At Hoa Sen University, the percentage of students who have a job before graduation has always reached over 83% continuously for many years.

According to the latest statistics, the rate of new graduates of Hoa Sen University having a job before the 35th graduation ceremony (January 2020) is very high, programs with a 100% employment rate are Management Information Systems, Media Production and Management, and Applied Mathematics.

Solving unemployment problem

Many programs with very high employment rates are Finance and Banking (95.7%), Restaurant Management (95.5%), International Business (94.3%), Hotel Management (94.1%), Information Technology (93.8%), and Marketing (92.3%).

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Ngoc Dien, President of Hoa Sen University said: “In order to get this result, the university implemented many measures, including two large groups of measures. Firstly, the university constantly promotes connection and cooperation with businesses in general and also with employers in the design as well as in updating and perfecting the content of the academic programs according to the HSU’s direction to meet social needs. Secondly, the university builds and develops high-quality academic programs, taught in English, with international output standards. These programs are considered as a strong base to bring learners into the global working environment in the sense of dedication and conquering�?

Hoa Sen University has a team of highly qualified lecturers, advanced teaching methods, and a lot of practical experience. Throughout the process of developing an academic program, establishing a new program, developing a course outline, etc., there are consultations and criticisms from experienced business partners. Most of the specialized courses have visiting lecturers who are currently holding management positions and holding high degrees in large companies and enterprises.

Every year, each faculty with different major groups of HSU organizes seminars, and workshops with businesses and alumni to exchange and listen to comments on market needs and working capacity requirements in careers. Students have 2 internships at enterprises, including 1 work experience internship in the second year and 1 graduation internship.

Nguyen Thi Ngoc Bich, an alumnus of the Environmental and Natural Resources Management Program (The class of 2014), is currently Deputy Head of the Office of Consulting and Technology Transfer, Envi-School Environmental Training and Consulting Co., Ltd. said: “My knowledge that I learned at Hoa Sen University has equipped me with many necessary skills and opportunities to practice through each internship period at the company. This not only helps me quickly integrate into the real environment but also meets the strict requirements of the business.”

“Hoa Sen University is an ideal environment for each student to experience meaningful youth. Students are equipped with useful knowledge from modern liberal education and create the best conditions for comprehensive development�? said Tran Thi Bao Trinh (a student in the English Language Studies Program at Hoa Sen University).

Besides that, at Hoa Sen University, students are also encouraged to join clubs or organize competitions to accumulate experience and maximize the capacity and interests of each individual. HSU’s students regularly participate in student exchange programs with universities in France, Thailand, Belgium, Finland, etc. to help improve their foreign language skills and integrate into a multicultural international environment.

This explains why Hoa Sen’s students always have a prominent advantage to employers, with good specialized knowledge, soft skills, and fluent in foreign languages. The program follows the credit system that allows students to design their own learning routes to shorten the time and the opportunity to receive 2 university degrees at the same time.

Building a smart-university

Hoa Sen University focused on “digital transformation” in administration and operation a few years ago. The first ERP system is applied in training, student management and other operational management processes are being implemented gradually. Hoa Sen University is taking the first solid steps in the digital transformation of university operations and administration.

Currently, Hoa Sen University is gradually improving its computer software for teaching and learning.

The university is implementing many e-learning classes and “blended learning�?(integrated learning methods between in-person class and online class). According to the roadmap, all programs have a certain number of appropriate courses organized in these forms. The university is also implementing artificial intelligence in teaching and learning as well as in university operations.

Learning outcomes assessment methods as well as feedback and internal information from all courses in the university can be implemented via mobile apps.

With the strength of a multidisciplinary university, in 2019, Hoa Sen University started implementing a research project on STEAM (Science, Tech, Engineering, Art, Math) applied in higher education and the community. This will be a contribution in terms of the practical application of Hoa Sen University in preparing for the young generation to be ready to adapt to the new stage of development.

Source: access here

On September 12, the Standing Committee of the National Assembly continued to give opinions on the Higher Education Law.

The majority of Standing Committee members evaluated the Higher Education Law project as having undergone significant revisions.

The Law project ensures that it can be passed at the 6th session of the 14th National Assembly.

On some specific issues, the National Assembly Committee for Culture, Education, Youth, Adolescents and Children has given their assessment feedback in the appraisal report.

