Index

The need for values education programs for both pre-service teachers and in-service teachers in Vietnam

Quynh Thi Nhu Nguyen1*; Son Van Huynh2

1School of Educational Studies, Ho Chi Minh City University of Education, Vietnam.
2Ho Chi Minh City University of Education, Vietnam.

Abstract

This paper investigates the perceptions of pre-service teachers and in-service teachers regarding the concept of 'values education' and the preparation of values education in professional programs in Vietnam. Furthermore, the pedagogical strategies employed by teachers in addressing values education situations in their classrooms are explored. A qualitative research design was employed, involving interviews with forty-three pre-service teachers from a university. Additionally, eighteen teachers from two different high schools were interviewed, and their teaching sessions, along with school assemblies, were observed. The findings reveal that values education is primarily understood as the instruction of living skills and moral education. There is a lack of conceptualization and knowledge regarding values education among the participants. Both pre-service teachers and in-service teachers did not receive formal values education programs during their university education, and the support provided by schools in this regard was limited. Teachers tended to integrate values education into subjects randomly and subjectively, without employing advanced strategies. Inconsistencies in implementation and challenges associated with teaching values were observed. Highlighting an urgent necessity, this article emphasizes the imperative need for values education programs tailored for both pre-service and in-service teachers in Vietnam. It underscores the significance of adequately equipping teachers to effectively address values education in their classroom.

Keywords: High school students, Pre-service teachers, Teacher education, Teachers’ perception, Teaching methods, Value education.

Contribution of this paper to the literature
This paper contributes to the literature by emphasizing the crucial role of integrating values education programs into pre-service training, highlighting their significance in enhancing future job performance among educators. Additionally, it identifies significant challenges within values education pre-service teacher training, advocating for administrative consideration in the design of programs aimed at teacher preparation.

1. Introduction

Contemporarily, a teacher's service extends beyond the intellectual growth of their students; they must also consider the individual's overall well-being and values tendency. This implies a role for values education in supporting comprehensive personal and social development of students as a whole.  If society expects teachers with their extended role to impart and promote values in their classrooms, universities must offer courses to pre-service teachers that enable them to comprehend their own values and belief, values education pedagogies, and values education evaluation (Mergler, 2008; Spooner-Lane, Curtis, & Mergler, 2010).

Lovat, Dally, Clement, and Toomey (2011b) maintain that the curriculum of teacher education should develop moral aspects of pre-service teachers to enhance quality teaching. In numerous researches and impractical experiences of values education in Australia, they found the link between quality teaching and values education (Lovat, 2011, 2017; Lovat, Dally, Clement, & Toomey, 2011a; Lovat et al., 2011b) . Correspondingly, Revell and Arthur (2007) address that pre-service teachers should be explicitly quipped with values education and moral development to support their students efficiently.

Nevertheless, Thornberg (2008) reveals that values education is “(a) most often reactive and unplanned, (b) embedded in everyday school life with a focus on students’ everyday behaviour in school as a constantly ongoing informal curriculum, and (c) partly or mostly unconsciously performed by the teachers” (p. 1795). Additionally, when describing the ways values education is implemented at their schools, instead of using academic language, theories and research in values education, teachers mention their personal stories and childhood experiences (Thornberg, 2008). Likewise, findings of the research of Thornberg (2013) show that both Swedish and Turkish teachers present a lack of professional language in values education practices and they employ values education strategies illustrated by their personal experiences. This problem may have originated from teacher education programs in values education (Thornberg, 2013). As Halstead (1996) proposes one issue of values education in school is an inadequate preparation in pre-service teacher training. Thus, teachers primarily depend on their own moral instincts to process daily values education practice in their classroom. Lovat et al. (2011a) also suggest that there has been a lack of attention in teacher education regarding values education.

Six significant obstacles to character education pre-service teacher training are outlined by Berkowitz (1998). These include disagreements over the definition of character education, what constitutes values or character education, limited space in pre-service teacher curricula, a lack of scientific data on effective character education factors and outcomes, a scarcity of character education expertise and resources, and conflicts among teacher educators over the compatibility of character education. He also proposes solutions to these challenges, such as conducting more research in teacher education. An essential requirement is the dedication of pre-service teacher educators and their institutions to character education.

