Keywords

1 Introduction

Following the international context of English education and graduate employability in Chapter 2, this chapter zooms into depicting socio-economic, cultural, political, and technological changes in Vietnam since the Đổi Mới policy (1986), one that marked Vietnam’s readiness to embrace internationalization and globalization. It highlights the role of English and other foreign languages in facilitating the internationalization and globalization in the country in the last three decades. It also reviews the national foreign language policy with its priorities, focus, and future move. This chapter also reviews current practices of English education alongside the employability agenda in Vietnamese higher education. It argues that although English skills are classified as essential soft skills necessary for graduates’ employability, English education in Vietnamese higher education is treated as an adjunct component of the curricula. Therefore, students have to enroll in private English classes or engage in informal learning activities (e.g. study groups, online forums, etc.) to develop English skills. The chapter argues that Vietnamese English education context provides an appropriate case study to investigate how English education can contribute to graduates’ employability. Socio-economic, cultural, political issues in the country are also interesting factors that should be examined when exploring the relationship between English education and graduate employability in the country.

2 Đổi Mới Policy and Its Impacts

The most fundamental reform to Vietnam’s socio-economic and cultural circumstances since the reunification of the country in 1975 is the Đổi Mới (Renovation) policy introduced in 1986. This reform policy paved the way for Vietnam’s transition from a subsidized, centralized economy to a multiple-sectored market-oriented economy under the state control and socialist governance (London, 2011; Ngo et al., 2006; Truong et al., 2010; World Bank, 2008). Đổi Mới is concerned about reducing existing barriers to economic development whilst implementing strategic policies to liberalize the domestic market, attract foreign direct investment (FDI), boost the private sector, and reducing subsidies to state-owned enterprises (Hong, 2012). Đổi Mới can be regarded as a strategic vehicle of the Vietnamese government in their long-standing agenda towards the modernization and reconstruction of the nation after the Vietnam War and a land invasion from China in the Northern border in 1979.

Đổi Mới had a profound impact on Vietnam’s economy, politics, society, and livelihood. As a vital strategic policy encompassing both open door and economic reform, Đổi Mới shifted Vietnam from an isolated and poor country, on the brink of economic and diplomatic crisis, to a revived one with growing prosperity and international standing. Vietnam’s remarkable rapid and sustained economic growth in the late 1980s throughout to 2000s as a result of Đổi Mới made the country known as ‘Economic Miracle’ (Vanham, 2018; Weinglass, 2018) or a ‘Transition Tiger’ (Arkadie & Mallon, 2003), and the second fastest growing country in Asia Pacific, only after China (Truong et al., 2010). Between 1991 and 1995, Vietnam’s annual gross domestic growth (GDP) rates were over 8 per cent, which was followed by an average annual GDP increase rate by 7% in the decade that followed (Abbott & Tarp, 2012; Truong et al., 2010). Observers have suggested that one of the most remarkable achievements of Vietnam under the impacts of Đổi Mới is its sustaining high economic growth rate over 10 years and 20 years since the launch of Đổi Mới, even amidst the backdrop of the 1997–1998 Asian Financial Crisis when other Asian economies were in dire straits (Hong, 2012; Truong et al., 2010).

Vietnam has embraced the opportunity for a rapid growth of private, joint venture and foreign direct investment enterprises, exports, imports, and international trade. The opportunities and favourable environments created by Đổi Mới policy, associated with the availability of a diligent (and low-wage) labour force, political stability, and dynamic economy, are amongst the factors that facilitate FDI in Vietnam. The open door strategy embedded in Đổi Mới embraces Vietnam’s commitment to broaden and deepen diplomatic and economic relations with many countries other than its traditional partners and to participate in various regional and international organizations. In particular, Vietnam became a member of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1995 and of the World Trade Organization in 2007, which boosted a remarkable growth in registered foreign direct investment (FDI), reaching US$71.7 billion in 2008 (Mori et al., 2010; Vuong, 2014). This figure was more than three times the level in 2007, US$21.3 billion (Mori et al., 2010).

Vietnam’s dramatic economic growth, rising prosperity, and increased living standards since the introduction of Đổi Mới in 1986 have brought in both positive and negative impacts on the country. The transition to a socialist-oriented market economy has been accompanied with numerous social problems such as drugs, prostitution, gambling, and the commercialism of what have been regarded as traditional values such as education and the student–teacher relationship. In addition, modernization, including Westernization and globalization has led to changing family structure and family relationships. It has generated changing lifestyles, including individualism, and the enrichment of cultural sources and social traditions through syncretization of ideas from other nations. It has also seen the erosion of some traditional values. In the process of preserving Vietnamese cultural identity and re-constructing the national image amid contemporary globalization, various attempts have been made by the government to revitalize past practices. These include restoring communal rituals of solidarity that are in harmony with the discourse of Đổi Mới, and cultural sites such as communal halls, temples, and pagodas that are regarded as symbols of national culture and identity. The promotion of Buddhism in recent years has been a flexible political and cultural response of the Government to Westernization, and to the demand for national security. Within the education setting, market forces and globalization have led to the trends towards marketization, privatization, commercialization, massification, hyper-competition, and increased inequality (Mok, 2007).