Regarding university autonomy, Chairman Phan Thanh Bình emphasized that the opinion of the delegates suggested specifying the content, level, roadmap, and conditions to ensure the implementation of autonomy rights in all aspects of academics, finance, organization, and personnel linked to accountability and innovation in university governance in accordance with the conditions and capabilities of each higher education institution; enhance accreditation and publicize of academic quality.

Amend related legal regulations to create unity and synchrony in implementing university autonomy substantively.

Chairman Phan Thanh Binh of the National Assembly Committee for Culture, Education, Youth, Adolescents and Children (Photo source: TTXVN)

After considering the delegates’ opinions, the draft Law has been revised to provide a clearer definition of autonomy. Autonomy is the right of a higher education institution to determine its own goals and choose the methods to achieve them. This includes the ability to operate independently, take responsibility for professional activities, and manage personnel, finances, assets, and other activities in accordance with legal regulations and the capacity of the institution.

At the same time, Article 32 about the autonomy and accountability of higher education institutions was edited to specify the conditions for autonomy.

Specifying the content of autonomy in academic expertise, organization, personnel, finance, and assets as well as detailing the content of accountability and requirements for higher education institutions when implementing autonomy.

Regarding accountability, the draft Law has been edited to clearly define the concept of accountability.

Specify the contents that the institution must publicly disclose, and be transparent with students, society, regulatory agencies, and related stakeholders.

Especially the responsibility to perform independent financial audits, publicize quality, tuition fees, service charges of the institution, be legally responsible if failing to implement the regulations, and commitments to ensure academic quality.

The draft Law stipulates that to be granted autonomy, the institution must achieve accreditation from a government-recognized organization.

Delegates requested clear legal positioning of the University Council; clarify the functions, duties, powers, responsibilities, and the relationship between the University Council and other governances.

Regulate the structure of the Council members, and the standards for the Council Chairman and the University President in an open, flexible manner to select many candidates with sufficient capacity and prestige.

After considering the delegates’ feedback, the draft Law has been edited to unify the name of the University Council in both public and private institutions; and distinguish the University Council from the University Board.

The University Council implements institution governance through specific responsibilities and powers.

The University President executes the right to manage and operate the institution based on legal regulations and the resolutions of the University Council, under the supervision of this body.

Contents about the term, working principles, structure, and proportion of the University Council members; standards, functions, and duties of the Council Chairman as well as the requirements for ensuring the operation of the University Council, the specific powers, and responsibilities of the President and more have all been mentioned very detailed, specific and suitable for the nature of each type of institution as presented in the draft Law.

To facilitate attracting many capable and dedicated candidates to participate in the governance and management of higher education institutions, the draft Law does not specify in detail the standards, age, and consecutive terms of the positions of the Council Chairman and President but leaves it to the institution to autonomously decide according to its organization and operation regulations based on the general legal regulations.

The University Board is responsible for the orientation and coordination to implement the mission of the whole system and participate in the process of key university-level personnel.

National Assembly Chairwoman Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan evaluated that the draft of the Higher Education Law has incorporated and adjusted the feedback from the delegates.

Some opinions are still concerned about the model of the higher education institution system.

The opinion of the review agency uniformly and coherently regulates the model of the higher education institution system including universities, and university schools.

This opinion does not reflect the reality of the current model of the higher education institution system. The National Assembly Chairwoman believes that this proposal should be considered further in the following aspects.

Current universities include National Universities, regional universities, universities, and academies.

Regarding National Universities, Chairwoman Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan affirmed: “My viewpoint is to raise the position, role of the 2 National Universities in this law rather than diminish.

But how to mention regional universities in this Law, what regulations to make to avoid major disruptions in the current model of education institutions”.

Regarding university autonomy, the National Assembly Chairwoman assessed that the draft has focused more on specifying the content, level, roadmap, and conditions to ensure the implementation of the autonomy rights of higher education institutions in academics, finance, and personnel.

The model of National Universities and regional universities continues to be affirmed in this draft law, but there are no regulations on the autonomy of departments, institutes, centers, and members of National Universities and regional universities.

“The major issue in the model of National Universities and regional universities is the legal relationship and autonomy of the member universities. It needs to be clearly regulated in this law,�?the Chairwoman said.

According to the Chairwoman, regarding governance, the law gives too much power to the University Council, effectively making this body a powerful authority �?too powerful.

