International Conference on
“Impacts of Globalization on Quality in Higher Education”
HCMC June 20-21 2013
CURRENT ISSUES IN GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT:
A CASE STUDY OF EDUCATION
COMMERCIALIZATION VIA JOINT-PROGRAMS
BETWEEN VIETNAMESE AND OVERSEAS
UNIVERSITIES
Nguyen Huu Cuong1, Nhan Thi Thuy2, Vu Thi Phuong Thao3
1 Ministry
of Education and Training, Vietnam
Nang Architecture University, Vietnam
3University of Languages and International Studies, VNU, Vietnam
2Da
Outline
①
Introduction
②
Literature review
③
Case study
④
Conclusion
⑤
Q&A
① Introduction
Education
Globalization
Knowledge
generator
Academic
mobility,
international
cooperation
schemes
Revenue
generator
A
‘tradable’
service
(WTO,
1995)
① Introduction
Purpose
• to investigate current issues of regulating joint-programs
in Vietnam under the impact of commercialization;
• to propose solutions accordingly
Scope
• programs at tertiary level held in Vietnam jointly by
domestic and foreign providers (excl. franchising, distance
learning, e-learning)
• efficient practices in cross-border educational activities
drawn from achievements of Australian institutions
Outline
①
Introduction
②
Literature review
③
Case study
④
Conclusion
⑤
Q&A
② Literature review
•Benefiting different groups
INTERNATIONALIZATION
•Institutions restructuring educational systems
•Countries seeking educational barrier removed
COMMERCIALIZATION
JOINT-PROGRAMS
• Education: a ‘tradable commodity’ (WTO,2008)
• Guidelines in The General Agreement on Trade
in Services (GATS) including 4 modes: Crossborder education, Consumption abroad,
commercial presence, natural person
• Collaborative programs (partially or fully
offshored curriculum, administrative staff and
teachers) between one local and another
foreign institution, both awarding degrees
(Huang, 2009)
② Literature review
Joint-program
regulation
Decisionmaking
e.g.
institutional
autonomy
Quality
assurance
e.g. equal
quality
provision
Partner
selection
e.g. provider’s
profile
Teaching &
learning
strategies
e.g. approved
& adapted
curriculums
(Hacket & Nowak, 1999; IDP Education Australia, 2000).
Outline
①
Introduction
②
Literature review
③
Case study
④
Conclusion
⑤
Q&A
Context of joint-programs in Vietnam
• Vietnam emerging as a dynamic spot for a variety of transnational
higher education practices (Altbach & Knight, 2007)
• the number of joint-programs increasing substantially (Altbach &
Knight, 2007; Thanh, 2008)
TNHE practices in Vietnam:
•
‘import-oriented’ (Huang, 2007, p. 246), adopting
“whole package” foreign programs and standards.
•
a pivotal contributor to the local socio-economic
advancement
•
adopting all the four GATS trading modes in
education (Pham, 2007)
•
operating within a basic regulation framework for
educational services (Pham, 2007)
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
Joint-program lifetime
Partner
selection
Learning and Teaching Strategy
Decision
Making
Quality Assurance
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
Joint-program lifetime
Partner
selection
Learning and Teaching Strategy
Decision
Making
Quality Assurance
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
• unauthorized
providers illegally
calling for academic
enrolment; fake
accreditation
certificates
which
providers can
operate in
the market?
• exceeding numbers of
courses and students
local
allowed
for
intake
Decision
institutions
Making
• a lack
of channels for
complete and
accurate information
for students to make
informed and rational
choices
governmental
authorities, not
local institutions
these authorities
not performing the
job properly.
?
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
Joint-program lifetime
Partner
selection
Learning and Teaching Strategy
Decision
Making
Quality Assurance
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
accreditation not to be equated with credibility
or reputation
Partner
selection
lacking timely, specific and transparent
guidelines for institutions
local
institutions’
demand for
Learning
and passivity
Teaching(great
Strategy
international partnership; relatively inferior
position to higher-ranked institutions)
reputed foreign providers being discouraged
possibly sacrificing long-term benefits
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
Most problematic issue
• the quality of imported programs lower than the
Joint-program lifetime
programs themselves in the home branch (Thanh,2008)
• Partner
an official and independent quality assurance
framework still missing
selection
Learning and Teaching Strategy
• a loophole for unqualified providers to leak into the
Decision
market via counterfeit accreditation mills. (Altbach &
Knight, 2007)
Making
Quality Assurance
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
Partner
selection
unsuitable or lowJoint-program lifetime
quality course content
and delivery; little
participation of highlyqualified foreign
teaching staff
Decision
Making
globalization or
localization?
