





































Microsoft Word - GRHE-V1N1-p45


Global Research in Higher Education 
ISSN 2576-196X (Print) ISSN 2576-1951 (Online) 

Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 
www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe 

45 
 

Original Paper 

English Language University Teachers’ Research Activity: 

Untold Stories in Vietnam 

Huong H. Le1* 
1 Hong Duc University, Thanh Hoa, Vietnam 

* Huong H. Le, Hong Duc University, Thanh Hoa, Vietnam 

 

Received: April 17, 2018         Accepted: May 2, 2018       Online Published: May 9, 2018 

doi:10.22158/grhe.v1n1p45          URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v1n1p45 

 

Abstract  

This qualitative case study explores English language university teachers’ engagement in research 

including their interests, publications and co-operation, from which the obligation of research activity at 

universities in Vietnam is revealed. Twenty-one English language university teachers at Hong Duc 

University were invited to participate in the research. Survey questionnaire and Skype semi-structured 

interview were employed to collect necessary data to identify teacher participants’ involvement in 

research. Being seen from socio-cultural perspectives, the findings of the study indicate that how English 

language university teachers engage in research is inter-twined with the current context where research 

is done. 

Keywords 

university teachers, research, research engagement, socio-cultural framework 

 

1. Introduction 

The vital role of research to education in general and to English language teaching in particular is 

acknowledged in policies, institutional regulations and operational plans in Vietnam, especially since the 

implementation of the Higher Education Reform Agenda (HERA) 2006-2000 (Pham, 2010; Sheridan, 

2010). HERA has directly influenced how university teachers react to the reinforced research activity (Le, 

2017), which is investigated in this current study. This study identifies the engagement in research of 

twenty-one English language university teachers at Hong Duc University. Specifically, the teachers’ 

research interests, publications, and co-operation are thoroughly examined in order for an insight into 

English language university teachers’ research activity. Moreover, framed within the socio-cultural 

viewpoint, the study analyzes how English language university teachers’ engagement in research is 

shaped through the higher education context. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

46 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

It is assumed that teachers have to play two roles, one is as a practitioner and the other is as a theorist. In 

this regard, teacher research helps mediate these two roles (Loughran, 2002; Robinson & Lai, 2006). In 

language teaching, language teacher research has rapidly drawn educational researchers’ attention for its 

research potential (Allwright & Bailey, 1991; Nunan, 1989a, 1989b; Freeman, 1998; O’Brien & 

Beaumont, 2000; Burns, 2010). In terms of English language university teachers doing research, Allison 

and Carey (2007) and Borg (2009) successfully investigated these teachers’ perceptions, aptitudes and 

challenges of their research engagement. In Vietnam, Hiep (2006) findings reveal a formal position of 

research in tertiary institutions incorporated with numerous challenges. More recently, Le (2017) 

explained English language university teachers’ perceived difficulties of research from socio-cultural 

perspectives. However, both Hiep (2006) and Le (2017) focus on obstacles that English language 

university teachers have to overcome rather than on their research interests, publications and 

co-authorship. These unaddressed issues are expected to leave the space for my current study, in which 

such questions like what English language university teachers have done as research, how they have 

published their work and how they have co-operated in research are examined. 

 

2. Method 

2.1 Socio-Cultural Framework 

According to socio-cultural theory, human cognition is seen as a dynamic social activity formed through 

interactions, thus is physically and socially contextualized (Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978). In this sense, 

socio-cultural framework is used to identify elements that constitute English language university 

teachers’ research activity. Teachers’ research involvement is, in turn, reflects the context where research 

is performed. In other words, what and how teachers do as research is inter-related. Such knowledge 

acquisition is seen as a mutually constituting process among individuals and cultural processes (Rogoff, 

2003), which occurs at three levels: personal, interpersonal and institutional levels (Rogoff, 1995). 

Personal level refers to teachers’ prior and existing knowledge, experiences and attitudes. Inter-personal 

level involves different personalities which may be teachers’ colleagues, researchers, policy makers, and 

students. Institutional level accounts for the community covering the government, Ministry of Education 

and Training (MOET), tertiary context, and curriculum. All these factors forming the whole settings of 

Vietnamese higher education are inter-related with teachers’ research activity.  

