Master plan for higher education institutions the lesson learn for Vietnam

he Ministry of Education, the governing Ministry, and the local government (Huang F, 2006, page 36)[16]. The initial breakthrough occurred in 1980 when for the first time vocational schools in China emerged to cater for employment opportunities in the tertiary sector of the economy. Schools whose graduates needed to find jobs in the labour market by themselves became more common afterwards. The impact of the market was most evident in higher education, where universities and colleges offered contract training in exchange for fees. This market-oriented experiment was endorsed by the Decision on the Reform of the Educational Structure, issued by the CCP Central Committee in 1985, and became part of the reform. As the market gained more significance in China, especially in the more developed coastal and urban areas, more substantial reform policies were introduced to make structural changes in education. The Programme for Education Reform and Development in China, jointly issued by the CCP Central Committee and the State Council in 1993, reaffirmed the 1985 Decision. The central government would refrain from direct control over education. Instead, government was to act as a facilitator. With the phasing out of the planned economy and the diminishing role of the state, the government became increasing reluctant to continue subsidizing students. Fees started to become a reality. Before long Chinese educational institutions were facing the market on all fronts with potential employers becoming clients. Meanwhile, China’s paltry educational spending (in proportion to its GDP) was distributed very unevenly especially between rural and urban areas, resulting in loss of educational opportunities among disadvantaged groups. The new market- oriented measures allowed only the fittest to excel and further widened regional MASTER PLAN FOR HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS THE LESSON LEARN FOR VIETNAM PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE EDUCATION FOR ALL KỶ YẾU HỘI THẢO QUỐC TẾ: GIÁO DỤC CHO MỌI NGƯỜI 458 disparities, leaving the poor in difficulties, especially those in inland and remote rural regions (Yang, 2003a[17]; Yang and Li, 2010)[18]. Vietnam has issued the first Master Plan for the network of universities and colleges in the 2006-2020 period [19] (The Plan 121), covering the following topics: (i) Total training size of university and college; (ii) training scale of universities; (iii) training disciplines; (iv) Training structure; (v) types of higher education institution; (vi) The system of higher education institutions; (vii) stratification of the university network; (viii) Distribution of university and college networks by region; (ix) Student distribution, school network in three key economic regions. In the context of integration and development, the Master Plan of HEIs for the period 2006-2020 (The Plan 121) reveals some inadequacies. Based on results of the National Assembly’s monitoring and evaluation studies on the status of higher education development, in 2013, the master plan would be adjusted and replaced by the plan adjustment under Decision 37/2013/QD-TTg (The Plan 37). The view point of the revised plan (The Plan 37) is to expand the rationality of higher education to meet the needs of industrialization and modernization; in line with the Vietnamese socio-economic conditions; To adjust the structure of the human resource training system, raise the quality and effectiveness of training and conduct training according to social demands; Link training process with scientific research and practical activities. 5. Conclusions and recommendations for Vietnam Many countries have plans for the higher education system, they have planned 3-4 levels for various types of higher education institutions. Like the above countries, Vietnam has issued the Master Plan for the network of universities. However, the plans in the world have specific forecasts and statistics on each type of institution of higher education (see Figures 1,2 & 3). Vietnam needs to forecast and plan in details for each type of schools so that the higher education system can develop in the right direction. This issue should be consulted for developed countries and developing countries with similar backgrounds to Vietnam. There are no studies on this issue have been published apart from the Vietnam Higher Education Network Planning Report conducted by the research team and the Higher Education Project 2. Master plan for network of universities and colleges and the Project on Renovation of Higher Education in the period of 2006-2020 mark a dynamic transition of higher education system in Vietnam. The target of the plan to 2020 is that there are around 256 students per ten thousand people; around 70-80% of 459 undergraduates are trained in occupational-applied programs and about 20 - 30% of students are trained in research programs. By 