Hoa Thi Mai Nguyen, Huong Thu Nguyen, Huy Van Nguyen, Trang

Thi Thuy Nguyen

12 Local challenges to global needs in English
language education in Vietnam: The perspective of
language policy and planning

English education reforms have been implemented across Asia in response to

globalisation and the increasing spread of English as an international language. This
has created both opportunities and challenges for local systems of English language
education in non-English speaking countries. This chapter critically examines the
role of English education in Vietnam in view of the broad context of the globalisation
of English. It starts with a discussion on how globalisation has impacted English
language education in general and in Vietnam in particular. It includes a review on
the current reforms in English education policy, which is followed by a discussion of
three empirical case study findings on the English education policy implementation
in Vietnam. The chapter concludes by highlighting the possible implications for
policymakers and language educators in Vietnam.
All across Asia, English seems to have become more important than ever before
due to its increasingly prominent role in globalisation. Globalisation and the spread of
English have undeniably resulted in English being recognised as a valuable resource
for national development and regional integration. The link between English and
globalisation is believed to be the driving force behind reforms in English education
policies in most Asian polities (Qi, 2009; Tollefson & Tsui, 2004). As a result, most
governments in Asia, including Vietnam, have recently initiated reforms in English
language education to improve the language proficiency of the learners (Hamid,
2010; Johnstone, 2010). English has been introduced as a compulsory subject at an
increasingly younger age. For example, in China and Korea, English is taught at Grade
3, while in Indonesia it starts at Grade 4, or in Taiwan at Grade 1. As English has been
increasingly used as medium of instruction, this has resulted in the transformation
of many local English education systems in Asia. For instance, this demand for
English offers opportunities to the Teaching English to Speaker of Other Languages
(TESOL) profession but at the same time it creates tremendous challenges for the local
education system.
For most of the countries in Asia, English education innovations have encountered
a number of issues, including teacher quality and quantity, teaching and learning
resources, and equality of learning outcomes (see Lamb & Coleman, 2008; Kosonen,

Hoa Thi Mai Nguyen, The University of New South Wales, Australia
Huong Thu Nguyen, Huy Van Nguyen, Trang Thi Thuy Nguyen, The University of Queensland, Australia
 Globalisation and global English education   215

2013). For example, the introduction of English as Medium of Instruction (EMI)

initiative in higher education in Malaysia has encountered inefficient implementation,
and less desirable learning outcomes (Ali, 2013; Gill, 2012; Lee, 2014). In a similar
vein, the issue of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) quality teaching and learning
environment is a major concern in the context of Indonesia (Dardjowidjojo, 2000;
Kirkpatrick, 2007). In many of the countries in Asia, the introduction of English
language policy initiatives has triggered issues of ineffective implementation at the
local level. In view of this, there is the need to investigate the tension between policy
formulation at the macro level and policy operation at the local level in developing
countries such as Vietnam.

12.1 Globalisation and global English education

English has been strongly associated with globalisation since it is the de facto working
language in this modern world. Together with Information Technology (IT), English
constitutes what is called “global literacy skills” (Tollefson & Tsui, 2007: 1), which
redefines labour efficiency in the globalised world. Lo Bianco asserts that the education
of English as a foreign language is “profoundly” influenced by globalisation and that
the spread of English is attributed to the fact the English is “well-endowed” with “Q
value” (Lo Bianco, 2014: 317), a term he borrowed from de Swaan (1993), to refer to the
“communication payoff” considering the time and effort one has to spend on learning
the language. Majhanovich even considers English as a “tool of neo-liberalism and
globalization in Asian contexts” (Majhanovich, 2013: 249). She argues that the spread
of English today helps to promote neoliberal ideals inherent in the globalisation
process. Neo-liberialism is associated with the ideologies of choice, competition,
and the free market (Price, 2014). Therefore, critics have pointed out that the spread
of English entails potential danger of “exacerbating or even creating socioeconomic
and educational inequalities” (Price, 2014: 569) between individuals, social groups,
as well as between developed countries and the less developed or developing ones.
Many non-English speakers in Asia are encouraged to attain the ideal English
language proficiency that is comparable to the English-speaking world regardless
of their local contexts and traditions. For example, Asian universities are keen to
adopt English as the main medium of instruction and establish high-stake language
testing as an entry and exit gatekeeper. Consequently, English language education
in many Asian countries is constructed based on Eurocentric knowledge, evaluation
systems, textbooks, and resources. This also reflects an important neoliberal ideology
perpetuated by the English-speaking world in education, and that is the shift from
“pedagogical to market values [and] the abandonment of the social and cooperative
ethic in favour of individualist and competitive business models” (Block, Gray &
Holborow, 2013: 6).
216   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

Empirical research evidence has converged on the challenges and adverse

impact of globalisation and neo-liberal agenda on language education in many Asian
contexts. For example, Lamb and Coleman (2008) warn that the spread of English in
the long run might deepen the “inequalities in the distribution of cultural, social, and
economic capital” among young Indonesian learners of English (Lamb & Coleman,
2008: 189). In line with this opinion, Price (2014) has looked at English language
education policies in Taiwan from 2000 to 2008 and argued that the neoliberal mantra
of choice and competition reflected in English-for-all policies did not guarantee
opportunities for learners. On the contrary, she posits that “regions, schools, and
individuals are forced to compete with each other on anything but a level playing field
given uneven resource allocation in the public education sector between rural and
urban areas” (Price, 2014: 586). In her review of current studies in English language
education in Asia, Majhanovich (2014) criticises the recent embracement of EMI in
some Asian countries including those who were never British colonies like Vietnam.
Siding with Kosonen (2013) and Brock-Utne (2013), she advocates for the role of local
Asian languages as media of instruction rather than that of English language. She
stresses that,

… more micro-level studies, and policy-practice studies, are desirable to highlight the inequities,
the contradictions, and the complexities of how language and education play out in a local or
national landscape pervaded by global influences and neo-liberal economic policies. (Majhano-
vich, 2014: 179)