2.2 Participants 

The participants of this study were twenty-one English language university teachers working in the 

Faculty of Foreign Languages at Hong Duc University in Vietnam. Twenty-one teacher participants 

agreed to take part in the survey whereas only four of them consented to participate in both the survey 

and the Skype interview. The survey participants were referred to as from P1 to P21 while the interview 

participants were IP1, IP2, IP3, and IP4. The participants included 5 males and 16 females whose age 

ranged from 27 to 50 years old. Three participants were currently pursuing PhD while 19 others had MA 

degree. Their majors were either English teaching methodologies or applied linguistics. The duration of 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

47 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

teaching experience of these participants ranged from 2 to 20 years. Their monthly salary varied from 

150 USD to 350 USD. 

2.3 Context of the Study 

Vietnam’s research performance is poor with low research intensity and modest research quality (Hien, 

2010). Universities have been much more teaching-based than research-oriented (Sheridan, 2010). 

However, the position of research has come at the forefront of educational policies, which has raised an 

urgent need to enhance research activity at universities, leading to the enforcement of research activity 

within the workload of all academics working there (Harman & Le, 2010).  

This current study was carried out within the context of Hong Duc University, located in Thanh Hoa 

Province. Hong Duc University, along with other tertiary institutions, is centralized under the Ministry of 

Education and Training (MOET) (Nguyen, Oliver, & Priddy, 2009). Recently when MOET started to 

foster university research capability development (Sheridan, 2010). Hong Duc University has adapted its 

operational plans towards a research-oriented institution. The university involves research activity with 

research projects, publishing research articles in journals and attending conferences. Each of these 

activities is converted into 50-minute periods. One of the compulsory annual tasks of each university 

teacher is to fulfill at least 180 periods for research activity. If he/she cannot complete this task, he/she 

will bear a termination of monthly extra-money for poor work performance (Personal communication 

with the Head of the Department of Scientific Research).  

2.4 Data Collection and Analysis 

2.4.1 Instruments of Data Collection 

In this study the instruments of data collection are a survey questionnaire and Skype semi-structured 

interview. Open-ended questions, enclosed in the questionnaire and interview, are expected to bring 

about “truly objective” responses from participants (Boden, Kenway, & Epstein, 2005, p. 44).  

The survey questionnaire consists of six demographic questions and other eight questions of research 

content. Copies of the questionnaire were sent to the 21 teacher participants through email. The survey 

questionnaire would take participants 15 to 20 minutes to finish. All 21 participants returned their 

completed questionnaire after one week. The survey questionnaire proved itself to be an effective tool 

when “inspiring a strong feeling among participants” (Boden, Kenway, & Epstein, 2005, p. 45). The 

participants provided thorough responses, which were seen as their eager when raising their own voice 

about their research experiences, needs and expectations, allowing meaningful amounts of data to be 

obtained. 

Skype semi-structured interview was used to support the survey questionnaire when collecting data in 

this current study. The interview helped “clarify, expand and explore participants’ responses in their own 

words and to express their own personal perspectives” (Patton, 2002, p. 348; O’Toole & Beckett, 2010, p. 

132). Moreover, semi-structured interview “involves a general set of questions and format which can be 

modified or varied if the situation demands” (Lichtman, 2010, p. 141) and “is prepared to ensure that the 

same basic lines of inquiry are pursued with each person interviewed” (Patton, 2002, p. 343). Skype 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

48 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

interview is the same as telephone interview which “helps avoid the safety problems of personal 

interviews and are much cheaper than these interviews since no travelling cost is involved” (De Vaus, 

2002, p. 123). The Skype semi-structured interview was performed among four participants at the 

convenient time and date. The interviews, lasting for 20 to 30 minutes, were performed and recorded in 

Vietnamese and then were transcribed verbatim, translated into English and returned to participants for 

double-checking and modification before approval.  

2.4.2 Data Analysis Procedure 

Firstly, the data collected from the survey questionnaire was processed following the steps suggested by 

Creswell (2009). The initial steps were to transcribe, summarize, and arrange participants’ responses into 

common themes. The same colors were used to mark the identical themes. After scanning all the data for 

its general sense of information, outstanding or significant patterns of meanings were coded. Finally a 

brief description of research issues was generated and some recurring categories were indicated. 

