A policy review of criteria and competencies for teaching staff of general education in Vietnam

Abstract

The teaching staff is one of the most significant factors determining the quality of education. Therefore, improving the quality of teaching staff is always considered by governments. The criteria of teacher competence, the basis for evaluating teachers as well as the basis for teachers to improve their capacity, is one of the factors to promote the quality of teachers. In the context of socio-economic changes and the need to comprehensively innovate education, Vietnam has issued new standards for teaching staff. With a documentary research approach, the study analysed the changes in criteria and capacity for general education teachers based on policy documents and explained the necessity of that criterion system for education in Vietnam in the current context. Along with the change in criteria and teacher capacity, approaches to teacher assessment and rating were also mentioned in this study. The results show that the criteria, methods of assessment, and grading of teachers are getting better. However, policy changes take time to successfully implement in practice and need to be consistent with other policies. Therefore, some recommendations on management, teacher training, and financial support were proposed for improving the quality of teaching staff.

Keywords:

• Teaching staff
• General education
• Competency
• Criteria
• Developing competent teacher

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Dear Editor,

Follow your requirements, I send herewith our PIS doc file for the Manuscript “A Policy Review of Criteria and Competencies for Teaching Staff of General Education in Vietnam” Manuscript Number COGENTEDU-2021-1003R1

The issue of teachers is always a significant concern of educators and society because of their importance in creating quality education. Therefore, the standards and competence of teachers are also considered by the wider community outside the schools. Studies and policies on teacher standards and competencies have been carried out in many countries and Vietnam. The change in regulations on teacher standards and qualifications not only affects schools but also serves as a basis for stakeholders to evaluate the effectiveness of education. However, along with that change, other factors also need to be taken into account. This study shows an example of Vietnam in its efforts to improve the capacity of teaching staff from the perspective of teacher evaluation policy. At the same time, the study also poses challenges and recommendations for the synchronous implementation of other solutions to contribute to improving the quality of teachers in schools.

Thank you so much

On behalf of the co-authors

The Thang Nguyen

1. Introduction

A growing number of governments are shifting away from an input-based assessment approach and toward a focus on process and output, or professional performance evaluation. However, there is still a tendency to prioritize success over the outcomes of lifelong learning and learning. Approaches to assessing and measuring teachers’ credentials and competency through process assessment are becoming more prevalent. Teachers must demonstrate accomplishment at these levels in order to meet the specified standards. On the one hand, the formation of professional standards to assess the professional performance of practicing teachers is to determine the competencies that need to be educated for teachers and, on the other hand, to identify instructors who can take on the following responsibilities, whether their job or not.

Figure 1. Structure of the 2018 School Teacher Professional Standards

Figure 2. Steps for teacher assessment and rating based on professional standards sets

Like many other countries in the world, in Vietnam, regulations on standards and competencies of general teachers are used as a basis for (MOET, 2018): (1) Teachers at general education institutions to self-assess; (2) General education institutions to assess their teachers; (3) State management agencies to make policies for teaching staff development; (4) Teacher training and retraining establishments to develop teacher training programs/plans. Accordingly, studies in Vietnam focus on two directions, first is to solve the problems of school teachers’ competencies in pedagogical institutions, such as balancing professional knowledge and pedagogical skills training (Cao, 2016; Do & Do, 2016; V.L. Nguyen, 2016), renovating training programs towards competency development (Phan, 2016), improving internal resources of pedagogical institutions (Le, 2005); second is to retrain school teachers, develop a curriculum (D.V. Nguyen, 2017), self-development (Phan, 2016), improve teaching competency for subject-based teachers (Vo, 2016), develop teaching staff competencies for creating a competitive advantage for schools (Duong & Nguyen, 2016).

Apart from studies and projects specializing in capacity development for school teachers, the above-mentioned international and domestic studies have shown the urgency of the competencies of teaching staff in the context of educational renovation. In terms of policies, teachers’ competencies and professional standards can be divided into two categories. The first includes regulating documents on civil servants; the second consists of all documents issued by the MOET as well as analyses of changing context in issuing the said policies in the past years.

2. Literature review

Recent studies on teacher competency policy and standards are frequently placed in a variety of global, regional, national, and problem-specific contexts. Globally, teacher education and professional development have recently emerged as hot topics in global policy debates because many educational improvements have been implemented without obvious reference to the findings of empirical research evaluating the efficacy of teacher education (Kaiser & König, 2019). Regionally, critical issues in education are now associated with low levels of socioemotional competence and high rates of school dropout, and there are no standard standards or recommendations to assist nations in assessing and training social and emotional skills (Aguilar et al., 2019). To address this limitation, the Learning to Be (L2B) project seeks to propose a comprehensive model of social and emotional competence assessment and development that brings together policymakers, researchers, teachers, school authorities, and learners from Finland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain.

Nationally, since the 1980s, government reform of the UK education system has included a sequence of policy interventions in Initial Teacher Training to specify the knowledge and competencies required of newly certified teachers (Graham, 1996). Furthermore, the policies, preparations, and views of pre-service foreign language teachers’ competency development were investigated within the framework of an innovative remote teacher training module (Stadler-Heer, 2021). Alternatively, when new innovations or measurement procedures are brought into the educational system in order to enhance or appraise the quality of its teaching force, starting teachers must frequently adjust to these new concepts of what constitutes high-quality teaching (Goh & Wong, 2014). Policymakers (Harley et al., 2000) have placed so much trust in education to better and strengthen South African society that contemporary policy documents define teachers’ vocational, professional, and academic obligations and skills. Furthermore, teacher competences are linked to the development and implementation of education policy (Kovač et al., 2014), and the transition to competency-based education has implications for both teachers and school administrators (Seezink & Poell, 2011). Australia, for instance, has a history of teacher capacity building extending back to the 1970s (Tania, 2006); (Department of Education and Training, 2004), and Singapore also (Steiner, 2010) is a country with exceptional educational progress. As a result, a quick comparison of teacher standards in Vietnam and these two nations is done to identify differences and similarities.