In short, Vietnam’s transition to market economy, enabled by Ðổi Mới, coupled with the country’s efforts to integrate into the global economy and its political and social stability, has accelerated the growth of private, joint venture and foreign direct investment enterprises, and international trade (Truong & Tran, 2014). These developments have turned Vietnam into one of Asia’s fastest-growing and dynamic economies, supported by a growing role in East Asia and the world. Rapid economic development led to a marked decrease in Vietnam’s poverty rate from 70 per cent in the mid-1980s to 37 percent in 1998 and 19 percent in 2007 (Hong, 2012). However, a number of side effects of Đổi Mới and global integration related to social issues, lifestyles and national culture and identity have also arisen that need sustaining efforts from different government levels and communities to tackle.

3 Đổi Mới and English Language Status

Đổi Mới opened up not only Vietnam’s economy but also its country as the whole to the Asian region and the world. The country’s reunification in 1975 marked Vietnam being imposed with the embargo from the United States. This embargo, resulted in Vietnam’s isolation from the outside world and coupled with the war against China’s land invasion until the early 1908s, led to the low status of foreign languages in Vietnam prior to Đổi Mới. In particular, from 1975 to 1986, the number of learners of Chinese, French, and English was relatively small (Nguyen, 2017). Yet, Đổi Mới as an open door policy facilitated Vietnam’s political and diplomatic integration into globalization flows and the world, and generated the demands for learning English and other foreign languages.

Đổi Mới paved the way for the acceleration of Vietnam’s international engagement and integration into the global economy and the enhanced impact of global cultural, educational, and scientific flows in Vietnam (Tran et al., 2014). Such an international integration and global flow have provided both the motives and the conditions for learning English and other foreign languages. At the same time, it is English and other foreign languages that have facilitated and fostered Vietnam’s international engagement, global connectedness, and global learning. Therefore, the relationship between international integration and the role of English and other foreign languages is reciprocal. In addition, foreign language education assists with the development of foreign language proficiency needed for Vietnamese students and graduates to effectively communicate, engage, and perform in an increasingly globalized and multilingual world exposed to them as a result of rising globalization, regionalization, and internationalization in the country.

The demands for English and other foreign languages in Vietnam have dramatically grown since the country’s open door policy in an attempt to strengthen its economic and political relations with the Asian region and world (Pham, 2014; Truong & Tran, 2014). Scholars argue that it was only after Đổi Mới that English was recognized as a foreign language in Vietnam, like Chinese, French, and Russian, and was accorded sufficient attention from both the government and people (Pham, 2014). There has been an urgent and ever-rising demand for English and intercultural communication since Vietnam joined the World Trade Organization in 2007, which is often seen as ‘a key to regional and global participation’ (Le, 2000, 2007). Đổi Mới also turned the green light for Vietnam’s participation in regional and international organizations such as Association of Southeast Asian Nations (1995), the Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (1998), Free Trade Area (AFTA), and the conclusion of the US-Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement (2001), which in turn accelerated the country’s integration into the global economy and international standing and generated the demand for English. The proficiency in English and other foreign languages is in great demand by a growing workforce wishing to join or operating in these joint venture companies and foreign direct investment enterprises or in international trade sector in general. And English has now become the most popular foreign language to be studied at all school levels in Vietnam.

The economic growth as a result of Đổi Mới has boosted the number of middle-class families in Vietnam, which in turn has fuelled the demand for overseas study amongst Vietnamese students. Vietnam is currently the country with the fastest rate of middle-class growth in ASEAN (Austrade, 2019). The number of Vietnamese students pursuing education in English speaking countries has rapidly increased over the past three decades. The latest statistics from UNESCO shows that in 2017, Vietnam had 94,662 students studying overseas (UNESCO, 2020), of whom the majority study in English speaking countries. Furthermore, recent years have seen a growth in labour migration from Vietnam to foreign countries under the labour dispatch program. In addition, there has been a massive growth of Vietnamese migrant workers abroad. The demands for overseas study and work facilitated by the country’s economic growth and global and regional integration have created an additional demand for English language learning in Vietnam.

In accordance to Đổi Mới policy, education is re-oriented to serve the market-oriented economy, as crystalized in the official report ‘Vietnam’s Education in the Transition Period’ (Tran et al., 2014). The core mission of Vietnamese higher education has been to enhance human capital for the nation’s social and economic development in response to the emerging and changing demands of the socialist-oriented market economy and the country’s international integration. As part of the nation’s commitment to joining the global economy and strengthening regional and international integration, the national government has accorded more attention to internationalization. Internationalization of HE is used as a strategic vehicle to boost the human capital and enhance the education sector’s ability to catch up with regional and international developments (Tran et al., 2014). The Strategy for Education Development for Vietnam 2011–2020 introduced in 2012 positioned the expansion and enhancement of international cooperation in education as a key component for the reform of Vietnamese education (Prime Minister, 2012). This policy, coupled with subsequent resolutions, has accelerated universities’ transnational partnerships, programs, and models with foreign countries such as the USA, Australia, Netherlands, Canada, Germany, Japan, and Malaysia. Joint, twinning and franchising programs have rapidly increased, with 133 such programs in 2007 (MOET, 2007, cited in Nguyen, 2011) and 542 such programs established since 2011 (MOET, 2018, 2019). These partnerships have enabled both an increased number of Vietnamese students to access transnational education programs and a growing demand for learning English (Nghia et al., 2019; Tran & Marginson, 2018).

