Schools usually partner around an early-years curriculum in one of four ways: by sending leaders and teachers for training in an approach, by licensing or adopting a curriculum framework with ongoing support, by joining a franchise or branded network, or by collaborating with another institution on research, exchange or professional learning. Each model gives a different balance of autonomy, support and shared identity. The right choice depends less on the reputation of the partner than on whether its educational approach, its way of working and its expectations genuinely fit the school and the families it serves.
This article is for owners, founders, principals and international organisations thinking about a partnership in early childhood education, in Vietnam or elsewhere. It describes the main models in plain terms, the questions worth asking before committing, the regulatory points to check in Vietnam and the signs that a partnership is healthy. It does not cover investment amounts, fees or business returns, which belong to a different conversation.
Four common partnership models
The labels vary between organisations, and many real partnerships combine elements of more than one model. The table describes the typical shape of each.
| Model | What the school receives | What the school keeps | Typical commitment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Training in an approach | Courses, workshops or coaching for leaders and teachers in a pedagogy or curriculum | Its own name, identity, curriculum decisions and daily management | Short to medium term; the school decides how far to apply what it learns |
| Curriculum adoption with support | A framework, planning tools, guidance and usually training and periodic review | Its own name and management, while agreeing to implement the framework faithfully | Medium to long term; some expectations about practice and review |
| Franchise or branded network | A brand, curriculum, operating standards, training and a network of sister schools | Day-to-day operation within the network's standards | Long term; significant obligations on standards, presentation and quality review |
| Collaboration or exchange | Shared professional learning, visits, research projects or staff exchange | Full independence, with joint work on agreed topics | Flexible; often project by project |
None of these models is better in itself. A strong independent school may gain most from training; a new founder without an educational team may need the structure of a framework or network; an established network abroad may want collaboration rather than control.
What each model means for a school's identity
The most important question in any partnership is who decides what children experience each day. In a training relationship, the school decides. Teachers return from a course with new ideas and the school chooses how to use them, which keeps identity intact but places the whole burden of implementation on the school itself. Many schools that send staff on excellent training see little lasting change because nobody inside is responsible for turning ideas into shared practice.
Curriculum adoption moves some decisions to the framework. The school agrees that its planning, observation and classroom practice will follow a common approach, and it usually accepts some form of review. In return, it gains a coherent curriculum it did not have to invent, along with tools and guidance. The school's name and community remain its own, but its educational identity becomes partly shared with other schools using the same framework.
A franchise or branded network goes further. Families choose the school partly because of the brand, so the network has a legitimate interest in what happens in every campus. That brings real support and recognition, and also obligations about standards, presentation and quality review that an independent school would not face. Collaboration, finally, leaves identity untouched and works best between institutions that already have mature practice and want to learn from each other.
Questions to ask before committing
What is the educational approach, in practice? Ask to see real classrooms, planning, observation records and documentation, not only brochures. A partner confident in its approach will show ordinary days rather than prepared demonstrations.
How does it relate to the national programme? In Vietnam, any preschool curriculum must sit within the national preschool education programme. A partner should be able to show clearly how its framework meets national goals rather than leaving the school to work it out alone.
What support continues after the start? Initial training is the easy part. Ask how the partner supports schools during the first two years, how often it visits or reviews practice, and who answers questions when teachers are stuck.
How much may the school adapt? A good framework distinguishes its non-negotiables from the things each school should decide for itself. A partner that cannot say which is which will either control too much or too little.
How is quality reviewed, and by whom? Ask what happens when practice drifts, how review visits are conducted and whether findings are used for support or only for compliance.
How do children experience assessment? For an early-years partner, the answer should involve observation and development records, not tests, scores or rankings of young children.
Can you speak with schools already in the partnership? Conversations with principals and teachers who have lived through implementation are more informative than any presentation.
Judging fit with your own school and families
Fit has three layers. The first is educational: do the partner's beliefs about how young children learn match the school's own? A school that believes in early academic drilling will struggle with a play-based framework, and a school committed to child-led inquiry will feel constrained by a highly scripted programme. It is better to discover this before signing than during the first year.
The second layer is practical. Does the school have, or can it build, the team the partnership requires? A bilingual curriculum needs teachers able to work in both languages and a structure for co-teaching. A project-based approach needs planning time and space for long periods of play. A partnership that assumes staff, rooms or schedules the school cannot provide will produce frustration on both sides.
The third layer is the community. Families choose a school for reasons, and a partnership that changes the school's approach changes the promise made to them. Leaders should think honestly about how current families will respond and how the change will be explained. Partnerships that families understand and support from the beginning are far easier to sustain than ones introduced as a surprise.
Regulatory points to check in Vietnam
Partnerships in Vietnamese education take place within a legal framework that school leaders should not treat as an afterthought. Every preschool operates under the Education Law and the regulations governing preschool establishments, and must implement the national preschool education programme issued by the Ministry of Education and Training. A curriculum partnership adds to that programme; it does not replace it.
