Abstract
General English (GE) curricula occupy a critical component of university language programs in Vietnam. National language policy reforms, particularly the utilization of the Vietnamese Standardized Test of English Proficiency (VSTEP), set outcome-based instruction benchmarks. Although previous research has substantially examined curriculum design, assessment practices, and learner perspectives, there remains a gap in understanding the lived experiences of lecturers in the context of GE teaching at the tertiary level. Bridging this gap, this study explored the experiences of three lecturers from a public university in Vietnam. Informed by Complexity Theory, this retrospective trio-narrative inquiry collected data qualitatively through narrative-oriented, semi-structured interviews and a joint conversation with purposefully selected participants. The qualitative data were analyzed utilizing a narrative thematic analysis, integrating individual-collective perspectives. Findings were grouped into three interconnected themes: (1) navigating institutional mandates and Level-3 proficiency standards in the VSTEP, (2) adapting teaching practices to meet the needs of heterogeneous learners, and (3) negotiating professional identity and sustaining motivation amid ongoing challenges. These insights showcased delicate balances that participants maintained between policy expectations and classroom realities. By tracing nuanced, locally embedded understandings, this study contributes to a more comprehensive perspective of GE teaching dynamics in Vietnam, proposing implications for stakeholders in comparable contexts. The study concluded by acknowledging limitations and recommending potential directions for future research.
Keywords
Introduction
In the Global South, particularly Vietnam, language education has been affected by its history and present-day globalization, correspondingly elevating English proficiency to a priority in workforce development (Lam & Albright, 2019; Phan et al., 2025; Sundkvist & Nguyen, 2020). As Bui et al. (2025) further asserted, to meet this demand, the Ministry of Education and Training (MoET) introduced the “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Education System during the Period 2008 to 2020,” known as the National Foreign Language Project 2020 (NFLP 2020; MoET, 2008). This initiative, later prolonged until 2025 through Decision No. 2080/QĐ-TTg (MoET, 2017), has sought to expand the number of Vietnamese citizens who can communicate fluently in foreign languages, with an emphasis on General English (GE) (Le & Pham, 2019; Trinh et al., 2024). Moving beyond its status as a content-specific subject, GE itself has been reconceptualized as a foundational requirement aligned with national goals for employability and international engagement (Lam, 2018). As a result, GE provision has expanded nationwide and became a mandated element across diverse higher education settings (Bui et al., 2018). Building on such foundations, lately, the Government promulgated Decision No. 2371/QĐ-TTg, approving the Project on Making English the Second Language in Schools for the period 2025 to 2035 with a vision to 2045, which aims to strengthen foreign language competence nationwide. As a result, GE can serve as a compass in equipping learners with critical competences, assisting them to participate in academic, professional, and global contexts effectively. In this sense, it repositions English proficiency as a key driver of Vietnam’s global integration and socio-economic development.
Within English Language Teaching (ELT) in Vietnamese higher education, GE has been institutionalized as a shared academic foundation for most undergraduate programs, while English majors pursue more specialized language trajectories (Pham, 2022; Phan, 2009). For students in other disciplines, GE courses represent the principal avenue through which academic English is encountered, shaping opportunities for international study, cross-cultural engagement, and career development in globally oriented sectors. (Pham, 2022; Quach & Nguyen, 2024). Yet despite such strategic significance, their impact is not without contention. Educational researchers have raised concerns about how GE provision interacts with lecturers’ teaching practices and learners’ real-life performances, particularly given complex influences within Vietnam’s language education system (Doan & Hamid, 2019). Research on GE in Vietnam (Le & Pham, 2019; Pham, 2022; Tran et al., 2023) has focused on curriculum structure, assessment practices, and learner perspectives. However, lived experiences of GE lecturers, primary agents who contribute to policy enactments, are reported to be under-explored. Understanding these experiences is much-needed because lecturers’ timely perspectives directly influence how GE courses are implemented and how learners engage with them. Therefore, drawing from the Complexity Theory (CT), this study addresses this gap by exploring the lived experiences of three GE lecturers in the Mekong Delta region. Capturing their own voices, the study is expected to provide context-specific insights that inform policymakers, curriculum designers, and educators working in similar English-as-a-Foreign-Language (EFL) contexts. In addition, the study portrays the interconnection between national objectives and classroom practices in an economically modest region in Vietnam.
Literature Review
General English in Tertiary Education
Within higher education, GE denotes a suite of English-oriented courses designed to foster learners’ overall language proficiency (Far, 2008). Additionally, with sustained engagement with diverse language practices, GE equips learners to operate more confidently across a wide range of academic, social, and intercultural situations. Furthermore, GE is referred to as a foundational pillar that undergirds academic progression, professional development, and learning engagement with the shifting demands of an increasingly globalized world (Waluyo, 2020). Johnson and Tweedie (2021) and Pham (2022) observed that across diverse higher education contexts, GE holds a vital role in fostering learners’ communicative competence, academic literacy, and higher-order cognitive capacities, while simultaneously cultivating a repertoire of personal and transferable skills. Importantly, although variations in curricular orientation, class size, and pedagogical emphasis inevitably mediate learners’ learning experiences, GE maintains a structurally central position within undergraduate curricula through which it serves as a pedagogical platform that prepares learners for subsequent academic trajectories as well as heterogeneous workplace demands. Basically, intended learning outcomes of GE articulate expected attainments in terms of competencies at course completion (Selçuk, 2025). Informed by Guilbert’s (1987) tripartite taxonomy, Bui et al. (2025) contended that the intended outcomes address multiple domains of learning, integrating cognitive development, hands-on competence, and the formation of positive learner attitudes. Correspondingly, when systematically aligned with curriculum design and assessment practices, such outcome structures enhance instructional coherence and strengthen the pedagogical quality of learning experiences, which supports more sustainable learning trajectories (Uygun & Cesur, 2025; Warnby, 2025).