Vietnam’s achievements in GDP growth and foreign direct investment brought about by Đổi Mới have had profound impacts on the development of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in Vietnam (Nguyen, 2017; Vu, 2019). Not until the early 2000s did English foreground the foreign language education landscape in Vietnam (Le, 2019) and the status of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) has become known in Vietnam since then. According to Braj Kachru’s (1992) model of World Englishes which is the most influential model of the spread of English, the Vietnamese national context is categorized as an EFL context. In the light of Kachru’s three Concentric Circles Model of English language comprising the Inner Circle (e.g. the UK, the US), the Outer Circle (i.e. mainly the Commonwealth countries), and the Expanding Circle (i.e. much of the rest of the World), Vietnam is situated in the Expanding Circles where English as a Foreign Language plays no historical or governmental role but where it is used as a medium of international communication or English as a lingua franca (ELF).

4 Đổi Mới and English Language Education Policy in Vietnam: Priorities & Focus

Since Đổi Mới, English language skills are in pressing needs, due to rapid socio-economic development and internationalization (Bodewig, 2014; Bodewig & Badiani-Magnusson, 2014); thus English as a primary foreign language has gained its privilege and become central in the national language policy in Vietnam (Bui & Nguyen, 2016; Vu, 2019). Being particularly tied up with Đổi Mới, Vietnam’s language education policies aiming at transformations have been developed in Vietnam over the past three decades. The Education Law (2005) and the Law of Higher Education adopted in 2012 (Vietnamese National Assembly, 2012), revised in 2018, both highlight an official pragmatic shift in foreign language education to English, whilst confirming Vietnamese as the official instructional language used in schools and all other educational institutions, affirming the Government’s strong desire to construct a linguistic identity amongst the Vietnamese people. In Article 7 of the 2005 Education Law, foreign language education was mentioned for the first time in Vietnam and opened the possibility of using a foreign language as the language of instruction, depending on educational goals and the specific requirements of the curriculum. Although foreign languages such as Russian, French, Chinese, and English had previously been taught in Vietnam from the founding of its tertiary sector, its official recognition of foreign language study in schools in the 2005 Education Law revealed a greater awareness of the nation’s integration into the world economy and a deeper concern for economic competitiveness and labour productivity (Vu, 2019). Given the history of foreign language teaching in Vietnam, this official acknowledgement represented a shift in the perception of foreign language (primarily English) instruction as an integral part of the nation-building project. In the process of reforming the tertiary sector, the Law of Higher Education later approved by the Vietnamese National Assembly in 2012 was introduced as a response to the growing need to promote national unity and strengthen the economy. Whilst Article 10 of the Law of Higher Education (2012) continued to reaffirm the status of the Vietnamese language, basing on the Prime Minister’s provision, it officially allows HEIs to make decisions on using foreign languages in their education programs (Vietnamese National Assembly, 2012).

5 The National Foreign Language Project (The NFLP 2020)

As a response to the need to improve the foreign language capacity of Vietnam’s workforce, the Prime Minister issued in 2008 the Decision 1400 QĐ-TTg titled Foreign Language Teaching and Learning Project in the National Education System during the Period of 2008–2020 (Prime Minister, 2008). This important Decision often known as the National Foreign Language Project 2020 (the NFLP 2020) is one of the most significant innovations in foreign language (primarily English) education in Vietnam. The Government of Vietnam considers the NFLP 2020 a breakthrough to improve the quality of English language education across all education levels in Vietnam, with the approved budget of VND 9,378 billion (or nearly US$500 million). To direct the organization of implementation of the NFLP 2020, the Central Steering Committee was set up and composed of representatives of leaderships of concerned ministries and agencies, with the Minister of Education and Training being its head.

The ultimate goal of NFLP 2020, as set in the Decision No. 1400, was that most Vietnamese students graduating from secondary and vocational schools, colleges, and universities would be able to independently and confidently use a foreign language (primarily English) in their daily communication, study, and work in an integrated multilingual multicultural environment by 2020, turning foreign languages into ‘a strength of Vietnamese to serve national industrialization and modernization’ (Prime Minister, 2008). This acknowledges foreign languages as essential soft skills needed for Vietnamese people’s communication, further study and very importantly, for employability. It is widely recognized that foreign languages, including English can be acquired through learning and used as a medium of communication and of instruction; thus they are soft skills, which ‘are defined broadly as non-disciplinary skills that may be achieved through learning and be applied in study, work, and life contexts’ (Tran, 2019, p. xv).