The goals of these studies are likewise fairly broad, as evidenced by features of policy, practice, professional growth, human resource development, and other remuneration-related concerns. That is teacher abilities were stressed in European policy discourse in the context of global convergences in education reform (Caena, 2014). It builds on important ideas, policy recommendations, peer learning, and publications that underline the significance of teacher quality for educational achievement, as recently highlighted in the European Commission Communication and Staff Working Papers Rethinking Education. Furthermore, the purpose of the research was to get a preliminary knowledge of the general orientation and variety of viewpoints of 396 primary and secondary school teachers in Croatia about a) the significance of their education policy competencies; b) cognition and mastery of education policy competencies; and c) the actual engagement of primary and secondary school teachers in the design and implementation of education policies (Kovač et al., 2014). Practically, the studies states that these new categories do not necessarily match to beginning teachers’ own judgments of their own abilities, nor have they provided a chance for beginning teachers to be heard (Goh & Wong, 2014). This study uses phenomenography, an interpretive research approach, to investigate what beginning teachers in Malaysia see and grasp as competency in relation to what they accomplish every day as instructors.

Other objective of these studies is professional development, it is a substantial transition to “extended” professionalism (Harley et al., 2000). Are these roles and competencies congruent with contemporary classroom realities and practices? This challenge was addressed by mapping “effective” teachers’ methods into research timelines based on the six primary policy responsibilities. In practice, instructors took on responsibilities that reflected their personal value systems, local cultures, and situations. Identify primary teachers’ use of nutrition competencies as part of their school wellness policies (SWP) using Organizational Change Theory (OCT) components (Lambert et al., 2010). And to investigate the evolution of policies addressing teachers’ digital competency in Norway, Ireland, and Spain (Competency et al., 1983; McGarr et al., 2021). Teacher competency is one of the important themes attractive to distinguished researchers, some of them are student teachers who need to be assessed in a competency framework (Roy Barton, 1988), and professional competencies and professional characteristics are closely associated (Geoff, 1996), policy developments and professionalism and professional competency in teaching, and some standard-setting at national and state levels (Walker, 1996). For professional competencies as well as curricular changes resulting from German universities’ transition to online teaching in the summer term of 2020, a Developmental Model of Teacher Professional Competence (DevTPC), is proposed, which can serve as the foundation for operationalizing required context- and content-specific teacher competences (Stadler-Heer, 2021). But the research offers an overview of current information gathered from empirical research on the structure of teachers’ professional competence and competence growth during teacher education (Kaiser & König, 2019). An international framework for regulating activities and assisting instructors working on students’ social and emotional competencies, as well as providing tools that may be utilized across borders (Aguilar et al., 2019). The purpose of this study is to show how L2B has evolved in Spain by assessing the worldwide framework’s contributions and identifying the special demands in the Spanish environment.

One of the research objectives of the studies is relevant to human resources, Seezink and Poell (2011) look at the professional development activities teachers engage in response to this transition and how these activities differ amongst schools with different human resource (HR) policies. There were two types of HR policies involved: (1) a government-enforced, national system of Integrated Personnel Management and (2) a voluntary, integrative approach to teacher education; organizational development of schools and teacher training institutes; action- and development-oriented research; and teacher professional development. Other factors, the significance of educator certification in resolving the Indonesian education financing system, which the government is still running until 2020 with some extra rules, and explain how the regulations are implemented in the system and offer suggestions for increasing their quality, qualification, and competence (Sholihah et al., 2020).

There were varied methods that have been applied to research in this sector: a pilot study (Stadler-Heer, 2021), a theoretical framework (Kaiser & König, 2019), a survey approach (Kovač et al., 2014), (Lambert et al., 2010), semi-structured interviews (Seezink & Poell, 2011), teacher competency frameworks (Caena, 2014), development of the toolkit (Aguilar et al., 2019), qualitative research (Sholihah et al., 2020), phenomenography, an interpretative research technique (Goh & Wong, 2014) and the documentary research technique were used to examine important policy papers from each country from the 1970s to the present (McGarr et al., 2021). The research methods mentioned above all point out remarkable aspects when studying the standards, criteria, competencies, and professionalism of high school teachers, especially the method of document research, with many important meanings, because applying this method will indicate the capacity requirements and professional standards of teachers at different stages of an education system. Most importantly, it will show the content and development of teacher standards policy.