General English in Tertiary Education in Vietnam
For a workforce with better English language proficiency, Circular No. 01/2014/TT-BGDDT was promulgated by the Vietnamese MoET as part of a more significant response to the demanding expectations placed on graduates to demonstrate well-developed competences. As Bui et al. (2025) claimed, this policystipulates that all tertiary-level learners undertake GE courses and attain Level 3 proficiency under the VSTEP, corresponding to with Level B1 of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001). As evaluated by Nguyen and Hamid (2015), from a theoretical standpoint, the VSTEP represents a balance between standardization and contextualization. It also serves as an instrument for Vietnamese higher education institutions, guiding curriculum design, clarifying learning outcomes, and shaping assessment practices that support sustainable language development (Albright, 2019; Le & Chen, 2019).
The integration of the VSTEP into higher education curricula indicates the prioritization of English language proficiency. In Vietnam, the proficiency benchmarks are set for specific learner groups; as Lam (2018) explained, “university students need to achieve level three (B1), and college students need to achieve level two (A2) to graduate; students who are considered ethnic minorities (including highland and tribal students) need only to achieve a lesser proficiency level of 2/6 (A2)” (p. 88). To address varied learner backgrounds and initial proficiency levels, institutions both adopt and adapt different class structuring approaches, ranging from specific proficiency subcategories to more inclusive groupings (Bui et al., 2025). In practice, learners are placed in levels corresponding to their pre-assessed proficiency and are provided with tailored curricula designed to support their progression toward the mandated competency targets (Le & Pham, 2019). Moreover, this instructional model ensures that learning itself is differentiated, sequential, and contextually relevant (Vu, 2017) and further enables learners at each level to acquire linguistic competencies essential for academic achievement and commitment readiness to professional workplaces (Bui et al., 2018; Lam, 2018; University of Cambridge, 2011). Within the scope of the current study, GE courses are conceptualized as mechanisms for achieving mandated proficiency benchmarks and as foundation English course for learners’ subsequent participation in English-medium instruction (EMI) programs, particularly through the development of academic language skills and communicative confidence required for content-based learning (Nguyen et al., 2025).
Vietnamese EFL Lecturers’ Lived Experiences in GE Classrooms
Lived experiences of Vietnamese EFL lecturers in GE classrooms are dynamic, contextually affected by interconnections among policy-based expectations, classroom realities, and professional identity negotiation. In addition, contextually, such experiences are under the influence of deep-seated socio-cultural factors. While the VSTEP was introduced to standardize English learning outcomes (Lam, 2018; Lam & Albright, 2019), its implementation in GE courses for non-English majors reveals enduring tensions that permeate the teaching-learning process (Le & Pham, 2019; Nguyen & Hamid, 2015).
At the institutional level, the requirement to align teaching with VSTEP benchmarks is experienced as not only a mandate but also a constraint. Placement tests frequently reveal that the majority of first-year students enter at the A1 level, despite this being the intended graduation standard for high school graduates. Socially, this phenomenon leads to a substantial gap between the policy aspirations and actual learner readiness (Pham, 2022). Besides, this mismatch compels lecturers to “teach up” to policy targets while compensating for foundational skills that a majority of learners have lost or never fully acquired. The gap, compounded by limited instructional hours, undermines the feasibility of meeting official performance outcomes, necessitating considerable pedagogical improvisation (Quach & Nguyen, 2024).
Within the classroom, tertiary lecturers navigate highly heterogeneous learner profiles. Students are more likely to display uneven skill strengths, showcasing collective progress and complicating lesson design (Le & Pham, 2019; Vu, 2017). Furthermore, low intrinsic motivation, shaped partly by cultural attitudes that frame English as an academic hurdle rather than an individual aspiration (Phan, 2009), further constrains progress. In such contexts, lecturers act as instructors and motivators, attempting to spark engagement in students who may be indifferent and overburdened with other coursework, or even discouraged by perceived incompetencies.
Professional engagement is mediated by the structural and cultural conditions of GE teaching. A proportion of teaching staff, especially externally recruited lecturers need to better get informed of the objectives of the program (Le & Chen, 2019). The lack of sustained professional development opportunities, especially those integrating socio-cultural dimensions of English use, probably leaves lecturers feeling loosely disconnected from the international communicative contexts wherein they are tasked to model. Correspondingly, insufficient institutional assistance and inadequate teaching time may dampen lecturers’ enthusiasm, a disengagement students readily perceive and may internalize (Pham, 2022). Beyond formal curricula, the absence of English-speaking environments inside and outside classrooms limits the needed opportunities for authentic language usage (Sundkvist & Nguyen, 2020). This sociocultural reality, ingrained in Vietnam’s exam-oriented teaching culture and modest public usage of English, amplifies the classroom’s role as the primary site of language interaction (Le & Chen, 2019). Correspondingly, lecturers themselves bear pedagogical burdens of creating the immersive conditions in a fundamentally non-immersive setting, a task that is academically demanding and emotionally taxing.
In brief, Vietnamese EFL lecturers’ lived experiences in teaching EG classrooms can be conceptualized as fluid, dynamic and contextually-contingent. Additionally, such experiences unfold within, and are continually reshaped by, the cultural traditions, institutional mandates, and interpersonal dynamics that characterize GE teaching dynamics in higher education.