Where a partnership involves a foreign organisation, foreign programmes, foreign investment or joint education arrangements, additional rules apply. The main government decree on foreign cooperation and investment in education, Decree 86/2018, together with any later amendments, sets out conditions and approval procedures for several forms of cooperation. The details depend on the exact form of the partnership and change over time, so leaders should check the current rules with the local Department of Education and Training and with qualified legal advice before signing anything.
International teachers working in a partner school also need the correct work permits and residence documents, which are a separate administrative matter from the curriculum itself. A responsible partner will raise these questions early rather than leaving them for the school to discover.
Signs of a healthy partnership after the first year
Teachers can explain the approach in their own words. The clearest sign that a curriculum has been adopted rather than merely installed is that teachers describe why they work as they do, not only what they do.
Support continues to reach classrooms. Review visits, coaching and professional learning still happen, and they focus on children's experience rather than paperwork.
Problems are discussed openly. Both sides can name difficulties, such as staff turnover, family concerns or gaps in materials, without defensiveness, and solve them together.
The school's community recognises the approach. Families can describe what the curriculum is trying to do, and their questions are about their child's development rather than about whether the approach works at all.
Adaptation happens through agreed routes. Changes to practice are discussed with the partner rather than made quietly, and good local ideas travel back into the shared framework.
The school is building its own capacity. Over time the school should depend less on outside trainers, because its own coordinators and experienced teachers can induct new staff and coach colleagues. A partnership that keeps the school permanently dependent is not serving it well.
When a partnership is not the right step yet
Not every school is ready for a partnership, and saying so is not a failure. A school with very high staff turnover, an unsettled leadership team or serious problems with basic safety and care will struggle to implement any curriculum well, and a partnership may simply add pressure. In those cases, stabilising the team and strengthening everyday practice usually comes first.
Similarly, a school that is unsure what it believes about young children's learning may benefit from a period of exploration, such as visits, reading and short training, before committing to a framework. Choosing a partner is easier, and the partnership more likely to last, when the school already knows what kind of early childhood education it wants to offer.
A responsible partner will recognise these situations and may suggest waiting, starting with training only or working first on foundations. Leaders should treat that advice as a sign of good faith rather than a lost opportunity.
Partnership is a relationship, not a purchase
Schools sometimes approach a partnership as they would buy equipment: compare offers, choose the best value, sign and receive. Curriculum partnerships do not work that way. What a school gains depends heavily on what it puts in, especially the time leaders spend learning the approach, the quality of the team that implements it and the honesty of the conversations with the partner when things go wrong.
The partner, for its part, has obligations beyond delivering materials. It should understand the school's context, adapt its support to the school's stage of development, listen when practice reveals that guidance needs to change and be clear about what it can and cannot provide. Partnerships that work over many years are usually those in which both sides are learning, not only one.
This is also why the first conversations matter so much. A partner that listens carefully to the school's situation, asks about its children and families and is willing to say that a partnership may not be the right step yet is often a better partner than one eager to sign quickly.
Routes to working with Global Nexus
The Global Nexus bilingual curriculum is the approach used at Global Star School in Ho Chi Minh City, and this site explains it in English for educators, leaders and international readers. Two related programmes sit alongside the curriculum. A training programme for kindergarten owners and leadership teams covers the approach and its implementation, and the Global Star campus franchise programme offers a route for founders who want to open a campus within the network. Each publishes its own information, and the terms of any partnership are discussed directly with them rather than set out here.
For international organisations, researchers and educators interested in collaboration, exchange or professional learning around early childhood bilingual education in Vietnam, the most useful starting point is a conversation about shared interests rather than a predefined package. The questions in this article apply as much to us as to any other partner, and we would encourage any school considering the curriculum to ask them.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
What are the main types of curriculum partnership for preschools?
Most fall into four groups: training in an approach, adoption of a curriculum framework with ongoing support, membership of a franchise or branded network, and collaboration or exchange between institutions. Many real partnerships combine elements of more than one of these.
How is a curriculum framework different from a franchise?
With a framework, the school keeps its own name and management while implementing a shared curriculum. In a franchise or branded network, the school also operates under a shared brand and standards, which brings more support and recognition but also more obligations.
What should a school ask a potential curriculum partner?
Ask to see real classrooms and records, how the framework meets the national programme, what support continues after the start, how much adaptation is allowed, how quality is reviewed, how children are assessed and whether you can speak with schools already in the partnership.
Does a curriculum partnership replace the national preschool programme in Vietnam?
No. Every preschool in Vietnam must implement the national preschool education programme issued by the Ministry of Education and Training. A partner curriculum is layered on top of it and should show clearly how national goals are met.
Are there special rules for partnerships with foreign organisations in Vietnamese education?
Yes. Foreign cooperation and investment in education are governed by specific regulations, notably Decree 86/2018 and any later amendments. Requirements depend on the form of partnership, so schools should confirm current rules with the education authorities and legal advisers.
How can a school tell if a curriculum partnership is working?
Teachers can explain the approach in their own words, support continues to reach classrooms, problems are discussed openly, families recognise and understand the approach, and changes to practice happen through agreed routes rather than quietly.