Such regulation turns the University Council into a management body, failing to clarify the role and responsibilities of the President.

“Therefore, to ensure the authority of the University Council but also to ensure the rights and responsibilities of the President in managing institution operations, it is necessary to more clearly define what the authority of the University Council is, and what the President’s rights are?�? Chairwoman Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan analyzed.

The Chairwoman added the governance model of private universities needs further clarification on how the governance model of private universities differs from that of non-profit private universities.

Do Thom

Source of the article: access here

The Prime Minister has assigned Ministers and heads of ministerial-level agencies to study and review the conclusions of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly on perfecting a few articles of the Law Project.

Regarding the draft Law amending and supplementing several articles of the Higher Education Law, the Prime Minister has given the responsibility to the Ministry of Education and Training to work with the Standing Committee of the National Assembly Committee for Culture, Education, Youth, Adolescents, and Children, along with other relevant ministries and agencies to research and gather opinions from National Assembly deputies from the September 2018 session of the National Assembly’s Standing Committee, and to seek opinions from National Assembly delegations, the Ethnic Council, and the committees of the National Assembly before submitting the draft Law to the National Assembly for consideration and approval at its 6th session of the 14th National Assembly.

This Law Project should note the following issues: Regarding the responsibility of the government, it is necessary to clarify the requirement to enhance the government’s responsibility for various types of higher education institutions, including investment and management responsibilities.

On university autonomy, it is important to promote the role, status, decision-making authority, and supervision of the University Council.

The Chairman of the University Council and its members must truly be reputable, competent individuals capable of ensuring internal unity, correct political orientation, and control of power within the institution.

The structure of the University Council, and its members, will be guided appropriately for each type of institution.

Regarding tuition fees, it is suggested to base them on the principle of valuing quality, emphasizing the responsibility of each institution; to promoting autonomy by allowing institutions to decide and report to the competent government authorities.

When it comes to collaborating with foreign educational institutions, it is important that the explanatory report explicitly outlines the Government’s responsibility. Schools and branches that have foreign affiliations must adhere to Vietnamese laws and regulations. Additionally, their lecturers must meet the standards set by Vietnamese law to obtain a license to operate.

Tax issues and research positions should be regulated in specialized laws; regulations on lecturer standards, age, and working duration should ensure compliance with the regulations of the Civil Servants Law, and the Public Employees Law.

The explanatory report needs to clearly explain the articles and clauses that are amended and supplemented in the Higher Education Law to ensure they do not contradict the principles in the draft Education Law (amendment).

Nhat Minh

Source of the article: access here

Attracting educational development resources from abroad

Analyzing this advantage, Mr. Nguyen Thanh Nha writes in his presentation: Through the integration process, Vietnamese higher education has the opportunity to receive more diverse resources for development, including finance, science and technology, management culture, and especially the workforce of international-level education experts, thereby allowing Vietnamese students to “study abroad at home.”

The opening up of the educational service market will provide a legal framework for institutions to establish partnerships and seek funding from international organizations such as the WB, IMF, etc. Private institutions can also raise capital from foreign individuals and businesses, which will help solve the financial burden on the government budget and address the problem of capital shortage.

Education integration has, is, and will continue to bring a strong wave of investment from the outside. The increase in foreign investment, besides other economic benefits, will contribute to the training of highly skilled, dynamic, and creative human resources and at the same time address the employment issue for workers in many economic sectors.
Creating motivation for comprehensive reform in higher education

Mr. Nguyen Thanh Nha believes that when foreign universities enter the Vietnamese market, the supply-demand balance will change. The monopoly status of domestic institutions will no longer exist, meaning there will no longer be room for poor-quality services.

Universities, whether they like it or not, must actively change to be able to survive and develop, otherwise, they risk falling behind or even being eliminated.

Proactively integrating into the market makes the competition in the higher education sector increasingly fierce, but it is also a factor that promotes profound and comprehensive innovation in our education system, aiming to build an open and democratic learning society.

Opportunities to learn from advanced education systems around the world

According to Mr. Nguyen Thanh Nha, integration of higher education offers developing countries in general, and Vietnam in particular, the opportunity to access modern educational models and academic programs, and advanced teaching methods of countries that have succeeded in this field; thereby, they can creatively apply these to their own country’s development.

Integration creates an opportunity to exchange experiences and learn from each other on an international scale.