Secondly, the data collected from the Skype semi-structured interviews was thoroughly analyzed. 

Initially, the audio records of all four interviews were transcribed and translated into English. Similar or 

contrasting information was highlighted with the same color before grouping as categories.  

After collecting categories from the survey questionnaire and the interview, some comparison and 

contrast were performed to come up with new themes, which would be interpreted through a reflection 

with my personal understandings of literature review and socio-cultural perspectives. 

 

3. Result and Discussion 

3.1 Research Interests 

3.1.1 Research Approaches 

The most popular research approach adopted by teacher participants was mixed methods. Some 

participants once did qualitative research whereas only one participant had ever experienced with 

quantitative research. Mixed methods “combine qualitative and quantitative methods” (Harwell, 2011, p. 

151) to “allows for the opportunity to compensate for inherent method weaknesses, capitalize on inherent 

method strengths, and offset inevitable methods biases” (Greene, 2007, p. xiii). Teacher participants used 

mixed methods in their research to collect both qualitative and quantitative data which resulted in both 

qualitative and quantitative analysis and integrated inferences. For example, the participant IP1 was 

carrying on her research on using Hot Potatoes software to teach English vocabulary to English 

non-majored students at the university.  

IP1: At the beginning of the semester, we organized a diagnostic vocabulary test to examine our 

students’ level of English. We then identified their difficulties with English vocabulary and applied 

Hot potatoes software in teaching them new words. At the end of the semester, we gave our students 

an achievement test on vocabulary and compared their current score with the very first score in the 

diagnostic test to see the effectiveness of the software. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

49 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

The participant IP1 mentioned qualitative data of students’ difficulties with English vocabulary. In 

addition, the comparison between students’ score in the achievement test and those in the diagnostic test 

embedded quantitative data. In this sense, the research data analysis and data interpretation needed the 

combination of both qualitative and quantitative methods.  

The popularity of mixed methods was, on the one hand, the result of the common assumption among 

scholars in Vietnam that research illustrated with tables, charts and graphs looked more scientific and 

convincing (Hiep, 2006). On the other hand, for a lack of time, funding, and skills of solving complex 

calculations, English language university teachers could not cover a large scope of research and a huge 

number of participants (if any) which were required by quantitative research. Consequently, those 

teachers chose something in the middle of quantitative and qualitative research or the combination of 

these two types. With the use of mixed method, they could present their research proposals with some 

numerical data as well as combine both quantitative and qualitative data for integrated interpretations. 

3.1.2 Types of Research 

Action research and case study were reported to be the most common types of research because these 

types were believed to be able to contribute to teachers’ teaching and students’ learning process. The 

participants tended to frame their experiences and understandings of research within applied research in 

general or action research in particular because they had to face a variety of research problems arising 

from their own teaching practice (IP1-2-3-4). Action research was conducted for “solving a specific 

problem or for providing information for decision making at the local level” (Wiersma & Jurs, 2009, p. 

13); hence, by doing action research, those teachers hoped to find solutions to their problems in order for 

improving their teaching job. Moreover, the participants usually selected their research subjects from 

students in classes where they were teaching to act as a case study. In this sense, their case study was 

mostly applicable to particular groups of students, as IP2 once experienced. 

IP2: Whether a research initiative being effective or not depends on contexts. For example, a 

teaching technique can bring positive result to this group of students but it cannot be applicable to 

other groups. However, we cannot say the study on that teaching technique is not valid. 

What the participant IP2 said about values of research was supported by Lincoln and Guba (1985). 

According to these authors, judgments of the quality of teacher research did not include reliability and 

generalizability because these criteria were rarely feasible in studies teachers conduct in their classrooms 

(Lincoln & Guba, 1985 as cited in Roberts; Bove & van Zee, 2007). By doing action research and case 

study research, English language university teachers prioritized their teaching practice and their students 

over anything else. Every teacher participants looked forwards to practical values presented by the 

improvement in their students’ learning results. 

