Tratamiento en pacientes con esclerosis múltiple confirmada

The literature review illustrates a dearth of research into the cultures of Vietnamese lower secondary schools. The following discussion describes some prominent features of the surveyed schools’ cultures and suggests how these elements impact on teaching for CT.

Data collected from both phases of the study indicate several positive cultural aspects. Over 50% of the teachers felt committed to their jobs. Many of them continuously participated in teacher contests at both provincial and district levels, attempted to apply modern software and teaching aids to their teaching. However, it should be noted that the research was conducted in Thai Binh, a province where teaching and learning performances, which are closely related to professional commitment (Du, 2013), have always been ranked highly. Another notable feature is that two-fifths of the teachers were not satisfied with their student achievement, suggesting that further advancement of students could be considered by many of them (Stoll, 1999; Rỹ, 2012). The majority of teachers (138/142) taking part in the study supported teaching CT to students, indicating their openness to new ideas. Most interviewees and focus group members demonstrated quite good understanding of the subject knowledge as well as the benefits of teaching for CT. Two of them reported frequent exchange of experiences amongst teachers including those from different disciplines within their schools. In contrast with the reserved attitudes of teachers in Bac Giang province (Saito et al., 2008), interviewees and focus

103

group members within this project enthusiastically participated in the research and expressed their viewpoints outspokenly.

Apart from these above positive features, it appears that the ‘formal culture’ characterised by high social control but low social cohesion (Hargreaves, 1995; Carrington and Elkins, 2002) exists in numerous schools. Consistent with Du (2013), both quantitative and qualitative data signify teachers’ low engagement in running the schools. There appears to be a gap between school leaders and teachers as well as between teachers and students. According to Phuong-Mai et al. (2005), this phenomenon could be a result of Confucian heritage culture, which regards unequal relationships between people as an essential ingredient of social stability.

The second cultural aspect that needs improvement is a working environment with limited professional support from school leaders. Inconsistent with the finding from a questionnaire survey by Hương and Thủy (2013), both quantitative and qualitative data of this study showed that only a small number of the surveyed teachers were happy with school support for change. In Vietnam, a main route to teacher professional development is to exchange ideas with school leaders after classroom observations. However, as most interviewees reported, the purpose of these observations was to fulfil the leaders’ managerial duties rather than to exchange experiences for professional growth. Consequently, constructive feedback or advice was not frequently provided to teachers with classrooms being observed. Worryingly, two interviewees: MT and FTh revealed that teachers in their schools managed to be ‘self-reliant’ (Day, 1999, p. 224) in pedagogical revisions, denoting limited coaching and mentoring in the schools. Consistent with earlier studies (e.g. Saito and Tsukui, 2008; Du, 2013), this finding indicates that school leaders in Vietnam tend to pay more attention to their supervisory function than supportive one. This may stem from the fact that Vietnamese schools are tightly controlled and regularly inspected by the local authorities (Quang, 2005; Saito and Tsukui, 2008).

Another typical feature of Vietnamese secondary schools identified as influencing teacher effort to teach for CT is the lack of collegiality in a large number of schools. Although collectivism is identified as one of the most dominant elements of Confucian culture (Phuong-Mai et al., 2005; Goldman, 2009), in accord with findings from previous studies (e.g. Saito and Tsukui, 2008; Saito et al., 2008) and the questionnaire data, six of

104

the interviewees reported their colleagues’ low interest in exchanging ideas and experiences. In Vietnam, lower secondary teachers are required to observe their colleagues’ lessons at least once a week with the purpose of fostering mutual understanding and developing collective expertise. Nonetheless, as described by half of the participants, when taking part in reflections, observers were likely to give merely superficial or inflated comments to please others. In doing so, they could attain uncritical consensus but fail to engage in frank and fruitful conversations to enhance mutual trust and professional capability (Hargreaves, 2001; Saito et al., 2008). In so doing, they indicated a lack of the disposition to ‘represent a position honestly and clearly’ (Ennis, 1996, p. 171) andmissed the opportunities to sharpen their own CT, a prerequisite for the development of CT for learners (Wright, 2002; Grosser and Lombard, 2008).

Such an attitude towards professional discussions could probably derive from a strong preference for group harmony embedded in many Vietnamese people (Tuong, 2002; Phuong-Mai et al., 2005; Goldman, 2009). More likely, it could spring from the lack of skills in exchanging ideas in a democratic and dialogical manner as Saito et al. (2008) have pointed out. The fact that a number of teachers only offered true and constructive feedback to their close friends somewhat reflects the teaching culture of ‘balkanisation’ (Hargreaves, 1994), a possible consequence of internal competition (Booher-Jennings, 2005; Fullan, 2007) and a lack of trust among teachers (Saito et al., 2008; Katz and Earl, 2010).