These are experiences in macro-management, budget planning, and investment mobilization, developing strategies, and promoting educational development projects, experimenting with interconnected models of research–training–production linked to the labor market, within the economic-social context as well as efficient operational techniques in organizing and conducting teaching, examinations, evaluations, program development, learning materials, and educational resources.

If we proactively integrate, we are fully capable of partnering with leading universities around the world in the field of scientific research, which is a very important area that is currently weak in Vietnamese institutions. This represents a precious opportunity to update to new scientific levels, avoid falling behind the world, and also to promote many of Vietnam’s potential scientific talents.

Information technology development facilitates both teaching and learning

The process of integration with the region and the world, along with the strong development of science and technology, especially information and communication technology, is and will contribute to accelerating learning, building global information and knowledge capacity, creating extremely convenient opportunities for learners while also facilitating educational leaders to exchange and share information better with staff, parents, and students.

Furthermore, information technology has created a highly effective new form of training, online training (E-learning), making the most of the power of the Internet and electronic means to provide visual, highly interactive, and engaging learning programs for learners.

Information technology and the Internet offer economic benefits to universities. That is the reduction in the number of regular budget estimates for the units.

Opportunities to build the brand of Vietnamese Higher Education

Mr. Nguyen Thanh Nha believes that integration offers an opportunity to affirm the position of Vietnamese education on the international stage. Along with deeper participation in international alliances and networks, signing more documents, and multilateral and bilateral treaties, domestic higher education institutions will have the opportunity for equal cooperation with institutions and educational organizations worldwide.

This is a crucial step towards elevating the status, role, and reputation of Vietnamese universities on an international scale.

Source of the article: access here

This information was provided by the research group of Professor Nguyen Huu Duc, Vice President of Vietnam National University, Hanoi, at a seminar on “standardization and international integration” organized by the National Assembly Committee for Culture, Education, Youth, Adolescents and Children on August 17.

Professor Nguyen Huu Duc at the conference (Source of photo: Nguyen Thao)

Not Present at the U21 Field

Universitas21 is a global network of research universities, established in 1997. The ranking of the education systems of U21 countries by the Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University of Melbourne since 2012, ranks the top 50 leading countries in the world.

In the latest ranking results of 2018, for each domain (standardized), Serbia is the number 1 country in Resources; the United States is the number 1 country in Policy Environment; Ukraine is the number 1 country in Connectivity; and Serbia is the number 1 country in Output.

In the overall ranking, the top 5 countries in the world are Finland, the United Kingdom, Serbia, Denmark, and Sweden, respectively. Additionally, the United States is ranked 15th in the overall ranking, and Ukraine is ranked 22nd.

According to these results, the ASEAN region includes 4 countries: Singapore (ranked 10th), Malaysia (ranked 28th), Thailand (ranked 42nd), and Indonesia (ranked 48th) (Table 2). Vietnam is not present.

Absent from the QS Ranking

Besides ranking universities, since 2016, the QS ranking organization also ranks the potential of higher education systems based on 4 criteria: The average ranking of a country’s universities in the top 500, The number of opportunities for students to study at the best universities; The position and leading capacity of the highest-ranked institution; Comparison of the country’s investment efficiency according to GDP.

According to the 2018 ranking results, the ASEAN region includes 5 countries. These are Malaysia (28th), Singapore (29th), Thailand (38th), Indonesia (39th), and the Philippines (45th). Once again, Vietnam was not able to make it onto the list.

Vietnam is in a trap of research productivity and internationalization level

According to the research team, in 2018, on a global scale, Vietnam had 2 national universities ranked in the “top 1,000” of the QS world university rankings. In the Asian region, Vietnam has 5 higher education institutions: Vietnam National University, Hanoi (139), Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City (142), Hanoi University of Science and Technology (291-300), Can Tho University (301-350), and Hue University (351-400).

However, comparing Vietnam National University, Hanoi with other universities in the “top 400 in Asia,” the results have only slightly exceeded the average by about 5%.

A detailed analysis of the ranking results for each criterion shows that Vietnam National University, Hanoi, in particular, and Vietnamese universities in general, are in a trap of research productivity and the level of internationalization.

The research team noted that, with the presence of 2 national universities in the top 1,000, the Vietnamese university system could be ranked in the group of 80 out of 196 countries in the world.

