Evaluation of the national English Curriculum in high schools in

Vietnam
I. Introduction.
Curriculum evaluation has always been a need in any institutions that wish to improve the
quality of their teaching and learning. Richards (2001) claims that educators and
curriculum planners have become more and more interested in curriculum evaluation
since the 1960s. This process does not only proves it significance in updating the
employed methodology but also helps to revise the contents and other features of the
curriculum (Al-Jardani, 2011).
In the case of language teaching and learning in high schools in Vietnam, although the
curriculum is nationalized and established by the Ministry of Education and Training
(MOET), curriculum evaluation should still be conducted for the following reasons:
firstly, to assess the effectiveness of the implementation of curriculum itself; secondly, to
identify the problems lying in the program and the way in which it is carried out, and
lastly, to recommend appropriate solutions to the problems to ultimately improve the
quality of the curriculum. This project paper, therefore, has been written for nothing but
the grounds mentioned above.
Due to the framework of this paper as well as the constraint of time and finance, the
evaluation is specifically conducted on the English language curriculum implemented at
Phu Hoa High School, where the assessor is working as an English teacher, and will be
afterwards presented to the Board of School Management as a recommendation for
improvement in teaching and learning English. The project is divided into four parts:
Part 1 introduces some background information about curriculum evaluation in general as
well as the aims, scope and structure of the project.
Part 2 is to establish a theoretical framework for evaluating the curriculum by presenting
the criterion utilized for assessment and the reasons for choosing it as well as the
introduction to the context of Phu Hoa High School and the language curriculum.
Part 3 is where the curriculum is evaluated in details to figure out the mismatch between
the objectives of the program and the real competence of the students. Then it continues
to address the problems lying under that.
Part 4 would then conclude all the points that have been made so far and suggest some
solutions to the mentioned problems.
II. Theoretical framework for evaluating the curriculum.
1. Criterion for evaluating the English curriculum at Phu Hoa High School.
An evaluation must always be based on certain criteria to be valid in assessing any
curriculum. Researchers have suggested several different criteria and have advised that in
every specific circumstance, assessors should adopt the most appropriate ones for their
own. Al-Jardani (2012) suggests a framework which consists of 13 elements ranging from
the visions and policies by the government to the specific textbooks and the follow-up
stages of teacher training and assessment. Richards (2001) cites Sanders (1992) and Weir
and Roberts (1994) so as to present the different aspects of a program that can be
evaluated. These aspects can be counted up to 11 points and though worded in a different
way, seem to be about the same things as those of Al-Jardani (2012), which can be
generalized as needs (concerning learner’s needs), situational factors (including societal,
project, institutional, teacher, learner and adoption factors) and learning goals and
program outcomes (dealing with the missions, goals and objectives of the program).
In the circumstance of the English curriculum in government-run high schools, it can be
seen that the first three mentioned criteria are not suitable enough to be employed. That is
to say learner’s needs are not considered an important factor as the curriculum is built up
on the National Framework for General Education and high school students are supposed
to need all of the knowledge and practice of skills presented in the curriculum. In a
similar way, the situational factors, in specific words, can be understood as the
recruitment of teachers, enrolment of students, policy-making, content of the syllabus and
program, teacher training, assessment are all governed by the MOET despite some slight
differences from school to school, which would create very few distinctions in the way
high schools all over the country implement the curriculum. As for the learning goals,
which are mentioned on the Assessment Primer webpage of the University of Connecticut
(2014) as “too broad or too abstract to measure directly”, it would be difficult to evaluate
such concepts as “competence in communicating, enthusiasm in learning foreign
language, understanding of the cultures of Vietnam and English speaking countries”
(Hoàng Văn Vân, 2008) in the framework and size of this project.
All of the mentioned above, as a result, have left ways for the last criterion, the program
outcomes, to be adopted to evaluate the curriculum. A word of notice should be put here
in order to make things clear for the two terms “objectives” and “outcomes” is that though
defined differently, these two terms are used interchangeably in the Teacher’s Guide for
the National Curriculum. It would sound reasonable to argue that the translated
measurable outcomes from the goals can be more easily assessed through the principle of
“coherence” stating the correspondence between the curriculum aims and the
achievements made by the students (Kamysheva, 1999) by means of different kinds of
tests and on-going assessment during the time students study in high schools. Firstly, it
would be easier for this project to measure students’ competence which has already been
described in detailed in the program outcomes. Second, it would be practical for teachers
to identify the problems lying in the curriculum if there is ever a mismatch between the
objectives and the real competence of students. Finally, the content of the program is
encouraged to be adapted by the MOET and is also easily to be done so, which gives
English teachers at high schools can have the right to modify and use them as they wish.
2. Introduction to the curriculum employed at Phu Hoa High School.
2.1. The teaching and learning context of English at Phu Hoa High School.
Phu Hoa High School, located in Cu Chi District about 37 kilometers northwest of Ho Chi
Minh City center, is a public school run by the government. This school was established
in 2003 and is currently offering education to approximately 1000 students. The students
enrolled in this school are primarily from the nearby villages where it is situated because
of the policy of local area enrolment with a not very high entrance grade compared to the
other schools in Cu Chi District. The students are divided into the units of classes, which
then form the three grades: Ten, Eleven and Twelve.
All the students in the school have to take English as one of their compulsory subjects and
study it for three years with the passing grade of 3.5 for each stage. According to the
survey conducted by the English club of this school on 100 students from different classes
and grades, not many students in this school would choose English as their favorite
subject.

