Cogent Education

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/oaed20

A policy review of criteria and competencies for

teaching staff of general education in Vietnam

Ca- Nguyen Duc, Phuong- Ngo Thi, Thang –Ngoc Hoang, Hai- Luong Dinh,
Lien- Nguyen Hong & Thang- Nguyen The

To cite this article: Ca- Nguyen Duc, Phuong- Ngo Thi, Thang –Ngoc Hoang, Hai- Luong Dinh,
Lien- Nguyen Hong & Thang- Nguyen The (2022) A policy review of criteria and competencies
for teaching staff of general education in Vietnam, Cogent Education, 9:1, 2133889, DOI:
10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access

article is distributed under a Creative
Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Published online: 22 Nov 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 104

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaed20
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889
Received: 22 November 2021
Accepted: 06 October 2022
*Corresponding author: Thang-
Nguyen The, Research Division of
Educational Policies, Vietnam
National Institute of Educational
Sciences, vietnam
Email: thangvcl@gmail.com
Reviewing editor:
Dorothy Chen, National Chi Nan
University, TAIWAN
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
Thang- Nguyen The
EDUCATION POLICY | REVIEW ARTICLE
A policy review of criteria and competencies for
teaching staff of general education in Vietnam
Ca- Nguyen Duc1, Phuong- Ngo Thi2, Thang –Ngoc Hoang3, Hai- Luong Dinh1, Lien-
Nguyen Hong1 and Thang- Nguyen The1*
Abstract: The teaching staff is one of the most significant factors determining the
quality of education. Therefore, improving the quality of teaching staff is always
considered by governments. The criteria of teacher competence, the basis for
evaluating teachers as well as the basis for teachers to improve their capacity, is
one of the factors to promote the quality of teachers. In the context of socio-
economic changes and the need to comprehensively innovate education, Vietnam
has issued new standards for teaching staff. With a documentary research
approach, the study analysed the changes in criteria and capacity for general
education teachers based on policy documents and explained the necessity of that
criterion system for education in Vietnam in the current context. Along with the
change in criteria and teacher capacity, approaches to teacher assessment and
rating were also mentioned in this study. The results show that the criteria, methods
ABOUT THE AUTHOR PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
Dr. Thang-Nguyen The Dear Editor,
Mr. Luong Dinh Hai Follow your requirements, I send herewith our PIS
Ms. Nguyen Hong Lien doc file for the Manuscript “A Policy Review of
Prof. Le Anh Vinh (General Director of Vietnam Criteria and Competencies for Teaching Staff of
National Institute of Educational Sciences). General Education in Vietnam” Manuscript
Number COGENTEDU-2021-1003R1
The issue of teachers is always a significant
concern of educators and society because of
their importance in creating quality education.
Therefore, the standards and competence of
teachers are also considered by the wider com­
munity outside the schools. Studies and policies
on teacher standards and competencies have
been carried out in many countries and Vietnam.
The change in regulations on teacher standards
and qualifications not only affects schools but
also serves as a basis for stakeholders to evalu­
ate the effectiveness of education. However,
along with that change, other factors also need
to be taken into account. This study shows an
example of Vietnam in its efforts to improve the
capacity of teaching staff from the perspective of
teacher evaluation policy. At the same time, the
study also poses challenges and recommenda­
tions for the synchronous implementation of
other solutions to contribute to improving the
quality of teachers in schools.
Thank you so much
On behalf of the co-authors
The Thang Nguyen
© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons
Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
Page 1 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

of assessment, and grading of teachers are getting better. However, policy changes
take time to successfully implement in practice and need to be consistent with
other policies. Therefore, some recommendations on management, teacher train­
ing, and financial support were proposed for improving the quality of teaching staff.

Subjects: Educational Research; School Leadership, Management & Administration;

Secondary Education; Teachers & TeacherEducation; Education Policy & Politics

Keywords: Teaching staff; General education; Competency; Criteria; Developing competent

teacher

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

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

Figure 1. Structure of the 2018

School Teacher Professional
Standards

Page 2 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

Figure 2. Steps for teacher

assessment and rating based
on professional standards sets

develop teaching staff competencies for creating a competitive advantage for schools (Duong &
Nguyen, 2016).

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

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

Nationally, since the 1980s, government reform of the UK education system has included
a sequence of policy interventions in Initial Teacher Training to specify the knowledge and
competencies required of newly certified teachers (Graham, 1996). Furthermore, the policies,
preparations, and views of pre-service foreign language teachers’ competency development
were investigated within the framework of an innovative remote teacher training module (Stadler-
Heer, 2021). Alternatively, when new innovations or measurement procedures are brought into the
educational system in order to enhance or appraise the quality of its teaching force, starting
teachers must frequently adjust to these new concepts of what constitutes high-quality teaching
(Goh & Wong, 2014). Policymakers (Harley et al., 2000) have placed so much trust in education to
better and strengthen South African society that contemporary policy documents define teachers’
vocational, professional, and academic obligations and skills. Furthermore, teacher competences

Page 3 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

are linked to the development and implementation of education policy (Kovač et al., 2014), and the
transition to competency-based education has implications for both teachers and school admin­
istrators (Seezink & Poell, 2011). Australia, for instance, has a history of teacher capacity building
extending back to the 1970s (Tania, 2006); (Department of Education and Training, 2004), and
Singapore also (Steiner, 2010) is a country with exceptional educational progress. As a result,
a quick comparison of teacher standards in Vietnam and these two nations is done to identify
differences and similarities.