3.1.3 Research Topics 

It was reported that English language university teachers’ research topics mostly covered English 

teaching methodologies. The selection of research topics could be divided into forced-choice topics and 

free-choice topics. Forced-choice topics were determined by the university’s authority represented by the 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

50 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Department of Scientific Research whereas free-choice topics were selected by university teachers 

(Personal communication with the Head of the Department of Scientific Research).  

Also according to the Head of the Department of Scientific Research, forced-choice topics accounted for 

about three to five percent of all research projects. The topics were mainly assigned to English language 

university teachers in preparation for thematic conferences in which they presented their research 

proposals about particular themes.  

IP2: Research topics can be assigned by my university. 

IP3: In my university research topics are periodically assigned to teachers by the authorities of the 

Faculty or the University. 

To some extent, forced-choice topics helped orient relevant issues discussed in such conferences 

(personal communication with the Head of the Department of Scientific Research). To the other extent, it 

was impossible for those topics to always satisfy all English language university teachers’ personal 

interests or suit their background knowledge.  

IP3: Sometimes teachers do not have insightful understanding of some topics. For instance, I was 

once assigned a research topic of management in teaching and learning of which I had no experience. 

In this case, the quality of my research was not good enough. I felt stressed with it. 

At this institutional level, the participant IP3 asserted that forced-choice topics did not always produce 

the so-called good quality research. They even depressed English language university teachers whose 

research was not up to their expectations. Also according to the participant IP3, less experienced English 

language university teachers have a heavier bulk of forced-choice topics than more experienced ones. 

Such novice teachers publish fewer research articles in specialist journals which were assumed to 

provide more freedom in terms of research topics. Hence, they had to conduct research on forced-choice 

topics required by the university to fulfill their assigned research activity.  

However, as stated above, forced-choice topics only occupied the minority of all research topics, the 

majority was for free-choice ones. Theoretically, free choice implied English language university 

teachers’ freedom in their research. Nevertheless, the question that whether the teachers completely felt 

comfortable with their free-choice topics needed more thorough consideration. 

Free-choice topics were generated by English language university teachers themselves. Almost all of the 

topics were provoked from teaching practice. Some was inspired by literature that the teachers read.  

IP2: I select topics depending on its practicality. I mean … from teaching practice some problems 

are raised, I consider such problems and adapt them into research topics. 

IP4: In order to find effective teaching techniques or methods, I spend some time on doing research. 

It was clearly seen that the conception of free-choice topics were limited or narrowed by English 

language university teachers. Personally, they only researched what was necessary to their own teaching 

practice. Moreover, they took the fulfillment of their assigned research activity into consideration when 

deciding what and how to do as research. 

IP3: Doing research individually helps them (teachers) to quickly fulfill such 180 periods as they do 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

51 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

not have to share with any others. 

IP4: According to the university’s requirements, each teacher needs to perform research activity 

converted into 180 periods. 

No teacher participant mentioned the total number of hours spent on research activity, including reading 

materials, investigating research setting, attending workshops, conferences and publishing final research 

product. Instead, they repeated the minimum standard workload of research activity or the required “180 

periods” in their interviews. The obsession of the assigned “180 periods” was interpreted as pressure of 

task fulfillment in that number itself. As a result, teacher participants took such “180 periods” into 

serious consideration when selecting research topics. Easily-approached and relevant topics were 

favorable because they took less time on studying and the teachers could speed up their workload 

completion. Institutionally, the university’s rules in general and the required “180 periods” of research 

activity in particular somehow influenced English language university teachers’ choice of what to 

research. 

3.2 Research Publications 

3.2.1 Volume of Research Activity 

As previously discussed, research activity assigned to English language university teachers included 

conducting research projects, publishing research articles in specialist journals, attending conferences 

and workshops. Each sort of research activity was converted into different number of periods. Teachers 

were free to choose any sort of research activity provided that they could fulfill 180 periods. That was the 

reason why the number of research initiatives each English language university teacher did every 

academic year varied from one to four depending on if they had already finished 180 periods or not. For 

example, in the last academic year by writing and publishing one research article in the university’s 

journal, the participant IP1 could complete her 180 periods of research activity. Equally, the participant 

IP3 had to perform one Divisional-level presentation, three Departmental-level presentations on 

particular research issues and attended other conferences or workshops to fulfill her assigned research 

activity. It seemed that English language university teachers were struggling to meet the required 

workload of research. Moreover, when they already finished their workload, they had no intention of 

doing more research. Such teachers’ reluctance to do research indicated that research was mainly related 

to satisfy employment criteria. In this sense, teachers’ research engagement seemed to be a burden rather 

than an inspiration. 