Related Studies on GE in Tertiary Education
Over recent decades, research into GE courses in higher education has greatly expanded. Such an expansion mirrors the increasing recognition of English language proficiency as a prerequisite for academic and professional competitiveness This growing recognition has constructively informed curriculum design and policy alignment. In this regard, it repositions GE as a vehicle for enhancing learners’ communicative needs, professional preparedness, long-term employability.
Internationally, recent research has illuminated pedagogical innovations and affective dimensions of GE learning. Shirvan and Taherian (2021) investigated the longitudinal link between the Foreign Language Enjoyment (FLE) and Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety (FLCA) among 367 undergraduates in a GE course. Through latent growth curve modelling, they observed a rise in FLE alongside a decline in FLCA over one academic semester, with changes in their correlation suggesting nuanced emotional trajectories. In an intervention-focused study, Zarrinfard et al. (2021) compared mid-tech and low-tech flipped instruction, blended learning, and conventional teaching for developing reading skills in 100 first-year undergraduates. Their findings demonstrated that mid-tech flipped instruction, where digital materials were integrated into a dedicated online platform, produced the most substantial improvement in reading performance. Learner feedback reflected positive attitudes toward flipped learning, albeit with important calls for re-calibrating teacher professional roles and instructional design.
In Vietnam, Le and Pham (2019) employed a sequential mixed-methods design to examine teachers’ responses to the top-down implementation of the VSTEP for non-English majors. Their findings show that teachers acknowledged the policy’s legitimacy while raising concerns about constrained instructional time, limited resources, and the gap between students’ entry proficiency and must-to-be-achieved outcomes. Similarly, Pham (2022) analyzed curriculum frameworks from one public and one private university. The study revealed divergent institutional strategies in aligning learning outcomes, course organization, and assessment practices with MoET regulations. Additionally, these practices were greatly shaped by contextual and organizational conditions. In the same line, Tran et al. (2023) surveyed 159 employees and reported positive evaluations of workplace-relevant English competencies. At the same time, respondents expressed dissatisfaction with theory-heavy content, a lack of authentic tasks, and insufficient formative feedback. In the quality assurance domain, Quach and Nguyen (2024) examined monitoring and evaluation practices related to General English programs. While these mechanisms broadly conformed to recognized standards, the authors identified limitations in addressing learner needs and in conducting systematic curriculum review.
When comparing and contrasting these bodies of research, clear patterns do emerge. Global studies (e.g., Shirvan & Taherian, 2021; Zarrinfard et al., 2021) have predominantly emphasized classroom-level dynamics, paying foci on the instructional innovation, learner engagement, and affective experiences. These studies suggest that pedagogical design can directly influence both cognitive and emotional gains. In contrast, Vietnamese studies (e.g., Le & Pham, 2019; Pham, 2022; Tran et al., 2023) have tended to focus more on systemic and structural dimensions (e.g., policy implementation, curriculum adaptation, and the alignment between institutional mandates and learner needs). While both strands portray the importance of contextual responsiveness, international research foregrounds practical classroom strategies, whereas local research highlights policy enactment, institutional adaptation, and the challenges of operationalizing standards across diverse learner populations. This contrast reveals that although global and local studies share a concern for effective learning outcomes, they approach the problem from different entry points: one from instructional micro-level practices, the other from macro-level systematic structures. This suggests that the insights from both perspectives are vital for a holistic understanding of GE education.
Despite the breadth of existing scholarly work, a paucity of research examining lecturers’ lived experiences in teaching these GE classrooms is reported. Understanding these lived experiences is critical for developing responsive practices that not only satisfy VSTEP proficiency requirements but also accommodate the contextual realities of Vietnamese higher education. To address this gap, the present study endeavors to explore a singular, focused research question: How do Vietnamese EFL tertiary lecturers narrate their lived experiences when teaching in GE classrooms? On centering lecturers’ perspectives, this study contributes uniquely to the current literature through illuminating the nuanced, context-specific ways in which teaching practices are enacted, adapted, and sustained. In this regard, it provides much-needed insights that extend beyond policy prescriptions and curriculum frameworks.
Theoretical Framework Underpinning the Study
This study is grounded in CT. This theory is a trans-disciplinary orientation influential in education and applied linguistics to portray dynamic, context-interdependent phenomena (Davis & Gaskell, 2009). More specifically, Larsen-Freeman (2013) claimed that CT conceptualizes socio-educational environments as complex adaptive systems. In such systems, multiple components interact in non-linear ways, giving rise to novel patterns, continuous alterations, and forms of order that cannot be reduced to individual elements (Holland, 1998; Mitchell, 2003). As Larsen-Freeman (2013) revealed, CT helps researchers in “understanding how complex order emerges from interacting components” (p. 228) and repositions learning as a dynamic process of becoming, rather than the accumulation of unchanging knowledge. Central to CT is a number of foundational constructs. Firstly, emergence refers to “the spontaneous occurrence of something new” (Van Geert, 2008, p. 182) which arises from the interactions among system elements. Supplementing emergence, non-linearity links to that small pedagogical adjustments can yield disproportionately large consequences which are more likely to be analogized to the “butterfly effect” (Elman, 2003; Larsen-Freeman, 2013). Thirdly, self-organization describes how patterned order develops without centralized control as individuals adapt to contextual demands (Mitchell, 2003). Moreover, complex systems possibly lead to adaptation and co-adaptation, hereby establishing openness and dynamism. This is because such systems interact with their environment, shift through phases of stability and instability. Additionally, they continually reorganize themselves in response to novel affordances and constraints (Gleick, 1987; Van Lier, 2000).