The findings of the studies mentioned in this review point to the need for competence as well as solutions and critical issues for the best development of teacher competence, which is a set of questions and research proposals to stimulate innovation in distant foreign language teacher training (Stadler-Heer, 2021). Furthermore, effective professional development approaches are essential owing to the dynamic increase of teacher competence through practical learning opportunities in early career teaching (Kaiser & König, 2019). In particular, elementary and secondary school teachers ranked their competencies related to education policy as an important feature of their teacher competency profile (Kovač et al., 2014). Teachers rated their cognition and command of competencies relevant to school-based education policy procedures as quite high. Mastery of competencies connected to the understanding of the education system, i.e., activity outside of the school context, on the other hand, has gotten relatively lower scores. The evaluations of scale items related to preconditions and personal engagement in decision making and educational policy implementation within the school vary from average to slightly above average. The critical importance of beginning teachers’ views of competency has significant consequences for educational policy and teacher education (Goh & Wong, 2014); any quality enhancement strategies should include instructors, and promote and encourage teachers’ professional growth as competent instructors, educational systems, and teacher training programs should also be given special consideration. The regulations of Continuing Professional Development to develop national standards for new categories of “expert teachers” pose serious concerns regarding academic and professional autonomy and have an influence on teachers and schools as well as develop new conceptions of professionalism (Graham, 1996). And professional development activities for teachers were found to be pretty consistent among schools with varying human resource regulations (Seezink & Poell, 2011). It is determined that neither government-mandated nor volunteer human resource rules appear to have a significant effect on teacher engagement in professional development activities. Certain developing patterns and trends across a range of policy initiatives, highlighting paradigmatic national instances and providing some food for thought, were identified (Caena, 2014). And the government’s efforts to implement a certification system have a positive influence on the quality, qualification, and competency of instructors (Sholihah et al., 2020). Some considerable gaps between policy and practice pose major concerns regarding policy assumptions (Harley et al., 2000). The educational structure, on which transformation and growth rely, would be jeopardized if “tissue rejection” occurred, which is not an improbable prospect. Worse, historically uneven schools may worsen. The historical variations and parallels in how technology in teacher education were addressed, as well as the relevance of teachers’ digital competency as influenced by supranational frameworks, the benefits and problems of policy convergence, and the potential impact of these supranational frameworks (McGarr et al., 2021). As school administrations execute organizational change (Lambert et al., 2010), using evaluation methodologies to help teachers shift from the moving to the refreezing stages would be advantageous.

To summarize, the context of the research manifests itself at all levels, from global to specific features pertinent to current teacher competence policy. The study’s primary goal is policy, but it also considers professional growth, human resource development, and other considerations. Each study employs a different approach, the most similar to this report being textual research to demonstrate changes in legislative texts on teacher competency through time. Key findings indicate a substantial relationship between regulatory and policy issues influencing teacher competency growth and standards. Thus, it can be said that the implications of the updated studies reviewed above reflect all aspects of teacher competency development policy with much experience should be learned and implemented in Vietnam, and the competencies and standards of general teachers should be investigated in the context of national and worldwide teacher standards and associated issues, especially when the documentary research approach is used in this paper to partly clarify the picture of criteria and competencies policy of teaching staff of general education in Vietnam today.

3. Method

This study applied a documentary research approach. Based on the question “How have policies changed on professional standards of general teachers before and after the radical and comprehensive renovation of education in Vietnam?”, we collected official national policy documents in which related to professional standards and/or competency development of school teachers issued by MOET in 2007, 2009 and 2018. To investigate the past the processes of change and continuity over time of this issue, these policy documents were highlighted in some aspects, i.e. regulations on civil servants concerns school teachers, teacher professional standards, teacher professional assessment standards, teacher assessment, and rating. This approach led us to shed the light on the policy reforms (McCulloch, 2013) in Vietnamese educational system. Moreover, in order to compare others school teacher professional standards, two policy documents, Australian Professional Standards for Teachers and Singapore Graduand Teacher Competencies were referred. Criteria of these standards were categorized into three groups, including professional knowledge, organization of teaching and learning activities, personal manners, and professional values.

4. Findings and discussion

4.1. School teachers

As the education law (Assembly, 2005) of Vietnam, school teachers are persons that carry out teaching, educating at the primary, middle, high schools and public preparatory schools. In terms of the quantity and quality (Ministry of Education and Traininig, 2017) by the school year of 2015–2016, the school teachers of Vietnam are divided into five main groups from grade I to grade IV and standard-unsatisfied, though the middle school teachers only are categorized as a grade IV. The number of teachers classified into groups from Grade I to grade IV graduated from universities is by the most numbers of them approximately over 802.000 people, which means these people hold college degrees and higher degrees, and about 110.000 graduated from secondary pedagogical schools only. They are adept in basic computer competency, and proficiency of a foreign language at the language framework adapted from the European Union, (Cambridge University Press, 2013). Compared with primary and middle school teachers, the high school teaching staff includes the best teachers are more highly educated with nearly 1200 people possessing master degrees or PhD Degrees, and just over 130.000 of teachers holding university degrees. Conversely, refresher training courses should be provided for about 5.500 teachers to meet the standards in terms of qualifications and professional competencies, and these are working in the primary sector are close to threefold compared to the lower secondary teachers and upper secondary teachers. The teachers working in the general educational sector have to meet two kinds of standards, one is qualifications and what they have to do in schools regulated by Joint Circulars (see more in Table 3), and the other is professional standards regulated by Circulars issued by the MOET. These Circulars have represented the policy changes in the professional competencies of the general teachers in recent years.

