Volume 40, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0272-2690
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9889
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This article explores language planning and policy from the perspective of individual agency and its embodiments in the process of implementing an English language education policy ensemble at a public university in Vietnam. The policy exemplifies the influence of globalized standards on local language education systems. It aims to build a national framework in Vietnam based on a Western model known as the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) which is expected to serve as a platform for reforming curriculum design, course materials development, and testing and assessment. Drawn from a set of data obtained through in-depth interviews with university administrators, the findings highlight the conflicting policy positions taken up by teacher-cum-administrators engaged in the policy enactment process. The paper argues that a critical barrier to CEFR enactment lies in the constraints and demotivation within each participant, particularly of those involved at a higher level of decision-making process in the institution. It is important, therefore, to deal with these conflicts at the level of macro policy planning to neutralize the paradox of policy enactment at the local site.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baldauf, R.B., Jr
    (2012) Introduction – Language planning: where have we been? Where might we be going?Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, 12(2), 233–248. doi: 10.1590/S1984‑63982012000200002
    https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-63982012000200002 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ball, S.J.J. , Braun, A. , & Maguire, M
    (2012) How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Biesta, G. , & Tedder, M
    (2006) How is agency possible? Towards an ecological understanding of agency-as-achievement. Retrieved fromwww.tlrp.org/project%20sites/LearningLives/papers/working_papers/Working_paper_5_Exeter_Feb_06.pdf
  4. Braun, A. , Ball, S.J. , & Maguire, M (2011) Policy enactments in schools introduction: towards a toolbox for theory and research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 581–583. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2011.601554.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601554. [Google Scholar]
  5. Campbell, E
    (2012) Teacher agency in curriculum contexts. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 183–190. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑873X.2012.00593.x.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012.00593.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Feryok, A
    (2012) Activity theory and language teacher agency. The Modern Language Journal, 96(1), 95–107. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2012.01279.x.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01279.x. [Google Scholar]
  7. Gal’perin, P.I
    (1992) The problem of activity in Soviet psychology. Journal of Russian and East European psychology, 30(4), 37–59. doi: 10.2753/RPO1061‑0405300437
    https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-0405300437 [Google Scholar]
  8. Hamid, M.O. , & Baldauf, R.B., Jr
    (2014) Public-private domain distinction as an aspect of LPP frameworks: A case study of Bangladesh. Language Problems & Language Planning, 38(2), 912–210. doi: 10.1075/lplp.38.2.05ham.
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.38.2.05ham. [Google Scholar]
  9. Honig, M.I
    (2006) New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting complexity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hu, G. , & McKay, S.L
    (2012) English language education in East Asia: Some recent developments. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(4), 345–362. doi: 10.1080/01434632.2012.661434.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2012.661434. [Google Scholar]
  11. Johnstone, R
    (Ed.) (2010) Learning through English: policies, challenges and prospects - Insights from East Asia. Malaysia: British Council.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Kelchtermans, G. , & Ballet, K
    (2002) Micropolitical literacy: reconstructing a neglected dimension in teacher development. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(8), 755–767. doi: 10.1016/S0883‑0355(03)00069‑7.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00069-7 [Google Scholar]
  13. Louis, K.S
    (1994) Beyond “managed change”: Rethinking how schools improve. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(1), 2–24. doi: 10.1080/0924345940050102.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0924345940050102. [Google Scholar]
  14. Menken, K. , & Garcia, O
    (Eds.) (2010) Negotiating language policies in schools: Educators as policymakers. Florence, KY: Routledge. Retrieved fromwww.ebrary.com.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Ministry of Education and Training
    (2008) De an day va hoc ngoai ngu trong he thong giao duc quoc dan giai doan 2008-2020 [Project guidelines for teaching and learning foreign languages in the national education system in the period from 2008 to 2020]. Hanoi: Retrieved fromwww.cfl.udn.vn/uploads/uploads/Vanban/pub_dir/3121_Deanngoaingu.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. (2014) Thông tư ban hành khung năng lực ngoại ngữ 6 bậc dùng cho Việt Nam [Circular No. 01/2014/TT-BDGĐT to issue a six-level framework for foreign language proficiency in Vietnam]. Retrieved fromvanban.moet.gov.vn/?page=6.10&view=5552&opt=brpage.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Pham, H.H
    (2001) Teacher development: A real need for English departments in Vietnam. English Teaching Forum, 39(4). Retrieved fromamericanenglish.state.gov/files/ae/resource_files/01-39-4-f.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (2006) Researching the research culture in English language education in Vietnam. TESL-EJ, 10(2). Retrieved fromtesl-ej.org/ej38/a10.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Ricento, T.K. , & Hornberger, N.H
    (1996) Unpeeling the onion: Language planning and policy and the ELT professional. TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 401–427. doi: 10.2307/3587691.
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587691. [Google Scholar]
  20. Shoba, J.A. , & Chimbutane, F
    (Eds.) (2013) Bilingual education and language policy in the Global South. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Singh, P. , Thomas, S. , & Harris, J
    (2013) Recontextualising policy discourses: A Bernsteinian perspective on policy interpretation, translation, enactment. Journal of Education Policy, 28(4), 465–480. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.770554.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2013.770554. [Google Scholar]
  22. Spolsky, B
    (2009) Language management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511626470
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511626470 [Google Scholar]
  23. Wallace, S
    (Ed.) (2009) A dictionary of education. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved fromwww.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199212064.001.0001/acref-9780199212064.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Wee, L
    (2003) Linguistic instrumentalism in Singapore. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 24(3), 211–224. doi: 10.1080/01434630308666499.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630308666499. [Google Scholar]
  25. Zacharias, N.T
    (2013) Navigating through the English-medium-of-instruction policy: Voices from the field. Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 93–108. doi: 10.1080/14664208.2013.782797.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2013.782797. [Google Scholar]
  26. Zhao, S
    (2011) Actors in language planning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 905–923). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Zhao, S. , & Baldauf, R.B., Jr
    (2012) Individual agency in language planning: Chinese script reform as a case study. Language Problems & Language Planning, 36(1), 1–24. doi: 10.1075/lplp.36.1.01zha.
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.36.1.01zha. [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): CEFR; individual agency; language policy; policy position; Vietnam
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error