In educational contexts, CT provides a powerful lens for understanding classrooms as fluid, interconnected spaces. Classroom phenomena emerge from the interconnection among learners, teachers, curriculum, institutional expectations, material resources, and wider socio-cultural norms (Trinh et al., 2025). Such systems cannot be meaningfully understood through reductionist approaches, as “the act of playing the game changes the rules” (Gleick, 1987, p. 24); teachers and students co-adapt through ongoing interaction, generating new forms of order and learning trajectories over time (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008). CT, as a result, foregrounds the adaptive agency of teachers, who recalibrate practices in response to learner needs, contextual particularities, and policy environments. Applying CT to the Vietnamese tertiary GE context facilitates the research team to conceptualize lecturers’ lived experiences as situated within a richly interconnected system. Vietnamese GE classrooms are shaped simultaneously by policy-driven proficiency demands (i.e., VSTEP), heterogeneous learner profiles, resource constraints, socio-cultural values, and institutional priorities. These elements interact non-linearly. More significantly, anchoring the study in CT also facilitates the integration of macro-level policy and micro-level classroom realities. The VSTEP represents a localized adaptation of an international proficiency framework, yet its implementation unfolds in a web of institutional, pedagogical, and socio-cultural influences.
To visually articulate this theoretical orientation, the current study uses a CT-informed blueprint (see Figure 1). In this model, lecturers’ lived experiences in GE teaching occupy the center of a dynamic system comprising four elements: VSTEP benchmarks, institutional policies, learner dynamics, curriculum resources, and socio-local contexts. The interactions among these components are regarded as non-linear and reciprocal, producing emergent classroom processes. Consequently, lecturers’ pedagogical adaptation and co-adaptation are results of mediating forces that shape, and are shaped by, the systems.
CT-informed theoretical blueprint guiding the study.
Research Methodology
Participants
This study invited three EFL lecturers from the School of Foreign Languages at a discipline-focused public university in the Mekong Delta region. They were non-probabilistically selected through the purposive sampling technique. The selection criteria included (1) having taught across all three sequential levels of the GE curriculum (GE1-GE3), and (2) possessing substantial instructional experience with the full program. This criteria-based selection ensured that participants could provide in-depth, timely insights into curriculum delivery, pedagogical challenges, and learners’ progression. Moreover, their sustained engagement with the GE program has contributed to the development of distinct professional identities among these participants, shaped by their unique role in mediating outcome-based instruction and preparing learners for subsequent EMI contexts. Accordingly, it differentiates their identities from those of other EFL lecturer groups within the institution. More significantly, selected participants represented a very diverse range of professional and demographic characteristics, including gender, years of teaching experience, academic rank, and disciplinary expertise (see Table 1). This diversity allowed the study to further capture multiple perspectives on curriculum implementation, classroom dynamics, and learner engagement, thereby enhancing the interpretive richness of the findings. Such purposive sampling demonstrates methodological rigor by intentionally including participants whose experiences are particularly relevant to the research focus.
Demographic Information of Participants.
Arguably, all three lecturers had successfully delivered courses at each GE level in the program, enabling them to self-reflect on the curriculum’s coherence and the adaptation of teaching strategies to diverse learner needs. Their professional trajectories contributed to a richer, more nuanced understanding of GE provision within the university context.
Research Setting and Design
The study employed a retrospective trio-narrative inquiry to explore how the participants experienced GE courses after completing their teaching practices. This qualitative research design was selected as it provides a means to explore lived experiences through the lens of personal storytelling (Clandinin & Connelly, 1990). As Holland et al. (1998) noted, narratives are the medium through which “people tell others who they are, but even more importantly, they tell themselves, and they try to act as though they are who they say they are” (p. 3). In the context of this study, narrative inquiry was well-suited to capturing participants’ reflections and meaning-making processes regarding their GE teaching journeys, yielding more comprehensive and contextually ingrained insights that other research methods might overlook. More significantly, three participants recounted narratives centering on the same shared experiences, offering complementary yet distinct perspectives. While the core event remained constant, each participant was expected to emphasize different aspects according to their individual roles, emotions, and retrospective interpretations. This convergence on a single experience allowed for in-depth exploration of how meaning-making can vary across individuals despite a common context.
The GE curriculum, managed by the GE Department within the School of Foreign Languages, serves approximately 1,200 learners each year. At the time of data collection, the curriculum comprised three sequential courses, comprising GE 1 (four credits), GE 2 (three credits), and GE 3 (three credits), with a total of 150 instructional hours. According to the NFLP 2020, the stipulated exit requirement for the curricula was the Level-B3 of the VSTEP . Upon completion of the GE sequence, learners could progress to ESP courses delivered by their disciplinary faculties. The selection of this GE curriculum as the research setting was based on three compelling considerations. First and foremost, GE substantially represents a compulsory and central component of undergraduate education in Vietnam. Secondly, the curriculum attracts learners from a wide spectrum of academic disciplines within the university, creating a diverse learning environment. Thirdly, despite its centrality, there is limited empirical research exploring lecturers’ lived experiences within such a curriculum in this school, particularly in relation to how they perceive the relevance of GE to their teaching practices and professional roles.
Data Collection and Analysis
Data collection was conducted through two rounds of semi-structured interviews. In the first round, individual interviews were carried out with each participant to elicit personal narratives of their lived experiences. These interviews allowed participants to reflect privately and provide detailed accounts of their perspectives without influence from outsiders. The duration of each interview ranged from 50 to 60 min. Each interview took place in a quiet, mutually-agreed location to ensure comfort and confidentiality. In the second round, a joint conversation was arranged in which three participants who shared the same experience engaged in a collective discussion. This conversational setting enabled them to revisit, clarify, and elaborate on their narratives, as well as to respond to and build upon one another’s recollections. The conversation lasted approximately 76 min. The interview protocols were designed according to Clandinin and Connelly’s (2022) narrative framework, attending to the three narrative dimensions of temporality (past, present, future), sociality (personal feelings, thoughts, and social interactions), and spatiality (contexts and environments in which experiences occur). Furthermore, the protocols were informed by CT-informed theoretical blueprint, encouraging participants to articulate how their experiences unfolded dynamically across complex adaptive systems (Appendices A and B). Prompting questions encouraged participants to recount their experiences across time, reflect on interpersonal influences and emotions, and situate their stories within specific classroom and institutional settings. All interviews and conversation were audio-recorded with participants’ consent and transcribed verbatim.