Table 1. Sets of professional standards for school teachers

Professional Requirements of Primary Teachers 03 standards—60 criteria (Decision No 14/2007/QĐ-BGDĐT)	Professional Standards of School Teachers 06 standards—25 criteria(Circular No 30/2009/TT-BGDĐT)^10	Professional Standards of Primary Teachers and General School Teachers 05 standards—15 criteria(Circular No 20/2018/TT-BGDĐT)^13
Standard 1. Politics, Morality, living style The awareness of politics—4 criteria Abide by the laws—4 criteria Abide by the rules of an educational sector and a school—4 criteria Morality—4 criteria Honesty—4 criteria	Standard 1. Politics, Morality, living style, including 5 criteria: Politics Professional morality Behavior towards students Behavior towards colleagues Working and living styles	Standard 1. Professional qualities, including 2 criteria: Morality of Teachers Working style
Standard 2. Knowledge Basic knowledge—4 criteria Age pedagogical psychology, primary education—4 criteria Assessment, tests the student’s achievements—4 criteria Knowledge of politics, society, minority or foreign language proficiency, ICT application- 4 criteria Knowledge of local where a teacher is working—4 criteria	Standard 2. Educational Objects and environment, including 2 criteria: Learn about Educational Objects Learn about Educational environment	Standard 2. Professional capacity and pedagogical competency, including 5 criteria: Professional capacity development Develop teaching and education plan towards the development of students’ quality and capacity Capacity to apply the education and teaching methods towards the development of students’ quality and capacity. Capacity for examination and evaluation towards the development of students’ capacity and quality Student counseling and supporting capacity
Standard 3. Pedagogical skills Develop a teaching plan; prepare a reform-directed lesson plan—4 criteria Organize and conduct teaching activities—4 criteria Head teacher activities—4 criteria Educational quality Management information; Educational attitudes, behavior—4 criteria Develop, manage educational and teaching files—4 criteria	Standard 3. Teaching competency, including 8 criteria: Teaching plan Knowledge of a subject Curriculum of a subject Teaching method Teaching facilities Learning environment development Teaching files management Assessment, tests of the student’s achievements	Standard 3. Capacity to build the education environment, including 3 criteria: Build a school culture Capacity to implement the democratic rights in schools Capacity to perform, build a safe school and prevent school violence
	Standard 4. Educational competency, including 6 criteria: Educational plan Education through a subject Education through Educational activities Education through community activities Applications of educational methods, forms and rules Student moral evaluation	Standard 4. Developing the relationships between schools, families and society, including 3 criteria: Create a cooperative relationship with students’ parents/guardians and other stakeholders Cooperate schools, families and the society for implementing teaching activities for students Coordinate between schools, families and the society in the implementation of ethics and lifestyle education for students
	Standard 5. Politics, society, including 2 criteria: Coordinate schools, families and the society Participate in political and social activities	Standard 5. Foreign or minority language proficiency, ICT application and use of IT devices in teaching and education, including 2 criteria: Foreign or ethnic minority language proficiency Application of information technology, use of IT devices in teaching and education
	Standard 6. Professional development, including 2 criteria: Self-educated, self- assessed and self-trained Find out and solve rising problems

Table 2. Conditions to classify teachers according to teachers’ professional standards

Primary teacher standards issued in 2007 (Decision 14/2007)
Rating levels	Good	Fair	Average	Bad
Conditions	All three standards are rated as Good Points for the standards are ranging from 180 to 200	All three standards are rated as Fair or higher Points for the standards are 140 or higher	All three standards are rated as Average or higher Points for the standards are 100 or higher	Some standards are rated as Bad Points for the standards are under 100
Secondary teacher standards issued in 2009 (Circular 30/2009)
Rating levels	Good	Fair	Average	Bad
Conditions	Total points: 90–100 All criteria: 3–4 points At least 15 criteria reaching 4 points	Total points: 65–89 All criteria: 2–4 points At least 15 criteria reaching 3–4 points	All criteria: 1–4 points Not rated as Fair, Good	Under 25 points Above 25 points but there are/is unrated criteria
Secondary teachers 2018 (Circular 20/2018)
Rating levels	Good	Fair	Passed	Failed
Conditions	All criteria are rated as Good or higher At least 10/15 criteria are rated as Good, in which criteria in Standard 3 are rated as Good	All criteria are rated as Passed or higher At least 10/15 criteria are rated as Good, in which criteria in Standard 3 are rated as Good	All criteria are rated as Passed or higher	There are/is criteria/criterion rated as Failed

Regulations issued after the Radical and Comprehensive renovation in Education

Table 3. Standards of training qualifications

	Grade	Code	Degrees	Certificates
Primary^11 school teachers	II	V.07.03.07	pedagogical university degrees of primary education major	the level 2 of foreign language the basic level of information technology use a certificate of primary teacher at the level II
	III	V.07.03.08	pedagogical college degrees	the level 2 of foreign language the basic level of information technology use
	IV	V.07.03.09	pedagogical secondary school diplomas	the level 1 of foreign language the basic level of information technology use
Lower secondary^12 teachers	I	V.07.04.10	pedagogical university degrees or suitable university degrees for teaching the subject to be taught	the basic level of information technology use a certificate of further training for middle school teacher at the level I
	II	V.07.04.11	pedagogical university degrees or pedagogical university degrees or suitable university degrees for the subject to be taught	the basic level of information technology use a certificate of further training for lower secondary teacher at the level II
	III	V.07.04.12	pedagogical college degrees or pedagogical university degrees or suitable university degrees for the subject to be taught	the level 1 of foreign language the basic level of information technology use
Upper secondary ^13 teachers	I	V.07.05.13	pedagogical master degrees;	a certificate of refresher training for those having not graduated from a pedagogical institutions the level 3 of foreign language the basic level of information technology use a certificate of further training for high school teacher at the level I.
	II	V.07.05.14	pedagogical university degrees or suitable university degrees for the subject to be taught, and a certificate of refresher training of high school teacher for those having not graduated from a pedagogical institutions;	the level 2 of foreign language the basic level of information technology use a certificate of further training for high school teacher at the level II.
	III	V.07.04.15	pedagogical university degrees or suitable university degrees for the subject to be taught, and a certificate of refresher training of high school teacher for those having not graduated from a pedagogical institution	the level 2 of foreign language the basic level of information technology use a certificate of further training for high school teacher at the level II.