Figure 1. Students’ opinions on studying English (reproduced from the Annual Report of
Phu Hoa English Club, 2013)
The recent result of the subjects chosen by the Twelfth graders for the General Certificate
in Secondary Education also reveals that only 31 out of 238 students in grade Twelve
choose English. It can be seen the learning of English at Phu Hoa High School, for some
reasons, is not of much favor.
As for teaching, the English Staff comprises ten members, one of whom has achieved
level C1 of the National Framework for Foreign Language Competence issued by the
MOET, six have accomplished level B2 and two are working on level B2. All of the
members in the staff are graduates in TESOL from different universities. When asked, 9
out of 10 teachers claim that they are satisfied with the teaching here; although they do
not feel happy to prepare their students for their English exams all the time.
Assessment, as required by the MOET, is conducted during the courses of the program.
Speaking skill is examined in form of a 15-mitue test once every semester and is carried
out on a separate day. Listening is assessed four times every course in two mid-term and
two end-of-term exams. Writing is assessed when students hand in their papers in every
lesson, which will be then graded by the teacher. Reading, grammar and vocabulary are
regularly tested in form of written tests.
2.2. Structure of the curriculum.
As part of the national system of education, Phu Hoa High School follows the curriculum
promulgated by the MOET, which means the English teachers here use the national
English textbooks as their main materials.
The English curriculum consists of three courses, namely English 10, English 11 and
English 12, which are respectively taught to grade Ten, Eleven and Twelve. Each course
utilizes one of the three textbooks in the series, which are Tiếng Anh 10, Tiếng Anh 11
and Tiếng Anh 12; and is taught in 105 45-minute periods, which makes the total amount
of time for the whole curriculum 315 periods (approximately 236 hours).
The three books follow the same structure which has been built up around the provided
themes. There are 16 units in each book, accompanied by 6 revision lessons. Each unit is
divided into 5 lessons as follows:
Reading: A text which usually contains virtually all the lexical items of the unit is
presented in this lesson with some tasks and exercises which focus on comprehension and
vocabulary practice.
Speaking: This lesson is usually built up on the same theme with the reading text but
provides students with different tasks so that they can develop their speaking skills.
Listening: Different listening strategies are taught in this lesson. It also offers students
opportunities to learn some more new words on the theme.
Writing: This lesson aims to develop students’ writing skills by following the product-
oriented approach in grade Ten and the process-oriented approach in the other two.
Language focus: This part focuses on practicing pronunciation and grammar.
2.3. Expected outcomes of the curriculum.
Stated in the Teacher’s Guide for Grade Twelve, which is the highest level of the whole
program, the objectives describe what students can do in each of the four skills after
having completed this level. This project would take those for evaluating the
correspondence between the program outcomes and the competence of students, which
are described as follows:
Reading: Students are expected to be able to read and understand a wide range of texts of
280-320 words in length and to develop the reading strategies of scanning, skimming and
guessing.
Listening: Students are expected to be able to develop listening skills of intensive and
extensive listening, listening for specific information and listening for gist and to
understand a wide range of spoken texts in a near-natural speed.
Speaking: Students are expected to talk about the topics in the program and to perform a
wide range of language functions of expressing opinions, discussing, explaining, and
describing abstract concepts in 2-3 minutes with or without assistance from teacher.
Writing: Students are expected to be able to go through the process of writing
(brainstorming, outlining, writing the first draft, editing, finalizing) by themselves in
writing report, business letters and about the topics in the program.
III. Evaluation of the English curriculum at Phu Hoa High School.
1. Evaluation on the correlation between the curriculum objectives and students’
proficiency.