In Vietnam, limited research has been conducted on values education, highlighting the gap in both research and implementation of values education in schools  (Nguyen, 2018; Nguyen, 2018). In addition, there is a lack of values education for pre-service teachers at universities and during on-the-job training (Nguyen, 2018). However, values education is still happening in schools, whether or not its stakeholders perceive it, as it is inherently values-laden. It is imperative to investigate the current state of values education in Vietnam, commencing with teachers' perceptions, as their beliefs and values have a significant impact on their teaching styles and pedagogies (Mergler, 2008). Pre-service teachers should be encouraged to explore the values they believe in, and the values they express by their choices and behaviour, which “allows them to become better informed about their own selves and more skilled at developing these skills in their future students” (Mergler, 2008). Additionally, according to Spooner-Lane et al. (2010), embedding values education in pre-service teacher education programs is crucial for enhancing the quality of teaching at universities.

Based on these theories and the issues surrounding values education in Vietnam, three research questions have been formulated as follows:

1. How do pre-service teachers and teachers perceive values education?
2. How do professional programs provide pre-service and in-service teachers with values education in Vietnam?
3. In which ways, does teachers cope with values-education-related situations in their classrooms?

2. Research Methods

The study employed a qualitative research methodology to respond to its research questions. The primary instruments employed for data collection were semi-structured interviews, utilized for both teachers and student teachers. Additionally, observations were conducted to collect data on teacher participants during their teaching sessions, head teachers' meetings, and school assemblies. The study encompassed a total of forty-three student teachers enrolled in a university, identified as ST1 to ST43, as well as eighteen teachers from two government colleges, designated as T1 to T18.

Thematic analysis was performed on the collected data using Nvivo software, resulting in the emergence of three key themes: (1) The perception of values education, (2) Professional preparation for teachers, and (3) Strategies for values-education-related situations. Frequencies of participants' responses were computed and categorized into these thematic areas. Noteworthy quotations were carefully selected to support the research findings. The data was analyzed using a descriptive and inductive approach, and subsequently presented in a written format.

3. Findings

3.1. Perception of Values Education

Table 1 provides different opinions of pre-service and teachers about the definition of values education. What is striking in this table is values education was understood as teaching living skills for students. Values education is “teaching living skills such as public speaking, presentation, listening, and persuading skills.” (T18), “skills to help students to apply their knowledge into their real live” (T7), and “helping students to develop skills. That is values education” (T6).

Table 1. Perception of values education.
Teachers and student teachers’ understanding of values education
f
T
ST
1 Values education is to train living skills for students
10
32
2 Values education is moral and character values education
12
23
3 Values education is a mean of transferring political education and teaching students becoming good citizens
7
9
4 Values education is comprehensive education to develop knowledge, skills and attitudes for students
2
2
5 Values education is what education can bring to a person and the purpose of learning
4
0
6 Values education is about teaching people the ways of behaving 
8
7
7 Values education is to shape students’ behaviour 
3
8
8 Values education is to build attitudes for students
4
8
9 Values education is teaching people the positive things
3
11
10 Values education is to teach students a way of thinking and living
2
0
11 Values education is the values of a subject
3
0
12 Values education is to something that helps young people to achieve their goals
1
2
13 Do not know what is values education
2
5

Similarly, the majority of student teachers described values education as teaching life skills to support students in their lives and future careers. One of the sample responses was as follows:

I think values education is like equipping students with important skills that will be useful in their lives, such as how to speak confidently in public places or how to effectively present and convince others. Other skills like teamwork building and cooperation are also very important because people will need them to succeed in the workplace. After leaving school, people want to find good jobs, and these skills can help them in that pursuit. Without these skills, students will be less competitive in the labor market. (ST 14).

Further analysis showed that values education was “educational activities to teach students about the good, the bad, the right and the wrong to help them to become good citizens” (T17), “teaching moral standards for our students” (T12), “guiding students to recognize what is right, what is wrong, what should do and should not” (T10), and “teaching and learning what values are important to students’ lives” (T9). For student teachers, values education served as a means to help individuals "understand and adhere to societal norms" (ST21), "prevent themselves from engaging in negative behaviors and attitudes" (ST27), and "cultivate a sense of being morally upright individuals for their families and society" (ST43).