12.2 Current English language policy and planning in Vietnam

The constitution of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam stipulates that Vietnamese is

the lingua franca of the country (National Assembly, 2013). With 54 ethnic minorities
in its territory, Vietnam boasts diverse language ecology. To maintain such linguistic
richness, the government tries to support the language capacity of minority people.
For example, even though it is stated in the Education Law that Vietnamese is the
language of education for all people, it also enshrines that,

The State shall enable ethnic minority people to learn their spoken and written languages in
order to preserve and develop their ethnic cultural identity, helping pupils from ethnic mino-
rities easily absorb knowledge when they study in schools and other educational institutions.
(National Assembly, 2005)

The major historical developments of the country have also contributed to the
country’s language environment. Chinese, French, Russian and English have come
to Vietnam through warfare, colonial domination, foreign support, economic
development and global integration (Lo Bianco, 2001; Wright, 2002). These political,
economic and social influences have impacted the government’s policies regarding
 Current English language policy and planning in Vietnam   217

the teaching of foreign languages as well as people’s attitudes in learning foreign

languages (Pham, 2014). At present, like other Asian countries, English is the most
popular foreign language in Vietnam for communication, education, trade, science
and technology (Goh & Nguyen, 2004). Facing the need to ensure economic growth
for the country, the Vietnamese government places special importance on the role of
foreign languages especially English education in the national economic development
and global integration (General Secretary, 2013).
In view of the importance of English education in Vietnam, the government
has recently approved the project “Teaching and learning foreign languages in the
national education system, period 2008-2020” (known as the Project 2020) (Prime
Minister, 2008a). Even though the document provides a framework for the education
of foreign languages, the focus is on strategies to develop English proficiency for
Vietnamese people particularly the students and teachers. For example at primary
school level, English as a school subject is introduced earlier, starting in grade 3
instead of grade 5, and includes minority students whose mother tongue is not
Vietnamese. In addition, in some schools EMI is used for mathematics and sciences.
In some private schools, bilingual education is offered for the development of primary
school children’s English proficiency. In senior high schools, the English programme
has also undergone a revamp – the objective is to ensure that there is a continuation
of English education from primary school to high school level. This is known as the 10-
year English programme, starting from grade 3 to grade 12. In higher education (HE),
the two prominent developments are 1) the application of the Common European
Framework of Reference (CEFR) in setting up core competences in English education
and assessment, and 2) the introduction of EMI programs in increasing number of
universities in Vietnam.
The aforementioned English language policy changes were aimed at improving
the quality of the country’s future workforce because once equipped with good English
skills, Vietnamese students will have a better chance to work in an international
market (Nguyen, 2010). However, what research on language policy and planning
has revealed is that planning might not necessarily lead to success and that planners
should be prepared for failure (see Kaplan & Baldauf, 1997). For the case of Vietnam,
we argue that without careful consideration and planning from the government,
challenges would outweigh chances. In the case studies that follow, we illustrate
some of the challenges triggered by such changes in the new English language policy
espoused by Vietnamese government. Adopting the language-in-education theory
posited by Kaplan and Baldauf (1997; 2005), this chapter discusses the need to put in
place the necessary conditions in order for successful language policy and planning
(see Table 12.1).
218   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

Tab. 12.1: Language-in-education goals (Kaplan & Baldauf, 2005: 1014).

Language-in-education planning goals Explanations

Access Policy Who learns what, when?

Personnel Policy Where do teachers come from and how are they trained?

Curriculum Policy What is the objective in language teaching/ learning?

Methods and Material Policy What methodology and what materials are employed
over what duration?

Resourcing Policy How is everything paid for?

Community Policy Who is consulted/involved?

Evaluation Policy What is the connection between assessment on the

one hand and methods and materials that define the
educational objective on the other?

In the following sections, three case studies will be discussed to highlight the
challenges and implications found in Vietnamese language planning and policy, in
particular, its Access Policy, Personnel Policy, Methods and Material Policy, as well
as Evaluation Policy.

12.2.1 Case study 1: English education for minority students

For the past years, the Vietnamese government has introduced a number of policies
that specifically relate to language and education for ethnic minorities, however,
until now most of the ethnic minority students in Vietnam still have to join the same
education system that uses Vietnamese as the only language of instruction together
with their Kinh (Viet) majority counterparts. Many of them have to start their first days
of primary school with little or no experience of Vietnamese (Aikman & Pridmore,
2001). The language barrier puts these minority students at a disadvantage when
attending school. The language problem becomes more complicated when minority
students start learning English as a compulsory subject because they have to depend
on the second language i.e., Vietnamese for foreign language learning.
The present case study sets its focus on English language policy and minority
students. Findings of this study were drawn from a large-scale project examining
bilingual identity of ethnic minority students in Vietnam. The data was taken from
eight college-age students who were focal participants of the larger project, and two
issues were surfaced from the data, and they were, the lack of considerations on
language and cultural factors, and the lack of students’ needs analysis.
 Current English language policy and planning in Vietnam   219

12.2.1.1 Lack of considerations on language and culture factors

The most salient issue that is related to language and culture discontinuation is the
use of the same curriculum and English teaching methods to both Kinh majority
and minority students. As what was reported by the minority students, because the
school language was Vietnamese rather than their mother tongue, they had many
initial language difficulties in their early schooling. Some of them related that in their
Grade 1, they could not understand what their teachers were saying and hence could
not follow the lessons in Vietnamese. One student even revealed that due to language
issue, he could not pass the first year and had to repeat Grade 1. Many students also
believed that their Kinh counterparts seemed to have more advantages in terms of
language than them.
All the students confirmed that they had little or no idea about English in primary
school and only started leaning it as a subject from Grade 6 (7 students) or Grade
10 (1 student). In early secondary school, although many of them were not fluent
in Vietnamese and were not confident in communication with their Kinh friends in
Vietnamese, they had to rely on Vietnamese to learn English. One student pointed out
that English was one more language burden for his study:

On early days of Grade 6, it’s more difficult for them [minority students], because... they haven’t
mastered Vietnamese yet, but had to speak English […]. In Grade 6, I was shocked... didn’t know
anything.