For implementing a nation-wide 10-year foreign language teaching program (from Grade 3 to Grade 12), two fundamental targets of the NFLP 2020 are (i) ‘to prescribe that English and some other foreign languages be the foreign language subject at education institutions [starting from primary school levels] of the national education system’ and (ii) ‘to formulate and promulgate a uniform and detailed framework of 6 levels of foreign language proficiency compatible with universal foreign language levels promulgated by the European Association for Language Testing and Assessment (EALTA)’ (Prime Minister, 2008). To meet these dual targets, MOET has thus decided to use the Common European Framework of References for Languages (CEFR) as ‘an instrument of its policy to mandate proficiency levels for different groups of learners and teachers’ (Le & Banard, 2019, p. 184), making significant shifts in the perception of the language to be taught, assessed, and learnt. However, the decision to use the Western CEFR standard in a non-Western EFL context of Vietnam was under criticism for being ‘abrupt and hasty without adequately considering its contextual constraints’ (Le & Banard, 2019, p. 184).

The NFLP 2020 has attracted considerable public attention and feedback in its first nine years (2008–2016) of implementation. The review conducted in MOET in 2016 on the project’s outcomes concluded that the targets for language proficiency set under the NFLP 2020 were too ambitious and unrealistic (MOET, 2016; Ngo, 2014). The Minister of Education and Training also officially admitted to the National Assembly in 2016 that the NFLP 2020 with an investment of more than VND 4.2 trillion (or nearly half of the approved budget) for the first period of 2008–2016 failed and its set targets could not be met by 2020, urging the need for comprehensively reviewing the objectives and targets (giaoduc.net.vn, 2016).

Following the first implementation phase of the NFLP 2020, in December 2017, the Prime Minister issued Decision No. 2080 titled Approving, Revising, and Amending the National Foreign Language Teaching and Learning Project in the National Education System for the Period 2017–2025 (Prime Minister, 2017). This new Decision known as the amended NFLP 2020 considered the extended timeframe for meeting the various benchmarks set in the initial NFLP 2020 from 2020 to 2025 for each specific task at each school and tertiary level. The newly amended NFLP 2020 calls for all academic levels to continue with the new foreign language curriculum and improve students’ English language proficiency to adapt to studying and working requirements towards English language universalization or ‘English for Everyone’ (Wedell, 2008) by 2025. Again, English language skill continues to be acknowledged in Decision No. 2080 as essential soft skills for graduates’ employability.

One of the key directions, as set in this new Decision No. 2080, is to make a breakthrough on the quality of foreign language education for all education levels and at all proficiency levels, encouraging to introduce foreign language education to schools earlier from kindergartens and to all social activities, promoting the teaching of foreign languages to be integrated in teaching other subjects and teaching other specialized disciplinary subjects such as Maths and Science in foreign languages. The key new objectives include 100 per cent of school students shall study 10-year foreign language curriculums, applied from Grade 3 to Grade 12; 50 per cent of vocational training providers shall teach foreign language curriculums in accordance with competency/skill requirements; 100 per cent of foreign language majors of universities must apply output criteria for students upon graduation whilst 80 per cent of other majors must also apply the criteria; 100 per cent of student majoring in foreign language pedagogy must follow professional criteria and fulfill requirements of foreign language teachers’ capacity (Prime Minister, 2017).

Alongside the employability agenda, both Decision No.1400 (i.e. the initial NFLP 2020) and Decision No. 2080 (i.e. the newly amended NFLP 2020) affirmed the Vietnamese Government’s strong views that English is a core soft skill crucial for a modern and globally connected economy. They both demonstrated the Government’s determination for the broadening adoption of English and English language education reforms, contributing to increasing public awareness of the importance of English competence in the current globalized era, as well as improving the quality of English teaching and learning in Vietnam. Both decisions expressed the Government’s legitimate aspirations for young Vietnamese workforces that are able to communicate confidently and competently in a foreign language (primarily English) and ready for the employment market.

Towards achieving the goal of English for employability, both Decisions issued by the Prime Minister adopted the ‘phased’ approach (Bui & Le, 2019; Nguyen, 2016) to ensure a smooth introduction of universalization of English language to the primary school curriculum through to the higher education curriculum in the nation-wide implementation of English language education policy. The initial NFLP2020, as stipulated in Decision No. 1400, is planned to be implemented in three phases of namely the 2008–2010 period, the 2011–2015 period, and the 2016–2020 period, each of which has its own priorities and focus (Prime Minister, 2008). Whereas the amended NFLP 2020 is planned to be implemented in two phases of the 2017–2020 period and the 2020–2025 period (Prime Minister, 2017) towards achieving the same goal of English language universalization.

In terms of priorities and focus, the initial Decision No. 1400 and the subsequently amended Decision No. 2080 have some similarities and differences. Though both Decisions acknowledged the important roles of foreign language education, of foreign language teachers, and the need for developing foreign language teachers’ competences for improved foreign language education, the subsequently amended Decision No. 2080 has given priorities to four new additional tasks (i) developing foreign language curriculum; (ii) innovative assessments; (iii) information technological application; and very importantly, (iv) to enhancing effectiveness in management, monitoring, supervising, and evaluating the implementation of the NFLP 2020 as a cluster of strategic solutions to reforming foreign language education policies (Prime Minster, 2008, 2017). Though such new important priorities could potentially contribute to innovating the foreign language education in Vietnam and better preparing Vietnamese graduates for their future employability, there have been no specific guidelines on how to address the contextual constraints confronting Vietnamese teachers and learners of English and how to successfully implement those new priorities in practice; thus both Decisions appear to be long ‘wish’ lists of many general ambitious tasks to be implemented for a nation-wide ‘English for everyone’ foreign language program.