As found in Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) and Flores (2004), novel ideas and efforts were not regularly welcomed or supported in the surveyed schools. Teachers who proposed change tended to receive unfavourable comments or discouragement. It seemed that numerous teachers worked in schools with the teaching culture of ‘individualism’. Such an uncooperative peer relationship inhibited them from making change to their teaching. The role of collegiality was also stressed by the focus group members through their recommendations for facilitating CT teaching. This finding extends those found in previous studies (e.g. Clarke and Hollingsworth, 2002; Saito et al., 2008; Priestley et al., 2011) which indicate adverse effects of poor collegiality on pedagogical revision. Particularly, it supports a study investigating lecture resistance to CT teaching by Haas and Keeley (1998) which argues that change tends to occur ‘if there is a supportive and encouraging environment within the department … than if individuals attempt changes on their own’ (p. 64). Based on this finding and the role of ‘peer power’ in whole system reform (Fullan, 2011, p. 12), the study suggests that one of the most significant measures

105

to ensure the success of the coming education reform in Vietnam would be to build and strengthen collegiality within each school.

One cultural characteristic of Vietnamese schools that may negatively affect teaching for CT is the modest level of teacher autonomy in teaching practice. As most interviewees and several focus group members reported, following the instructions of MOET and LEAs they attempted to cover all textbook contents by lecturing despite the fact that it was superficial coverage. With this teaching approach, as their colleagues in Bac Giang province do, the teachers ‘function as the deliverers of a curriculum defined by the government rather than as developers of an autonomous one’ (Saito et al., 2008, p. 98). By conveying all contents, they could have avoided criticisms or sanctions from school leaders and local authorities; nevertheless, this didactic teaching approach suppressed learning desires and failed to establish good thinking habits in students. As reported in Quang (2005), within this study the impact of limited autonomy was exacerbated by the matter of overloaded textbooks. It appears that the matter that Duggan (2001) noted over a decade ago has not been successfully tackled.

The textbooks bind teachers to a rigid pattern of delivering each lesson, this in itself reducing flexibility in teaching and restricting student exposure to such activities as problem-solving and integrated learning (p. 208).

To avoid this constraint, a clear distinction should be made between curriculum and textbooks. Whilst the national curriculum provides an outline of essential knowledge and skills for students in a subject or a programme of study (Department of Education, 2013), textbooks are regarded as a means of achieving the curriculum’s objectives and can be used flexibly and contextually. Rather than being seen as ‘mere practitioners of curriculum’ (Yilmaz, 2009, p. 41), teachers should be encouraged to work beyond textbooks, design their own teaching materials and base their teaching on interests, learning needs and learning speeds of their students (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001; Kelly, 2009). Although this approach is demanding, requiring teachers’ frequent reflection, it is highly desirable because it relates learning to individual experiences (Ross, 2000), the key feature of the teaching methodology being recommended in Vietnam. As the focus group members suggest, higher degrees of autonomy should be given to teachers to enable them to concentrate on meaningful classroom activities. Nonetheless, this does not mean that teachers can bring to classrooms whatever they wish without the intervention or direction of their school leaders or colleagues as MT reported.

106

Teachers with no colleague in the same discipline like me work in our own ‘restricted zone’, paying little attention to how other teachers may think of us. We do whatever we wish because nobody can find foul with us.

Instead, professional autonomy should be accompanied by constructive feedback and widespread support from colleagues and external sources (Harvey and Broyles, 2010; Priestley et al., 2011). Given that intellectual independence levels should correspond with professional competence and commitment (Sahlberg, 2011), it is worth reminding Vietnamese educational policymakers that:

The teacher, like the artist, the philosopher, and the man of letters, can only perform his work adequately if he feels himself to be an individual directed by an inner creative impulse, not dominated and fettered by an outside authority (Russell, 2009, p. 420).

Another feature of school cultures regarded as a key barrier to teaching for CT by the majority of interviewees is the modest levels of internal school democracy. As several interviewees reported, they were criticised for permitting discussion of controversial issues because it caused ‘noise’ in the classroom and encouraged over-democracy in students. Some reported their colleagues’ authoritative attitudes and providing students with few opportunities to question or challenge them. This lends support to Saito et al. (2008) and Hảo’s (2008) criticism of the undemocratic relationships between teachers and learners in Vietnamese schools. In conjunction with the rigid perspectives on political matters of a considerable number of parents, limited school democracy inhibited teachers from organising classroom activities beneficial to the development of learners’ CT dispositions and abilities. This finding confirms findings of Alazzi (2008) and Tsui (2000) who respectively argue that educators tend to devote low effort to teaching for CT if they perceive untouchable political issues and if they are not open to arguments and challenges from students. Consistent with the suggestion on promoting school democracy by the focus groups, the finding implies that without an increased level of school democracy and an open relationship between teachers and learners, teaching for CT in Vietnamese secondary schools is unlikely to succeed.

Findings indicate whilst parent expectation was not regarded as an important predictor of teaching for CT by the focus group members, many interviewees reported that to meet the expectations of parents who evaluated and paid their respect to teachers based on test results, they taught to the test and encouraged rote learning at the expense of

107

learners’ thinking skills. One of the causes of this contradiction could be the fact that by teaching to meet the requirements of BOET, teachers could also meet the expectations of parents, as Fla, one of the group focus members explained. Thus, parent expectation was not a priority for the focus group participants, who had to make a choice between the given factors. Given such a conflict, taking into account its significant association with the dependent variable found in the questionnaire survey, parent expectation could be considered a predictor of teaching for CT in this context. Though the generalisability of this finding is limited, it may be compatible with the proposals of Wright (2002) and Priestley et al. (2011): pedagogical change can be hampered by parents’ obsolete perceptions of education.