Thus, these students have faced many language obstacles in learning English; they
need to double their efforts in order to keep pace with their Kinh counterparts.
Furthermore, due to the highly centralised education system in Vietnam, the students
in this study had to follow the same curriculum together with their Kinh counterparts
in which the cultural contents were mainly designed for Kinh majority students. As the
curriculum, learning materials, and teaching practices mainly follow the Kinh culture,
the inclusion of minority cultures in English lessons has been omitted. Therefore,
the policies have failed to take into consideration students’ cultural heritages and
linguistic ability when learning English. Basically, the minority students have to
learn the Kinh culture and the culture of English language concurrently. In addition,
compared to their Kinh counterparts, most of the minority students live in remote
places and are usually unfamiliar with the outside world, especially Western culture,
thereby making it even harder for them to learn English (Blachford & Jones, 2011).

12.2.1.2 Lack of students’ needs analysis

The implementation of English language policy for minority students also failed to
accommodate students’ needs and attitudes. The students reported that English did
not play any considerable role in their daily communication although common words
or phrases such as “hello” or “thank you” were added into their speech. In fact, after
a few years of learning English in secondary and high schools, they still could not
220   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

engage in basic communication in English well, as the emphasis was on vocabulary,

grammar, reading or writing in English and not communication skills. To them, the
Vietnamese language could bring them more practical benefits in school and the
mainstream society than English.
The students’ limited use of English in their real life and their basic English
proficiency is evidence of the failure of teaching and learning English in school in terms
of developing English communication skills for young learners. Although English was
considered to be less practical in real life by the students, most of them asserted that
they had positive attitudes towards this language as they believed that English was
useful for them, for communication with foreigners, travel and career opportunities
because this language was “the trend” of the society. It is indicated that although
the students had to deal with many problems in learning English in school, they did
not undervalue the importance of this language. Hence, the hypothesis that minority
students often attach little value to English and do not have much motivation to learn
English, therefore, is not always empirically true (Sunuodula & Feng, 2011). Students’
needs in learning and using English as well as their attitudes towards English can vary,
depending on personal motivation, ethnicity, age or the environment they are living.

12.2.2 Case study 2: English-medium instruction in Vietnamese universities

The introduction of EMI in Vietnam higher education (HE) can be traced back to the
early 1990s. This period was marked by the emerging of joint programmes between
Vietnamese and partner higher education institutions (HEIs) from overseas for post-
graduate level, an attempt to improve the quality of education in HE sector (VIED,
2015). Thus, in 2008 the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) provided financial
incentives for Vietnamese HEIs to develop another type of cooperative programmes
known as the Advanced Programmes, which are joint collaboration projects with
high-ranked universities in the West, such as United States (US) and United Kingdom
(UK) (Prime Minister, 2008b). The project aims to develop Vietnamese universities
to the level of the 200 world’s leading universities. To date, there are 27 Advanced
Programmes offered in Vietnamese HEIs.
The EMI-based Joint Programmes and Advanced Programmes in local HEIs receive
support from their foreign partners in terms of curriculum, materials, assessment,
etc., hence their label Foreign Education Programmes (MOET, 2014). In recent
developments, local HEIs have also introduced their own EMI-based programmes
using foreign English materials from countries, such as Australia, UK and US. These
locally developed EMI programmes are known as High Quality Programmes (MOET,
2014), and to date, 21 Vietnamese HEIs are offering 55 High Quality Programmes.
This case study was undertaken by the second author over a period of four months
in 2012 to 2013; it focused on one Vietnamese HEI (called E-University, a pseudonym),
which offers all types of aforementioned graduate EMI-based programmes. In 2006,
 Current English language policy and planning in Vietnam   221

E-University started its first EMI-based programmes while maintaining the existing
Vietnamese-medium-instruction (VMI) programmes. In total, the institution offers
two Advanced Programmes with US partners, two Joint Programmes with UK partners,
one Joint Programme with a Danish institution, and four High Quality Programmes.
However, the existence of both EMI and VMI programmes has created tension in the
university.

12.2.2.1 Language barriers

Both students and academics reported difficulties in using English for academic
functions. The criteria for selecting academics teaching in EMI programmes was
that their previous education must be in an English-speaking environment, either
in a country or a programme that uses English on a regular basis. Even though all
non-native English speaking academics in EMI programmes received an overseas
education, such as from Australia, UK, US and the Netherlands, it was different
from lecturing in English. Thus, the students would face ‘double difficulty’ learning
in English through non-native-English-speaking academics. For example, some
international students shared the fact that they were lost in the lectures because of
the unfamiliar English spoken by local academics and totally different teaching styles.
Many local students revealed that it was also very difficult for them to understand the
lectures and even if they did, they could not retain the knowledge for long. Although
being admitted to EMI programmes meant that students had had acquired sufficient
English proficiency to learn in English, in reality, many students could not function
well in the programme. One reason was that the E-University set the language
requirement bar low for student admission. Students only needed to demonstrate
Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) result of 500 points (ETS,
2014b). This test result could be substituted by Test of English as Foreign Language
(TOEFL) paper-based 477 points, or TOEFL internet-based 53 points (ETS, 2014a), or
International English Language Testing System (IELTS) band 4.5 (IELTS, 2012). Such
low requirements have negative impacts on teaching and learning in EMI setting.
For example, foreign lecturers complained that students in Joint Programmes could
barely contribute to class discussion or answer questions.

12.2.2.2 Insufficient language support

Both students and academics faced this language stumbling block in EMI classrooms,
and the support available for them was inadequate. For example, an English course
was once made available for academics and was provided by British Council.
However, what they received was general English skills, such as presentation skills
and not specific pronunciation and teaching skills in English i.e., appropriate English
and pedagogy support for their teaching needs in EMI settings. Likewise for students,
English classes were available for them throughout their study but the lessons did
222   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

not support their academic needs. For example, students practiced IELTS tests
that included academic English content but it was not catered to specific academic
purposes, i.e., academic style, citation and referencing.