Notes: (1) the foreign language competencies regulated at the Circle No 01/2014/TT-BGDĐT; (2) information technology competencies regulated at the Circle No 03/2014/TT-BTTTT

4.2. Change in school teacher professional standards

4.2.1. Policy context

4.2.1.1. Regulations issued before the radical and comprehensive renovation in education

In the year of 2000, studies and regulations on school teachers’ competencies were started by defining the competency according to the requirements that elementary teachers must perform at school rather than the time for professional activities (MOET, 2007). This is the first step before applying a competency-based approach with the development of specific standards for middle and high school teachers that some of the standard development solutions have been proposed to determine the skills and knowledge needed for teaching in each education level in Vietnam (Pham, 2009; Phí, 2005; Tran, 2009; Vũ, 2005). There are three main purposes of the solutions: (1) Experiment, validate and refine standards; (2) Identify effective grading procedures and standardize professional assessment of teacher qualifications; (3) Identify the most appropriate way to gather evidence of teachers’ ability to perform professional activities.

The context of issuing professional standards for primary teachers originated from practical reasons¹ including (1) the number of teachers is sufficient or at a surplus in some localities; (2) the period of expansion of the scale of teacher training and development has been stable; (3) the notion that qualified teachers are those holding pedagogical diplomas has been changed; (4) the attachment of specific requirements and benefits of the primary teachers to regulations on state civil servants.

Concerning issued policies, in response to the requirement of Radical and Comprehensive renovation in Education and Training (Vietnam Communist Party, 2013), in order to meet practical requirements, the innovation of forms and contents in teacher retraining aiming at improving teacher professional capacity has become an urgent demand. Besides, the adjustment or development of teacher training and retraining plans to meet the competition mechanism and implement competency-based activities has become an inevitable trend.

Along with the demands of education renovation, the Government, the Ministry of Education and Training have issued documents serving as a legal foundation for changing the school teacher professional standards. They are the regulations stipulating the change of functions, tasks, powers and structure of the MOET,² including regulations on teacher professional standards; regulations on functions, tasks, powers and organizational structure of ministries and ministerial-level agencies (Decree No. 123/2016/ND-CP dated September 1, 2016, by the Government), regulations on Recruitment, use and management of civil servants .³ New legal bases have been issued while eliminating the validity of the regulations on teacher professional standards issued in 2007 and 2009.

In addition, the integration of legal documents also became a need as the documents issued for Primary level in 2007, and for the secondary level in 2009 were not consistent. The document regulating standards of primary teachers was issued as a «Decision» while the document for secondary teacher standards was as a «Circular». Moreover, there was a lack of documents regulating professional standards for college preparatory teachers who are also a part of school teachers, and in fact, there were some documents regulating professional title codes⁴ and working conditions for college preparatory teachers.⁵

With regard to policy practice, apart from the changes and legal foundation, the reality was also a factor making authorities consider new policies on school teacher professional standards.

• Firstly, they were factors relating to inadequacies or difficulties in the process of implementing documents issued in 2007 and 2009 on professional standards of primary and secondary teachers (MOET, 2007, 2009): (1) The standards were developed according to knowledge- and skills-based approach rather than teacher competency-based one; (2) The assessment principles were not regulated so it was difficult to ensure objectivity; (3) The standards were not clearly described; (4) There were too many criteria, so it was hard to assess teachers in objective manner; besides, there were several criteria which were not suitable anymore to the demands of the educational renovation; (5) The assessment process was not clear enough making difficulties for the assessment implementation; (6) No regulations on the evidence system were issued. Accordingly, to deal with the above-mentioned problem, the MOET has issued a document⁶ guiding how to assess and rate primary teachers, as well as a document⁷ guiding how to assess and rate school teachers. However, the rules for drafting these documents were not in line with the 2015 Law on Promulgation of Legal Normative Documents.

• There was another practical shortcoming that made the policymakers change regulations on Teacher professional standards and issue new documents, which was the overlap or missing of legal documents which made educational institutions difficult in their policy implementation. In 2010 and 2012, the MOET issued such documents as Rules of Primary Schools⁸ and Tasks of Secondary Teachers and of Schools.⁹ It is noteworthy that there were similarities in terms of school teacher professional standards in these documents and in previous regulatory documents on teacher professional standards as mentioned above: (1) Teaching and educating according to programs, educational plans and teaching plans set by the school; (2) Practicing morality, studying, retraining with professional knowledge; (3) Maintaining qualities, honor and prestige of the teacher, being exemplary before students; loving, respecting students, treating students fairly, protecting their legitimate rights and interests; (4) cooperating and helping colleagues; (5) Participating in educational universalization activities at the locality; (6) Implementing decisions by the Principal, being monitored and assessed by the Principal and other administrative levels; (7) Performing other duties as prescribed by law; (8) Coordinating with colleagues, organizations inside and outside the school, with parents of students (homeroom teachers, other teachers, students’ families, Ho Chi Minh Communist Youth Union, Ho Chi Minh Pioneering Youth Union) in teaching and educating students. There were only 02 differences: (1) For primary teachers: Educating inclusive students (if any); (2) For secondary teachers: Homeroom teachers are assigned the task of career counselling for their students.

• While there are many overlapping documents on professional standards of primary, middle and high school teachers, there is no regulatory document on professional standards for college preparatory teachers, which creates difficulties in assessing teachers by educational institutions and also difficulties in evaluating school teachers in general.