3.2.2 Publishing Research 

What the participants IP1 and IP3 said revealed the two most popular channels of publishing research as 

agreed by all 21 participants: submitting to the University Internal Circulation, and presenting in 

domestic workshops, seminars and conferences. The third channel mostly taken by experienced teacher 

researchers was sending to domestic specialist journals. Two other much less popular ways were 

presenting in international conferences and sending to foreign specialist journals. Only three participants 

experienced presenting in international conferences whereas only one participant once sent his research 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

52 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

article to a foreign specialist journal. This closure to international environment was interpreted as English 

language university teachers’ lack of confidence in their research quality on personal plane: 

IP4: Some (research initiatives) have not been applied in reality, so I do not know about their 

effectiveness. 

As well as a lack of opportunity for international exposure on interpersonal plane: 

IP1: I once attended an international conference. 

And also a result of the university’s obligations on institutional plane: 

IP1: … according to our university’s requirements, it is NOT obligatory for teachers to publish 

articles in foreign journals. Publishing research articles in domestic specialist journals is enough 

for fulfilling duties. 

This shortage of international research output explained Vietnamese low position of research capacity 

when such capacity was assessed basing on the number of peer-reviewed international publications and 

citation statistics (Hien, 2010). This measurement of research capacity of a country ignored domestic 

research output. Therefore, no matter how enormous domestic research output was, it could not help 

improve the position of a country’s research capacity in international environment. Moreover, this 

measurement of research capacity of a country did not take into account the fact that many of the 

Peer-Reviewed International Publications (PRIPs) in Asian countries were co-authored by foreigners. In 

so saying, such measurement seemed to be unfair to some extent; however, it was time for Vietnamese 

researchers to seriously consider their international research output. 

3.2.3 Choosing Languages 

One more legacy of such above closure to international environment was the dominance of Vietnamese 

used in research initiatives. Although all participants were university teachers of English, they conducted 

their pieces of research in Vietnamese. It did not mean that those teachers’ competence of English was 

insufficient. Instead, they needed to publish research in Vietnamese if they wanted to have their work 

published in local journals and meet the research target. First of all, because the teacher participants 

tended to send their research articles to domestic journals printed in Vietnamese (IP2), they had to write 

their work in Vietnamese. Also according the participant IP2, he adapted his M.A thesis to a research 

article and sent to a domestic linguistic journal. In doing so, he had to translate his original version 

written in English into Vietnamese to match the journal format. The situation was somehow the same to 

the participant IP3 when she sent her research article to the university’s Department of Scientific 

Research for verification. She submitted her research proposal written in English but the Department 

asked her to translate it into Vietnamese because they hardly understood its content. In this sense, those 

teachers had to do more job without any support. Additionally, the similar situation happened to domestic 

conferences. 

IP1: Attendees in such (domestic) conferences are Vietnamese majored in different field and their 

English competence is of low level (so I used Vietnamese). 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

53 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

“The lack of proficiency of foreign languages is a particular hindrance to the improvement of quality in 

Vietnamese higher education” (Pham, 2010, p. 56). In this case, English as a foreign language was 

proved to be challenging to the enforcement of research activity. This problem demanded comprehensive 

measurements for improvement in foreign proficiency. It was not only teacher researchers but also those 

who were in charge of editing research as well as public readers needed to be master on foreign 

languages. 

3.3 Co-Operation in Research 

3.3.1 Discussion of Research with Colleagues 

Nineteen out of twenty-one teacher participants confirmed that they did discuss research topics or 

research directions with their colleagues. Two interview participants explained their discussion in more 

details as followed: 

IP2: When I do research and encounter difficulties, I talk to my colleagues to see if they have any 

suggestions or recommendations. It is really of great help. 

IP3: I usually ask for advice from experienced colleagues. 