12.2.2.3 Quality downgrade

It was also found that students constantly compared the curriculum between EMI and
VMI programmes. They discovered that academics had simplified and shortened the
course content for EMI class due to language barrier and felt that upon graduation
their knowledge might not be as good as VMI peers. Another concern was due to the
aforementioned difficulties in comprehension and knowledge retainment, many of
them thought that they would not perform well in the examinations but somehow
they still managed to obtain good results in the end. Such disparity had led to
students questioning the quality of EMI programmes since these programmes were
more expensive and promised to provide students with international standard quality
programmes, and the opportunity to study with foreign/native-English-speaker
academics.

12.2.2.4 Social division and tensions

Another unequal treatment between the VMI and EMI programmes is that academics
who taught in EMI programmes received from four to seven times higher payment
than those teaching in VMI stream, and they were waived from administrative
work. Furthermore, EMI programmes were labelled as High Quality and Advanced
Programmes whereas VMI programmes were perceived as ‘normal quality
programmes’. In other words, education in English was associated with high quality
and Vietnamese with low quality. In addition, the presence of foreign academics put
pressure on local academics. Students preferred studying with foreign academics not
only because they were native English speakers but also because they had Western
teaching styles. Students found these academics more open, catering for students’
needs (such as ready to stop the lecture and explain any unclear point) and friendlier
than local academics whose teaching styles were more distant and hierarchical.
In summary, although the introduction of EMI in E-University has been a good
initiative, as mentioned previously, there are pressing issues that require institutional
attention in order for the EMI programmes to be sustainable over time.

12.2.3 Case study 3: The CEFR policy in Vietnam

In 2008, Decision 1400 was issued by the Prime Minister of Vietnam to complement
Project 2020 guidelines that required a nationally unified framework to be developed
 Current English language policy and planning in Vietnam   223

and implemented to strengthen teaching and learning of foreign language within

the Vietnamese education system. Based on a Western-based model, known as
the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), a detailed description of
language competence levels compatible with international categorisation of foreign
language competence was introduced. This framework serves as a platform for
curriculum design, course materials development, teaching plans, and evaluation
i.e., assessment. The objective was to ensure that there was connectedness between
the different stages of learning in the national education system of foreign language
teaching and learning.
This new policy have triggered a lot of debate among educators and attracted
the attention of many researchers in the field of language education. Policymakers
believed that this CEFR-based policy would lead to a comprehensive reform in foreign
language education and transform the way language educators and learners carry out
their daily work. However in reality, there are enormous challenges in its translation
process due to huge financial and contextual barriers. Educators from many
Vietnamese universities have indicated that the new CEFR-based language outcome
is over-ambitious and likely unachievable for students in the near future. To further
complicate matter, institution administrators have been confused and could not reach
a consensus on the interpretation of the policy, resulting in possible intuitive coping
strategies which could do more harm than good to the foreign language education
system in the long term.
This study explored how CEFR was adopted in Vietnam and how this process
had influenced language learning and teaching activities in a Vietnamese tertiary
educational institution. The data were obtained from a larger research project that
looked at how local actors’ agency in the implementation of the CEFR in Vietnamese
higher education. In-depth interviews were conducted with academic administrators,
teachers and students in University A (UA ‒ a pseudonym). The data were analysed
using qualitative content analysis procedures (Krippendorff, 2013). Findings from our
data showcased the challenges generated by the CEFR policy enactment, which have
been reported in details elsewhere by the third author in Nguyen and Hamid (2015). In
this section, we recapitulated three important challenges for lecturers and students in
a Vietnamese tertiary institution.

12.2.3.1 Overdependence on ready-made Western teaching and testing materials

An important aspect of CEFR-related practice observed at UA was that the CEFR was
mainly used to set obligatory language proficiency standards for both lecturers and
students. It was employed to design high-stake language proficiency testing which
then served as a powerful tool to execute obligatory changes in curricula and teaching
methodology. For example, lecturers were found to adopt a pragmatic approach
towards teaching by employing ready-made international textbooks with invalidated
224   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

claims of being aligned to the CEFR common levels of reference65. In addition, they
also used ready-made practice tests designed by Cambridge English Language
Assessment66 that could be easily found and downloaded for free from the Internet.
Such practice seemed to suggest that teachers at UA had run out of alternatives and
had to rely heavily on invalidated CEFR-aligned textbooks and testing materials
proliferated in local market by different commercial agencies.

12.2.3.2 A poor sense of ownership towards the framework

Despite UA administrators’ effort to communicate the value of CEFR as a reforming
tool to all teachers, the majority of them still preferred testing scores and numbers.
Some teachers had adopted other testing mechanisms, such as IELTS, TOEFL, TOEIC to
present the students’ English language competency level. According to an administrator
at UA, this had reduced the understanding of the framework, which had also reflected
a lack of engagement and a poor sense of ownership towards the framework.

12.2.3.3 Lack of learner-centred pedagogical tools

Despite the fact that some lecturers had started to incorporate can-do statements67 in
their lessons, students at UA appeared to be less informed about the framework and
how it could work to the best benefits of their study. Many students confided that they
mainly heard of the CEFR “through the grapevine”. They preferred ready-made self-
assessment tools from some textbooks rather than reflected on their actual need for
language use. They seemed to have failed to internalise the self-assessment can-do
statements that promote a learner-centred approach to language learning.

65 The CEFR common reference levels categorise language learners into three kinds of users and six
levels of proficiency, including A1 (Breakthrough) and A2 (Waystage) for basic users, B1 (Threshold)
and B2 (Vantage) for Independent users and C1 (Effective operational proficiency) and C2 (Master) for
proficient users.
66 Cambridge ESOL/Cambridge English practice test papers include Key English Test for A2 level,
Preliminary English Test for B1, First Certificate in English for B2, Certificate of Advanced English for
C1 and Certificate of Proficiency in English for C2.
67 The CEFR can-do statements constitute a self-assessment grid that guides learners to progress
with their learning. For example, a can-do statement for level B1 listening skill is “I can understand
the main points of clear standard speech on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school,
leisure, etc.”
 An overview of the effectiveness and sustainability of the reforms   225

12.3 An overview of the effectiveness and sustainability of the

reforms

As a lingua franca, English has been increasingly recognised as a mediating

communicative tool for people of diverse linguistic background in Asia in
communication in this globalised world. As such, in recent years, there have been
reforms in English language education in many Asian countries including Vietnam.
However, as discussed previously, English education reform in Vietnam has led
to problems and dilemmas for the country. The implementation of new English
education initiatives in Vietnam is one of the governmental responses to the impact
of globalisation. However, the effectiveness and sustainability of these initiatives
remain a major concern. As illustrated in the three case studies, there are a number of
implementation issues at the micro level. Using Kaplan and Baldauf’s framework (1997;
2005), this chapter highlights a number of issues associated with the implementation
of English language education reforms in Vietnam.

