Conclusion of the VNU Quality Assurance Council, 8th session

The conclusion of the VNU Quality Accreditation Council, 8th session (No. 525/ĐBCL, dated February 4, 2010, signed by the Director - Chairman of the VNU Quality Accreditation Council, Prof. Dr. Mai Trong Nhuan), includes the conclusion on the high-quality undergraduate program in Linguistics.On January 9-10, 2010, the Quality Accreditation Council of Vietnam National University, Hanoi (VNU-Hanoi) held its eighth expanded meeting with the following agenda: * Review of the self-assessment report and external evaluation report of the high-quality undergraduate programs of the University of Economics, the University of Foreign Languages, and the University of Social Sciences and Humanities. * Review of the self-assessment report and external evaluation report of the talented science undergraduate program in Physics of the University of Natural Sciences. The meeting was chaired by Prof. Dr. Mai Trong Nhuan, Director of VNU-Hanoi and Chairman of the VNU-Hanoi Quality Accreditation Council. Attendees: 15; absent: 6 with valid reasons. The expanded composition included Heads/Deputy Heads of functional departments (not members of the Council), representatives of the leadership of training units and the Information and Library Center. After hearing the summary reports from the Heads of the Accreditation Expert Teams, the Principals of the schools with accredited programs, the counter-arguments and discussions of the Council, and the voting results of the Council members, the Chairman of the Council concluded:

I. Results of Quality Accreditation for 04 Training Programs

1. High-Quality Training Program in International Economics

1. The International Economics training program at the University of Economics received 14 out of 21 votes, with 100% of the criteria achieving Level 2 or higher, to be recommended for Level 1 accreditation of training programs by Vietnam National University, Hanoi.
2. The University of Economics needs to address existing shortcomings such as: inviting employers to participate in designing training programs, updating training programs to meet societal needs; supplementing evidence of applying CDIO in training program development; and simultaneously addressing shortcomings and promoting strengths as mentioned in the external evaluation report, the review comments, and the Council's opinions;
3. The University of Economics needs to officially register for quality accreditation in 2010 according to the AUN program accreditation standards.

2. High-Quality Training Program in English Language Teaching

1. The High-Quality Training Program in English Pedagogy at the University of Foreign Languages ​​received 14 out of 21 votes, with 100% of the criteria achieving Level 2 or higher, to be recommended for Level 1 accreditation of training programs by Vietnam National University, Hanoi.
2. The University of Foreign Languages ​​needs to make adjustments regarding: (1) evaluating the output standards of the high-quality English language teaching program using both tools: IELTS for English proficiency and TKT for foreign language teaching proficiency; (2) organizing teaching and managing the high-quality English language training program according to AUN standards; while overcoming shortcomings and promoting strengths as mentioned in the external evaluation report, the review comments and the Council's opinions;
3. The University of Foreign Languages ​​needs to prepare to register for accreditation of its high-quality English Language Teaching program according to AUN's program accreditation standards in 2011.

3. High-quality Bachelor's degree program in Linguistics

1. The high-quality training program in Linguistics at the University of Social Sciences and Humanities received 14 out of 21 votes, with 95% of the criteria achieving level 2 or higher (details can be found in Appendix 4), to be recommended for Level 1 accreditation of training programs by Vietnam National University, Hanoi.
2. The University of Social Sciences and Humanities needs to address existing shortcomings such as: equipping Linguistics students with scientific research methods, soft skills, foreign language proficiency, and improving facilities to support training; while simultaneously overcoming existing shortcomings and promoting strengths as mentioned in the external evaluation report, the opinions of reviewers, and the Council;
3. The university plans to register for accreditation of its high-quality Linguistics program according to AUN accreditation standards.

4. Training program in Natural Sciences, majoring in PhysicsAfter hearing the report from the Head of the Evaluation Team, the opinion of the Rector of the University of Science, and the counter-arguments, the Council discussed and unanimously concluded: The University of Science needs to gather additional evidence and refine the self-evaluation report for the Physics program in Natural Sciences, ensuring that the report accurately reflects the strengths and weaknesses of the program so that the Council can decide to conduct another external evaluation. The deadline for submitting the self-evaluation report to the Standing Committee of the Council is April 10, 2010.

II. Lessons Learned from Implementing Self-Assessment

At the 8th session, the Chairman of the National Council for Educational Quality Accreditation, Prof. Dr. Banh Tien Long, emphasized the significance and importance of Vietnam National University, Hanoi (VNU) leading the way in quality accreditation of training programs in Vietnam through the accreditation of 3 high-quality training programs and 1 natural science training program. To better implement quality accreditation within VNU, the Council has drawn some lessons learned regarding the implementation of quality accreditation as follows:1. For training institutions

1. When writing program self-assessment reports, training units need to provide sufficient evidence to be recognized under the quality accreditation process regarding the level of achievement according to the quality accreditation standards;
2. Units needing to utilize the common resources of the National Accreditation Council when writing self-assessment reports should clearly describe these resources to provide to relevant units, serving the purposes of training and quality assurance;
3. The evaluation report should describe, with supporting evidence, the reach of the training program, as well as the extent to which the training program meets the needs of society;
4. Units with quality assurance programs need to arrange for interviewees to be representative of the various components of the unit;
5. The head of the training unit with the accreditation program needs to allocate time to work with the Accreditation Team and answer the interview questions from the Accreditation Team;
6. Heads of units are directed to implement self-assessment of talent training programs, high-quality and advanced programs, and programs that meet international standards in order to strengthen quality assurance conditions, identify strengths, and overcome shortcomings of the training programs; ensuring the effectiveness of self-assessment without incurring unnecessary costs;
7. Training programs are developed based on output standards. These output standards must include professional and technical skills, specific characteristics of the unit, and soft skills and life skills for graduates.
8. Research the model of the Director and Coordinator of training programs at the University of Economics, aiming to apply it to training programs at our unit.

2. External evaluation team and reviewers

1. In addition to the designated Head of the team and secretary, the accreditation team should include experts specializing in specific fields related to the program being accredited.
2. Reviewers of external evaluation reports need to have in-depth expertise in the relevant fields of the accredited training program;
3. When conducting an on-site evaluation of a unit with an accredited program, the evaluation team should interview the head of the unit (the Rector or the Head of the relevant department) and the Head of the department whose training program is being evaluated;
4. The selection of the interview sample must ensure high representativeness to objectively and truthfully reflect the subject being accredited;
5. The accreditation report should clearly state the specific evidence/data that led to the conclusions regarding the level of achievement of the accreditation criteria.

3. Responsibilities of the VNU Quality Assurance Council

1. Assign the Center for Quality Assurance and Educational Development Research the responsibility of clarifying and refining the concepts and terminology in the quality accreditation criteria;
2. The Center for Quality Assurance and Educational Development Research is studying ways to address the issues related to the three levels of quality accreditation in the current Quality Accreditation Regulations and is sending the findings to the Council members for feedback.
3. The members of the Quality Assurance Council promote autonomy and accountability in quality assurance work by thoroughly studying dossiers, documents, self-assessment reports, and evaluation reports on the entities being accredited before attending the Council's meeting.