The Ministry of Education is considering proposed changes to the rules for enrolling pupils in high schools, which are expected to begin to be implemented from the 2027/2028 academic year.
According to the proposal, it is planned to increase the minimum number of points required for admission to grammar schools, as well as to vocational and arts secondary schools. As stated in the Ministry’s announcement, it is proposed that the minimum threshold for grammar schools be set at 70 points, based on results from the final exam and overall achievement from the sixth to the eighth year of elementary school, and 60 points for vocational and arts secondary schools.
This measure could be introduced as early as the next academic year, meaning that pupils currently in Year 7 would face a different admissions threshold for four-year vocational schools and grammar schools. As emphasised, the Ministry is considering this proposal with the aim of improving the quality of the educational process and students’ attainment.
“This has allowed the enrolment of pupils with relatively low levels of achievement and prior knowledge into educational programmes that are inherently more demanding, which has resulted in difficulties in keeping up with lessons, an increased risk of academic failure, and added challenges for teachers in adapting the teaching process to different needs and levels of prior knowledge. By introducing a higher minimum threshold, the aim is to reduce this gap and to align educational provision more closely with labour market needs,” the Ministry of Education stated.
At present, the rule requires that a pupil must achieve at least 50 points to enrol in vocational high schools and grammar schools. Based on overall academic performance, a candidate can earn up to 60 points, and up to 40 points in the final exam. Currently, the maximum score on the Serbian language and mathematics tests is 14 points each, and 12 points on the elective subject.
In most schools, pupils effectively set the threshold themselves
Ana Dimitrijević from the Forum of Belgrade Grammar Schools says that the proposal generally makes sense, especially regarding grammar schools, which are mostly attended by pupils with good academic results who later go on to university and are prepared to devote time to studying. However, she adds that, in practice, pupils themselves tend to determine the threshold in grammar schools.
“Schools are also, in a sense, operating in a market. Those that have proven to be good, where children achieve a high level of knowledge and later find it easier to enrol in and complete university, are more popular. The best pupils go there, and that’s where the highest thresholds are. In schools where that is not the case, slightly weaker pupils enrol, and the threshold is lower. Of course, there are differences; the situation is not the same across all parts of the country. In larger centres, in cities where there is a wider choice of grammar schools and schools in general, introducing this measure will make little to no difference, because those differences already exist – indeed, the lower threshold there may already be higher in practice. On the other hand, in smaller towns and local communities where there are not enough nearby schools, children enrol based on proximity or due to a lack of applicants, so a grammar school may admit someone with, say, 57 points. There, this change will make a difference,” Dimitrijević explains.
According to her, this could create significant problems in grammar schools, which typically require a high level of prior knowledge.
“The fact is that when a pupil enrols with a very low number of points, for example 58 or 62, that indicates a low average grade and poor performance in the entrance exam, signalling weak prior knowledge. It is very difficult for such a pupil to make up for what they have missed. No matter how hard a teacher tries to bring them up to a higher level, it rarely succeeds, because it is extremely demanding and difficult – sometimes even impossible. In that sense, the threshold does have a certain logic,” she says.
On the other hand, Dimitrijević points out that the number of points awarded in schools is generally not realistic.
“Even if we ignore all boundaries, the number of points is not realistic due to grade inflation – top grades, the holders of the so-called ‘Vuk diplomas (straight A students), and so on are often effectively manufactured. A large number of grades do not correspond to pupil’s actual knowledge, so in reality, every 90 points might correspond to 87, every 95 to around 91 or 92. This applies to lower scores as well. Teachers tend to award higher grades, especially to otherwise good pupils, even when that may not be entirely justified at the time. So I think the number of points with which a child enrols in high school is generally inflated and, in reality, lower for most pupils,” she emphasises.
Who will benefit from this change?
Dimitrijević believes that the idea behind the proposal is to increase the number of pupils in vocational high schools, many of which have low enrolment and are at risk of closure. However, she argues that this is the wrong way to achieve that goal.
“You are essentially forcing some children to attend those schools, even if they do not want to. The proper approach is to make these schools more attractive in other ways – subjects need to keep pace with the times, and since these are vocational schools with a strong practical component, they must have laboratories, agreements with companies where pupils can undertake placements, and so on. They need modernisation,” she says.
She concludes that this change may ease the situation for teachers and pupils in those grammar schools where children with very low point totals are currently admitted, but notes that such schools are relatively few.
“In those cases, it will make it easier for colleagues to work with pupils who come in with stronger prior knowledge, because the grammar school curriculum is demanding. If you have to spend time covering basic material with them, you can never complete what is required or get through the curriculum needed to prepare them for further education,” Dimitrijević concludes.
(NIN, 15.04.2026)