Both decisions entailed various issues concerning the inadequacy of the top-down approach towards English language education policies in Vietnam. Vietnam’s approach was top-down because the Decisions were issued by the Prime Minister and the organization of implementation was assigned to MOET who is responsible for overseeing the national education system, including formal English teaching and learning at school and university levels. Scholars argued that such centralized reform policies developed at the macro level have failed to consider the contexts at the grassroot levels and the important consultation and feedback from the community (i.e. teachers, students, parents, and administrators) and have consequently not been translated well to practice at institutional and classroom levels (Nguyen, 2011). Such a top-down approach to English language education policy planning has resulted in a misalignment amongst decisions made by policy makers (i.e. the Government issuing the Decisions), actions taken by policy implementers (i.e. MOET), and what English language classroom teachers and students actually need for improving their English language proficiency levels and academic performance.

In addition, there is an issue of inadequate evaluation of the country’s physical and human resources, whereby policy goals are hard to reach within the intended time frame by 2020 (Nguyen, 2011) and even within the extended one by 2025 (Le, 2019). Apart from that issue, there is no available evidence as to whether or not the development of goals, objectives, tasks, and recommended solutions presented in both decisions were supported by any empirical national research and/or international comparative research on English language education policies, with reference to other similar EFL contexts’ successes and failures. Seriously, they both lacked a strategic focus on how English language education could contribute to Vietnamese graduates’ employability, making it a long hard way for Vietnam to implement English as a soft skill for its graduates’ employability, as desired. Whether or not the new targets set in the amended Decision No. 2080 will be achieved by 2025 is not guaranteed and awaits investigation.

6 Current English Language Education Practices: Realities and Challenges

In practice, since Đổi Mới, English has been introduced at all levels of education and is widely used for international communication in Vietnam (Bui & Nguyen, 2019; Le, 2016). Like China, South Korea, and Japan in the region, English language has been viewed as ‘one of the key strands of today’s Vietnamese education, alongside mathematics and information technology’ (Le, 2019, p. 9). English is now being taught and learnt at kindergartens, primary and high schools, colleges and universities, and thousands of local and international ELT centres throughout Vietnam (Le, 2019; Nguyen, 2017; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019). At primary levels, since 2011, English has been officially taught as a compulsory primary school subject throughout the country in Grade 3 with many public and private primary schools in the metropolitan cities being at the forefront of the innovative ‘English for Everyone’ movement (Le, 2019). For private school systems, including International schools, English is commonly used as a medium of instructions (EMI). From Grade 6 to 12 of secondary education, English is a compulsory subject across the Vietnamese public school system. Different English language courses and training programs across education levels have been developed over the past decades, aiming to satisfy the diverse learning needs of Vietnamese learners of English language (Le, 2019; Thinh, 2006).

6.1 Contextual and Pedagogical Challenges

Despite increasing attention and financial investment from both the Government and the individuals, English language teaching and learning across education levels in Vietnam has not yet met people’s expectations, due to challenges in the current English language education practices in Vietnam. Both contextual and pedagogical challenges have recently been documented in the emerging body of literature on Vietnam’s English education (e.g. Albright, 2019; Bui & Nguyen, 2016; Grassick, 2019; Le & Barnard, 2019; Le et al., 2017; Ngo, 2019; Nguyen, 2013; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019). Examples of contextual challenges are, just to name a few, the big class size, mixed level classes, teachers’ heavy teaching workloads, a shortage of class time, the big gap between the ambitious policy goals and the implementation reality, outdated textbooks, the lack of learning facilities and reference materials, traditional teaching and learning for examinations, a lack of environment to practice and use English and learners’ low levels of motivation to learn English (e.g. Le, 2019; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019; Nhung, 2019; Tran, 2019).

Apart from contextual challenges, English language education in Vietnam has been faced with many pedagogical challenges, such as teachers’ and learners’ traditional subscription to the native speaker model with a native speaker goal, which is ‘not appropriate in all circumstances and unattainable by the vast majority of students’ (Cook, 2016, p. 6), a mismatch between modern English language teaching methods and traditional Vietnamese classroom cultures, conventional beliefs about teachers’ and learners’ roles, their weaknesses in communicative skills, teachers’ difficulties in applying advanced teaching methods and best practices to the reality of English language teaching in Vietnamese university contexts, outdated methods of assessments, improper implementation of EMI across all education levels, and most seriously, a shortage of qualified and competent English language teachers and teacher trainers at all education levels and problematizing pre-service and in-service English language teacher education courses (Le, 2019; Ngo, 2019; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019; Nhung, 2019).

As a consequence, high school graduates have performed poorly in the compulsory English test of the annual national entrance exam to universities. In 2018, of the 814,779 students taking the English test to enter universities, 78.22% scored less than 5 out of 10 and the average score was 3.91 (up from 3.4 in 2017). In 2019, high school students’ poor performance continued to produce disappointing results, of the 789, 535 English test takers, 68.74% scored less than 5 out of 10 and the average score was 3.75 (down from 3.91 in 2018). These current low English language proficiency levels amongst school learners in Vietnam do not meet the country’s employment market and socio-economic development demands (Le, 2019).