There were a few teachers and student teachers who were unable to provide a direct definition of values education; they simply answered that they did not know. However, some of them did provide specific examples of values education.

Values education is to teach students about love, responsibility, tolerance and some traditional values such as respect teachers and studious spirit, patriotism and humanity. (T15).

I think they are care, honesty, integrity, braveness and freedom, I guess (ST 42).

Values education, is that we teach students about disciplines, hard work, care, and compassion? (ST 29).

3.2. Professional Preparation for Teachers

3.2.1. Pre-Service Teacher Training                   

According to student teachers, their university provides a course called "Values Education." However, this course “is not mandatory and is specifically included in the curriculum of the Department of Education for their own students. It is not a requirement for all pre-service teachers of our university”. (ST23).

The curriculum at university did not provide pre-service teachers with values education, as some teachers answered straightforwardly: “At university, people did not teach us [pre-service teachers] values education” (T4). “Values education was taught at university? As far as I can remember, it hardly was not!” (T2). “I am unsure about that, maybe not” (T12). “When I studied at university ten years ago, any values education training program for students was absent. Now I have to manage the classroom and solve all the problems within it by myself as a head teacher” (T1), “Our university hardly trained us or even hardly mentioned values education in the training programs. So, values education with us is quite new” (T15), “No, but maybe in text books, people are illustrated with some classroom situations but I think proposed solutions are ideal and unrealistic” (T5).

Several teachers said that they found subjects such as General Education, High School Education and Educational Psychology included some aspects of values education. Yet these subjects were deemed overly theoretical and rooted in a Soviet educational philosophy which was not suitable for the current educational context in Vietnam. As a result, teachers found it challenging to apply these concepts in practical teaching.

We learnt some educational and psychological subjects such as General Education, Student Psychology with basic knowledge but they were so theoretical. (T1).
The educational philosophies of educational and psychological textbooks were so ideal and far different from the real situations in classrooms. (T5).
There has been a big gap between what we learned and what is really happening in the classroom. (T7).
Maybe we learned values education implicitly through some Education and Psychology subjects but the university used the curriculum and textbooks from the Soviet time… I think the Vietnamese society now is quite different and we should not use these old books for teaching at universities. (T10).
The university trained us in some subjects related to students’ psychology but they were so theoretical and abstract. We got bored and often ignored them. (T13).

Some teachers also mentioned that their practicum periods in upper secondary schools aided them with valuable and practical experiences, particularly in terms of creating lesson plans and engaging in rehearsal teaching sessions. However, the effectiveness of these experiences largely relied on the practicum supervisors as a teacher said:

I was so lucky when I did internship in an upper secondary school and my supervisor was so nice and enthusiastic. She instructed me how to compose lesson plans, practise teaching and process common situations happening in classroom. However, some supervisors of my friends did not pay attention to giving practical guidance. (T1).

3.2.2. Professional Developments

When questioned about the level of support from the school regarding values education, the majority of teachers responded with statements such as “There has been no training program to assist us to teach values” (T9) or “I have never heard of any seminars or workshops about values education at my school” (T12). Teachers had to manage values education problems by themselves, for example, “Students in my head class are quite passive and do not want to attend some social activities. I often encourage them to join in and tell them how to be confident to communicate with other people” (T10).  A teacher who is also a school leader admitted that the school did not organize any values education training programs for teachers, except for occasional workshops and seminars for head teachers focused on managing classroom behavior- “No, we do not train teachers in values education…We sometimes provide workshops and seminars for head teachers to cope with some problems in their classrooms” (T17).

However, teacher T10 thought that extra-curricular activities of the Youth Union supported them to teach values. The Youth Union is responsible for holding extra-curricular activities to promote values such as respect for teachers and studious spirit, patriotism, friendship, unify and so forth. Throughout each school year, these activities are organized according to the theme of each month. The Youth Union of the school assists head teachers to organize some creative activities and entertainment to help students to release stress and promote friendship, confidence and teamwork.