In evaluating the program outcomes, the assessor has had to appeal for the overall results
of the school year of the Twelfth graders, who are supposed to finish their program at the
end of April by completing all the exams following the structures stated in II. 2.1., from
his colleagues to put in comparison with the objectives in order to be able to demonstrate
the most truthful correlation. The results, which have been interpreted into the form of
skills, can be examined in the following table.
My school is currently following the curriculum promulgated by the MOET which means
the English teachers here use the national English textbooks as their main materials. The
English curriculum consists of three courses, namely English 10, English 11 and English
12, which are respectively taught to grade Ten, Eleven and Twelve.
 Table 1. Final results of 12th grader in forms of language skills

Area Good Fair Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Bad Failed

examined (8.0 - 10) (6.5 - 7.9) (5.0 - 6.4) (3.5 - 4.9) (2.0 - 3.4) (0 - 1.9)
Speaking 7 22 35 102 72 0
Listening 14 36 45 98 45 0
Reading 55 83 46 54 0 0
Writing 23 56 75 56 28 0
As can be seen from the table, there is a big difference in the number of students who
achieved above-average and below-average scores in verbally communicative skills and
in literacy skills. More students showed their competence in reading and writing than in
speaking and listening. In the speaking and listening tests, more than half of the students
scored below 5.0 (approximately two-thirds in speaking and half in listening) while in
reading and writing tests, only 54 and 84 students (approximately one-fourth) did not
reach the average. The number of students who met the objectives in literacy skills,
therefore, seems to outnumber that of the others with 184 out of 238 showed their
acceptable proficiency in reading and 154 in writing while only 64 and 95 could do this in
speaking and listening respectively. It would be of acceptable agreement to claim that the
students at Phu Hoa High School are weaker in communicating verbally in English than
they can perform themselves in literacy skills of English.
The test results, in some aspects, have revealed one important thing about the English
curriculum employed at Phu Hoa High School: for some reasons, students’ real
proficiency fails to meet all the objectives stated by the MOET despite the fact that the
curriculum has been utilized fully to an acceptable and practical extent. Although it can be
admitted that the number of students who scored satisfactorily and better in reading and
writing has somehow made it possible to argue that the objectives for those two skills has
virtually been fulfilled, that of speaking and listening has neglected to do so.
2. The problems in the curriculum that cause the mismatch.
In addition to some problems that come from the teaching – learning process, the grounds
for this mismatch would possibly come from the curriculum itself. In the framework of
this evaluation project as well as due to the fact that it is not the primary aim of this
project, it would appear to be impossible to examined the problems to their full depth. It
is, therefore, would be more appropriate for the assessor to present the two main problems
of the curriculum briefly coming from his own teaching experience in teaching it.
One problem would be addressed here is the time-constraint which prevents students from
having a continuous practice of the language skills, especially speaking and listening
which do not have an environment in Vietnamese context. Taught in 3 periods a week, a
lesson would take approximately 2 weeks or more to complete. A considerable amount of
time must be spent on practicing grammar as well. As a consequence, time for practice
seems to be insufficient.
The other problem is the lack of integrating different skills in one lesson. The lessons are
designed separately in form of the four skills. In case of speaking and listening, if they are
ever borrowed in a lesson of another, they would be utilized in a very minor amount of
time and is not worth mentioning. This disintegration of the skills does not allow students
to use them in a real way. Additionally, when practiced in isolation, the skills become
form-focused, not really communicative.
IV. Conclusion and Recommendations.
A conclusion can be drawn from the analysis of the final results of students that owing to
some problems in the teaching learning process and in the program itself there exists a
mismatch between the intended objectives and the proficiency of verbal communication
of students who have completed the whole program. In other words, students’ competence
in speaking and listening does not live up to the objectives.
A recommendation can be made in order to resolve one of the problems mentioned above
on the ground that the problem of insufficient amount of time is something related to the
policy, which English teachers have no right to influence or change. It is suggested that
the teachers, when designing their English lessons, should take into consideration the
need to integrate speaking and listening skills. For instance, the warming-up and follow-
up activities of a reading or listening or even writing lesson can be in form of a speaking
activity. A listening activity on the same theme can also be employed for the post-reading
part.
It can be believed that, though fails to achieve some of its objectives, the language
curriculum employed at Phu Hoa High School can be adapted and utilized in order to
assist students’ on their way of acquiring the language.

References
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Al-Jardani, K. S. (2011). The need for developing a Framework for Curriculum
Evaluation. Proceedings of ICERI 2011 Conference. 14th-16th November 2011, Madrid,
Spain.
Phu Hoa English Club. (2013). The Annual Report on the Club’s Activities. Ho Chi Minh
City: Phu Hoa High School.
Al-Jardani, K. S. (2012). Evaluating a Developed Framework for Curriculum Evaluation
in Oman. International Journal of English Linguistics; Vol. 2, No. 6. Canada: Canadian
Center of Science and Education.
University of Connecticut. (2014). Assessment Primer: Goals, Objectives and Outcomes.
In Assessment Primer. Retrieved May 3, 2014, from
http://assessment.uconn.edu/primer/goals1.html.
Kamysheva, L. M. . (1999). Language Curriculum Design and Teacher. In Rostov State
Transport University Research. Retrieved May 3, 2014, from
t21.rgups.ru/archive/doc2007/1/01.doc.