Discussion with experienced colleagues for advice and recommendation seemed to be favorable. On 

personal plane, this matched Vygotsky’s emphasis on the necessity of “interaction with more skilled 

partners” (Rogoff, 1990, p. 148) because such interaction provided inexperienced people with a means 

for learning about the world. Teacher participants had different levels of qualifications and experiences. 

Through discussion, they learned much from each other. Gradually a personal habit of sharing 

knowledge was created. More and more discussion, in turn, was done.  

At the institutional level, the physical environment of the university encouraged conversation among 

their teaching staff. In fact, that environment fostered both personal talk of research and formal meetings 

for discussion of research. On the one hand, each English language university teacher had no private 

office; instead all of them used a common room. It was where those teachers met and talked in intervals 

between teaching periods. Such shared space gave English language university teachers opportunities for 

more contact and discussion than any private offices could do. On the other hand, every month a formal 

meeting was held. All the issues related to teaching job and research activity covering problems arose 

from teaching practice, recommendations for solutions, and schedule of the coming month were 

discussed there. In addition, academic conferences specialized in research projects were organized 

periodically. Positioned in such environment, English language university teachers’ interest in discussion 

of research with their colleagues was a matter of certainty.  

3.3.2 Co-Authorship 

The favor of discussion of research with colleagues did not entail a bigger number of co-authored works 

than individual works. In fact, all English language university teachers had more research initiatives done 

individually. The choice of working alone on research work was for three main reasons. On personal 

plane, it was independence on time management. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

54 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

IP2: when doing research individually … they (teachers) can manage time flexibly and 

independently. 

IP3: I tend to do research individually. Time management is the first reason. Some teachers and I 

possibly want to co-author but we cannot arrange convenient time for all of us. 

On interpersonal plane, it was avoidance of conflicts with co-authors in terms of research ideas or 

directions (IP3 & IP4). The participant IP3 also provided the last reason on institutional plane, which was 

to accelerate task fulfillment: 

IP3: Doing research individually help them (teachers) to quickly fulfill such 180 periods allotted for 

research activity as they do not have to share with any others. 

Although individual works out-numbered co-authored works, teacher participants appreciated 

advantages of co-authorship. According to those participants, co-authorship provided teachers with great 

cooperation and support from their partners. The workload shared by all partners became less heavy (IP2 

& IP4). In fact, English language university teachers did co-author with their partners, especially in 

high-level research projects such as national-level projects, provincial-level projects, and 

organizational-level projects (IP2). The participant IP1 added: 

IP1: At the moment I am co-authoring with 2 other colleagues in an organizational-level research 

project. It’s the project about using Hot potatoes software to teach vocabulary to English 

non-majored students. 

English language university teachers’ experience of co-authorship was mostly reported to be domestic 

authorship. Only one teacher once co-authored with a foreign researcher. The others had not ever worked 

on research with a foreign partner before; however, they all welcomed an opportunity to do so (IP2, IP3 

& IP4). Such teachers’ willingness of having foreign authorship was interpreted as a desire for 

integration. Working with foreign researchers promised to be a chance for English language university 

teachers to communicate with other cultures (P3) as well as learn effective research skills from more 

advanced countries (P4). 

 

4. Conclusion 

In conclusion, the study explored English language university teachers’ research activity specified in 

three categories including their research interests, publications and co-operation. Seen from 

socio-cultural perspective, such research involvement is mutually constituted within Vietnamese higher 

education settings. From what teacher participants have voiced, the research-related policies and 

operational plans seem to force, instead of encouraging, university teachers to do research. A sense of 

obligation and an obsession of task fulfilment among teachers appear to outweigh their desire, interests 

and dedication to research. In this regard, the enforcement of research activity at universities has only 

helped to increase the number of research publications, but could do almost nothing to raise their research 

quality. Furthermore, peer-reviewed international publications are likely to be out of these teachers’ 

reach, leading to the general poor research performance in Vietnam because research intensity is 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

55 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

measured by the total number of Peer-Refereed International Publications (PRIP) per one million persons. 

All things considered, it is high time more practical and supportive research-related plans were 

implemented if the authorities would like to improve Vietnam’s research performance. 