‘a global template’
(Yang, 2008; Ziguras & Fazal, 2001)
Learning and Teaching Strategy
“[…] reinforce the perception that real or proper
knowledge is only produced by particular countries in a
particular
way, and warns us that the Western
Quality
Assurance
educational system and structures continue to define
education for the rest of the world.”
(Goodman, 1984, as cited in Yang, 2008, p. 284)
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
Lack of consistency, transparency and reliability
Partner
selection
Learning and Teaching Strategy
Decision
Making
Quality Assurance
Issues in Vietnam’s current regulation
of joint-programs
Lack of consistency, transparency and reliability
THREATS
• quality compromises
COMMERCIALIZATION
Legal loopholes for commercialized practices
• foreign values'
invasion to the
national education
sovereignty and
autonomy
• local institutions'
failure to fulfil their
community-oriented
education service
Recommended solutions
• provide specific and transparent guidelines for the
selection and registration of joint-program partners (HONG
KONG, MALAYSIA)
• establish an independent quality assurance body and
standardisation at the governmental level (EUROPE, the
USA)
• improve the quality assurance capacity and autonomy in
the institutional administrators (HONG KONG)
• implement strictly and consistently the legal framework
defining the extent of violation that leads to dissolution of
a joint program (INDIA)
Outline
①
Introduction
②
Literature review
③
Case study
④
Conclusion
⑤
Q&A
Conclusion
Joint-programs in Vietnam
•key issues: lacking consistency,
transparency, reliability in quality and
regulation aspects
•key solutions: guidelines, quality
assurance body, legal framework
Further research:
•applying international good TNHE
practices in Vietnam: ‘adapting’ vs.
‘adopting’
References
Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities.
Journal of Studies in International Education, 11, 290-305.
Dang, Q. A. (2011). Internationalisation of Higher Education: China and Vietnam: from importers of education
to partners in cooperation. MSc MSc Thesis, Copenhagen.
Daniel, J., Kanwar, A., & Uvalié-Trumbié, S. (2009). Form innocence to experience: The politics and projects of
cross-border higher education. In J. Fegan & M. H. Field (Eds.), Education Across Border - Plotics, Policy
and Legislative Action (Vol. 19-31): Springer.
Deem, R., Mok, K., & Lucas, H. L. (2008). Transforming higher education in whose image? Exploring the
concept of the 'world-class' university in Europe and Asia. Higher Education Policy, 21, 83-97.
Doorbar, A., & Bateman, C. (2008). The growth of transnational higher education: The UK perspective. In L.
Dunn & M. Wallace (Eds.), Teaching in Transnational Higher Education - Enhancing learning for offshore
international students (pp. 14-22): Routledge.
Fang, W. (2011). The development of transnational higher education in China: A comparative study of
research universities and teaching universities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 16(1), 5-23.
Fang, W. (2012). The Development of Transnational Higher Education in China: A Comparative Study of
Research Universities and Teaching Universities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 16(1), 523. doi: 10.1177/1028315311410607
Field, M. H. (2009). Crossing border in education is inevitable. In J. Fegan & M. H. Field (Eds.), Education
Across Borders - Polictics, Policy and Legislative Action (pp. 1-18): Springer.
Garret, R., & Verbik, L. (2003). Transnational higher education: The major markets - Hong Kong and
Singapore. London: Observatory on Borderless Higher Education.
References
Gezgin, U. B. (2009). The currents and trends in the Vietnamese education system within the
internationalized context: A comparative perspective. Paper presented at the Hợp tác Quốc tế
trong Giáo dục và Đào tạo Đại học Viet Nam-Cơ hội và Thách thức, Vietnam.
Hacket, J., & Nowak, R. (1999). Onshore and offshore delivery of higher education programs: A
comparison of academic outcomes Paper presented at the 13th Australian International
Education Conference, Frematle.
Hong, H. (2010). Tổng kiểm tra các chương trình liên kết đào tạo với nước ngoài [All-sided inspection of
joint-programs] Retrieved May 22, 2013, from http://dantri.com.vn/giao-duc-khuyen-hoc/tongkiem-tra-cac-chuong-trinh-lien-ket-dao-tao-voi-nuoc-ngoai-374895.htm
Huang, F. (2003a). Transnational higher education: A perspective from China. Higher Education
Reseach & Development, 22(2), 193-203.
Huang, F. (2003b). Transnational Higher Education: A perspective from China. Higher Education
Research & Development, 22(2), 193-203. doi: 10.1080/07294360304114
Huang, F. (2009). Regulations and practice of transnational higher education in China. In L. Dunn & M.