12.3.1 Access policy

Access policy designates who learns what languages at what age or what level, and this
will provide guidelines in the designing of school-based language programmes (Kaplan
& Baldauf, 2005). In Vietnam, this new initiative requires the minority students to learn
English and Vietnamese at the same time while maintaining their ethnic languages,
and this has placed them in a disadvantaged position. Such demand shows that
inadequate consideration has been given to the minority students’ language, culture,
their needs and attitudes (Bui & Nguyen, 2016; Nguyen, Le, Tran, & Nguyen, 2014).
By applying the same English language education system that is mainly constructed
for the majority, schooling in Vietnam “focuses more on providing access to the high
status language than on promoting diversity and a distinct sense of cultural identity”
(Adamson & Feng, 2009, p. 329). Hence, such a biased access policy empowers the
majority Kinh group and alienates the minority peoples even more (Bastid-Bruguiere,
2001; Beckett & Macpherson, 2005). Although Kirkpatrick (2010) explains that the
Vietnamese school curriculum can be seen a good example of pressures on minority
students to learn the national language along with the international lingua franca
while still maintaining the language of their ethnic group, the introduction of English
into the school system have caused more challenges for minority language education
and policy (Blachford & Jones, 2011).
The second case study on the practice of EMI also reveals the differences between
the English-medium programmes and Vietnamese medium programmes. Social
division and tensions were reported to impact on lecturers’ teaching methods and
students’ perceptions toward their learning. The study shows the inequality on access
to teaching and learning conditions and instruction methods of different groups of
226   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

students. Further discrimination has been created through higher tuition fees, higher
payments and better conditions for the EMI population. This supports the claim in a
recent study on Vietnamese primary school education that the implementation of the
national language policy has failed to address the equal access to quality teaching and
learning conditions at the primary level (Nguyen et al., 2014), and this has led to the
division between VMI for the mass and EMI for the elite (Wilkinson, 2013). As seen in
E-University, the difference in access to resources has divided the students, academics
and programmes depending on which programmes that they were enrolled. Without
further consideration of this symbolic dichotomy, division will be clearer and more
serious in the near future such as in the case of Bangladesh (Hamid & Jahan, 2015). It
can be seen that the current reform in English education in Vietnam allegedly brings
along the division and gap among individuals and communities, which, in according
to Sung-Yul Park and Wee, such social division is an example of the “problems and
dilemmas that globalization engenders or exacerbates” (Sung-Yul Park & Wee, 2013: 3).

12.3.2 Personnel policy

Kaplan and Baldauf (2005) believe that when a new language policy is introduced,
the authorities need to consider the role of teachers in implementing a new language
curriculum program. A number of researchers (e.g., Baldauf 2005; Chua, 2010;
Hamid, 2010; Li, 2007) agree that if the policy does not deal with the issues related to
teachers effectively, failure to achieve policy goals is inevitable. Findings from case
study two on the practice of EMI in universities in Vietnam revealed that academics
had difficulty in using English for academic functions. This difficulty could be
attributed to the fact that graduation abroad served as the eligibility for teaching in
EMI for academics while in practice many academics revealed many problems faced,
such as mispronunciation or inflexibility in classroom communication. In fact, these
findings confirm claims about the serious lack of English competence of Vietnamese
academics and students in EMI programmes by a number of scholars in Vietnam
(Department of State & MOET, 2009; Duong, 2009; Le, 2012; Vu & Burns, 2014). This
finding also supports the findings from research in other non-English dominant
contexts such as in Europe (Tatzl, 2011; Wilkinson, 2005), Africa (Jones, 2013; Wyk,
2014) or Asia (Cho, 2012; Toh, 2014). Similarly, findings from the third case study on
the use of the CEFR in teacher education also revealed that the teachers’ inability
to employ the new framework in their designing of teaching materials and teaching
in class. This could be attributed to lack of appropriate teacher training and teacher
professional development in the midst of education reforms. These issues not only
deprive students from effective learning but also bring about confusion to teachers
when they are not trained to effectively implement an innovation.
 An overview of the effectiveness and sustainability of the reforms   227

12.3.3 Methods and material policy

Methods and material policy, which are often specified in curriculum policy, are two
important areas in the curriculum implementation process (Kaplan & Baldauf, 1997;
2005). In the third case study, it was found that teachers and students turned to coping
strategies and adopted teaching-and-learning-to-the-test rather than switching to
innovative teaching and learning methods. Such practice could lead to “detrimental
implications for language educators and learners, making the enactment process of
the CEFR in Vietnam a conundrum” (Nguyen & Hamid, 2015: 71). The high-stakes
testing mechanism generated by the convenient adoption of the CEFR was found to
lead to a reductive and narrow curriculum, pedagogy and teaching professionalism.
Furthermore, by depending on high-stake tests proliferated by commercial agencies
in the market  could further complicate, rather than  alleviate,  the consequences of
wash-back effects on learning and teaching English in the country.

