The University of Social Sciences and Humanities announces the results of the first round of the Academic Advisor Skills Competition and the tasks to be done to prepare for the second round – “Responsibility”.
1. Results of the "Accompanying" round
- Individuals awarded for achieving the highest scores in the "Companion" round are: Ms. Do Thi Thuy Lan (Faculty of History), Dr. Nguyen Thi Phuong Thuy (Faculty of Linguistics), Ms. Tran Phuong Hoa (Faculty of Archival Studies and Office Management), Ms. Hoang Cam Giang (Faculty of Literature), Ms. Hoang Hong Nga (Faculty of History), Ms. Phan Thi Hoang Mai (Faculty of Philosophy). - The teams participating in the "Responsibility" round are: History, Philosophy, Literature Pedagogy, Social Work, Archival Studies and Office Management, Sociology, Tourism Studies, and Management Science.
Exam results:
| TT |
Team |
Branch |
Total score |
Order |
| 1 |
History Education |
History Education |
70.5 |
1 |
| 2 |
Philosophy |
Philosophy |
69.8 |
2 |
| 3 |
Literature Teacher Training |
Literature Teacher Training |
68.7 |
3 |
| 4 |
History |
History |
68.1 |
4 |
| 5 |
Social work |
Social work |
68.0 |
5 |
| 6 |
LTH&QTVP |
LTH&QTVP |
68.0 |
6 |
| 7 |
Sociology |
Sociology |
67.3 |
7 |
| 8 |
Tourism studies |
Tourism studies |
64.7 |
8 |
| 9 |
Management Science |
Management Science |
63.9 |
9 |
| 10 |
Library information |
Library information |
63.3 |
10 |
| 11 |
Linguistics |
Linguistics |
62.3 |
11 |
| 12 |
Literature |
Literature |
61.8 |
12 |
| 13 |
Han Nom |
Han Nom |
51.5 |
13 |
| 14 |
Psychology |
Psychology |
50.3 |
14 |
| 15 |
Anthropology |
Anthropology |
47.0 |
15 |
| 16 |
Orientalism |
Orientalism |
46.7 |
16 |
| 17 |
Press |
Press |
42.7 |
17 |
| 18 |
Political science |
Political science |
42.5 |
18 |
| 19 |
International Studies |
International Studies |
42.0 |
19 |
NoteEight teams competed in the second round, with the History Education and History majors combined into one team at the suggestion of the History Faculty.
2. Prepare for the "Responsibility" round of the competition.
- Each team participating in Round 2 must have a minimum of 3 academic advisors (no maximum limit) and the team leader must be a member of the Faculty/Department's Board of Directors. The head of the unit is responsible for ensuring the minimum number of members in the team. - Details regarding the time, organization, and scoring criteria for the "Responsibility" round can be found at the end of this page. - A maximum of 2 million VND will be allocated from the regular undergraduate training support fund to the faculties to support staff participating in the "Responsibility" round.
3. We invite you to join the judging panel for the "Responsibility" round.
The "Responsibility" round of the competition was judged in two parts: a written test and a presentation. For the presentation judging, the Organizing Committee invited the Information and Library Science and Linguistics departments, each sending two academic advisors to participate in the judging panel at 6 PM on April 20, 2011 and 6 PM on April 21, 2011, respectively, on the 5th floor of building H.
ORGANIZATION AND GRADING OF THE "RESPONSIBILITY" ROUND OF THE COMPETITION
1. Grading schedule
a) Grading written exams- Teams must submit their entries before 11:00 AM on April 18, 2011, to the Training Department. - The judging panel will evaluate entries from 2:00 PM to 5:00 PM on April 18, 2011.
b) Grading presentations- Order of participation
- 6 PM on April 20th
- Social work
- Tourism studies
- History
- Philosophy
- 6 PM on April 21st
- Management Science
- Archival Studies and Office Management
- Literature
- Sociology
- Procedure: + Team representative presents: Maximum 5 minutes. + Team discusses the written exam content with the Judging Panel, representatives of teams not competing in Round 2, and student representatives: Maximum 25 minutes for both Q&A and debate. + Representatives of the Judging Panel present their comments on the written exam content. + The Judging Panel meets separately to finalize scores for each team after each day of judging. At the end of the judging session on April 21, 2011, the Judging Panel summarizes the results of Round 2 and selects teams for the final round.
2. Scoring criteria
a) Written test- Analyze the advantages and disadvantages students face during their studies: Maximum 10 points - Clarify the responsibilities of the academic advisor: Maximum 8 points - Clarify the responsibilities of the training unit's leadership: Maximum 8 points - Clarify the responsibilities of the University (Board of Directors, functional departments): Maximum 8 points - Propose two solutions to improve the effectiveness of academic advising within the unit, with justification for their feasibility: Maximum 16 points
NoteThe essay must adhere to the topic (responsibilities of the stakeholders) and maintain a systematic connection between the four points mentioned above. There is no limit on the length of the essay. It is essential to include factual evidence to support the arguments.
b) Presentation test- Active and effective participation of the Team Leader: Maximum 10 points. - Level of use of factual materials in the debate process: Maximum 10 points. - Clear demonstration of understanding of regulations and training programs: Maximum 15 points. - Successful defense of proposed solutions: Maximum 15 points.
3. ConclusionThe score for each team is the average score given by the judging panel members, two representatives from teams not participating in Round 2, and two student representatives.