The data were analyzed using a narrative-oriented thematic analysis approach (Clandinin & Connelly, 2022). This approach integrates the holistic, story-based perspective of narrative inquiry with the systematic categorization of thematic analysis. This hybrid method was selected to ensure that participants’ teaching experiences were interpreted both as coherent narratives and as thematic patterns that transcend individual accounts. Importantly, the process was also informed by the CT-informed lens. Guided by its characteristics (e.g., non-linearity, emergence, and self-organization), the analysis paid attention to how participants’ experiences were shaped by multi-layered interactions. The process unfolded through a series of iterative stages. Firstly, each transcript from both the individual and joint interviews was read and re-read to foster deep immersion in the lecturers’ stories and to attend closely to contextual details in which these experiences occurred. Secondly, distinct narrative segments were identified, each representing a significant episode in the participants’ teaching journeys. Thirdly, these narrative segments were inductively coded to generate initial themes that captured recurring dimensions of their experiences. In the fourth stage, preliminary themes were refined, merged, or expanded into broader categories that reflected convergences and divergences among participants’ accounts, while safeguarding the integrity of each lecturer’s narrative voice. Fifthly, composite narratives were constructed to weave together individual and shared perspectives, particularly drawing on a second-round joint conversation to illuminate how collective meaning-making occurred.
Throughout this iterative process, three overarching convergent themes crystallized, representing the most salient, recurrent dimensions of participants’ narratives: (1) Navigating the institutional mandates and the VSTEP proficiency standards, (2) adapting pedagogy to diverse and multi-level learners, and (3) negotiating professional identity and sustaining teaching motivation (see Table 2). These themes emerged from sustained engagement with the data as the most conceptually robust lenses for explaining how participants experienced, interpreted, and responded to the demands of GE teaching contexts. Arguably, such themes provided a coherent analytic architecture for the presentation of findings, enabling both within-case narrative integrity and cross-case thematic comparability.
The Data-Coding Example for the Current Study.
Ethical Considerations and Trustworthiness
The study complied with institutional and international guidelines for human subjects research. All participants were provided with the study’s purpose, procedures, and potential risks. Informed consent was obtained in written form before participation. Then, participants were reminded of their right to withdraw at any stage without consequences. Numerical codes were assigned to three participants, and identifiable information was altered to maintain confidentiality. Interview recordings and transcripts were carefully stored in password-protected folders accessible only to the research team.
To enhance trustworthiness, the study adopted multiple strategies as recommended by Lincoln and Guba (1985). Credibility was established through prolonged engagement with participants across two interview rounds. Furthermore, the member checking was used, whereby participants reviewed and confirmed the accuracy of the transcripts and preliminary interpretations. Peer debriefing was conducted with two experienced qualitative researchers who critically examined the thematic interpretations and the logical flow between collected data and findings. Transferability was facilitated by providing thick descriptions of the research context, participants, and data collection and analysis process, enabling readers to determine the applicability of the findings to other settings. Dependability was supported through an audit trail documenting all methodological decisions, data management steps, and analytical processes. Finally, confirmability was ensured by maintaining reflexive notes during the study to track researchers’ positionality, assumptions, and data interpretations.
Findings
Navigating Institutional Mandates and VSTEP Proficiency Standards
Participants’ narratives revealed that navigating the institutional mandates and VSTEP proficiency requirements had been a challenge and a motivator in shaping their practices. In the first round of interviews, L1 recalled a memorable experience: When I first heard about the requirement, I felt excited and anxious. Excited because it gave us a clear target, but anxious because I was not sure how my learners, especially those from rural areas, could reach that level. I remember staying up late to adapt my lesson plans. (L1, first round interview)
This reflection illustrated how institutional policy generated both clarity and emotional strain, compelling participants to recalibrate pedagogical planning to accommodate learners’ diverse needs. L1’s experiences set the tone for greater concerns shared by other participants. Expanding upon L1’s perspective, L3 described in her individual interview how the VSTEP benchmarks influenced her instructional decisions: The B1 requirement for graduation meant I had to make sure every activity in class pushed my learners towards that goal. Sometimes, I felt like I was teaching to the test, but I also knew that without this standard, some might not take English seriously. (L3, first round interview)
L3’s lived experiences highlighted the pedagogical tension between maintaining learner-centered instruction and adhering to a high-stakes proficiency benchmark. This reflection subsequently demonstrated how the standards affected participants’ day-to-day pedagogical choices. While L1 and L3 recounted their workload and instructional pressures, L2 emphasized practical difficulties of helping learners meet VSTEP descriptors. His own account offered a complementary perspective on how local expectations played out at the classroom level: Some struggled with basic grammar and reading sections, yet the VSTEP descriptors expected them to handle complex tasks like giving presentations. […] I had to break things down, scaffold a lot, and sometimes slow the pace so they would not give up. (L2, first round interview)
Arguably, these self-reflections emphasized that participants continuously adjusted their pedagogy through added preparation, test-oriented activities, or intensified scaffolding so that learners could progress without being overwhelmed. This shared struggle became even more visible in the second round of joint conversation, where the participants expanded on each other’s earlier points.
