SU NGUYEN The University of sydney Conceptual changes on curriculum and course design - Impacts of a professional development training program for higher education teachers in Vietnam SU NGUYEN The University of sydney

Ly Pham, Langkawi (2014)

Central governance, dominant teacher-centred, not in tune with current higher education developments of the world, teacher training is insufficient (Tran et al., 2016; Dao, 2015; Welch, 2011; Harman et al., 2010)

COMPULSORY PEDAGOGICAL TRAINING FOR HE TEACHERS IN VIETNAM Number Contents/Modules Credits   1 Higher education (HE) in the world and in Vietnam 2 Educational Psychology in HE 3 Principles and methods of teaching in HE 4 Curriculum design and development 5 Assessment in Higher Education 6 Use of ICTs in HE 7 General Psychology 8 Introduction to educational science TOTAL 15 Table 1. Compulsory modules of the pedagogical program by MOET COMPULSORY PEDAGOGICAL TRAINING FOR HE TEACHERS IN VIETNAM Compulsory higher education pedagogical training for prospective and in-service higher education teachers (MOET, 2013)

Literature Review Biggs’ constructive alignment to curriculum and course design Promoting students’ voices and “being” through new frameworks to higher education curriculum and course design Annala, Linden, and Makinen’s (2016) framework to higher education curriculum Co-constructing curriculum (Brooman, Darwent & Pimor, 2015; Bovill, 2014; Bovill, Cook-Sather & Felten, 2011) “Being” curriculum in a world full of “supercomplexity” (Barnett, 2009; Coate & Barnett, 2005). Curriculum in Vietnam Product and teacher-focused curriculum (Phan, Lupton & Watters, 2016) Decentralization and great autonomy would be one solution for higher education curriculum (Tran et al., 2014; Dao & Hayden, 2010)

Annala et al.’s (2016) framework to higher education curriculum approaches

Methods Case study: one university in the Mekong Delta River Region, Vietnam Participants: 15 program participants, 2 program presenters Instruments: semi-structured interviews (pre-program, post-program), and document analysis Pedagogical training Pre-program Conceptions on HE curriculum Post-program Conceptions on HE curriculum

Module guideline Curriculum Design and Development module: Equip participants with the basic knowledge and skills in curriculum design and implementation in higher education institutions. Help participants to design curriculum, syllabus, and evaluate curriculum in higher education. (Circular 12/2013/TT-BGDDT)

Program presenters’ emphasis on curriculum and course design …The aim of this module is to help participants understand the procedures of designing a curriculum, credit-based curriculum in higher education contexts. In terms of skills, participants can develop their course syllabus. And they will know how to analyse their own contexts, their students’ diversity, and from there, decide the contents of the course, select the right teaching approach, and assessment based upon the outcomes of the courses. (Dr Lam) In this module, Teaching Practice, participants have to design situation or project-based lesson plans, with teaching activities and the assessment methods align with guided learning outcomes, which they learn from Curriculum and Course Design module…. This is a chance for them to use theory we provide in the program into practice and perform with their peers. (Dr Nhung)

Findings Pre-program participants’ conceptions on curriculum Post-program participants’ conceptions on curriculum Outcome-based approach Teachers’ voices and power in curriculum construction  Three-month program - MOET’s emphasis on curriculum design competence - Presenters’ underpinning philosophy: Biggs’ outcome-based and local context curriculum Pre-program participants’ conceptions on curriculum Teachers’ limited power in curriculum construction Practical curriculum

Participants’ conceptions on curriculum and course design PRE-PROGRAM Teachers’ limited power in curriculum design and discrepancy in implementation Most institutions design curriculum and course outlines for teachers and teachers just have to follow. But the detailed outline and the implementation are decided by the teachers and teachers’ understanding of curriculum is different and the way we translate the regulated into their classes can even be way different. (Quan) Curriculum needs to be practical Curriculum design has to be student-centred. It needs to research what students need, what they want to study in certain major and how to help them easily apply knowledge in students’ practical fields. The curriculum needs to cater both knowledge and the application demand of students. (Ha)

Participants’ conceptions on curriculum and course design POST-PROGRAM Knowledge, Skill, and Attitude outcome-based curriculum The program has influenced me on how to design curriculum and courses that meet the knowledge-skill-attitude outcomes. The program explains why our course design must align with the overall curriculum for our discipline, and similarly, why teaching approaches, activities, assessment must align with the outcomes of the course. (Tai) Teachers’ voices in curriculum construction It is essential to have teachers’ voice in this (curriculum construction) but most teachers do not recognise their power in curriculum design. Another issue here is the quality of curriculum designers and teachers’ contribution in designing it. They need to have good knowledge in curriculum design and development. (Quan)

DISCUSSION Impacts of the studied program on curriculum and syllabus conceptions: What is good and what needs improving? Towards the inclusion of students’ voices in curriculum construction in Vietnam and the being curriculum: is it possible? Implications for policy makers, and teacher training in higher education

Acknowledgements The Australian Government The teachers and presenters participated in the study Correspondence: tngu3559@uni.sydney.edu.au

References Annala, J., Linden, J., & Makinen, M. (2016). Curriculum in higher education research. In J. M. Case & J. Huisman (Eds.), Researching Higher Education: International Perspectives on theory, policy and practice (pp. 171-189). London, UK: Routledge. Barnett, R. (2009). Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum. Studies in Higher Education, 34(4), 429- 440. doi:10.1080/03075070902771978 Barnett, R., & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Berkshire, GBR: McGraw-Hill Education. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2 ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press (Society for Research into Higher Education). Bovill, C. (2014). An investigation of co-created curricula within higher education in the UK, Ireland and the USA. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(1), 15-25. doi:10.1080/14703297.2013.770264 Bovill, C., Cook‐Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011). Students as co‐creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: implications for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), 133-145. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2011.568690 Coate, K. (2009). Curriculum. In M. Tight, K. H. Mok, J. Huisman, & C. C. Morphew (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Higher Education (pp. 77-90). New York: Routledge. Cook-Sather, A. (2010). Students as Learners and Teachers: Taking Responsibility, Transforming Education, and Redefining Accountability. Curriculum Inquiry, 40(4), 555-575. doi:10.1111/j.1467-873X.2010.00501. Pham, T. N. (2010). The Higher Education Reform Agenda: A Vision for 2020. In G. Harman, M. Hayden, & T. N. Pham (Eds.), Reforming Higher Education in Vietnam: Challenges and Priorities (pp. 51-64). New York: Springer. Phan, T. N., Lupton, M., & Watters, J. J. (2016). Understandings of the higher education curriculum in Vietnam. Higher Education Research & Development, 1-13. doi:10.1080/07294360.2016.1149693 Tran, T. L., Le, T. T. T., & Nguyen, T. N. (2014). Curriculum and Pedagogy. In L. T. Tran, S. Marginson, H. M. Do, T. N. Q. Do, T. T. T. Le, T. N. Nguyen, T. P. Vu, N. T. Pham, T. L. H. Nguyen, & T. H. T. Ho (Eds.), Higher Education in Vietnam: Flexibility, Mobility and Practicality in the Global Knowledge Economy (pp. 86-106). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK