About half of the training programme has been completed by participants in Indonesia, Thailand, and Viet Nam. IIEP is taking this opportunity to pose questions to some participants and coordinators.
Last to be published: Mr. Tran Phuoc Linh, Team coordinator of ESP Programme in Ho Chi Minh City (Viet Nam) and Specialist, Division of Science, Technology, and International Relations at the Institute of Educational Managers, Ho Chi Minh City (Viet Nam)
You have been coordinating the ESP Programme for the past 6 months. Could you please tell us about your role as Team Coordinator?
T.P.L: As a group coordinator, I have played different roles in running the programme. First, I worked as a communicator. I have been the bridge between my institution, the participants’ organizations and the ESP Team, as well as among the participants. Second, I worked as a planner. Whenever a new instruction was released, I made a detailed plan about the time and venue of the coming meeting, the duty of each participant in preparing for the meeting, and other administrative issues. Third, I worked as an “instructor” or “lecturer”. Usually, I had to read the materials very carefully to make presentations at the beginning of each meeting. These presentations covered the key points in each unit/section, including the objectives, outcomes, main points, concepts and especially practical current issues in Viet Nam which may be involved in the lessons. Participants found these presentations and lectures very useful to review what they had read before the meetings. Fourth, I worked as a facilitator at the group discussion. Whenever we had to prepare a group report or discuss a certain issue, we shared ideas by open discussions. I facilitated these discussions so that everyone could join in actively and effectively. At the beginning of the meetings, I let each participant share their feelings and experience in reading the text or simply the difficulties in pursuing the programme. This helped create more morale for the team. Fifth, I worked as an “editor”. Usually, each participant was responsible for drafting a group report prior to the meeting. Then we worked together to make a complete report at the meeting, which usually took place on Friday. During the weekend, I edited the report in terms of language usage, format, and other aspects of the report as instructed before submission. In short, as a local coordinator, I have tried my best to support and lead the team so as to reach the targets as much as possible on behalf of the IIEP ESP team.
Could you briefly explain why your training institution is participating in this programme? How do you think this programme has been beneficial for your institution?
T.P.L: My Institute is major training centre which is experienced and prestigious in providing courses in educational administration, including educational planning in southern provinces of Viet Nam. It is our honour to have been recommended by Mr Vice Minister to cooperate with IIEP in the implementation of the ESP programme.
The cooperation with IIEP on the implementation of the programme is a good chance for us in enhancing international relations in general and our relation with UNESCO agencies in particular. This cooperation also provides us a good chance to work with other partners in Viet Nam. Professionally, we benefit a lot from participating in the programme as we can integrate many parts of the programme into the curriculum and materials of the course in Educational Strategic Planning in our institute, which in turns benefits the educational agencies in our region. Besides, our staff can take this opportunity to enhance their language skills by working in the international contexts.
Participants just taken the first individual examination and have completed three out of the six training modules. How would you assess the progress made by participants so far? Do you have some concrete examples?
T.P.L: The performances of my team in the first three modules were above average and reached the expectations. In terms of engagement, most participants have tried their best to grasp the lessons and to learn new things from the course. In terms of the result of the group report, the team in Ho Chi Minh City needs to improve more so as to meet the expectations. Regarding the mid-term examination, as the UNESCO examination supervisor, Ms Sun Lei, could confirm, most participants were very serious in their active engagement in the revision workshop and tried their best to achieve high scores; nevertheless, the results of the exam might be not as good as we wished.