In the joint conversation, these reflections became interconnected. L3 responded to L1’s earlier point about workload, noting that: I remember rewriting entire exam papers so they matched the VSTEP can-do statements. We felt like we had to do it because their futures were on the line. (L3, joint conversation)
L2 then built on L3’s reflection, reinforcing the idea of collective responsibility That really made us feel like the stakes were higher than just teaching English; we were gatekeepers to their degree. (L2, joint conversation)
Implied in his recalling, L2’s remark foregrounded the moral and emotional dimensions of teacher identity. It further revealed how VSTEP alignment positioned participants as pivotal actors whose decisions held long-term implications for learners’ academic trajectories.
In brief, these narratives demonstrated that while VSTEP proficiency requirements offered a unified benchmark, three participants experienced them as a delicate balancing act. They continually negotiated between institutional policy and classroom realities, employing strategies ranging from curriculum adaptation to scaffolding learning.
Adapting Pedagogy to Diverse and Multi-Level Learners
Participants’ accounts consistently revealed that the heterogeneous nature of their GE classes required continual pedagogical adaptation. In the first round of individual interviews, L3 reflected on the wide range of learner abilities in her classes: I had learners who could hold a conversation fluently and others who still struggled with the alphabet in GE 1. It was impossible to use the same approach for everyone. I had to prepare two or three different sets of activities for the same lesson. (L3, first round interview)
This narrative illustrated how instructional differentiation was an operational necessity, as participants had to design parallel tasks to address wide-ranging proficiency levels. L3’s concern aligned with L1’s lived experiences, who shared a similar struggle in maintaining engagement across ability levels: In the GE1 and GE2 level, if I focused too much on more competent learners, the weaker ones got lost and stopped participating. But if I slowed down for the weaker ones, the more competent ones became bored and disengaged. (L1, first round interview)
L1’s account highlighted the inherent tension between pacing and inclusivity. It further showcased how they continually negotiated their conflicting instructional priorities to keep all learners engaged. L2 highlighted how he addressed these differences through scaffolding: I would pair more competent learners with weaker ones so they could support each other. It didn’t solve everything, but it helped create a more collaborative atmosphere. Some of my weaker ones became more confident because they had a peer to guide them. (L2, first round interview)
These accounts indicated that multi-level classrooms had demanded strategic planning and moment-to-moment adjustments. In the second round of joint conversation, participants further expanded and connected their own reflections to each other’s. Responding to L3’s point about preparing multiple activity sets, L2 noted: Yes, I did that too, but sometimes I felt like I was teaching three mini-classes inside one big class. It was exhausting to keep track of who was doing what. (L2, joint conversation)
His reflection revealed the cognitive load associated with teachers’ professional roles. He had to juggle multiple instructional tracks simultaneously, often at the expense of their energy and focus. L3 then contributed a perspective on the emotional dimension of managing diverse classrooms: I think the hardest part was not just the planning, but the feeling that you could never fully meet everyone’s needs. You always left class wondering if you had done enough for the weakest ones while still challenging the strongest. (L3, joint conversation)
These narratives showcased that teaching in multi-level GE classrooms demanded strategic planning and emotional resilience. Teachers employed a range of adaptive strategies, from differentiated materials to peer-pairing, yet still grappled with persistent challenges in pacing, engagement, and equitable learning outcomes. Their reflections suggested that while diversity enriched the classroom environment, it also intensified the demands on teachers’ time, energy, and pedagogical creativity.
Negotiating Professional Identity and Sustaining Teaching Motivation
Retold in participants’ narratives, professional identity was what they continuously negotiated in response to their teaching contexts, personal beliefs, and evolving career goals. In the first round of individual interviews, L1 reflected on how her understanding of being a GE teacher had developed over time: In the early years of teaching GE, I thought being a good teacher meant delivering lessons clearly and covering the syllabus on time. But the longer I taught, the more I realized that it’s also about the way you carry yourself, the relationships you build, and the way you inspire learners to want to learn. (L1, first round interview)
This account shed light on how identity formation unfolded as an iterative and reflective process. Arguably, it was shaped by accumulated experiences and shifting perceptions of what effective teaching itself entailed. L1’s narrative resonated with L3’s experience, who described how her motivation to teach was intertwined with a sense of professional purpose: When a boy tells me, “I finally understand this topic.” What he said was small, but it reminds me that the work matters. I think I should be more committed to helping someone feel capable and confident in a language they once found impossible. (L3, first round interview)
L3’s reflection demonstrated how learner progress, however incremental, functioned as an emotional anchor that greatly reinforced her professional commitment and sustained her motivation. Furthermore, in L2’s point of view, sustaining motivation also meant finding ways to stay intellectually engaged in his role: If I only focus on repeating the same lessons year after year, I’d lose my own spark. That’s why I try to attend workshops, read about new methods, and experiment with different activities in class. It keeps me interested, and when I’m interested, learners can feel it too. I think that’s a big part of how I stay motivated. (L2, first round interview)
In this reflection, his account highlighted the role of continuous professional learning in preserving enthusiasm. Through this lens, he affirmed that teachers’ motivation was closely linked to their own sense of growth and intellectual stimulation.