The academic reputation and employer reputation ratings of Vietnamese universities are much lower than those mentioned. In summary, the ranking results of Vietnamese universities are very low.

When compared to the ranking results of the top universities in the ASEAN region, the quality of publications (evaluated by the number of citations) of Vietnam National University, Hanoi, and Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City “can basically be compared with the top universities in the region, but our research productivity is lower.”

Besides the reasons related to the research level and internationalization traps, the low ratio of academic reputation and reputation among employers also reflects the relationship between the higher education system and stakeholders, regarding the models and operational mechanisms of Vietnamese universities, where market mechanisms and the goal of meeting stakeholders’ requirements have not been adequately addressed.

The research team believes that solving these problems requires capabilities: adapting to the trends of global higher education transformation, organizing training oriented towards entrepreneurship, academic research oriented towards innovation, building digital universities, and fulfilling the third function of higher education.

In his presentation, Professor Nguyen Huu Duc concluded: For the sustainable development of higher education, it is necessary to build a strategy towards standardization, set development targets towards integration, and evaluate and compare with countries around the world.

Report by Mr. Dilip Parajuki, from the World Bank

In the opening report of the seminar, Mr. Dilip Parajuli (World Bank Vietnam) introduced another “ranking index” regarding the quality of higher education in Vietnam. It is ranked 84th out of 137 according to a global competitiveness index for 2017-2018. According to him, the main reason for this low ranking is due to policies that are holding back the “explosion” of universities. Vietnam needs to shed the “one-size-fits-all” approach in financial and administrative management at universities to develop.

Speaking after the discussion session this morning, Deputy Prime Minister Vu Duc Dam said that, according to some comprehensive and inferential evaluations, Vietnamese higher education ranks about 80th in the world, while secondary education ranks 50th. He humorously remarked, “To some extent, higher education should strive to catch up with their ‘younger siblings,’ secondary education.”

Nguyen Thao

Source of article: access here

A Worldwide Movement

Accreditation is described as “the process by which a (non-) governmental or private body evaluates the quality of a higher education institution as a whole or of a specific educational programme in order to formally recognize it as having met certain pre-determined minimal criteria or standards” (Vlăsceanu, Grunberg et al. 2007, pp. 25).

First emerging in the United States at the end of the 19th century, quality accreditation has rapidly become a global standard for ensuring the quality of higher education. The mid-1990s saw a surge in the adoption of quality accreditation across various countries, with early adopters including Eastern European nations such as Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania. Meanwhile, well-established educational systems in European countries like the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany have long embraced quality accreditation. This trend has also taken hold in Latin American and Gulf countries, including Oman, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Chile, and throughout Asia.

In the Asia and Pacific regions, quality accreditation is universally implemented across countries from Australia to Japan, South Korea, China, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, Laos, and Cambodia. Remarkably, Southeast Asia has developed its own quality accreditation framework known as AUN-QA, specifically tailored for universities in that region. Additionally, African nations such as Kenya and South Africa have adopted quality accreditation practices.

For global researchers and practitioners in the field of higher education quality assurance, quality accreditation serves as a critical tool to boost the accountability of educational institutions. However, its overall impact and effectiveness on enhancing educational quality are still under examination. Despite its broad application, quality accreditation has faced criticism for potentially fostering negative outcomes, including resistance within the academic community in many developed countries. Critics argue that quality accreditation may inadvertently encourage a culture of conformity and compliance, potentially stifling innovation and quality improvement. Furthermore, quality accreditation is often seen as overly bureaucratic, adding layers of administrative burden. Despite these criticisms, quality accreditation remains the most comprehensive framework available, without any immediate alternatives. Consequently, governments worldwide continue to rely on quality accreditation for the oversight of higher education quality. Nevertheless, it’s important to acknowledge that authorities in countries such as the US, Australia, and the Netherlands are proactively refining and rigorously evaluating their quality accreditation systems to address any flaws and enhance their effectiveness progressively.

Vietnam: Facing Early Challenges in Quality Accreditation

Since the Educational Testing and Quality Accreditation Agency was founded under the Ministry of Education and Training in 2003, Vietnam has been experimenting with qualityaccreditation in higher education as a governmental tool to ensure the quality of university education since 2005. A landmark achievement of this pilot program by 2009 was the introduction of external assessment for 40 leading universities. The program’s most notable success was establishing a set of assessment criteria and a comprehensive quality accreditation process for higher education institutions, developed with insights from Dutch quality accreditation experts and inspired by the systems in the USA and the Netherlands.

