Entry Criteria for Spine-Cluster Training in Vietnamese Specialised Informatics: A Readiness Framework

The Spine-Cluster architecture for competitiveprogramming pedagogy in Vietnamese specialised-informatics (chuyên Tin) classes was specified in the parent paper [1]. The architecture separates a two-dimensional linear cognitiveprogression spine from algorithmic-content star clusters, with the explicit pedagogical aim of training algorithm-selection ability as a distinct competence. Spine-Cluster training assumes the learner enters with a baseline of prerequisite constructs, transferready schemas, and contest-session stamina; entering below this baseline produces measurable training failure (the spine becomes confusing rather than ordering, and cluster axis-progression collapses into surface-form drill). This paper specifies the entry baseline as a readiness framework: seven named criteria (C1 procedural fluency in core constructs; C2 problem-decomposition skill; C3 debugging hypothesis-test cycle; C4 algorithmicpattern recognition baseline; C5 contest-session stamina; C6 self-regulated learning; C7 motivation profile), each presented with definition, theoretical basis, evidence per criterion, an informal-indicator and diagnostic-task assessment template, and a threshold value. A readiness rubric aggregates per-criterion results into one of three states (ready, partial-ready with scaffolding, not-ready). A staged-entry protocol distinguishes the criteria that must gate entry (C1, C3, C5) from the criteria that can be scaffolded inside the first weeks of Spine-Cluster training (C2, C4, C6, C7). The framework draws on Anderson's ACT-R proficiency-threshold programme; the knowledge-spaces tradition of Doignon and Falmagne; Bloom's mastery-learning model; Ericsson's deliberate-practice literature; Sentance and Waite's PRIMM model for novice-to-intermediate progression; the IOI Syllabus 2024 baseline; the USACO Guide bronze-tosilver progression; and Halim and Halim's CP3 / CP4 prerequisite assumptions. The framework is country-calibrated to chuyên Tin practice but criteria-level transferable to USACO and CSES learners. Three open questions are flagged: weighting under genuine partial-readiness profiles; instrument validation outside cohort study; and the threshold-update cadence as the IOI Syllabus evolves.