12.3.4 Evaluation policy

According to Kaplan and Baldauf (2005: 1014), evaluation policy is concerned with
the “the connection between assessment on the one hand and methods and materials
that define the educational objectives on the other”. Cumming (2009) highlights that
consistency between these two aspects is one of the critical factors in the success of
policy implementation. As evident in case study three, there was a mismatch between
what was taught and what was evaluated when the new framework was employed to
impose a CEFR-based evaluation mechanism. Although the framework was originally
adopted and expected to serve as a reforming tool in curriculum design, course
materials development, teaching plans, and evaluation, it was conveniently to be
adopted for testing and evaluating purposes at the school level. The situation could
be traced to the nature of the CEFR. According to Little (2011), the CEFR is originally
designed for two purposes. The first purpose of the CEFR is to place learners in a
criteria-based system of assessment for comparison purposes while the second is to
encourage language learner autonomy and learner self-assessment. As Alderson has
pointed out the most influential part of the CEFR is the illustrative scales, and warns
that some politicians and civil servants have been too eager to adopt a partial use
of these illustrative scales to define standards “without considering achievability or
justifiability” (Alderson, 2007: 662).
The case studies show that although English language reform has gained
momentum in Vietnam, English language education is suffering from inconsistencies
and inadequacies in terms of equality, implementation, quality insurance, resources,
and infrastructure. Therefore, it is critical that these reforms need to be carefully
drafted, and adequate support needs to be in place since students are the direct
subjects of the policy changes. In addition, the language used to teach English for
228   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

minority students and the cultural references made during English lessons should be
further researched and debated (Sunuodula & Feng, 2011). Scholars have suggested
that the use of mother tongue as the medium of instruction is more effective in learning
another language (Sunuodula & Feng, 2011). Based on this argument, when providing
English education to minority students, it is better to apply a first-language-based
education as a transition by which the students are able to gradually transit to second
and other languages in their schooling progress (Bui & Nguyen, 2015). The reasons for
maintaining students’ first language in school need to be stated clearly (Gao, 2011).
In the classroom, more ethnically sensitive teaching approaches should be developed
(Blachford & Jones, 2011). It is therefore necessary to reposition languages and its
accompanying culture references used in teaching and learning. In other words,
there is a need to restructure the curriculum and conduct more research to compare
minority language and culture to English language and culture (Blachford & Jones,
2011; Sunuodula & Feng, 2011). Basically, top-down language policy makers need to
carefully analyse the roles, benefits, risks and costs of English education for minority
students (Coleman, 2011). Thus, the students’ linguistic desires, geographical
characteristics, professional trajectories, their socioeconomic and educational
challenges must be taken into consideration when they participate in the mainstream
society and the global world through the languages they learn (Bui, 2013).

12.4 Conclusion

Policies can conserve traditional values, reinforce heritage identity and provide more
access to mainstream opportunities or they can result in marginalisation and social
disadvantage (Edwards, 2004). As in the case of Vietnam, first, in order to minimise
the side effects, it is necessary to ensure a range of options for minority people to
create their own pathways (Adamson & Feng, 2009). In English education provision
for minority students, reimagining and redefining multilingualism is needed; and
flexible attainment goals set in all languages that allows students to determine their
own language target could provide a way forward to enhancing equity in language
education policies for minority people (Adamson & Feng, 2009; Bui & Nguyen, 2015).
In other words, sufficient and appropriate support must be provided at the macro
level. This chapter argues the need to put in place sufficient and adequate resources
to support the recent language reform. In order to improve the quality of teaching,
both language and pedagogical training for teachers is essential, and this should be
done on needs-analysis basis because as revealed in the case study two, the general
English course provided through British Council was of no value to academics.
This supports Mai’s (2014) suggestion that a holistic approach is needed to improve
language proficiency of Vietnamese teachers. He further highlights three major factors
challenging teachers’ English proficiency development, namely personal, school-
related, and socio-cultural challenges.
 References   229

Regardless of the state’s effort and investment in enhancing the quality of teacher
professional development programs, the school or in this case the university should
contextualise the policy to their own context to ensure that the outcomes of such
programmes are met (Bui & Nguyen, 2016; Mai, 2014; Nguyen et al., 2014; Nguyen,
2011). For example, the EFL teacher professional development has not been effective
because at the micro level the programmes do not meet the teachers’ needs. Instead,
different models of mentoring for language teachers are needed in order to address
context-specific needs of the teachers and to exploit more efficient human resources
(see Nguyen, 2017). As seen in the findings from case study two, local academics
valued useful experiences of observing and mingling with foreign academics. In view
of this, collaborative models of professional development such as mentoring and
peer mentoring could be organised for academics to learn from one another. Foreign
academics could also benefit from this opportunity as they could learn more about
Vietnamese market and culture to add a few aspects into their lectures. Previous
studies also reveal that non-native-English academics might benefit from specific
training about pedagogy in EMI settings (Klaassen & De Graaff, 2001). Therefore, it
is critical for the ministry to provide platform for teachers to raise their concerns,
and their needs and suggestions should be taken into consideration. Likewise, similar
platform should be provided for EMI students so that the aims and objectives of the
English reforms can be successfully achieved.

Acknowledgement

This chapter is dedicated to our late supervisor and mentor, Professor Richard (Dick)
Baldauf Jr, a world-leading scholar in Language Policy and Planning field. We are
indebted to his expertise in scholarly supervision, valuable guidance, and support
throughout our PhD candidature and academic career. His mentorship has had a
significant impact on us, both personally and professionally.

References
Adamson, B., & Feng, A. 2009. A comparison of trilingual education policies for ethnic minorities in
China. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39(3), 321-333.
Aikman, S., & Pridmore, P. 2001. Multigrade schooling in ‘remote’ areas of Vietnam. International
Journal of Educational Development, 21(6), 521-536.
Alderson, J. C. 2007. The CEFR and the need for more research. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4),
659-663. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00627_4.x
Ali, N. L. 2013. A changing paradigm in language planning: English-medium instruction policy
at the tertiary level in Malaysia. Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 73-92. doi:
10.1080/14664208.2013.775543
Baldauf , R. B. J. 2005. Micro language planning. Multilingual Matter, 133, 227-239.
Bastid-Bruguiere, M. 2001. Educational diversity in China. China Perspectives, 36, 17-26.
230   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

