shift tutoring underground rather than eliminate it.

Hoang Linh