3.3. Strategies for Values-Education-Related Situations

The teacher participants employed various strategies in their classrooms to address values education situations, as shown in Table 2. Modeling positive behavior and attitudes emerged as a prevalent approach. Additionally, integrating values education into lessons through questioning, storytelling, and discussions, as well as utilizing videos, games, and visual aids for class debates and role-playing, were common methods. Creating a friendly learning environment and establishing strong rapport with students were also emphasized. Teachers drew upon real-life examples and guided students to collaborate as a team to promote cooperation, tolerance, and respect. However, it is worth noting that some teachers still resorted to the use of rebuke and punishment.

Table 2. Strategies for values-education-related situations.
Ways in which teachers handle values-education-related situations
f
1 Modeling positive behaviour and attitudes
16
2 Integrating values education into their lessons by questioning, storytelling, discussing
13
3 Using videos, games and visual objects for class debate, discussion and role-playing
10
4 Using good examples of real people in life
10
5 Guiding students to work as a team to promote cooperation, tolerance and respect
9
6 Creating a friendly learning environment where students feel comfortable
8
7 Building good rapports with students
9
8 Drawing on their own teaching experiences, using a trial-and-error approach to determine what is right and wrong
5
9 Using their childhood experiences (For example, moral lessons from their parents or grandparents)
6
10 Using experiences from their own schools (From their former teachers)
8
11 Asking students to read good books
2
12 Using rebuke and punishment
6

These strategies were mostly unplanned in advance and based on each teacher experiences as a teacher said: “when I have an unsuccessful teaching session, I note my failure and try to avoid this at other times.” (T8).  They also rely on their own childhood experiences:

Now I manage a classroom and solve all problems within it by my teaching experiences. In some cases, I thought I used experiences that I was taught by my family… I was taught Confucian values by my parents and grandparents and now I am teaching students in the same way… Women need to achieve four virtues including housework competency, good appearance, skilful speech and moral behaviour. Men need to fulfil benevolence, propriety, righteousness, knowledge, integrity. (T1)

Similarly, T12 employed his adherence to Confucian values to instruct students:

I have a deep faith in Confucian values and utilize them as a foundation for teaching my students. These values serve as a key for assessing an individual's dignity. Confucian values regulated the ways that people behaved in family and in society Confucianism promotes the social responsibilities of an individual. A noble man cannot think only for himself and his family but only for all people in society. Thus, the most remarkable advantage we learn from Confucianism is respect for teacher and studious spirit. (T12)

The data collected from teacher interviews occasionally overlapped with the findings derived from classroom observations. For instance, during the interviews, T1 and T4 emphasized the utilization of positive examples in their teaching practices. In a recorded head teacher meeting, T1 highlighted the involvement of class 12A2 in a charitable volunteer group that regularly visited orphanages and assisted homeless individuals. T1 encouraged all students to participate and conveyed that through helping others, not only do they benefit the recipients, but they also cultivate love and inner peace within themselves. Similarly, in a teaching session, T4 shared real-life stories and provided updates on positive news. T4 emphasized the effectiveness of using good examples as students were more receptive to hearing others' stories and applying them to their own situations, rather than being lectured directly.

However, certain teacher responses diverged significantly from the actual implementation observed in their classrooms. When I observed T5 during a teaching session, I noticed a silent and tense atmosphere in the classroom. The teacher moved from the front to the back of the room, reprimanding students for various reasons such as their hair color, untidy notebooks, and sitting posture. Although other teachers did not explicitly mention frequent reprimands and punishments, their teaching sessions often involved such disciplinary actions. During a head teacher meeting, T2 engaged in an argument with a student who allowed a friend to copy their homework, labeling it as cheating. The teacher also criticized another student who failed to greet the History subject teacher in the car park. As a consequence, both students received a personal behavior report that required their parents' signatures as a form of punishment. T8, on the other hand, would raise her voice loudly when students couldn't answer her questions and would even hit the hands of two students who were not focusing, instructing them to meet her after class.

Classroom observations supported the notion that the level of student cooperation was influenced by the atmosphere created by teachers. The majority of teachers (13 out of 18) managed their classrooms in a gentle and open manner, employing humorous questions to re-engage bored students. Students in these classrooms displayed interest in the lessons, actively participated in answering questions, and sought clarification when needed. In contrast, the classes of T2, T5, T8, T13, and T16 were characterized by high levels of stress, resulting in a lack of student cooperation. During a Monday morning head teacher meeting, T2 criticized students who had violated rules and expressed concerns about their passive approach to learning. The students remained quiet, offering no response or expression. A similar situation unfolded in T5's teaching period, as he focused on behavior, uniform, and hair, walking around the classroom. T8 divided the class into groups to discuss different topics within a short time frame, resulting in an abstract and challenging task. The teacher's use of shouting, standing with arms akimbo, and pointing towards students' faces further contributed to a negative classroom atmosphere, leading students to ignore the teacher and the lesson. T13 and T16 expressed dissatisfaction with student attitudes and mistakes, creating a stressful environment where students felt nervous or disengaged.