Because of the mismatch in forms and contents of those documents mentioning the teacher competency as well as problems and limitations which occurred in practice, the issuance of new documents with consistency in forms, contents and assessment methods aiming at increasing the validity and use-value of documents in practice and accordance with regulations on legal documents is necessary.

There have been many changes relating to policies of school teacher professional standards as per educational levels. However, some most noteworthy points can be listed as forms of documents, contents of teacher professional standards, the structure of criteria and assessment methods. The change in policies are also found in the consistency of forms and contents among relative legal documents; the linkage between teachers’ professional competencies and the development of students’ qualities and competencies after performing general curriculum.

4.3. In terms of the document form

The regulatory documents on the teacher competencies always included circulars and documents guiding the implementation of the circulars. However, along with the development of the policy process, those documents are gradually improved by issuing circulars’ guidance appendices or adjusting guidance appendices to suit the reality, creating favourable conditions in the process of evidence maintenance, identification and evaluation. The obvious difference between regulations on teacher professional standards issued before and after the educational renovation is the consistency of documents for different educational levels (see more in the Figure 2). Before the renovation, in both documents on the primary teacher professional standards (MOET, 2007) and on secondary teacher professional standards (MOET, 2009) there was no consistency found in terms of standards, number of criteria, ways of teacher assessment and rating. However, with the current circular (MOET, 2018), primary teachers and secondary teachers have a common system of assessment criteria with the similar number of criteria and ways of assessment and rating (see more in the Figure 1). The number of standards has changed from 03 to 05 or 05, and the number of criteria mentioned in the documents follows the declining trend from 60 to 25 and is now 15 (see more in the Table 1). Also, the guidance appendices appeared to be clearer with the evidence system serving as a tool for effectively assessing teachers’ competencies, facilitating the realization of the teacher professional standards.

4.4. In terms of teacher profession assessment standards

Initially, regulations and required levels were set up based on the school tasks and primary teachers’ position requirements; Gradually, they have been developed into standards and criteria for middle and high school teachers. However, in terms of tasks, the tasks accomplished by teachers at all levels are almost the same. The only difference found is that primary teachers have to perform duties of inclusive education while secondary teachers are assigned the tasks of career consultation. However, despite there are three categories are mentioned in all levels as (1) political qualities, morality, lifestyle; (2) knowledge and teaching/educational skills; (3) professional development, but there is a shift from general requirements for primary teachers into specific standards and criteria for secondary teachers. They can be divided into three aspects (1) What are expected from the teacher?—Requirements; (2) What evidence can prove the effectiveness of the teacher?—Performance indicators; (3) How does the teacher show?—Quality criteria; (4) How can quality criteria differentiate teachers?

Specifically, before the educational renovation, the teacher professional standards were developed with knowledge-and-skills-based approach aiming at training teachers as well as researching, recommending and implementing policies. For primary teachers, it included a system of basic requirements related to political qualities, morality, lifestyle, knowledge, pedagogical skills needed to be met by primary teachers in order to meet objectives of primary education (MOET, 2007). The secondary teacher professional standards included a system of basic requirements on political qualities, morality, lifestyle, professional competencies (MOET, 2009).

However, with the main purpose of teachers’ competencies assessment which serves as a foundation for teacher training meeting the requirements of professional development, of educational renovation and of regulations on legal documents (MOET, 2018), the teacher professional standards have been developed based on competence development approach and are understood as a system of qualities and competencies that teachers need to achieve in order to carry out the task of teaching and educating students in general education institutions.

A noticeable change is that all pre-renovation standards focused on teaching and education competencies; however, in current documents, there are 5 criteria focusing on assessing teacher professional development. This means that teacher professional standards have shifted from emphasizing on the teacher’s ability of school work accomplishment to focusing on teacher quality development systematically.

4.5. In terms of the professional standards structure and ways of assessment

The teacher professional standards in Vietnam are structured into four layers. The standard set includes many standards; each standard consists of criteria each criterium consists of one or more indicators; each indicator is specified by corresponding evidence. Specifically: (1) Standards: regulate core requirements on professional competencies and qualities (generally called as competency), (2) Criteria: each standard consists of several criteria which describe specific competencies, (3) Indicators Each criterium is described with several indicators, each indicator is shown with gradually increasing levels; (4) Evidence: specific evidence (documents, materials, things, phenomena, witnesses, etc.) confirming the level of correspondence with each level of the indicator.

4.6. In terms of teacher assessment and rating

The teacher assessment and rating is carried out at the end of academic years with three steps: (i) Self-assessment and rating; (ii) Assessed and rated by Subject-based Group; (iii) Assessed and rated by the Principal. Criteria for assessment are based on teachers’ evidence.

Comparing to the previous standard sets, the evidence for criteria in the current standard set are more open and suggestive so that the localities could develop their own evidence being appropriate to their local and school characteristics; and teachers are rated based on the comprehensive evaluation of criteria. According to previous standard sets, teachers are rated with four levels: “Bad—Average—Fair—Good” while according to the current one, they are rated as “Failed—Passed—Fair—Good” (see more in Table 2).

Differences in teacher assessment and rating are also found in some documents. According to 2007 documents, teacher assessment and rating were based on points and rating of each criterion and each standard; according to 2009 documents, they were based on points of each criterion and on the total of points from all criteria altogether, while the Current standards indicate that teacher rating is based on the rating of each criterion.

The advantage of the first two documents is that the process of evaluating and developing teachers’ competencies is systematically organized according to the rank and to competency levels, thereby creating a legal and scientific foundation for planning the development of teaching staff at the national scale. Moreover, based on that, educational institutions know how to evaluate their teachers, especially; every teacher can perfect him/herself according to the requirements and criteria of the standard. However, the gap from level 3 to level 4 is quite big, so it is hard for teachers to reach the “Excellent” level. Therefore, teachers desire some adjustment made between these two levels (a level of “Good” may be recommended in between the two levels mentioned above), and the level of “Bad” may be changed into “Failed”.