Beckett, G. H., & Macpherson, S. 2005. Researching the impact of english on minority and
indigenous languages in non-Western contexts. TESOL Quarterly, 39(2), 299-307.
Blachford, D. R., & Jones, M. 2011. Trilingual education policy ideals and realities for the Naxi in
Rural Yunnan. In A. Feng (Ed.), English language education across greater China (Vol. 80, pp.
228-259). Tonawanda, NY; Bristol, UK: Multilingal Matters.
Block, D., Gray, J., & Holborow, M. 2013. Neoliberalism and applied linguistics: Taylor and Francis.
Retrieved from http://www.eblib.com
Brock-Utne, B. 2013. Language and liberation. Language of instruction for mathematics and
science: A comparison and contrast of practices focusing on Tanzania. In C. Benson & K.
Kosonen (Eds.), Language Issues in Comparative Education: Inclusive Teaching and Learning in
Non-Dominant Languages and Cultures (pp. 77-96). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Bui, T. T. N. 2013. “Can a basket hide an elephant?”--- Engaged language policy and practices
toward educational, linguistic, and socioeconomic equity in Vietnam. (Dissertation/Thesis),
ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing.
Bui, T. T. N., & Nguyen, H. T. M. 2015. Standardizing English for educational and socio-economic
betterment? A critical analysis of English language policy reforms. In R. Kirkpatrick (Ed.),
English education policy in Asia. Switzerland: Springer. 363-388.
Cho, J. 2012. Campus in English or campus in shock?. English Today, 28(02), 18-25. doi: 10.1017/
S026607841200020X
Chua, S. K. C. 2010. Singapore’s language policy and its globalised concept of Bi(tri)lingualism.
Current Issues in Language Planning, 11(4), 413-429.
Coleman, H. 2011. Developing countries and the English language: Rhetoric, risks roles and
recommendations. London: British Council.
Cumming, A. 2009. Language assessment in education: Tests, curricula, and teaching. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 90-100.
Dardjowidjojo, S. 2000. English teaching in Indonesia. English Australia Journal, 18(1), 21-30.
Department of State & MOET. 2009. Final report: US - Vietnam education task force. Hanoi: Embassy
of the United States.
de Swaan, A. 1993. The evolving European language system: A theory of communication potential
and language competition. International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de
science politique, 14(3), 241-255. doi: 10.2307/1601192
Duong, T. H. H. 2009. The modernization of the national higher education of Vietnam, 1990s -
present: American universities - A resource and recourse. (Doctor D.A.), St. John’s University
(New York), Ann Arbor. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global database. (3365691)
Edwards, J. 2004. Language minorities. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied
Linguistics (pp. 451-475). Oxford: Blackwell.
ETS. 2014a. English Testing System (ETS) - TOEFL. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/toefl?WT.
ac=toeflhome_faq_121127
ETS. 2014b. English Testing System (ETS) - TOEIC. Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/toeic
Gao, Y. 2011. Development of English language education in ethnic minority schools in Inner
Mongolia autonomous region. Intercultural Communication Studies, 20(2), 148-159.
General Secretary. 2013. Resolution No. 29/2013-NQ/TW on “Fundamental and comprehensive
innovation in education, serving industrialization and modernization in a socialist-oriented
market economy during international integration” ratified in the 8th Congress session. Hanoi:
Communist Party.
Goh, E., & Nguyen, B. 2004. Vietnam. In H. W. Kam & R. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Language policies and
language education: The impact in East Asian Countries in the next decade Vol. 2. Singapore:
Eastern Universities Press. 342-353.
Gill, S. K. 2012. The complexities of re-reversal of language-in-education policy in Malay. In A.
Kirkpatrick & R. Sussex (Eds.), English as an international language in Asia: Implications for
language education. Dordrecht: Springer.45-61.
 References   231

Hamid, M. O. 2010. Globalisation, English for everyone and English teacher capacity: Language
policy discourses and realities in Bangladesh. Current Issues in Language Planning, 11(4), 289
- 310.
Hamid, M. O., & Jahan, I. 2015. Language, identity, and social divides: Medium of instruction
debates in Bangladeshi print media. Comparative Education Review, 59(1), 75-101. doi:
10.1086/679192
IELTS. 2012. The world speaks IELTS. Retrieved from http://www.ielts.org/
Jones, J. M. 2013. The ‘ideal’ vs. the ‘reality’: Medium of instruction policy and implementation in
different class levels in a western Kenyan school. Current Issues in Language Planning, 15(1),
22-38. doi: 10.1080/14664208.2014.857565
Johnstone, R. 2010. Learning through English: Policies, challenges and prospects: Insights from East
Asia. Malaysia: British Council.
Kaplan, R. B., & Baldauf, R. B., Jr. 1997. Language planning: From practice to theory. Clevedon, Avon,
UK: Multilingual Matters.
Kaplan, R. B., & Baldauf, R. B., Jr. 2005. Language-in-education policy and planning. In E. Hinkel
(Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates. 1013-1034.
Kirkpatrick, A. 2007. Teaching English across cultures: What did English language teachers need to
know to know how to teach English. English Australia Journal, 23(2), 20-36.
Kirkpatrick, A. 2010. English as a lingua franca in ASEAN: A multilingual model. Hong Kong [China]:
Hong Kong University Press.
Klaassen, R. G., & De Graaff, E. 2001. Facing innovation: Preparing lecturers for English-medium
instruction in a non-native context. European Journal of Engineering Education, 26(3), 281-289.
doi: 10.1080/03043790110054409
Kosonen, K. 2013. The use of non-dominant languages in education in Cambodia, Thailand and
Vietnam: Two steps forward, one step back. In C. Benson & K. Kosonen (Eds.), Language issues
in comparative education. Inclusive teaching and learning in non-dominant languages and
cultures. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. 39-58.
Krippendorff, K. 2013. Content analysis: An Introduction to its methodology. Los Angeles, London:
Sage.
Lamb, M., & Coleman, H. 2008. Literacy in English and the transformation of self and society in
post-Soeharto Indonesia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11(2),
189-205. doi: 10.2167/beb493.0
Le, D. M. 2012. English as a medium of instruction at tertiary education system in Vietnam. The
Journal of Asia TEFL, 9(2), 97.
Lee, S. C. 2014. A post-mortem on the Malaysian content-based instruction initiative. Journal of
Asian Pacific Communication, 24(1), 41-59.
Li, M. 2007. Foreign language education in primary schools in the People’s Republic of China.
Current Issues in Language Planning, 8(2), 148-161.
Little, D. 2011. The common European framework of reference for languages: A research agenda.
Language Teaching, 44(03), 381-393. doi: 10.1017/S0261444811000097
Lo Bianco, J. 2001. Vietnam: Quoc Ngu, colonialism and language policy. In N. Gottlieb & P. Chen
(Eds.), Language Planning and Language Policy: East Asian Perspectives. Richmond: Curzon.
159-206.
Lo Bianco, J. 2014. Domesticating the foreign: Globalization’s effects on the place/s of languages.
The Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 312-325. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12063.x
Mai, N. K. 2014. Toward a holistic approach to developing the language proficiency of Vietnamese
primary teachers of English. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 11(2), 341-357.
Majhanovich, S. 2013. English as a tool of neo-colonialism and globalization in Asian contexts.
In Y. Hébert & A. Abdi (Eds.), Critical Perspectives on International Education Vol. 15. Sense
Publishers.249-261.
232   Local challenges to global needs in English language education in Vietnam ...