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

Other objective of these studies is professional development, it is a substantial transition to

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

One of the research objectives of the studies is relevant to human resources, Seezink and Poell
(2011) look at the professional development activities teachers engage in response to this

Page 4 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

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

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

The findings of the studies mentioned in this review point to the need for competence as well as
solutions and critical issues for the best development of teacher competence, which is a set of
questions and research proposals to stimulate innovation in distant foreign language teacher
training (Stadler-Heer, 2021). Furthermore, effective professional development approaches are
essential owing to the dynamic increase of teacher competence through practical learning
opportunities in early career teaching (Kaiser & König, 2019). In particular, elementary and
secondary school teachers ranked their competencies related to education policy as an important
feature of their teacher competency profile (Kovač et al., 2014). Teachers rated their cognition and
command of competencies relevant to school-based education policy procedures as quite high.
Mastery of competencies connected to the understanding of the education system, i.e., activity
outside of the school context, on the other hand, has gotten relatively lower scores. The evalua­
tions of scale items related to preconditions and personal engagement in decision making and
educational policy implementation within the school vary from average to slightly above average.
The critical importance of beginning teachers’ views of competency has significant consequences
for educational policy and teacher education (Goh & Wong, 2014); any quality enhancement
strategies should include instructors, and promote and encourage teachers’ professional growth
as competent instructors, educational systems, and teacher training programs should also be
given special consideration. The regulations of Continuing Professional Development to develop
national standards for new categories of “expert teachers” pose serious concerns regarding
academic and professional autonomy and have an influence on teachers and schools as well as
develop new conceptions of professionalism (Graham, 1996). And professional development
activities for teachers were found to be pretty consistent among schools with varying human
resource regulations (Seezink & Poell, 2011). It is determined that neither government-mandated
nor volunteer human resource rules appear to have a significant effect on teacher engagement in
professional development activities. Certain developing patterns and trends across a range of
policy initiatives, highlighting paradigmatic national instances and providing some food for
thought, were identified (Caena, 2014). And the government’s efforts to implement
a certification system have a positive influence on the quality, qualification, and competency of
instructors (Sholihah et al., 2020). Some considerable gaps between policy and practice pose
major concerns regarding policy assumptions (Harley et al., 2000). The educational structure, on
which transformation and growth rely, would be jeopardized if “tissue rejection” occurred, which

Page 5 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

is not an improbable prospect. Worse, historically uneven schools may worsen. The historical
variations and parallels in how technology in teacher education were addressed, as well as the
relevance of teachers’ digital competency as influenced by supranational frameworks, the bene­
fits and problems of policy convergence, and the potential impact of these supranational frame­
works (McGarr et al., 2021). As school administrations execute organizational change (Lambert
et al., 2010), using evaluation methodologies to help teachers shift from the moving to the
refreezing stages would be advantageous.

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

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

4. Findings and discussion

4.1. School teachers

As the education law (Assembly, 2005) of Vietnam, school teachers are persons that carry out
teaching, educating at the primary, middle, high schools and public preparatory schools. In terms
of the quantity and quality (Ministry of Education and Traininig, 2017) by the school year of 2015–
2016, the school teachers of Vietnam are divided into five main groups from grade I to grade IV
and standard-unsatisfied, though the middle school teachers only are categorized as a grade IV.
The number of teachers classified into groups from Grade I to grade IV graduated from universities
is by the most numbers of them approximately over 802.000 people, which means these people
hold college degrees and higher degrees, and about 110.000 graduated from secondary pedago­
gical schools only. They are adept in basic computer competency, and proficiency of a foreign
language at the language framework adapted from the European Union, (Cambridge University
Press, 2013). Compared with primary and middle school teachers, the high school teaching staff
includes the best teachers are more highly educated with nearly 1200 people possessing master
degrees or PhD Degrees, and just over 130.000 of teachers holding university degrees. Conversely,
refresher training courses should be provided for about 5.500 teachers to meet the standards in

Page 6 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

terms of qualifications and professional competencies, and these are working in the primary sector
are close to threefold compared to the lower secondary teachers and upper secondary teachers.
The teachers working in the general educational sector have to meet two kinds of standards, one is
qualifications and what they have to do in schools regulated by Joint Circulars (see more in
Table 3), and the other is professional standards regulated by Circulars issued by the MOET.
These Circulars have represented the policy changes in the professional competencies of the
general teachers in recent years.

4.2. Change in school teacher professional standards

4.2.1. Policy context

4.2.1.1. Regulations issued before the radical and comprehensive renovation in education. In
the year of 2000, studies and regulations on school teachers’ competencies were started by
defining the competency according to the requirements that elementary teachers must perform
at school rather than the time for professional activities (MOET, 2007). This is the first step before
applying a competency-based approach with the development of specific standards for middle and
high school teachers that some of the standard development solutions have been proposed to
determine the skills and knowledge needed for teaching in each education level in Vietnam (Pham,
2009; Phí, 2005; Tran, 2009; Vũ, 2005). There are three main purposes of the solutions: (1)
Experiment, validate and refine standards; (2) Identify effective grading procedures and standar­
dize professional assessment of teacher qualifications; (3) Identify the most appropriate way to
gather evidence of teachers’ ability to perform professional activities.
The context of issuing professional standards for primary teachers originated from practical
reasons1 including (1) the number of teachers is sufficient or at a surplus in some localities; (2) the
period of expansion of the scale of teacher training and development has been stable; (3) the notion
that qualified teachers are those holding pedagogical diplomas has been changed; (4) the attachment
of specific requirements and benefits of the primary teachers to regulations on state civil servants.

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

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

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

Page 7 of 21
 Table 1. Sets of professional standards for school teachers
Professional Requirements of Primary Teachers
03 standards—60 criteria (Decision No 14/2007/
QĐ-BGDĐT)
Standard 1. Politics, Morality, living style
(1) The awareness of politics—4 criteria
(2) Abide by the laws—4 criteria
(3) Abide by the rules of an educational sector and a school
—4 criteria
(4) Morality—4 criteria
(5) Honesty—4 criteria
Standard 2. Knowledge
(1) Basic knowledge—4 criteria
(2) Age pedagogical psychology, primary education—4
criteria
(3) Assessment, tests the student’s achievements—4
criteria
(4) Knowledge of politics, society, minority or foreign lan­
guage proficiency, ICT application- 4 criteria
(5) Knowledge of local where a teacher is working—4 cri­
teria
Page 8 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
Professional Standards of School Teachers Professional Standards of Primary Teachers and
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889
06 standards—25 criteria(Circular No 30/2009/TT- General School Teachers
BGDĐT)10 05 standards—15 criteria(Circular No 20/2018/TT-
BGDĐT)13
Standard 1. Politics, Morality, living style, including 5 criteria: Standard 1. Professional qualities, including 2 criteria:
(1) Politics (1) Morality of Teachers
(2) Professional morality (2) Working style
(3) Behavior towards students
(4) Behavior towards colleagues
(5) Working and living styles
Standard 2. Educational Objects and environment, including 2 Standard 2. Professional capacity and pedagogical
criteria: competency, including 5 criteria:
(1) Learn about Educational Objects (1) Professional capacity development
(2) Learn about Educational environment (2) Develop teaching and education plan towards the
development of students’ quality and capacity
(3) Capacity to apply the education and teaching methods
towards the development of students’ quality and
capacity.
(4) Capacity for examination and evaluation towards the
development of students’ capacity and quality
(5) Student counseling and supporting capacity
(Continued)
 Table 1. (Continued)
Professional Requirements of Primary Teachers
03 standards—60 criteria (Decision No 14/2007/
QĐ-BGDĐT)
Standard 3. Pedagogical skills
(1) Develop a teaching plan; prepare a reform-directed les­
son plan—4 criteria
(2) Organize and conduct teaching activities—4 criteria
(3) Head teacher activities—4 criteria
(4) Educational quality Management information;
Educational attitudes, behavior—4 criteria
(5) Develop, manage educational and teaching files—4 cri­
teria
Page 9 of 21
Professional Standards of School Teachers
06 standards—25 criteria(Circular No 30/2009/TT-
BGDĐT)10
Standard 3. Teaching competency, including 8 criteria:
(1) Teaching plan
(2) Knowledge of a subject
(3) Curriculum of a subject
(4) Teaching method
(5) Teaching facilities
(6) Learning environment development
(7) Teaching files management
(8) Assessment, tests of the student’s achievements
Standard 4. Educational competency, including 6 criteria:
(1) Educational plan
(2) Education through a subject
(3) Education through Educational activities
(4) Education through community activities
(5) Applications of educational methods, forms and rules
(6) Student moral evaluation
Standard 5. Politics, society, including 2 criteria:
(1) Coordinate schools, families and the society
(2) Participate in political and social activities
Standard 6. Professional development, including 2 criteria:
(1) Self-educated, self- assessed and self-trained
(2) Find out and solve rising problems
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
Professional Standards of Primary Teachers and
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889
General School Teachers
05 standards—15 criteria(Circular No 20/2018/TT-
BGDĐT)13
Standard 3. Capacity to build the education environment,
including 3 criteria:
(1) Build a school culture
(2) Capacity to implement the democratic rights in schools
(3) Capacity to perform, build a safe school and prevent
school violence
Standard 4. Developing the relationships between schools,
families and society, including 3 criteria:
(1) Create a cooperative relationship with students’ parents/
guardians and other stakeholders
(2) Cooperate schools, families and the society for imple­
menting teaching activities for students
(3) Coordinate between schools, families and the society in
the implementation of ethics and lifestyle education for
students
Standard 5. Foreign or minority language proficiency, ICT
application and use of IT devices in teaching and education,
including 2 criteria:
(1) Foreign or ethnic minority language proficiency
(2) Application of information technology, use of IT devices
in teaching and education
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

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

Primary teacher standards issued in 2007 (Decision 14/2007)
Rating levels Good Fair Average Bad
Conditions ● All three stan­ ● All three stan­ ● All three stan­ ● Some standards
dards are rated dards are rated dards are rated are rated as Bad
as Good as Fair or higher as Average or ● Points for the
● Points for the ● Points for the higher standards are
standards are standards are ● Points for the under 100
ranging from 140 or higher standards are
180 to 200 100 or higher

Secondary teacher standards issued in 2009 (Circular 30/2009)

Rating levels Good Fair Average Bad
Conditions ● Total points: ● Total points: ● All criteria: 1–4 ● Under 25 points
90–100 65–89 points ● Above 25 points
● All criteria: 3–4 ● All criteria: 2–4 ● Not rated as but there are/is
points points Fair, Good unrated criteria
● At least 15 cri­ ● At least 15 cri­
teria reaching 4 teria reaching
points 3–4 points

Secondary teachers 2018 (Circular 20/2018)

Rating levels Good Fair Passed Failed
Conditions ● All criteria are ● All criteria are ● All criteria are ● There are/is cri­
rated as Good rated as Passed rated as Passed teria/criterion
or higher or higher or higher rated as Failed
● At least 10/15 ● At least 10/15
criteria are criteria are
rated as Good, rated as Good,
in which criteria in which criteria
in Standard 3 in Standard 3
are rated as are rated as
Good Good

Regulations issued after the Radical and Comprehensive renovation in Education

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

● Firstly, they were factors relating to inadequacies or difficulties in the process of implementing
documents issued in 2007 and 2009 on professional standards of primary and secondary teachers
(MOET, 2007, 2009): (1) The standards were developed according to knowledge- and skills-based
approach rather than teacher competency-based one; (2) The assessment principles were not
regulated so it was difficult to ensure objectivity; (3) The standards were not clearly described; (4)
There were too many criteria, so it was hard to assess teachers in objective manner; besides, there
were several criteria which were not suitable anymore to the demands of the educational renova­
tion; (5) The assessment process was not clear enough making difficulties for the assessment
implementation; (6) No regulations on the evidence system were issued. Accordingly, to deal with
the above-mentioned problem, the MOET has issued a document6 guiding how to assess and rate
primary teachers, as well as a document7 guiding how to assess and rate school teachers. However,
the rules for drafting these documents were not in line with the 2015 Law on Promulgation of Legal
Normative Documents.
● There was another practical shortcoming that made the policymakers change regulations on
Teacher professional standards and issue new documents, which was the overlap or missing of
legal documents which made educational institutions difficult in their policy implementation. In
2010 and 2012, the MOET issued such documents as Rules of Primary Schools8 and Tasks of

Page 10 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

Secondary Teachers and of Schools.9 It is noteworthy that there were similarities in terms of school
teacher professional standards in these documents and in previous regulatory documents on
teacher professional standards as mentioned above: (1) Teaching and educating according to
programs, educational plans and teaching plans set by the school; (2) Practicing morality, studying,
retraining with professional knowledge; (3) Maintaining qualities, honor and prestige of the teacher,
being exemplary before students; loving, respecting students, treating students fairly, protecting
their legitimate rights and interests; (4) cooperating and helping colleagues; (5) Participating in
educational universalization activities at the locality; (6) Implementing decisions by the Principal,
being monitored and assessed by the Principal and other administrative levels; (7) Performing other
duties as prescribed by law; (8) Coordinating with colleagues, organizations inside and outside the
school, with parents of students (homeroom teachers, other teachers, students’ families, Ho Chi
Minh Communist Youth Union, Ho Chi Minh Pioneering Youth Union) in teaching and educating
students. There were only 02 differences: (1) For primary teachers: Educating inclusive students (if
any); (2) For secondary teachers: Homeroom teachers are assigned the task of career counselling for
their students.
● While there are many overlapping documents on professional standards of primary, middle and high
school teachers, there is no regulatory document on professional standards for college preparatory
teachers, which creates difficulties in assessing teachers by educational institutions and also diffi­
culties in evaluating school teachers in general.

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

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

4.3. In terms of the document form

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

4.4. In terms of teacher profession assessment standards

Initially, regulations and required levels were set up based on the school tasks and primary
teachers’ position requirements; Gradually, they have been developed into standards and criteria
for middle and high school teachers. However, in terms of tasks, the tasks accomplished by

Page 11 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

teachers at all levels are almost the same. The only difference found is that primary teachers have
to perform duties of inclusive education while secondary teachers are assigned the tasks of career
consultation. However, despite there are three categories are mentioned in all levels as (1) political
qualities, morality, lifestyle; (2) knowledge and teaching/educational skills; (3) professional devel­
opment, but there is a shift from general requirements for primary teachers into specific standards
and criteria for secondary teachers. They can be divided into three aspects (1) What are expected
from the teacher?—Requirements; (2) What evidence can prove the effectiveness of the teacher?—
Performance indicators; (3) How does the teacher show?—Quality criteria; (4) How can quality
criteria differentiate teachers?