 

References 

Allison, D., & Carey, J. (2007). What do University Language Teachers Say about Language Teaching 

Research? TESL Canada Journal, 24(2), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v24i2.139 

Allwright, D., & Bailey, M. K. (1991). Focus on the Language Classroom: An Introduction to 

Classroom Research for Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Boden, R., Kenway, J., & Epstein, D. (2005). Getting Started on Research. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage 

Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209205 

Borg, S. (2009). English Language Teachers’ Conceptions of Research. Applied linguistics, 30(3), 

358-388. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp007 

Burns, A. (2010). Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A guide for Practitioners. 

New York: Routledge. 

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches 

(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications. 

De Vaus, D. A. (2002). Surveys in Social Research (5th ed.). Australia: Allen & Unwin. 

Freeman, D. (1998). Doing Teacher Research. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. 

Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley. 

Harman, G., & Le, T. B. N. (2010). Research Role of Vietnam’s Universities. In G. Harman, M. 

Hayden, & T. N. Pham (Eds.), Reforming Higher Education in Vietnam: Challenges and 

Priorities (pp. 87-102). The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3694-0_6 

Harwell, R. M. (2011). Research Design in Qualitative/Quantitative/Mixed methods. In C. Conrad, & R. 

C. Serlin (Eds.), The Sage Handbook for Research in Education (2nd ed., pp. 147-163). Thousand 

Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483351377.n11 

Hien, D. P. (2010). A Comparative Study of Research Capabilities of East Asian Countries and 

Implications for Vietnam. Higher Education, 60, 615-625. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9319-5 

Hiep, H. P. (2006). Researching the Research Culture in English Language Education in Vietnam. 

TESL-EJ, 10(2), 1-20. 

Le, H. H. (2017). English Language University Teachers’ Difficulties in Research Engagement: A Case 

Study in Vietnam. Journal of English Educators Society, 2(2), 91-100. 

https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v2i2.979 

Litchtman, M. (2010). Qualitative Research in Education: A User’s Guide (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, 

Calif: SAGE Publications. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/grhe            Global Research in Higher Education                  Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018 

56 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Loughran, J. (2002). Teachers as researcher. In J. Mitchell, J. Loughran, & I. J. Mitchell (Eds.), 

Learning from Teacher Research (pp. 3-18). New York: Teacher college press. 

Nguyen, D. K., Oliver, E. D., & Priddy, E. L. (2009). Criteria for Accreditation in Vietnam’s Higher 

Education: Focus on Input or Outcome? Quality in Higher Education, 15(2), 123-134. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320902995766 

Nunan, D. (1989a). The Teacher as Researcher. In C. Brumfit, & R. Mitchell (Eds.), Research in the 

Language Classroom (pp. 16-32). London: Modern English in association with the British 

Council. 

Nunan, D. (1989b). Understanding Language Classrooms. New York: Prentice Hall. 

O’Brien, T., & Beaumont, M. (2000). Collaborative Research in Second Language Education. 

Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books. 

O’Toole, J., & Beckett, D. (2010). Educational Research: Creative Thinking and Doing. Melbourne: 

Oxford. 

Patton, Q. M. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: 

SAGE Publications. 

Pham, T. N. (2010). The Higher Education Reform Agenda: A Vision for 2020. In G. Harman, M. 

Hayden, & T. N. Pham (Eds.), Reforming Higher Education in Vietnam: Challenges and 

Priorities (pp. 51-64). The Netherlands: Springer. 

Roberts, D., Bove, C., & van Zee, E. (2007). Teacher Researcher: Stories of Learning and Growing. 

NSTA Press. 

Robinson, V., & Lai, K. M. (2006). Practitioner Research for Educators: A Guide to Improving 

Classrooms and Schools. USA: Corwin Press. 

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Development in Social Context. New York: OUP. 

Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing Sociocultural Activity on Three Planes: Participatory Appropriation, 

Guided Participation, and Apprenticeship. In J. V. Wertsch, P. D. Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), 

Sociocultural Studies of Mind (pp. 139-163). New York: Cambridge University Press. 

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174299.008 

Rogoff, B. (2003). The Cultural Nature of Human Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Sheridan, G. (2010). Vietnam: Preparing Higher Education Sector Development Project (HESDP). 

ADB. 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. 

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 

Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2009). Research Methods in Education: An Introduction (9th ed.). Boston: 

Pearson. 

 


