Volume 07 Issue 09 September 2024
1Khuong Phi Dinh, 2Duong Lam Thuy
1Thai Nguyen University of Sciences, Vietnam
2Thai Nguyen University of Education, Faculty of Primary Education, Vietnam
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i09-05Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
This study investigates the factors influencing the quality of training programs at the University of Sciences – Thai Nguyen University (TNUS) by conducting a survey among final-year students to obtain feedback on their experiences. Data was collected from 242 TNUS students in Course 18 (cohort 2020-2024) and analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software. The findings identify six key factors impacting training quality at TNUS: (1) objectives, program learning outcomes, and training program contents; (2) teaching activities in the course; (3) assessment of learning outcomes; (4) student consulting and support services; (5) learning materials and facilities; and (6) General assessment of the course. These factors collectively affect the quality of graduates. Based on these results, the article offers recommendations for enhancing training programs to better meet current societal needs.
KEYWORDS:Training programs, quality, survey, feedback, final-year students
REFERENCES1) Resolution No. 29-NQ/TW dated November 4, 2013 of the 8th Central Conference, session XI on fundamental and comprehensive innovation of education and training
2) Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 2005, Resolution No. 14/2005/NQ-CP dated November 2, 2005 on basic and comprehensive innovation of Vietnamese university education in the period 2006 - 2020
3) Ministry of Education and Training, No.: 01/2024/TT – BGDDT, Hanoi, February 5, 2024 Circular promulgating standards for higher education institutions
4) Vu Xuan Hung (2016), High quality human resources retrieved from the website address http://www.nhandan.com.vn/cuoituan/item/29833602-nhan-luc-chat-luong-cao.html.
5) Alvarez, K., Salas, E., and Garofano, C.M. (2004), An integrated model of training evaluation and effectiveness, Human Resource Development Review, 3, 385–407.
6) Areti, S. and Theodora, S. (2014), Evaluation of Educational Programmes – the Contribution of History to Modern Evaluation Thinking, Health Science Journal, Volume 8 (2014).
7) Austrian Development Cooperation (2009), Guidelines for Project and Programme Evaluations
8) Kaufman, R., Keller, J. and Watkins, R. (1996), What works and what doesn’t: Evaluation beyond Kirkpatrick. Nonprofit Management Leadership, 35: 8–12. doi: 10.1002/pfi.4170350204.
9) KirkPatrick D.L (2006), Evaluating training programs: The four levels, Berett – Koehler Publishers.
10) Stufflebean, D.L (1983), The CIPP model for Program evaluation, Kluwer – Nijhpff Publishing, pp 117-141.
11) Victor C.X. (2009), Assessing and evaluating adults learning in career and technical education, Zhejiang University Press.
12) Hoang Trong, Chu Nguyen Mong Ngoc (2005). Analysis of research data with SPSS. Statistics Publishing House, Ho Chi Minh City.
13) Bui Ngoc Anh, Dao Thi Hong Van (2013). Survey on student satisfaction with training quality at University of Economics - Vietnam National University, Hanoi. Scientific research, University of Economics - Hanoi National University.
14) Nguyen Thi Bao Chau, Thai Thi Bao Chau (2013). Evaluating the level of student satisfaction with the training quality of the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Can Tho University in the period 2012 - 2013. Science Magazine, Can Tho University, No. 28, 117-123.
15) Nguyen Hoang Diem Huong (2014). Factors affecting alumni satisfaction with the quality of undergraduate training at University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City. Scientific Conference - New consumer behavior in the Asean community - Opportunities and challenges. Ho Chi Minh City National University Publishing House.
16) Nguyen Thi Hong Linh (2010). Evaluating the satisfaction of college Course 1 students about the course at Nha Trang Vocational College. Master's thesis, Nha Trang University.
17) Hill, FM. (1995). Managing service quality in higher education: the role of the students as primary consumer. Quality Assurance in Education, 3(3), 10-21.
18) Oliver, R. L., W. O. Bearden. (1985). Disconfirmation Processes and Consumer Evaluations in Product Usage. Journal of Business Research, 13, 235-246.
19) Parasuraman, A, Zeithaml, V.A. anh Berry, L.L.(1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.
20) Philips Kotler (2001). Marketing Management Milenium Edition. Ten Edition, USA: Prentic Hall Inc, pp 239.
21) Ministry of Education and Training, Department of Quality Management, No. 166/QLCL – KĐCLGD, December 31, 2019 Regarding replacing the evaluation guideline issued with official dispatch No. 768/QLCL – KĐCLGD.
22) Ministry of Education and Training, Department of Quality Management. Evaluation guidelines according to Circular No. 12/2017/TT-BGDDT dated May 19, 2017 of the Minister of Education and Training promulgating Regulations on quality accreditation of higher education institutions (Attached to the Document No. 1668/QLCL-KĐCLGD dated December 31, 2019 of the Department of Quality Management, replacing the Evaluation Instructions issued with Document No. 768/QLCL-KĐCLGD dated April 20, 2018 of the Department of Quality Management)
23) Ministry of Education and Training, Department of Quality Management. Guidelines on evaluating the quality of training programs at all levels of higher education. According to Circular No. 04/2016/TT-BGDĐT dated March 14, 2016 of the Minister of Education and Training promulgating Regulations on standards for evaluating the quality of training programs at all levels of higher education (Attached to Circular No. 1669/QLCL-KĐCLGD dated December 31, 2019 of the Department of Quality Management, replacing the Guidelines on assessing the quality of training programs at higher education levels issued together with Guidelines No. 769/QLCL-KĐCLGD dated April 20, 2018 of the Department of Quality Management)
24) Ministry of Education and Training, Department of Quality Management. No.: 768/QLCL-KĐCLGD, Hanoi, April 20, 2018 Regarding assessment instructions according to the set of standards for assessing the quality of higher education institutions
25) Ministry of Education and Training, No.: 12/2017/TT – BGDĐT, Hanoi, May 19, 2017 Circular promulgating Regulations on quality accreditation of higher education institutions
26) Ministry of Education and Training, Department of Quality Management. No.: 2085/QLCL-KĐCLGD, Hanoi, December 31, 2020 Instructions for self-assessment and evaluation outside the training program