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

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

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

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

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

4.6. In terms of teacher assessment and rating

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

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

Page 12 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

Table 3. Standards of training qualifications

Grade Code Degrees Certificates
Primary11 school II V.07.03.07 ● pedagogical ● the level 2 of
teachers university foreign
degrees of pri­ language
mary education ● the basic level
major of information
technology use
● a certificate of
primary teacher
at the level II

III V.07.03.08 ● pedagogical ● the level 2 of

college degrees foreign
language
● the basic level
of information
technology use

IV V.07.03.09 ● pedagogical ● the level 1 of

secondary foreign
school diplomas language
● the basic level
of information
technology use

Lower secondary12 I V.07.04.10 ● pedagogical ● the basic level

teachers university of information
degrees or sui­ technology use
table university ● a certificate of
degrees for further training
teaching the for middle
subject to be school teacher
taught at the level I

II V.07.04.11 ● pedagogical ● the basic level

university of information
degrees or ped­ technology use
agogical univer­ ● a certificate of
sity degrees or further training
suitable univer­ for lower sec­
sity degrees for ondary teacher
the subject to at the level II
be taught

III V.07.04.12 ● pedagogical ● the level 1 of

college degrees foreign
or pedagogical language
university ● the basic level
degrees or sui­ of information
table university technology use
degrees for the
subject to be
taught

(Continued)

Page 13 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

Table3. (Continued)

Grade Code Degrees Certificates

13
Upper secondary I V.07.05.13 ● pedagogical ● a certificate of
teachers master degrees; refresher train­
ing for those
having not
graduated from
a pedagogical
institutions
● the level 3 of
foreign
language
● the basic level
of information
technology use
● a certificate of
further training
for high school
teacher at the
level I.

II V.07.05.14 ● pedagogical ● the level 2 of

university foreign
degrees or sui­ language
table university ● the basic level
degrees for the of information
subject to be technology use
taught, and
● a certificate of
a certificate of
further training
refresher train­
for high school
ing of high
teacher at the
school teacher
level II.
for those having
not graduated
from
a pedagogical
institutions;

III V.07.04.15 ● pedagogical ● the level 2 of

university foreign
degrees or sui­ language
table university ● the basic level
degrees for the of information
subject to be technology use
taught, and
● a certificate of
a certificate of
further training
refresher train­
for high school
ing of high
teacher at the
school teacher
level II.
for those having
not graduated
from
a pedagogical
institution

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

Page 14 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 15 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

Table 4. The professional standards of school teachers of Vietnam, Australia and Singpore
Vietnam14 Australia15 Singapore16
PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE

Criterion 3. Professional capacity Professional knowledge: Cultivating knowledge

development Standard 1: Know students and Criterion 1: Subject Mastery
Criterion 4. Developing teaching how they learn
and education plan towards the
development of students’ quality
and capacity
Criterion 14. Foreign or ethnic
minority language proficiency
Criterion 15. Application of
information technology, use of IT
devices in teaching and education
Criterion 5. Capacity to apply the Standard 2: Know the content and Criterion 3. Analytical Thinking
education and teaching methods how to teach it Criterion 4. Initiative
towards the development of
students’ quality and capacity.
Criterion 3: Understanding
educational psychology
Criterion 6. Capacity for
examination and evaluation
towards the development of
students’ capacity and quality
Criteria 7. Student counseling and Criterion 5. Know the development
supporting capacity problems, other work related
Criterion 5: Development of Criterion 6. Know the development
professional knowledge problems, other work related
ORGANIZATION OF TEACHING AND LEARNING ACTIVITIES

Standard 3. Capacity to build the
education environment:
Criterion 8. Building a school
culture
Criterion 9. Capacity to implement
the democratic rights in schools
Criterion 10. Capacity to perform,
build a safe school and prevent
school violence
Criterion 4: Conducting inspection
and assessment.
PERSONAL MANNERS AND PROFESSIONAL VALUES
Professional Practice Winining Hearts and Minds
Standard 3: Plan for and Understanding Environment
implement effective teaching and Developing others
learning
Standard 4: Create and maintain
supportive and safe learning
environments
Professional Engagement
Standard 6: Engage in professional
learning
Standard 5: Assess, provide
feedback and report on student
learning

Standard 1. Professional qualities: Working with others

Criterion 1. Morality of Teachers Partering with Parents
Criterion 2. Working style Working in Teams

(Continued)

Page 16 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

Vietnam14 Australia15 Singapore16

Standard 4. Developing the Standard 7. Commitment to Partering with Parents
relationships among school, family professional activities with Working in Teams
and society: colleagues, students’ parents and
Criterion 11. Create a cooperation community
relationship with students’
parents/guardians and other
stakeholders
Criterion 12. Cooperation between
schools, families and the society
for implementation of teaching
activities for students
Criterion 13. Coordination between
schools, families and the society in
the implementation of ethics and
lifestyle education for students