At tertiary levels, English can be taught either as a compulsory subject or as a major across the whole higher education system in Vietnam (e.g. Albright, 2019; Bui & Nguyen, 2016; Hoang, 2009; Le, 2019). In the former category, undergraduate students in non-English major universities study English as a foreign language subject for a few hours weekly with only 14 out of 140 credit hours, accounting for only 10 percent of the total credit hours of an undergraduate program whilst postgraduate students study English for 7 out of 50 credit hours, making up only 12 percent of the total credit hours of a postgraduate program (Hoang, 2009). With such limited credit hours allocated to teaching and learning English, English language is evidently treated as an adjunct component of the university curricula. This negatively impacts teachers’ and learners’ perceptions, motivation to teach and learn English, and ultimately their low English language proficiency levels, although English is claimed to take a primary position amongst foreign languages being taught and learnt in Vietnamese universities and English skills are acknowledged as essential soft skills for their graduates’ employability.

In the latter category, students study English for their Bachelor, Master, or doctoral degrees majoring in English to become qualified English language teachers or lecturers, translators and/or interpreter, and/or researchers in applied linguistics or in English language methodology. There used to be only four public universities in 2009 in Vietnam offering undergraduate and postgraduate programs in English (i.e. Hanoi University and The University of Languages and International Studies in the North, Da Nang University and Hue University in the Center of Vietnam), compared to the current number of hundreds of public and private universities where students can choose to do their majors in English nationwide. For promotion of English language education at tertiary levels, the Vietnamese Government has encouraged pivotal universities to implement the so-called ‘advanced programs’ in which English is required to be the medium of instructions (EMI).

Despite an exponential growth of EMI programs in Vietnam’s higher education, the majority of university lecturers still lack formal training in pedagogical techniques for EMI teaching (Nhung, 2019). Also, the current practice of EMI is not fully informed by empirical evidence, due to a lack of research in this area (Nguyen et al., 2016; Vu & Burns, 2014). The effectiveness of EMI programs in universities in Vietnam is thus open for empirical investigation and interpretation. In addition, tertiary students’ motivation to learn English varies from student to student; some are motivated to learn English as a tool for more attractive and lucrative employment opportunities after graduation whilst others learn English for further studies in English speaking countries or simply for the sake of passing exams. The general tendency is to learn English for international communication and better paid employment (Hoang, 2009).

Those students, especially in urban areas, who are self-motivated to study English for better employability and associate English language proficiency with better future life, could not rely on their formal learning of English in their HEIs, due to limited credit hours allocated to English language teaching and learning, and have thus enrolled into private English classes or engaged in informal learning activities such as study groups, online forums to develop their own English skills whilst formally studying English in class in their universities simply to meet the course requirements. This has resulted in a boom of private English Language Teaching (ELT) centres since 2010s, especially in big cities in Vietnam (Saigon Giai phong Online, 2019). According to the statistics of Ho Chi Minh City’s Department of Education and Training, by January 2019, Ho Chi Minh City alone has 1250 ELT centres (of which 98% are locally invested ones and only 2% are foreign invested), compared to 370 centres in 2010.

In response to a boom of ELT centres nationwide, including those who do not have establishment licenses (Saigon Giaiphong online, 2019), MOET recently issued the Circular 21/2018/TT/BGDĐT dated 24th August 2018 on establishment and operations of foreign languages training centres, including the ELT centres (MOET, 2018). The Circular defines English training centres into three main types of ownership, public, private, and foreign invested. These centres are part of the national education system and deliver continuing education functions. Whilst MOET is responsible for national policy and regulatory aspects, the province and city Departments of Education and Training (DOETs) oversee the establishment licensing and operation of the ELT centres. It is worth noticing that the Circular was issued quite late after thousands of ELT centres were already established and in operation nationwide for long; there is a lack of quality assurance mechanism and research on the quality and effectiveness of these centres. Many ELT centres have employed even untrained or inadequately trained non-native and native English teachers to attract fee-paying students from affluent families to make huge profits from the increasingly high market demands for English language learning (Le, 2019), making it hard for MOET and DOETs to monitor, control, and manage the education quality of those booming ELT centres.

As a consequence, current university and workforce English proficiency levels in Vietnam have remained low despite a high demand for skilled workers to sustain its high economic growth rate. According to Education First (EF), an international education company specialized in language training and providing the world’s largest ranking of countries and regions by English skills acquired by secondary and tertiary students, Vietnam ranked 66th out of 112 countries and territories in 2021 global English Proficiency Index (EPI). In 2018, Vietnam’s EPI ranked 41st amongst that of 88 countries and territories. Vietnam is in the twelfth position out of the 24 countries in Asia in 2021 (EF, 2022). According to EPI rankings, Vietnam’s proficiency level ranked low with its score of only 52 out of 100 in 2019 (down from its moderate level in the preceding year of 2018) across the Asian region and worldwide. Unsurprisingly, many university graduates in Vietnam are complained by recruiters for not having sufficient mastery of English language competences to be employed in private and foreign companies and neither do working professionals to be fully productive in their current roles nor to evolve into new ones (Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019).