Moving into the joint conversation, these individual reflections intertwined and became communal. Responding to L2’s point about learner progress, L1 shared: Yes, exactly. I remember a girl who barely spoke in the first semester, and then 1 day she volunteered to give a full presentation in English. I felt so proud of the journey we had together. Those are the moments that make the challenges worth it. (L1, joint conversation)
L1’s recollection recalled how the breakthrough moments not only validated teachers’ efforts but also contributed to the emotional architecture of professional identity. Grounded upon both L1 and L3’s reflections, L2 linked these moments to a sense of shared identity among those who work in tertiary contexts: I think we all live for those breakthroughs. They remind us why we chose this profession in the first place. When we share these stories with each other, we’re part of a community that’s working towards the same goal. (L2, joint conversation)
These narratives illustrated that negotiating professional identity and sustaining teaching motivation were interconnected processes. Participants drew on personal reflection, learner successes, and collegial exchange to reaffirm their sense of purpose, even amid the demands of their work. Reshaping professional identities served to maintain their academic resilience, ensuring that their commitment to teaching remained long-lasting.
Discussion
The study’s findings elucidated the complex interconnection among institutional policy, classroom dynamics, and continuously adapted pedagogical choices of lecturer participants engaged in teaching GE classrooms in Vietnamese higher education. From a CT perspective, these interconnections exemplified how GE classrooms function as complex adaptive systems wherein multiple elements interacted dynamically and non-linearly. Centering on experiences of tertiary lecturers offered timely, practice-oriented perspectives on the enactment of the VSTEP aligned curricula in a context-specific GE curriculum.
From a theoretical perspective, GE itself represents a central element in cultivating communicative competence that advanced academic progression and professional trajectories (Campion, 2016; Johnson & Tweedie, 2021; Waluyo, 2020). Empirically, the narratives gathered in this study reconfirmed the significance of this mission and portrayed considerable pedagogical practices necessary for its realization in a policy-defined framework governing participants’ teaching practices. In accordance with Guilbert’s (1987) tripartite taxonomy, the participants’ instructional practices engaged the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective dimensions, enabled the development of linguistic knowledge, the refinement of practical communicative abilities, and the strengthening of learner self-efficacy. Each of these dimensions required distinct forms of instructional focus, and institutional mandates such as the B1 proficiency graduation benchmark amplified the cognitive and affective demands on lecturers and students. The findings further enriched the conceptualization of GE by portraying it as more than a broad-based linguistic preparation (Campion, 2016; Far, 2008). GE constituted as a pedagogical space that embodied the intersection between standardization and adaptation. The VSTEP provided a nationally recognized structure for curriculum design (Lam, 2018; Nguyen & Hamid, 2015), yet its successful classroom application frequently required micro-level curricular refinements, differentiated instructional strategies, and tailored scaffolding approaches.
Moreover, the study’s exploration of teaching practices in heterogeneous GE classrooms deepened the theoretical discourse on learner diversity in higher education. Previous scholarship had recognized the importance of sequential and differentiated instruction for addressing diverse learner backgrounds (Bui et al., 2018; Le & Pham, 2019). The present study offered a detailed portrayal of how this differentiation operated in practice. Lecturers navigated multiple ability groups within the same class, calibrated task complexity, and adjusted instructional pacing to sustain engagement for both higher- and lower-proficiency learners. Such experiences positioned effective GE pedagogy as a dynamic process of continuous situational adjustment in which instructional content, lesson pace, and support mechanisms evolved in response to the changing characteristics of the learning environment. In addition, three participants’ accounts of professional identity development and sustained motivation introduced an essential human dimension to the current understanding of GE implementation in Vietnam. While policy frameworks foregrounded learner attainment, the lecturer emerged as a pivotal agent who mediated between policy goals and pedagogical realities. Professional resilience flourished through visible learner achievements, collegial exchange, and continuous self-initiated professional learning. These insights aligned with Warnby’s (2025) argument that coherent alignment among learning outcomes, curriculum, and assessment had to be complemented by institutional support for the affective and professional well-being of those delivering instruction.
The findings of this study resonated with both international and Vietnamese research on GE curricula. Consistent with Shirvan and Taherian’s (2021) and Zarrinfard et al.’s (2021) emphasis on the interplay between instructional innovation and learner engagement, this study highlighted how participants adapted their teaching methods to meet diverse learner needs while managing emotional and motivational dimensions in the classroom. In the Vietnamese context, the findings aligned with Le and Pham’s (2019) and Pham’s (2022) findings regarding the difficulties in implementing VSTEP standards amid limited resources and mismatches between learners’ proficiencies and policy expectations. Tran et al. (2023)’s observations about the gap between the curriculum content and workplace relevance also resonated with participants’ reflections on practical challenges of preparing students for real-world English use. Meanwhile, Quach and Nguyen’s (2024) arguments on quality assurance mechanisms underscored the systemic pressures that shaped curriculum and teaching practices, echoed in lecturers’ lived experiences of balancing institutional mandates with classroom realities. Most significantly, this study advanced the current literature by foregrounding lecturers’ experiences as they negotiated not only pedagogical adaptations but also professional identities and sustained motivation under institutional pressures. Unlike prior studies that focused mainly on policy enactment, curriculum design, or learner affect separately, this study integrated these dimensions to provide a holistic understanding of how GE teaching was enacted in Vietnamese tertiary education.
