Governance in higher education in Vietnam – a move towards decentralization and its practical problems

Abstract

Decentralization, the transfer of decision-making authority, responsibility and tasks from higher to lower organizational levels, has been adopted as a policy in governance in higher education (HE) in Vietnam. With the decision to move away from the traditional centralization in decision-making, the government expects to bring HE institutions more autonomy and accountability, and increase the effectiveness of the system. However, the limited understanding and experience in leading the change, the unclear strategies for successful policy implementation, the overlapping functions among different related authorities and the lack of necessary financial support for the change, all hinder the effort to decentralize the system. The reform in governance in HE in Vietnam also proves that decentralization is not necessarily a good thing, especially when the lower organizations who receive the power are not strong enough to create a positive change, and when the central ministry also loosens the control over the outcomes or the goals the lower organizations need to achieve.

Exploring Key Competencies of Mid-Level Academic Managers in Higher Education in Vietnam

“…The functions and responsibilities of mid-level academic managers in Vietnam are still conceptualised under the state steering of higher education systems. Despite government initiatives to reform institutional governance, public universities in Vietnam remain heavily dependent on state funding to sustain their personnel, curriculum, and infrastructure [47][48][49][50]. MOET prescribes and monitors admission quotas, recruitments of academics, and curricular development.…”

Faculty perception of shared governance at Vietnamese private universities

“…Since 2003, the government has laid the foundation for decentralization through laws and regulations, but many issues concerning governance in higher education remain unresolved (George, 2011;Tran, 2014). In 2003, the Prime Minister issued a new charter mandating higher education institutions to establish Governing Councils (for all universities and colleges) which hold accountability for : (1) developing the mission, goals and strategic plans for the institution;…”

“…(2) establishing specific regulations and rules for all institutional activities; (3) approving significant expenditure and facility projects of the institution, and (4) monitoring the implementation of democratization of the institution (Lam, 2004, p. 290). The implementation of this charter, however, was very slow within the public sector due to the conflicting control between the Governing Council and other powers such as the MOET and the Institutional Communist Party Committee (Tran, 2014). In November, 2005, after the official release of the Education Law 2005, the government promulgated Resolution 14/2005/NQ-CP dated November 2 nd , 2005 in light of a Higher Education Reform Agenda (HERA) to assert the right to autonomy of higher education institutions in Vietnam.…”

“…The establishment of private ("non-public") university was designed to serve the needs of a booming market-oriented economy in the late 1980s. At the time, there were approximately 101 colleges and universities throughout the country with a total of about 100,000 students (Tran, 2014); subsequently, enrollment increased from 162,000 students between 1992 and 1993, prior to the birth of the private university in 1994, to well over 1,760,000 students as of July 2017 (Hayden & Lam, 2007;MOET, 2017). Vietnam's economy has been recognized as one of the fastest growing economies worldwide between 1989 and 2010 (World Bank, 2011) and the private university system can be credited with contributing to this growth (Pham, 2002).…”

“…The birth of the non-public higher education sector in 1994 was a result of the shift from a centralized economy to a market economy in Vietnam beginning in the 1980s (Tran, 2014, Tran & Villano, 2017. During this period, the Vietnamese economy was developing rapidly which led to increasing demands for human resources in both quality and quantity (Pham & Fry, 2002).…”