Observations conducted in classroom lobbies during lunchtime and at Monday assemblies, which focused on superintendents' communication and behavior. On one occasion, a female superintendent addressed a boy impolitely as he attempted to escape, chasing him and painfully pinching his left ear in front of a crowd. During a Monday assembly, the general superintendent displayed strict behavior, shouting impolitely when someone was talking and instructing those students to stand in front of the school. Another incident involved a female superintendent interrupting a Geography session to publicly read a list of students with outstanding tuition fees, neglecting to express gratitude when leaving. These incidents served as poor behavioral models for students. Furthermore, during the study period, a serious case of a boy bullying his peers for money emerged. As observed during a head teacher meeting, teacher T1 utilized this incident to educate students about appropriate behavior, ensuring anonymity for the boy. However, during a school assembly, the general superintendent singled out the boy, publicly announcing his actions and assigning a punishment of two weeks off-school. The boy kept his head down, gazing at his feet while holding his hands in front of his chest. T17 is also a school leader said that: “Some in-service teachers do not know how to teach values. That is not to mention some in-services teachers may exclude values education. Instead, they just focus on their subjects”. T14 felt that “some in-service teachers are confused with values education. Each teacher has their own way. Even in a class, students might be upset because values are guided differently from teacher to teacher depending on their own personal beliefs”.

4. Discussion

First, this study revealed diverse perspectives on values education among participants, with some considering it as a way for teaching practical life skills, such as public speaking, presentation, listening, and persuading skills, while others emphasized the significance of moral and character education. According to Berkowitz (2011); Lovat (2017) and Thornberg and Oğuz (2016), moral education is one kind of values education. In various Asian countries, particularly those in the Asia-Pacific region like Vietnam, values education is predominantly conveyed through moral education, which is delivered as a distinct subject rather than being integrated into the mainstream educational intentions and pedagogy, as is common in other parts of the world, including Australia (Lovat, 2017). These study findings partly align with participants' perceptions of values education. However, the notion that values education encompasses the teaching of practical living skills, such as public speaking, presentation, listening, and persuading skills, has not been previously documented. It is important to recognize that values education differs from the training of life skills or survival skills. Notably, the focus on teaching life skills in Vietnam schools has emerged recently, likely due to a recognition of the inadequate life skills among Vietnamese students. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this approach remains questionable. Many Vietnamese schools currently offer life skills education on a temporary basis without adequate attention to its impact on students, prioritizing competitive achievements over the genuine effects of life skills activities (Le, 2018).

Nonetheless some teachers and student teachers, encountered difficulties in providing a direct definition of values education and expressed their limited understanding of the subject matter. Previous research has highlighted that “educators lack a discourse to express their ideas about values and to conceptualize the area of values in education. This stems, largely, from the lack of theoretical knowledge and experience educators possess in this area.” (Ling, 1998). The research of Thornberg (2016) indicates that respondents relied on everyday language to describe values and values education, which proved challenging to verbalize. The participants in these studies exhibited a dearth of meta-language when discussing values education, opting to reference their childhood experiences and personal learning rather than drawing upon educational theories or studies from academic disciplines. Likewise, the work of Puroila et al. (2016) and Sigurdardottir and Einarsdottir (2016) reveals that preschool teachers encounter difficulties in defining the concept of values, rarely employing the term in interviews. These findings partially align with the viewpoints expressed by the participants regarding values education in the present study.