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

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

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

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

The development of a policy on school teachers’ professional standards is an indispensable

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

The reasons for these challenges may come from the management way of teacher retraining meet­
ing the requirements of teacher professional standards (e.g. the assessment and application of teacher

Page 17 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

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

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

Funding
The author received no direct funding for this research.
Author details
Ca- Nguyen Duc1
Phuong- Ngo Thi2
Thang –Ngoc Hoang3
Hai- Luong Dinh1
Lien- Nguyen Hong1
Thang- Nguyen The1
E-mail: thangvcl@gmail.com
1
Research Division of Educational Policies and Strategies,
The Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences,
Hanoi, Vietnam.
2
Faculty of Social Sciences, Tay Bac University, Son La
province, Vietnam.
3
The Faculty of Political Theory and Humanities Social
Science, The University of Fire Prevention and Fighting.
Citation information
Cite this article as: A policy review of criteria and compe­
tencies for teaching staff of general education in Vietnam,
Ca- Nguyen Duc, Phuong- Ngo Thi, Thang –Ngoc Hoang,
Hai- Luong Dinh, Lien- Nguyen Hong & Thang- Nguyen
The, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889.
Notes
1. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from
https://tuoitre.vn/giao-vien-tieu-hoc-duoc-danh-
gia-theo-chuan-nao-6052.htm
2. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from
https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Bo-may-hanh-
chinh/Nghi-dinh-69-2017-ND-CP-chuc-nang-nhiem
-vu-quyen-han-co-cau-to-chuc-Bo-Giao-duc-va-
Dao-tao-350206.aspx
3. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from
https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Bo-may-hanh-
chinh/Nghi-dinh-29-2012-ND-CP-tuyen-dung-su-
dung-va-quan-ly-vien-chuc-137919.aspx
4. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from https://
thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Giao-duc/Thong-tu-30-
2017-TT-BGDDT-Quy-dinh-tieu-chuan-chuc-danh-
nghe-nghiep-giao-vien-du-bi-dai-hoc-369188.aspx
5. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from
https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Bo-may-hanh-
chinh/Thong-tu-15-2017-TT-BGDDT-sua-doi-Quy-
dinh-che-do-lam-viec-doi-voi-giao-vien-pho-thong
-341252.aspx
6. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from
https://thuvienphapluat.vn/cong-van/Giao-duc
/Cong-van-616-BGDDT-NGCBQLGD-huong-dan-
danh-gia-xep-loai-giao-vien-tieu-hoc-theo-Quyet-
dinh-14-2007-QD-BGDDT-101299.aspx
7. Accessed 11 November 2020, available from
https://thuvienphapluat.vn/cong-van/Giao-duc
/Cong-van-660-BGDDT-NGCBQLGD-huong-dan-
danh-gia-xep-loai-giao-vien-trung-hoc-theo-Thong
-tu-30-2009-TT-BGDDT-101609.aspx
8. accessed 30 Oct 2020, available at https://thuvien
phapluat.vn/van-ban/giao-duc/Thong-tu-41-2010-
TT-BGDDT-Dieu-le-Truong-tieu-hoc-116657.aspx
9. accessed 30 Oct 2020, available from https://thu
vienphapluat.vn/van-ban/van-hoa-xa-hoi/Thong-tu
-12-2012-TT-BGDDT-huong-dan-cong-tac-thi-dua-
khen-thuong-137618.aspx
10. Accessed 17 September 2022, available from
https://luatvietnam.vn/giao-duc/thong-tu-30-2009-
tt-bgddt-bo-giao-duc-va-dao-tao-47669-d1.html
11. The Joint Circular No 21/2015/TTLT-BGDĐT-BNV
(Ministry of Education and Training and Ministry of
Internal Affairs) (issued 16th September 2015)
regulating the code, criteria on the job place of the
public primary education teacher, available from
http://www.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/chinh
phu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&_page=
11&mode=detail&document_id=182020
12. The Joint Circular No 22/2015/ TTLT-BGDĐT-BNV,
(Ministry of Education and Training and Ministry of
Internal Affairs) (issued 16 September 2015) regu­
lating the code, criteria on the job position of the
public lower secondary education teacher. Available
from http://www.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/
chinhphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&_page=
11&mode=detail&document_id=182018.
13. The Joint Circular No 23/2015/TTLT-BGDĐT-BNV
(Ministry of Education and Training and Ministry of
Internal Affairs) (issued 16 September 2015) regu­
lating the code, criteria on the job position of the
public upper secondary education teacher. Available
from http://vanban.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/por
tal/chinhphu/hethongvanban?class_id=1&_page=
1&mode=detail&document_id=181995.
14. Accessed 30 October 2020, available from https://
luatvietnam.vn/giao-duc/thong-tu-20-2018-tt-
bgddt-chuan-nghe-nghiep-giao-vien-co-so-giao-
duc-pho-thong-166608-d1.html
15. Accessed 30 October 2020, available from https://
www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/national-
policy-framework/australian-professional-
standards-for-teachers.pdf