This current situation of graduates’ low English language proficiency levels in Vietnam revealed a huge gap between what is intended (ambitiously) in Government policies and what is actually happening in English classrooms (Le, 2019). Such a huge gap is evidence of unsuccessful implementation of English language education policies in Vietnam and its failure to meet the employability agenda, urging the need for strategic initiatives to implement English as a soft skill in Vietnam so as to catch up with other countries in the ASEAN region.

7 English as a Soft Skill Implementation Initiatives in Vietnam’ HE: Ways Forward

Looking ahead, English will continue to maintain its primary role as the key foreign language to be taught and learnt across education levels, including HE in Vietnam and English skills will continue to be the core soft skill to be implemented in Vietnamese HEIs for graduates’ employability (Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019). Given the current situation, there is an urgent need for Vietnam to take more strategic actions to improve its current low English proficiency levels amongst students at all school and university levels and keep them high to enhance its graduates’ employability and the country’s competitive position in the international economic and political arena (Nguyen, 2011; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2019).

To contribute to graduates’ employability, English language skill development should be an integral component of soft skill implementation initiatives in HE in Vietnam. The implementation of such initiatives ‘depends on contextual factors’ (Tran, 2019, p. xv) and involves various ‘tasks’ at different levels devoted to English as a soft skill implementation. In this regard, Tran (2019) developed a comprehensive four level conceptual framework for soft skill implementation in HE which is applicable for English skill implementation initiatives in Vietnam’s HE system. Tran (2019)’s four level conceptual framework comprises implementation tasks at the national level (i.e. the general context of soft skills implementation), the institutional level (i.e. all mechanisms and strategies for executing the soft skills policy), the curriculum level (i.e. setting soft skills learning objectives, teaching, and assessing these skills), and the extra-curricular level (i.e. the use of non-curricular activities for developing soft skills). Reviewing common practices for soft skill implementation in the literature, Tran (2019, p. 36) identified a comprehensive list of specific tasks to be implemented at each of the four levels, many of which are relevant for English skill implementation initiatives in Vietnam’s HE, and discussed hereinafter.

At the national level, Vietnamese policy makers should be mindful of the socio-economic, political, and cultural contexts of the country and associated challenges described above whilst making systematic efforts for quality assurance, accreditation, and learning-outcome assessment of English language programs across the national education and higher education system, including ELT centres nationwide. Such systematic efforts could also help depict the realities of English language teaching and learning in Vietnam, based on which more realistic goals and tasks will be set in any amended Decisions to be issued by the Government in the years to come. It is also imperative that the Government consults policy implementers at multiple levels for their insights, including MOET at the macro levels, institutional leaders at the meso levels, and very importantly, English language teachers, learners, and administrators (including those in ELT centres) at the micro levels who are crucial for the successful implementation of English as a soft skill initiative in Vietnam and in any contexts.

At the same time, the Government’s future Decisions must be well informed and supported by the contemporary research on English language education before policies are formulated and implemented (Le, 2019). Though it might be ‘too late to “look before leap” by undertaking exploratory research to consider the feasibility of what is proposed’ (Le & Banard, 2019, p. 192), for any future amended decisions to be made, the Government should refer to the relevant research conducted in Vietnam, relating to English language education innovations, namely curricular, assessment, teacher development, teaching and learning innovations. In this vein, Le & Banard (2019) suggested:

One way to do this is for MOET to set up an archive of abstracts of all relevant research carried out in Vietnam relating to such innovations and make a continuously updated register of these details available to potential and actual researchers. Some of these might well be commissioned by MOET to undertake specific projects; university departments and staff might also follow up on the implications of studies conducted in areas of interest. (p. 192)

At the institutional level, for successful implementation of Government’s Decision, it is advisable that MOET should strategically develop more specific policies, guidelines, incentives, and drivers for ‘English as a soft skill’ implementation by carefully looking inside, critically analysing the causes and effects of the multiple factors confronting English language teachers and learners, comprehensively reviewing and evaluating what has and has not yet been achieved, including its past decision to use the Western CEFR standards, so as to maximize strengths, minimize problems, and to learn from failures. This should be done before looking outside to draw practical lessons from successes of other selective Asian countries whose contexts are almost similar and whose English proficiency levels are moderate (but currently higher than Vietnam’s in EF rankings) (e.g. India and China) and very high (e.g. Singapore, the Philippines and Malaysia) (EF, 2022).

At the same time, it is important for each HEI in Vietnam to strategically align the implementation of English as a core soft skill with its own vision, mission, and purposes which are to get its graduates ready for employment with good quality work performance. In addition, each HEI needs to analyse the context in which it operates and its own institutional capacity for appropriately contextualizing the implementation, devising and deploying implementation strategies effectively, and engaging stakeholders in English as a soft skill implementation initiative (Tran, 2019). HEIs’ leaders need to be aware of the shortcomings of the centralized leadership in selecting outcomes and curriculum models; rather they should coordinate the implementation of English language skill development whilst empowering and engaging TESOL researchers and practitioners who have the relevant expertise for innovating the teaching and learning of English language.