Second, the support of values education in pre-service teacher training at the university level is limited. Student teachers reported that their university offers a subject called "Values Education," but it is not mandatory for all pre-service teachers. This aligns with the experiences shared by several teachers who indicated that values education was not emphasized or taught during their university training. They described a lack of focus on values education in the curriculum and expressed that the theoretical nature of subjects like General Education, High School Education, and Educational Psychology made it difficult to apply those concepts practically in the classroom. While the university training was lacking in values education, some teachers mentioned the value of practical experiences gained during their practicum periods. These experiences provided them with opportunities to create lesson plans and engage in rehearsal teaching sessions, although the effectiveness of these experiences varied depending on the guidance provided by practicum supervisors. In terms of professional development, the majority of teachers expressed a lack of support from their schools in terms of values education. They reported a lack of training programs, seminars, and workshops specifically addressing values education. Teachers were left to manage values education issues on their own, finding ways to encourage student participation and address values-related challenges. However, some teachers highlighted the support they received from extracurricular activities organized by the Youth Union.

Recent values education research in many parts of the world shows that the quality of education can be significantly enhanced through explicit and systematic planning and implementation of values education  (Australian Government, 2008, 2011; Berkowitz, 2011; Hawkes, 2010; Lovat, 2017; Lovat et al., 2011a; Thornberg, 2016) . The data from this study express opposite findings wherein values education is either  largely unplanned by the school, or poorly prepared for and by teachers.

The participants in the study disclosed that their universities did not offer any specific values education programs during their studies. Furthermore, the knowledge they acquired in general education and psychological education was perceived as excessively theoretical and outdated, making it challenging for them to effectively incorporate these concepts into their current teaching practices. These findings are consistent with previous research that highlighted the insufficient training of pre-service teachers in values education (Halstead, 1996; Lovat et al., 2011b; Thornberg, 2013) . As previously mentioned, the new request for teachers is being effective agencies and models of values education (Mergler, 2008; Revell & Arthur, 2007; Spooner-Lane et al., 2010) . However, given the ineffective role of teacher education programs in training teachers in values education, it becomes challenging to expect teachers to fully comprehend and successfully implement values education in their job.

Finally, the teacher participants employed various strategies to address values education situations in their classrooms. The most prevalent approach was modeling positive behavior and attitudes. They also integrated values education into their lessons through questioning, storytelling, and discussions, as well as using videos, games, and visual aids for class debates and role-playing. Creating a friendly learning environment and establishing rapport with students were emphasized. Teachers drew upon real-life examples and guided students to work as a team to promote cooperation, tolerance, and respect. However, some teachers still resorted to rebuke and punishment. These strategies were mostly unplanned and based on each teacher's experiences. They often relied on their own childhood experiences and teachings from their families. Some teachers emphasized the influence of Confucian values in their teaching, promoting respect, social responsibility, and studious spirit.

Although the data from teacher interviews occasionally overlapped with classroom observations, there were significant divergences. Some teachers exhibited disciplinary actions and created tense atmospheres in their classrooms, leading to a lack of student cooperation. Observations in the school environment, such as in the lobbies and during assemblies, also revealed poor behavioral models from superintendents. Additionally, there were challenges and inconsistencies in implementing values education. Some in-service teachers lacked knowledge and guidance on how to teach values, resulting in confusion and variations in approaches. This inconsistency among teachers could lead to student dissatisfaction and confusion. This highlighst the necessity to develop a comprehensive values education training program targeted towards in-service teachers.

5. Conclusion and Implications

 The findings highlight the diverse understandings of values education, mostly is teaching living skills and moral education. Participants acknowledged the limited discourse and, relying on everyday language and personal experiences rather than drawing upon educational theories or academic disciplines.

The study also revealed a lack of emphasis on values education in pre-service teacher training and limited support from schools in terms of professional development. The curriculum at the university level often overlooked values education, with theoretical subjects making it challenging for teachers to apply concepts practically in the classroom. The absence of specific values education programs and outdated knowledge further hindered teachers' ability to effectively incorporate values education into their teaching practices.

While teachers employed various strategies to address values education, including modelling positive behaviour and integrating values into lessons, there were inconsistencies in implementation and challenges in teaching values. Some teachers resorted to disciplinary actions, leading to a lack of student cooperation, while others emphasized Confucian values. In the school environment, poor behavioural models from superintendents and inconsistent approaches among teachers added to the complexities of values education.