2015, there will be 10 universities in which at least 1 faculty (sector) or training sector has an equivalent quality compared to prestigious universities in the world. By 2020, 20 universities meet the above criteria and one university is ranked among the top 200 universities in the world. Although Vietnam has redefined its higher education goals, so far in 2018, the target that is “by 2020 there will be 20 universities meeting the above criteria and one university is ranked among the top 200 universities in the world” is still very far away. In order to achieving this objective, it’s necessary for Vietnam to have a specific research on network of higher education and there should be an action plan and a system of indicators to monitor the implementation of master plan. Acknowledgment This work was supported by the National Program of Educational Sciences for the period of 2016-2020 fund for the Research of the Master plan of higher education institutions in Vietnam [grant number KHGD/16-20.ĐT.021] References [1] Douglass, J. (2010). Re-Imagining California Higher Education. A Research & Occasional Paper (Series: CSHE.14.10) from the Center for Studies in Higher Education at the University of California (Berkeley). [2] Prime Minister, Decision No. 121/2007/QD-TTg, date on 27/7/2007. [3] Martin Hayden (2012) Master Plan for Vietnam’s Higher Education System. Higher Education Project II [4] Isaac Kandel: Comparative Education. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1933, p.20. [5] Kirsch, U. (2014). The higher education system in Israel – Issues, characteristics, and unique aspects. Jerusalem: Shmuel Ne‟aman Institute. [6] Reed, L.A. 1988. Education in the People’s Republic of China and U.S.-China educational exchanges. Washington, DC: National Association for Foreign Student Affairs. [7] Pepper, S. 1990. China’s education reform in the 1980s: Policies, issues, and historical perspectives, Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California. [8] Hayhoe, R. (Ed.) 1984. Contemporary Chinese education. London: Croom Helm. [9] Yang, R. 2003b. ‘Globalization and higher education development: A critical analysis’. In: International Review of Education, 49(3-4), 269–291. [10] Kennedy, K.J. 2003. ‘Higher education governance as a key policy issue in the 21st century’. In: Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 2, 55–70. MASTER PLAN FOR HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS THE LESSON LEARN FOR VIETNAM PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE EDUCATION FOR ALL KỶ YẾU HỘI THẢO QUỐC TẾ: GIÁO DỤC CHO MỌI NGƯỜI 460 [11] Cai, Y. Z. (2011). Chinese Higher Education Reforms and Tendencies: Implications for Norwegian Higher Education in Cooperating with China: SIU Report Series. [12] Le Van Giạng- Summary History for 1000 years of Vietnam Education – The Publish of National Politics, Hanoi, 2003. [13] MoET – 50 years for development of Education and Training (1945-1995) – The Publish of Education - 1995 [14] MoET (2010), Introduction the renew Law of Education. [15] Government, 73/2015/NĐ-CP, Decree on the criteria for stratification, the framework for classification and the criteria for ranking higher education institutions [16] Huang, F. (2006). Incorporation and University Governance. Higher Education Management and Policy, 18(2), 1-15 [17] Yang, R. 2003a. ‘Progresses and paradoxes: New developments in Chinas higher education’. In: K.H. Mok (Ed.), Centralization versus decentralization: Educational reforms and changing governance in Chinese societies (pp. 173–200). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, University of Hong Kong. [18] Yang, R.; Li, M. 2010. Country report: Access and equality in China’s higher education. Manila: Asian Development Bank. [19] Prime Minister, Decision 121/2007/QĐ-TTg, Planning a Network for Universities and Colleges in the period of 2006 - 2020 461 QUI HOẠCH GIÁO DỤC ĐẠI HỌC THẾ GIỚI - BÀI HỌC KINH NGHIỆM CHO VIỆT NAM Pham Thi Thanh Hai1 Nguyen Thi Huong Giang2 Tóm tắt: Gần đây, vấn đề qui hoạch tổng thể giáo dục đại học (GDĐH) được cơ quan ban hành chính sách và giới chuyên môn bàn luận nhiều. GDĐH Việt Nam trong tiến trình đổi mới và hội nhập quốc tế theo hướng tăng quyền tự chủ cho cở sở GHĐH. Bài học kinh nghiệm về quy hoạch mạng lưới GDĐH từ Hoa Kì, Trung Quốc là cần thiết để tham chiếu cho Việt Nam. Nghiên cứu so sánh quốc tế này cho thấy, Việt Nam có quy hoạch GDĐH giống Hoa Kì và Trung Quốc ở 3-4 tầng loại hình cơ sở GDĐH (Nghiên cứu, đào tạo đại học- thạc sỹ, đào tạo nghề). Tuy nhiên, Việt Nam cần nghiên cứu về qui hoạch hệ thống và công bố các số liệu cụ thể mỗi tầng loại hình cơ sở GDĐH để hệ thống phát triển theo qui hoạch. Từ khóa: Qui hoạch, hệ thống giáo dục, loại hình giáo dục, giáo dục đại học, đổi mới. 1 Trường Đại học Giáo dục - ĐHQGHN; Email: haiphamtt.vnu@gmail.com, Tel: 0913.509.074. 2 Viện Sư phạm Kỹ thuật – Đại học Bách khoa Hà Nội; Email: giang.nguyenthihuong@hust.edu.vn, Tel: 0983.660.128.