Majhanovich, S. 2014. Neo-liberalism, globalization, language policy and practice issues

in the Asia-Pacific region. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 34(2), 168-183. doi:
10.1080/02188791.2013.875650
MOET. 2014. Circular No. 23/2014/TT-BGDĐT on “Regulations on high-quality programs in
universities”. Hanoi: Ministry of Education and Training (MOET).
National Assembly. 2005. Education Law (No. 38/2005/QH11). Hanoi: The Government.
National Assembly. 2013. The constitution of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam (adopted on
November 28, 2013, by the XIIIth National Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, at its
6th session). Hanoi: The Government.
Nguyen, C. D., Le, L. T., Tran, Q. H., & Nguyen, H. T. 2014. Inequality of access to English language
learning in primary education in Vietnam. In H. Zhang, P. W. K. Chan & C. Boyle (Eds.), Equality
in education: Fairness and inclusion. Rotterdam, Boston, Taipei: Sense Publisher. 139-153.
Nguyen, H. T. M. 2011. Primary English language education policy in Vietnam: Insights
from implementation. Current Issues in Language Planning, 12(2), 225-249. doi:
10.1080/14664208.2011.597048
Nguyen, H. T. M. 2017. Models of mentoring in language teacher education. Switzerland: Springer.
Nguyen, N. H. 2010, 15 September. Innovation in English language education in Vietnam:
Challenges, opportunities and solutions. Paper presented at the English for All - International
Conference in TESOL, Hue, Vietnam.
Nguyen, V. H., & Hamid, M. O. 2015. Educational policy borrowing in a globalized world. English
Teaching: Practice & Critique, 14(1), 60-74. doi: 10.1108/ETPC-02-2015-0014
Pham, N. T. 2014. Foreign language policy. In T. Ly-Tran, S. Marginson, M. Hoang-Do, T. N. Quyen-Do,
T. T. Truc-Le, T. Nhai-Nguyen, P. T. Thao-Vu, N. Thach-Pham & T. L. Huong-Nguyen (Eds.), Higher
education in Vietnam: Flexibility, mobility and practicality in the global knowledge economy.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 169-186.
Price, G. 2014. English for all? Neoliberalism, globalization, and language policy in Taiwan.
Language in Society, 43(5), 567.
Prime Minister. 2008a. Decision No. 1400/QD-TTg on “Teaching and learning foreign languages in
the national education system, period 2008-2020”. Hanoi: The Government.
Prime Minister. 2008b. Decision no. 1505/QD-TTg on “The introduction of advanced programs in
some Vietnamese universities in the period of 2008-2015”. Hanoi: The Government.
Qi, S. 2009. Globalization of English and English language policies in East Asia: A comparative
perspective. Canadian Social Science, 5(3), 111-120.
Sunuodula, M., & Feng, A. 2011. Learning english as a third language by Uyghur students in
Xinjiang: A blessing in disguise? In A. Feng (Ed.), English language education across greater
China Vol. 80. Tonawanda, NY; Bristol, UK: Multilingal Matters.260-283.
Sung-Yul Park, J., & Wee, L. 2013. Markets of English: Linguistic capital and language policy in a
globalizing world. New York: Routledge.
Tatzl, D. 2011. English-medium masters’ programmes at an Austrian university of applied sciences:
Attitudes, experiences and challenges. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(4), 252-
270. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2011.08.003
Toh, G. 2014. English for content instruction in a Japanese higher education setting: Examining
challenges, contradictions and anomalies. Language and Education, 28(4), 299-318. doi:
10.1080/09500782.2013.857348
Tollefson, J. W., & Tsui, A. B. M. (Eds.). 2004. Medium of instruction policies: Which agenda? Whose
agenda? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tollefson, J. W., & Tsui, A. 2007. Language policy, culture and identity in Asian contexts. Mahwah,
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vu, T. T. N., & Burns, A. 2014. English as a medium of instruction: Challenges for Vietnamese tertiary
lecturers. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 11(3), 1-31.
 References   233

VIED. 2015. List of approved joint education programs. Retrieved from http://www.vied.vn/images/
lien_ket_dao_tao/LKDT%202015%207.1.15%20-%20up20website.pdf
Wilkinson, R. 2005. The impact of language on teaching content: Views from the content teacher.
Paper presented at the bi- and multilingual universities – Challenges and future prospects,
Helsinki.
Wilkinson, R. 2013. English-medium instruction at a Dutch university: Challenges and pitfalls. In A.
Doiz, D. Lasagabaster & J. M. Sierra (Eds.), English-Medium Instruction at Universities: Global
Challenges. Canada: Multilingual Matters. 3-24.
Wright, S. 2002. Language education and foreign relations in Vietnam. In J. W. Tollefson (Ed.),
Language Policies in Education: Critical Issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 225-244.
Wyk, A. V. 2014. English-medium education in a multilingual setting: A case in South Africa.
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 52(2), 205-220. doi: 10.1515/
iral-2014-0009