Based on these discussions, it is evident that there is an urgent need to develop a comprehensive values education-training program specifically targeted towards in-service teachers. This program should address the conceptual understanding of values education, provide practical strategies for teaching values, and promote consistent and effective implementation. Collaborative efforts between educational institutions, external organizations, and policymakers should be undertaken to design and deliver high-quality professional development programs that equip teachers with the necessary skills and resources for successful values education integration.

Additionally, it is crucial to revise the pre-service teacher-training curriculum to include a compulsory values education course. This course should emphasize the significance of values education, provide theoretical foundations, and offer practical approaches for future teachers. Schools should also create a supportive environment that values and encourages the integration of values education, along with incorporating values education components into assessment frameworks to highlight its importance.

Overall, it is time for urgent values education programs for either pre-service or in-service teachers in Vietnam. This, in turn, will contribute to the holistic development of students, fostering their moral and ethical growth and preparing them to become responsible and engaged citizens in Vietnamese society and international community.

References

Australian Government. (2008). The final report of the values education good practice schools project – stage 2. Carlton: Curriculum Corporation.

Australian Government. (2011). Values education and the Australian curriculum commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

Berkowitz, M. W. (1998). Obstacles to teacher training in character education. Action in Teacher Education, 20, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.1999.10462930

Berkowitz, M. W. (2011). What works in values education. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 153-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.07.003

Halstead, M. (1996). Values and values education in schools. London: Taylor & Francis Group.

Hawkes, N. (2010). Values education and the national curriculum in England. In T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing. In (pp. 225-238). Dordrecht; London: Springer.

Le, K. (2018). Do not turn living skills into 'dying" skills. The Ho Chi Minh Laws. Retrieved from http://plo.vn/xa-hoi/giao-duc/dung-bien-ky-nang-song-thanh-ky-nang-chet-751197.html

Ling, L. (1998). Conclusion. In J. Sephenson, L. Ling, E. Burma, & M. Cooper (Eds.), Values in education. In (pp. 207-210). London; New York: Routledge.

Lovat, T. (2011). Values education and holistic learning: Updated research perspectives. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(3), 148-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.07.009

Lovat, T. (2017). Values education as good practice pedagogy: Evidence from Australian empirical research. Journal of Moral Education, 46(1), 88-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2016.1268110

Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011a). Values pedagogy and student achievement. Dordrecht: Springer.

Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011b). Values pedagogy and teacher education: Re-conceiving the foundations. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(7), 31-44.

Mergler, A. (2008). Making the implicit explicit: Values and morals in Queensland teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 33(4), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2008v33n4.1

Nguyen, Q. T. N. (2018). Values education at classroom level in Vietnam: The insider view. In M. Carmo (Ed.), Education applications & developments III. Lisbon: InScience Press.

Nguyen, T. N. Q. (2018). Values education in Vietnam: Case studies of two upper secondary schools. Doctor of Philosophy, Monash University, Melbourne.

Puroila, A.-M., Johansson, E., Estola, E., Emilson, A., Einarsdóttir, J., & Broström, S. (2016). Interpreting values in the daily practices of Nordic preschools: A cross-cultural analysis. International Journal of Early Childhood, 48, 141-159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-016-0163-3

Revell, L., & Arthur, J. (2007). Character education in schools and the education of teachers. Journal of Moral Education, 36(1), 79-92. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240701194738

Sigurdardottir, I., & Einarsdottir, J. (2016). An action research study in an Icelandic preschool: Developing consensus about values and values education. International Journal of Early Childhood, 48, 161-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-016-0161-5

Spooner-Lane, R., Curtis, E., & Mergler, A. (2010). Embracing philosophy and raising the standard of pre-service teacher education programs T. Lovat, R. Toomey, & N. Clement (Eds.), International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing. In (pp. 377-394). Dordrecht: Springer.

Thornberg, R. (2008). The lack of professional knowledge in values education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(7), 1791-1798.

Thornberg, R. (2013). Teachers’ views on values education: A qualitative study in Sweden and Turkey. International Journal of Educational Research, 59, 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.03.005

Thornberg, R. (2016). Values education in Nordic preschools: A commentary. International Journal of Early Childhood, 48(2), 241-257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-016-0167-z

Thornberg, R., & Oğuz, E. (2016). Moral and citizenship educational goals in values education: A cross-cultural study of Swedish and Turkish student teachers' preferences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 110-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.002

Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article.