Page 18 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889
16. Accessed 30 October 2020, available from https://
www.nie.edu.sg/docs/default-source/td_practi
cum/te21—gtc.pdf
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
References
Aguilar, P., Lopez-Cobo, I., Cuadrado, F., & Benítez, I.
(2019). Social and emotional competences in Spain:
a comparative evaluation between Spanish needs
and an international framework based on the
experiences of researchers, teachers, and
policymakers. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(September),
1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02127
Caena, F. (2014). Teacher competence frameworks
Europe: Policy-as-discourse and policy-as-practice.
European Journal of Education, 49(3), 311–331.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12088
Cambridge University Press, (2013). Introductory guide to
the common European framework of reference (CEFR)
for English language teachers. https://www.acade
mia.edu/23729900/Introductory_Guide_to_the_
Common_European_Framework_of_Reference_
CEFR_for_English_Language_Teachers.
Cao, T. K. (2016). Measures for improving quality of ped­
agogical skill training in the task of Physics teacher
training at Pedagogical college - Thai Nguyen
University to meet requirements of post-2015
General education. Teacher Training at
Multidisciplinary Universities to Meet Requirements of
the Current Educational Renovation, 281–286.
Competency, T., As, T., & Innovation, A. P. (1983). David C
(pp. 45–54). Nice, University of Georgia.
Department of Education and Training. (2004) .
Competency Framework TITLE . Competency
Framework for Teachers.
Do, T. M. L., & Do, K. D. (2016). Renewing models of
pedagogical skill training for students of Preschool
major in the period of integration. Teacher Training at
Multidisciplinary Universities to Meet Requirements of
the Current Educational Renovation, 286–297 https://
tapchigiaoduc.moet.gov.vn/vi/magazine/so-418-ki-ii-
thang-11/03-doi-moi-mo-hinh-ren-luyen-nghiep-vu-
su-pham-cho-sinh-vien-nganh-giao-duc-mam-non-
trong-thoi-ki-hoi-nhap-5430.html.
Duong, T. H. Y., & Nguyen, H. C. (2016). Re-training of high
school teachers towards professional competency
development approach. Developing Teaching Staff to
Meet Requirements of General Education Renovation,
504–510.
Geoff, W. (1996). Professional competences and profes­
sional characteristics: The Northern Ireland approach
to the reform of teacher education. In D. Hustler &
D. McIntyre (Eds.), Developing competent teachers:
Approaches to professional competence in teacher
education. David Fulton Publishers. https://www.ama
zon.com/Developing-Competent-Teachers-
Approaches-Professional/dp/1853463833
Goh, P. S. C., & Wong, K. T. (2014). Beginning teachers’
conceptions of competency: Implications to educa­
tional policy and teacher education in Malaysia.
Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 13(1),
65–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-013-9147-3
Graham, J. (1996). The teacher training agency, continu­
ing professional development policy and the defini­
tion of competences for serving teachers. British
Journal of In-Service Education, 22(2), 121–132.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305763960220202
Harley, K., Barasa, F., Bertram, C., Mattson, E., & Pillay, S.
(2000). “The real and the ideal”: Teacher roles and
competences in South African policy and practice.
International Journal of Educational Development, 20
(4), 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-0593(99)
00079-6
Kaiser, G., & König, J. (2019). Competence measurement in
(mathematics) teacher education and beyond: impli­
cations for policy. Higher Education Policy, 32(4),
597–615. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-019-00139-z
Kovač, V., Rafajac, B., & Buchberger, I. (2014). Croatian
teacher competencies related to the creation and
implementation of education policy. Center for
Educational Policy Studies Journal, 4(4), 51–73.
https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.185
Lambert, L. G., Monroe, A., & Wolff, L. (2010). Mississippi
elementary school teachers’ perspectives on provid­
ing nutrition competencies under the framework of
their school wellness policy. Journal of Nutrition
Education and Behavior, 42(4), 271–276.e4. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2009.08.007
Le, D. L. (2005). Recommendations for developing internal
force of Pedagogical Universities. Training Goals and
Models of Pedagogical Universities in Vietnam,
129–133.
McCulloch, G. (2013). Educational reconstruction: The
1944 education act and the twenty-first century.
Routledge.
McGarr, O., Mifsud, L., & Colomer Rubio, J. C. (2021).
Digital competence in teacher education: Comparing
national policies in Norway, Ireland and Spain.
Learning, Media and Technology, 46(4), 483–497.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1913182
Ministry of Education and Traininig. (2017). https://moet.
gov.vn/thong-ke/Pages/to-gap.aspx?ItemID=5138
MOET. (2007). Decision on professional standards for tea­
chers of primary educational institutions. https://thu
vienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Giao-duc/Quyet-dinh-14-
2007-QD-BGDDT-quy-dinh-Chuan-nghe-nghiep-giao-
vien-tieu-hoc-21063.aspx
MOET. (2009). Circular on professional standards for tea­
chers of lower secondary and upper secondary insti­
tutions. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Giao-
duc/Thong-tu-30-2009-TT-BGDDT-quy-dinh-chuan-