Wallace (Eds.), Teaching in Transnational Higher Education - Enhancing learning for offshore
international students (pp. 23-33). London: Routledge.
IDP Eudcation Australia. (2000). Transnational education - Providers, partners and policy - Challenges
for Australian institutions offshore. Paper presented at the 14th Australian International
Education, Brisbane.
References
Knight, J. (2006a). Crossborder education: An analytical framework for program and provider mobility
Vol. 21. J. Smart & B. Tierney (Eds.), Higher Education Handbook of Theory and Practice (pp. 345395).
Knight, J. (2006b). Higher education crossing borders: a guide to the implications of the General
Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) for cross-border education. In G. Montgomery (Ed.),
UNESCO Regional Meetings on “GATS and Higher Education (pp. 1-71).
Kritz, M. M. (2006). Globalisation and internationalisation of tertiary education Paper presented at the
International Symposium on International Migration and Development, United Nations
Population Division, Turin.
Le, Q. M. (2011). Good governance in higher education: Concepts, implement and training. . Paper
presented at the DIES: Strengthening universities, enhancing capacities - Higher education
management for development, Bonn, Germany.
McBurnie, G., & Ziguras, C. (2001). The regulation of transnational higher education in Southeast Asia:
Case studies of Hong Kong, Malaysia and Australia. Higher Education, 42(1), 85-105.
McBurnie, G., & Ziguras, C. (2007). Transnational education: Issues and trends in offshore higher
education: Routledge
Nix, J. V. (2009). Sino - U.S. Transnational education - "Buying" an American higher education program:
A participant observation study. Doctoral dissertation, Washington State University.
Pham, D. N. T. (2007). Phát triển giáo dục đại học Việt Nam trong bối cảnh mới [Vietnam's education
and training development strategy in the new context]. Tạp Chí Cộng Sản, 5(125), 6-12.
References
Yang, R. (2008). Transnational higher education in China: Contexts, characteristics and concerns.
Australian Journal of Education, 52(3), 272-286.
Zeleza, P. T. (2012). Internationalization in higher education: Opportunities and challenges for the
Knowledge Project in the Global South. Paper presented at the A SARUA Leadership Dialogue on
Building the Capacity of Higher Education to Enhance Regional Development, Maputo,
Mozambique.
Ziguras, C. (2003). The impacts of the GATS on transnational tertiary education: Comparing experiences
of New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and Malaysia. The Australian Educational Researcher, 30(3),
89-109.
Ziguras, C. (2007). Good practice in transnational education: A guide for New Zealand providers.
Melbourne: RMIT University.
Ziguras, C., & Fazal, R. (2001). Future directions in international online education. In D. Davis & D.
Meares (Eds.), Transnational education: Australia online (pp. 151-164). Sydney: IDP Education
Australia.
Ziguras, C., & McBurnie, G. (2008). The impact of trade liberalization on transnational education. In L.
Dunn & M. Wallace (Eds.), Teaching in Transnational Higher Education - Enhancing learning for
offshore international students (pp. 3-13): Routledge.
Outline
①
Introduction
②
Literature review
③
Case study
④
Conclusion
⑤
Q&A
Table 1. Modes of supply for the delivery of educational
services in cross-border trade (GATS, 1995)
Supply
Types of
Examples
Market
modes
arrangement
potential
A service crosses the
distance education, currently small
Mode 1
market; seen to
Cross-border border while consumers e-learning, virtual
still remain inland.
universities
have great potential
education
There is physical
Mode 2
Consumption movement of customers
across border.
abroad
There is a commercial
Mode 3
Commercial presence of the provider
in a foreign country to
presence
Mode 4
Natural
presence
part/whole of the
course in a foreign
country
local branch,
satellite campuses,
twinning
render service.
partnerships,
franchising
People travel to another professors, teachers,
country on a temporary researchers working
basis to provide the
abroad
service.
in technological age
currently the largest
share of global
market
strong potential for
future growth
potentially a strong
market, emphasizing
mobility of
professionals
For a business course that is jointly provided by Help University (Malaysia),
International School (Vietnam National University – Hanoi) and Institute of
Economics and Finance IEFS (Ho Chi Minh City), each student must cover a
tuition fee of 11,000 USD. This amount will be divided among the partners: 46%
for Help University, 27% for International School, 3% for Vietnam National
University – Hanoi and the remaining 24% for IEFS. Accordingly, for each
student, Vietnam National University earns 330 USD; and International School
and IEFS make a profit of 50% after staff, translators and facilities costing
(Thanh, 2010).