Theoretically, these findings illuminated defining characteristics of complex adaptive systems as articulated in the CT. First and foremost, participants’ narratives portrayed clear manifestations of emergence. As recalled in their stories, GE teaching practices were continuously adapted through real-time engagements with learner behaviors, institutional expectations, and shifting classroom ecologies. Participants interacted with moment-to-moment contingencies, and these interactions generated “fresher” pedagogical strategies and relational patterns. Such developments aligned closely with Van Geert’s (2008) depiction of emergence as “the spontaneous occurrence of something new” (p. 182). Additionally, their experiences exemplified the non-linear characteristic of GE teaching. Small instructional alterations frequently produced substantial changes in learner engagement and classroom momentum. These outcomes echoed the “butterfly effect” described by Elman (2003). In this regard, it shed light on the heightened sensitivity of GE classrooms, highlighting the central role of responsive decision-making in incrementally enhancing pedagogical quality. Thirdly, self-organization constituted another prominent feature within the participants’ teaching practices. Following Mitchell’s (2003) conceptualization, self-organization occurred through the spontaneous formation of coherent patterns that guided classroom work without centralized orchestration. This process unfolded not only at the individual level but also collectively, emerging through collegial dialogues, shared problem-solving efforts, and organically formed professional learning communities within their institutions. Finally, these findings further highlighted continuous adaptation and co-adaptation across GE classroom interactions. As participants made their pedagogical decisions, learners responded in ways that influenced subsequent instructional decisions, creating reciprocal cycles of change that enriched the learning environment. This dynamism aligned with CT’s conceptualization of educational systems as permeable in response to contextual demands, reconstructing participants’ identity and sustaining motivation in the teaching profession.
Contextually, participants’ experiences reflected the profound influence of Confucian values, particularly the principle of social responsibility, alongside Vietnamese professional ethics rooted in President Hồ Chí Minh’s philosophy: “Vì lợi ích mười năm trồng cây, vì lợi ích trăm năm trồng người” (For the benefit of 10 years, plant trees; for the benefit of a hundred years, cultivate people). This highlighted their conviction that education shaped not only individual futures but also the long-term development of society. Their dedication was further affirmed by revered Vietnamese proverbs such as “Mỗi thầy cô giáo là tấm gương cho học sinh noi theo” (Every teacher should be a role model for students to follow) and “Dạy học là nghề cao quý nhất trong những nghề cao quý” (Teaching is the noblest profession among noble professions). Together, these cultural and professional values informed participants’ professional identities and provided enduring motivation when they navigated the challenges inherent in GE classrooms.
Conclusions and Pedagogical Implications
This study substantially advanced the understanding of GE teaching within Vietnamese higher education by foregrounding lived experiences in such teaching among three lecturers. These experiences revealed how the VSTEP aligned curriculum transcends its theoretical design to become a complex, contextually mediated practice. GE should be considered a vital educational pillar fostering linguistic competence and academic capacities that enabled learners to navigate diverse communicative demands. In this regard, high-quality GE instruction is a crucial preparatory pathway for successful engagement in English-medium instruction contexts (Nguyen et al., 2025). Additionally, participants’ stories to live by implied the significant intellectual, emotional labor invested in reconciling standardized proficiency benchmarks with varied learner needs. Furthermore, the profound influence of Confucian social responsibility and Vietnamese professional ethics enriched participants’ motivation and shaped their enduring commitment, positioning education as a transformative social endeavor reaching beyond immediate instructional goals. Ultimately, this holistic perspective integrated policy, pedagogy, and cultural values, contributing meaningfully to both local and international discussions on language education in higher education contexts.
The findings highlight the imperative for educational stakeholders to cultivate a more responsive and flexible approach to GE curriculum design and implementation. Policies should place greater emphasis on adaptability at the micro-level, empowering educators to tailor content and instructional strategies in ways that address the complexities of heterogeneous classrooms. This includes fostering differentiated pedagogy that balances cognitive challenge with affective support, ensuring equitable learning opportunities across proficiency levels. Teacher preparation and continuous professional development should prioritize equipping lecturers with practical skills for scaffolding, emotional resilience, and reflective practice. Institutional leaders bear responsibility for creating supportive environments that recognize the affective dimensions of teaching and encourage collaboration among educators to share effective practices and sustain professional well-being. Additionally, integrating cultural values such as social responsibility and moral exemplariness into teacher education programs can deepen lecturers’ professional identity and motivation, reinforcing teaching as a vocation with profound societal significance. Such an integrative framework holds potential to enhance not only the quality of GE instruction but also the educational mission within Vietnamese tertiary contexts.
Limitations and Future Research Directions
While the study provides valuable insights, certain limitations should be acknowledged accordingly. The participant sample was limited to three lecturers within a specific local context, which may constrain the transferability of the findings to other Vietnamese higher education settings or beyond. Additionally, the reliance on self-reported narratives may introduce subjective biases and limit the scope of observable classroom practices. The study focused predominantly on lecturers’ perspectives, thereby omitting complementary views from stakeholders. Furthermore, translating culturally-embedded expressions in interview transcripts from Vietnamese into English may be influenced by semantic nuances and cultural sensitivities. Such translation challenges can affect the authenticity of meaning conveyed, potentially limiting the full appreciation of participants’ philosophical references.
Future investigations could expand on this study by incorporating a larger and more diverse participant pool with multiple institutions and regions to enhance the generalizability of findings. To be more specific, including learners’ voices and institutional stakeholders would provide a more comprehensive picture of GE curriculum implementation and its challenges. Furthermore, longitudinal research tracking pedagogical changes in lecturers’ adaptations would further deepen important insights into the dynamic nature of GE teaching. Additionally, exploring the impact of culturally embedded values on teacher motivation and learner outcomes could offer valuable contributions to local and international discourses on language education. Attention to cultural and linguistic particularities in such research would strengthen the relevance and applicability of findings within diverse educational contexts.
Footnotes
Appendices
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all participants for their valuable time and contributions to this study.
Consent for Publication
Informed consent for publication of anonymized data was obtained from all participants involved in the study.
Author Contributions
Trinh Quoc Lap conceptualized and supervised the current study. Phan Nhat Hao designed the research, conducted data collection and analysis, and drafted the manuscript. Le Huu Ly contributed to the data interpretation and manuscript revision. Nguyen Thanh Hung provided methodological advice and proofread the final version of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Can Tho University and Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.