nghe-nghiep-giao-vien-trung-hoc-co-so-trung-hoc-
pho-thong-97317.aspx
MOET. (2018). Circular on promulgation of regulations on
professional standards for teachers of general edu­
cation institutions. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-
ban/Giao-duc/Thong-tu-20-2018-TT-BGDDT-quy-
dinh-chuan-nghe-nghiep-giao-vien-co-so-giao-duc-
pho-thong-392701.aspx
National Assembly, 14 June. (2005). The education law,
1–48. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Giao-duc/
Luat-Giao-duc-2005-38-2005-QH11-2636.aspx
Nguyen, V. L. (2016). Renewing programs and modes in
teacher training towards professional competency
development meeting social demands and require­
ments of international integration. Teacher Training
at Multidisciplinary Universities to Meet Requirements
of the Current Educational Renovation, 307–314.
Nguyen, D. V. (2017). Developing teacher re-training pro­
grams to meet requirements of the educational
renovation. Developing Teaching Staff to Meet
Requirements of the Educational Renovation,
570–580.
Pham, D. N. T. (2009). Training educational administrators
according to social needs. Vietnam Journal of
Education, 216, 2009. https://sti.vista.gov.vn/file_
DuLieu/dataTLKHCN//CVv216/2009/
CVv216S2162009004.pdf
Phan, T. K. A. (2016). Current state and solutions for
developing competences for secondary school
Page 19 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889
teachers in the context of general education
renovation. Developing Teaching Staff to Meet
Requirements of General Education Renovation,
427–434.
Phí. (2005) . Some management solutions for fostering
technical pedagogical capacity for vocational teachers
in technical and technological schools. The Vietnam
National Institute of Educational Sciences.
Roy Barton, J. E. (1988). Designing a competency based
framework for assessing student teachers: The UEA
approach (pp. 1988). David Fulton Publishers.
Seezink, A., & Poell, R. (2011). The role of schools’ per­
ceived human resource policies in teachers’ profes­
sional development activities: A comparative study
of innovations toward competence-based education.
Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(1), 149–160. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12564-010-9115-z
Sholihah, M., Ratnasari, K., Permatasari, Y. D.,
Muawanah, U., & Fajri, A. N. F. (2020). The policy of
educators’ certification : An effort to improve quality,
qualification, and teachers’ competence. IOP
Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
28-29 September (IOP Publishing Ltd) East Java,
Indonesia, 485(1). https://iopscience.iop.org/article/
10.1088/1755-1315/485/1/012130
Stadler-Heer, S. (2021). Introducing German pre-service
teachers to remote teaching: Policy, preparation and
perceptions of competence development of future
foreign language teachers. Training, Language and
Culture, 5(1), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.22363/2521-
442X-2021-5-1-68-85
Steiner, L. (2010). Using Competency-Based Evaluation to
Drive Teacher Excellence: Lessons from Singapore.
Building an Opportunity Culture for America's
Teachers. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539994.
pdf
Tania, Á. (2006). Changing patterns of teacher education
in Australia. Education Research and Perspective, 33
(2), 470–471. http://erpjournal.net/wp-content/
uploads/2012/07/ERPV33-2_Aspland-T.-2006.-
Changing-patterns-of-teacher-education-.pdf
Tran. (2009) . Management of pedagogical training for
teachers at Hoang Quoc Viet secondary school -
District 7 - ho chi minh city. The Vietnam National
Institute of Educational Sciences.
Vietnam Communist Party. (2013). Radical and
Comprehensive renovation in Education and Training
meet the requirements of industrialization and
modernization in a socialist-oriented market econ­
omy and international integration. https://luatminh
khue.vn/nghi-quyet-29-nq-tw-nam-2013-doi-moi-
can-ban–toan-dien-giao-duc-va-dao-tao–dap-ung-
yeu-cau-cong-nghiep-hoa–hien-dai-hoa-trong-dieu-
kien-kinh-te-thi-truong-dinh-huong-xa-hoi-chu-
nghia-va-hoi-nhap-qu.aspx
Vo, V. D. E. (2016). Improving teaching competencies for
subject-based teachers - a core factor for general
education renovation in Vietnam. Teacher
Development for Meeting of the Requirements of
General Education Innovation. Hanoi National
University of Education: University of Education
Publishing House.
Vũ. (2005) . Some measures to manage and foster pro­
fessional skills for teachers at Bac Giang Arts and
Culture Vocational School. The Vietnam National
Institute of Educational Sciences.
Walker, J. (1996). Professional Standards for Teachers in
Australia. In D. Hustler & D. McIntyre (Eds.),
Developing competent teachers: Approaches to pro­
fessional competence in teacher education 6 . David
Fulton Publishers 215. https://www.stem.org.uk/
resources/resources-by-publisher/1173?page=1
Page 20 of 21
Duc et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2133889
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2133889

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Cogent Education (ISSN: 2331-186X) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group.
Publishing with Cogent OA ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online
• Download and citation statistics for your article
• Rapid online publication
• Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards
• Retention of full copyright of your article
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com

Page 21 of 21