In addition, there are criteria being difficult to quantify, to encode, to collect evidence as the ways of encoding are not appropriate enough, evidence resources are not duly maintained, and some evidence can be found only in the practical relationships, such as evidence of morality, of relationship with colleagues, participation in political and social activities, cooperation with parents and communities. E.g. Standard 5: required for confirmation by local authorities and representatives of parents on teachers’ competencies in political and social activities; those criteria belonging to Standard 3 (teaching competency) are too qualitative; some other criteria are believed to be relevant to homeroom teachers only.

The Teacher rating based on current 2008 Standards seems to be simpler than that of previous standards. However, it needs more time to collect evidence from researches and practical teacher assessment, and actually, there is some limitation having been found. For example, regarding evidence for the criterion of Teacher Ethics, the document number 4530/BGDĐT-NGCBQLGD dated 2018 stipulates that teachers reaching level “Good” if they accomplish all their tasks in excellent results; other criteria are rated in correspondence with levels of task accomplishment. However, the selection for evidence is unpractical as teachers need to show letters of thanks or compliments from student parents or colleagues, school leaders/administrators, other individuals and organizations in which teachers’ moral qualities are mentioned. This apparently cannot assure the transparency of evidence. Therefore, the requirements for evidence should be practical and facilitate the process of teacher assessment and rating.

Moreover, the current Standard Set uses criteria for rating teachers instead of standards as used by the 2007 document, based on that criteria are used to rate standards, criteria and standards are used to rate teachers. This helps teachers themselves and educational institutions make appropriate plans for teacher retraining.

4.7. Compared to the general teachers’ professional standards of Singapore and Australia

There are several similarities and differences between the professional standards of the general teachers of Vietnam and their counterparts in Australia and Singapore. Regarding the same characteristics, firstly the three core domains are comprised of professional knowledge, Organization of teaching and learning activities, and personal manners and professional values. Secondly, the standards, which are uniform, suitable to realize the competencies of the teachers teaching in three levels from primary education sector to upper secondary education sector, have covered quite a lot of teacher criteria that can be used to assess the general teachers’ domains. Thirdly descriptions of indicators that help understand clearly attitudes and behaviors represented by teachers in the teaching and education process to serve as a basis for evaluation (see more in Table 4).

Table 4. The professional standards of school teachers of Vietnam, Australia and Singpore

Vietnam^14	Australia^15	Singapore^16
Professional knowledge
Criterion 3. Professional capacity development Criterion 4. Developing teaching and education plan towards the development of students’ quality and capacity Criterion 14. Foreign or ethnic minority language proficiency Criterion 15. Application of information technology, use of IT devices in teaching and education	Professional knowledge: Standard 1: Know students and how they learn	Cultivating knowledge Criterion 1: Subject Mastery
Criterion 5. Capacity to apply the education and teaching methods towards the development of students’ quality and capacity.	Standard 2: Know the content and how to teach it	Criterion 3. Analytical Thinking Criterion 4. Initiative
Criterion 3: Understanding educational psychology Criterion 6. Capacity for examination and evaluation towards the development of students’ capacity and quality
Criteria 7. Student counseling and supporting capacity		Criterion 5. Know the development problems, other work related
Criterion 5: Development of professional knowledge		Criterion 6. Know the development problems, other work related
Organization of teaching and learning activities
Standard 3. Capacity to build the education environment:	Professional Practice Standard 3: Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning Standard 4: Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments	Winining Hearts and Minds Understanding Environment Developing others
Criterion 8. Building a school culture Criterion 9. Capacity to implement the democratic rights in schools Criterion 10. Capacity to perform, build a safe school and prevent school violence	Professional Engagement Standard 6: Engage in professional learning
Criterion 4: Conducting inspection and assessment.	Standard 5: Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
Personal manners and professional values
Standard 1. Professional qualities: Criterion 1. Morality of Teachers Criterion 2. Working style		Working with others Partering with Parents Working in Teams
Standard 4. Developing the relationships among school, family and society: Criterion 11. Create a cooperation relationship with students’ parents/guardians and other stakeholders Criterion 12. Cooperation between schools, families and the society for implementation of teaching activities for students Criterion 13. Coordination between schools, families and the society in the implementation of ethics and lifestyle education for students	Standard 7. Commitment to professional activities with colleagues, students’ parents and community	Partering with Parents Working in Teams

Regarding the differences, the numbers of standards and criteria are different between these countries and the terms describing these standards and criteria are not the same (Vietnam: five standards and 15 criteria; Australia: three domains and seven standards; Singapore: four competency Clusters and eight competencies). More particularly, the regulations of Vietnam, which focus on moral aspects, have many more indicators guiding for varied assessors

By comparison with Australia and Singapore, it can be said that the professional standards of the general teachers of Vietnam have been developed making it easier for recognizing, classifying the teacher competencies in the context of a radical and comprehensive renovation in education of Vietnam

5. Conclusions

The school teacher competencies are governed by many legal documents regulating educational qualifications and professional certifications according to each job position. Teachers are also civil servants according to the administrative system in Vietnam and teacher recruitment, salary and other incentives regulated by Ministry of Internal Affairs, while the Ministry of Education and Training sets all details of their professional standards at the educational development stages.