In the following period, from 2014 to early 2016, the Ministry of Education and Training set up four supposedly independent quality accreditation centers. In the context of developed nations, ‘independence’ means the capacity to assess and make decisions on quality accreditation autonomously, without external influence from any side, including government or educational bodies. Of these centers, three were based at the National Universities in Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, and the University of Danang, with another under the Association of Vietnamese Universities and Colleges. The Ministry also established regulations for the training and certification of quality accreditation assessors. To date, these centers have conducted multiple training sessions for assessors and begun accepting applications from educational institutions for external assessment. However, given the sheer number of around 450 universities and colleges, plus vocational schools overseen by the Ministry of Labor, War Invalids, and Social Affairs, these four centers are overwhelmed and unable to meet the full demand for quality accreditation across all institutions.

From 2009, following the end of the second pilot phase, to 2016, the majority of universities and colleges had carried out self-assessment and submitted their self-assessment reports to the Ministry of Education and Training. Yet, no further institutions underwent external assessment, leaving them unaccredited.

The inexplicable and extended delays in rolling out the national quality accreditation system have rendered the mandatory quality accreditation compliance for universities and colleges, as dictated by the Education Law of 2005 and 2009, somewhat superficial. This is largely because sanctions cannot be effectively applied to institutions that postpone or sidestep quality accreditation without a complete cycle of assessment across the system. These delays, regardless of their causes, have substantially undermined confidence in the policy and dampened the enthusiasm and commitment of institutions to engage in quality accreditation processes.

Exploring the Dual Aspects of Quality Accreditation

Quality Accreditation fundamentally acts as a mandate from governmental management bodies to educational institutions. The centralized management approach and a prevailing culture of compliance continue to drive organizational behaviors, making changes in quality accreditation activities at educational institutions more obligatory than voluntary. Institutions are thus required to engage with quality accreditation and conform to its established standards. While this enforced compliance facilitates significant learning about management and organizational strategies within institutions, it also limits the scope of learning and improvement to the confines of the quality accreditation body’s criteria and standards. Observations from other countries indicate that such learning and improvement are most pronounced during the initial accreditation cycle, with a notable decrease in subsequent cycles.

It is essential to recognize that quality accreditation serves as a prerequisite rather than an assurance of improved educational quality. Quality accreditation focus on assessing the ‘fitness for purpose’ rather than the inherent quality, indicating that the participation of all universities and colleges in quality accreditation does not automatically ensure or enhance the quality of higher education in Vietnam.

Quality accreditation itself is subject to the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle of quality management, necessitating adjustments in its design, methodology, and processes to rectify identified shortcomings. For instance, the Netherlands embarked on quality accreditation implementation in 2003, a couple of years prior to Vietnam, and achieved system-wide quality accreditation in three years, albeit with a smaller educational system. Following two cycles of quality accreditation, the Netherlands undertook significant revisions to enhance their quality accreditation framework.

Conversely, Australia initially adopted a quality assessment (audit) approach before transitioning to quality accreditation in 2011, implementing substantial modifications from the original U.S. quality accreditation model. The U.S., as the progenitor of quality accreditation, has also made numerous modifications over the years to amend the tool’s deficiencies.

The quality accreditation framework we aim to develop today is fundamentally based on a model that is 10-15 years old. It’s critical to underline that Vietnam’s initiation of quality accreditation in 2005, albeit slightly later than some other countries, was not excessively delayed. Nevertheless, 12 years on, the effort to complete the first accreditation cycle for universities and colleges indicates a notable lag, underscoring the challenges in keeping pace with global standards.

Author: Do Thi Ngoc Quyen/ Tia Sang

The author of the article is an independent education researcher who completed her Master’s degree in Educational Effectiveness and School Improvement at the University of Groningen, Netherlands, and earned her Ph.D. in Higher Education Research at the University of Melbourne, Australia. She has held the position of Director of the Quality Assurance Center at the University of Economics, Vietnam National University, Hanoi, and Head of the Education Research Department at the Institute of Quality Assurance, Vietnam National University, Hanoi. Her research areas of expertise include: effective educational models in secondary and higher education; quality assurance: accreditation, benchmarking, and ranking; university management; and M&E �?Monitoring and Evaluation.

Source of the article: access here