Institutional leadership should be strong enough, with implementation actions and strategies, to promote and support the engagement of not only English language teachers but also disciplinary lecturers through a strategic move to EMI programs. To avoid teacher disengagement, Tran (2019, p. 229) warned us all that ‘a lack of clarity in the soft skills policy [in this case, the English language education policies] and implementation strategy, a shortage of teacher capacity, and an absence of incentives and management tools all contributed to teachers disengagement with the implementation.’ It is worth noting that disengaged teachers and lecturers of English whose salaries are low may choose to practically invest their time and energy into moonlighting and working elsewhere in booming ELT centres to earn their living.

At the curriculum level, HEIs in Vietnam should make full use of their curriculum autonomy granted by the 2012 Higher Education Law (Vietnamese National Assembly, 2012) to modify their curricula balancing disciplinary and non-disciplinary (i.e. English skill) subjects, to set English skill learning objectives, and to teach and assess English language skills as one of the main subjects, not an adjunct one throughout their curricula. Universities should be proactive in treating English language skills development as an integral component by allocating more reasonable number of credit hours to English language teaching and learning in the curricula from students’ first year of study until their final year of graduation.

Also, for successful curriculum implementation, pedagogical priorities should be given to a student-centred approach to English language teaching and learning, including a consideration of students’ entry levels of English language proficiency, their learning needs analyses, students’ experiential learning activities, and student-centred principles of English language teaching and learning (Brown, 2014). University leaders and English language departments need to implement strategies for recruiting and developing competent English language teachers and lecturers (Le & Ngo, 2015) who are knowledgeable about key Second Language Acquisition (SLA) theories, different approaches and models of learning English as a second language, different teaching styles, techniques, and principles of English language teaching and learning, and their implications for English language teaching and learning and thus are willing to adopt flexibly into own classroom practices (Brown, 2014; Cook, 2016; Ngo, 2022). Teachers should be supported with the most favourable working conditions and empowered to make research-informed decisions that pedagogically fit for their teaching contexts towards achieving the expected learning outcomes meeting the employability demands for work readiness skills relevant to the employment markets. Conscious efforts should also be made to address contextual constraints such as large size classes, English language teachers’ teaching workloads, shortage of classroom time allocated to English language teaching, and lack of incentives and support for doing action classroom research and professional development.

At the extra-curricular level, apart from curriculum-based activities, Tran (2019) suggested extra-curricular activities such as social-engagement activities, employment orientation and consultation, skills classes, and political education, many of which are applicable for English as a soft skill implementation in Vietnam’s HE. The use of English language-oriented extra-curricular activities (ECAs), for example, dramatization, video or movie watching, quizzes, English speaking or reading clubs, speaking or writing contests, and debates should be promoted because of their potentials for helping address students’ low motivation to learn English whilst providing them with real-life like practice and more opportunities to use the English language beyond the classroom (Yildiz, 2016). ECAs should be sponsored, structurally organized, and supervised by educators and English language teachers outside classrooms (Park, 2015). Though the planned development and integration of non-curricular activities in second language curriculum are highly recommended and well documented in the international literature (e.g. Joseph et al., 2005; Kuimova & Gaberling, 2014; Park, 2015; Tosun & Yildiz, 2015; Tumanov, 1983; Yildiz, 2016), they are not seriously researched and implemented in English language teaching and learning practices in Vietnamese HE and thus need more special attention.

8 Conclusion

English is no doubt a tool to connect Vietnam with the World and links foreign investors with the young local labour market. In its regional and international integration, it is important to be reminded of what the former Singapore Prime Minister advised the Vietnamese Government in his visit to Vietnam in 2007 that ‘the key to avoid falling behind the World is English’ (Dan Tri, 2015). In order not to fall behind and to sustain its high economic growth rate achieved since the launch of Đổi Mới, Vietnam needs to continue its efforts more strategically to innovate its English language education that assists with the development of higher English language proficiency needed for Vietnamese graduates to effectively communicate, engage, and perform in an increasingly globalized and multilingual world as a result of rising globalization, regionalization, and internationalization in the country. At the heart of those efforts must be a more strategic focus on English as soft skills for employability. The future of teaching and learning English as a soft skill in Vietnam will be shaped by a more holistic approach to innovating English language education, with due attention drawn to effective implementation tasks at the national, institutional, curriculum, and subject levels.

This chapter has attempted to sketch out the socio-economic, cultural, political, and technological changes at the national level in Vietnam since the Đổi Mới policy in 1986 marking Vietnam’s readiness to embrace national economic development, internationalization, and globalization. At the institutional levels, HEIs’ core mission has long been to enhance human capital for the nation’s social and economic development in response to the emerging and changing demands of Đổi Mới (Renovation), the socialist-oriented market economy, and the country’s international integration. Đổi Mới has brought marked changes to all aspects of Vietnamese life, including its national foreign language (primarily English) education policy with the ultimate goal of English language universalization, including English as a soft skill implementation. Given the mismatch between the Government’s Decisions for English as a soft skill for employability and what is actually being implemented at the institutional, curriculum, and subject levels across education levels, including HE, this chapter argues that Vietnamese English education context provides an appropriate case study to investigate how English education can contribute to graduates’ employability.