To properly determine the status of teachers’ capacity through standards and guidelines for using standards, it is necessary to meet the requirements of both internal and external evaluation in order to objectify the assessment process according to standards and ensure the reliability of the assessment results, clearly identifying the teaching staff’s capacity. Professional standards of teachers simply proclaim the essential abilities of instructors; localities can augment or alter the indicators to make the application of teacher assessment standards more realistic, based on local circumstances, training industries, and the obligation to teach certain topics.

The development of a policy on school teachers’ professional standards is an indispensable requirement as demands and requirements on general education are increasing not only from policy documents but also from educational practice. The content, forms and ways of evaluating professional standards of school teachers have been increasingly improved towards the international trend. These are effective tools serving as a basis for those policies related to teacher competency development, as well as indirectly developing the quality of general education. In contrast, the change of this policy resulted in repeated or newly raised limitations in which a notable one is that the shift of requirements on professional standards from text into practical activities is challenging.

The reasons for these challenges may come from the management way of teacher retraining meeting the requirements of teacher professional standards (e.g. the assessment and application of teacher professional standards by general educational institutions based their realities); or may be because of financial matters as it is challenging if teachers have to pay themselves for retraining to meet the new standards. Another reason is that the professional requirements are increasing, but remuneration policies are not yet commensurate. It is commonly said that teachers are not dedicated enough at schools as they have to work more jobs to get more income, or, when reaching competencies as required by the New Standards, they would move to private schools or educational businesses … to get higher income. Accordingly, the teacher training and retraining by the State are limited or not as effective as initially expected to be more professional to work in public schools. Financial aids or incentives, therefore, play one of the primary roles in making this new policy into effective.

Based on the standards issued, teachers should be empowered as much as possible to manage all what they have to do in the school, by doing so they will likely become creative, initiative and it can help them cut the working hours and administrative tasks and then they have more time for further learning to develop profession, and the competent teachers are a driving force for any educational reforms.

Correction

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Thang- Nguyen The

Dr. Thang-Nguyen TheMr. Luong Dinh HaiMs. Nguyen Hong Lien

Notes

1. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://tuoitre.vn/giao-vien-tieu-hoc-duoc-danh-gia-theo-chuan-nao-6052.htm

2. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Bo-may-hanh-chinh/Nghi-dinh-69-2017-ND-CP-chuc-nang-nhiem-vu-quyen-han-co-cau-to-chuc-Bo-Giao-duc-va-Dao-tao-350206.aspx

3. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Bo-may-hanh-chinh/Nghi-dinh-29-2012-ND-CP-tuyen-dung-su-dung-va-quan-ly-vien-chuc-137919.aspx

4. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Giao-duc/Thong-tu-30-2017-TT-BGDDT-Quy-dinh-tieu-chuan-chuc-danh-nghe-nghiep-giao-vien-du-bi-dai-hoc-369188.aspx

5. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Bo-may-hanh-chinh/Thong-tu-15-2017-TT-BGDDT-sua-doi-Quy-dinh-che-do-lam-viec-doi-voi-giao-vien-pho-thong-341252.aspx

6. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://thuvienphapluat.vn/cong-van/Giao-duc/Cong-van-616-BGDDT-NGCBQLGD-huong-dan-danh-gia-xep-loai-giao-vien-tieu-hoc-theo-Quyet-dinh-14-2007-QD-BGDDT-101299.aspx

7. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://thuvienphapluat.vn/cong-van/Giao-duc/Cong-van-660-BGDDT-NGCBQLGD-huong-dan-danh-gia-xep-loai-giao-vien-trung-hoc-theo-Thong-tu-30-2009-TT-BGDDT-101609.aspx

8. accessed 30 Oct 2020, available at https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/giao-duc/Thong-tu-41-2010-TT-BGDDT-Dieu-le-Truong-tieu-hoc-116657.aspx

9. accessed 30 Oct 2020, available from https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/van-hoa-xa-hoi/Thong-tu-12-2012-TT-BGDDT-huong-dan-cong-tac-thi-dua-khen-thuong-137618.aspx

10. Accessed 17 September 2022, available from https://luatvietnam.vn/giao-duc/thong-tu-30-2009-tt-bgddt-bo-giao-duc-va-dao-tao-47669-d1.html

11. The Joint Circular No 21/2015/TTLT-BGDĐT-BNV (Ministry of Education and Training and Ministry of Internal Affairs) (issued 16^th September 2015) regulating the code, criteria on the job place of the public primary education teacher, available from http://www.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/chinhphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&_page=11&mode=detail&document_id=182020

12. The Joint Circular No 22/2015/ TTLT-BGDĐT-BNV, (Ministry of Education and Training and Ministry of Internal Affairs) (issued 16 September 2015) regulating the code, criteria on the job position of the public lower secondary education teacher. Available from http://www.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/chinhphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&_page=11&mode=detail&document_id=182018.

13. The Joint Circular No 23/2015/TTLT-BGDĐT-BNV (Ministry of Education and Training and Ministry of Internal Affairs) (issued 16 September 2015) regulating the code, criteria on the job position of the public upper secondary education teacher. Available from http://vanban.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/chinhphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&_page=1&mode=detail&document_id=181995.

14. Accessed 30 October 2020, available from https://luatvietnam.vn/giao-duc/thong-tu-20-2018-tt-bgddt-chuan-nghe-nghiep-giao-vien-co-so-giao-duc-pho-thong-166608-d1.html

15. Accessed 30 October 2020, available from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/national-policy-framework/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers.pdf

16. Accessed 30 October 2020, available from https://www.nie.edu.sg/docs/default-source/td_practicum/te21—gtc.pdf