The headline of the article below piqued my interest to find out with bated breath what those "educational strengths" are (especially irrestible for one who has long experience in Thai education). More often than not, my experience in this country tells me that "international courses" mean Thai lecturers use English to teach Thai students. The primary motivation (as with evening, training, up-country courses) is to generate money for the institution.
The story begins by relating that a group of "relevant agencies" (starting) to encourage the Education Ministry to seriously strengthen the country's transnational education.
So now I began to wonder with a tinge of impatience ..... the headline implicity asserts that Thailand has strengths in transnational education... what are these strengths? In what sense are they considered strengths?
Further down the lines, you find out these consist of "medical fields; nursing; tourism; service and hospitality; food; and agricultural fields" being "accepted internationally". Is anyone aware of these facts? A professor at Siriraj Hospital Faculty of Nursing told me that they barely manage to have 2 to 3 nursing students (who receive some kind of international scholarships). These students come from Bangladesh, China, Laos, etc. on the purportedly south-south kind of "cooperation". (This is the premier Faculty of Nursing in Thailand). Tourism? Hospitality?
When I worked at Mahidol University, the number of students studying hotel management at the international college was rather conservative and consisted mainly of rich Thai kids. Food? I wonder how many international students are studying in private universities in Bangkok to be chefs? Agricultural fields??? Really? Are these not in fact "spectacular claims" that have no bases in fact? "Accepted internationally" in reference to which countries, may I ask?
Instead of being enlightened, I became more confused with the seemingly illogical thought process of the reporter. It reminded me of the incomprehensible answers I get from my students in their test papers which they directly attribute to their lack of competence in English. (i.e., had they written in Thai, their thoughts would come out clearly.)
As you read further down the quote of the Dhurakij Pundit University (DPU)'s vice president, Prof Paitoon Sinlarat - you would have thought that in desperation, Thai universities are being encouraged to attract drug addicts to come to study to Thailand with the addition of "indigenous drugs" to international programmes. Thailand may have a few liberal notions about some areas of life, but I can assure you this is not one of those that Mr. Taksin believed when he conducted his drug war while Prime Minister. And how will that strengthen international programmes? Surely, in more civilized societies a vice president of a university saying that would end up in public disfavor and ridicule! But not in Thailand. Perhaps, the news reporter misquoted or did not probe for clarification from the distinguished Prof Dr (a statement is enough whether you understand or not because it comes from a professor)? or maybe it was a matter of poor translation and editing?
My acculturated Thai self tells me not to pursue 'deeper' thoughts. Farangs must conform to Thainess not the other way around. In the same way that I believe there was no flood mismanagement, and I believe the government when it guarantees that there will be no more flood next year (2012). (http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/270327/govt-promises-flood-free-future)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Focus on Thai educational strengths, govt told
Wannapa Khaopa
The Nation December 20, 2011 1:00 am
With demand for education growing and student mobility increasing due to globalisation and internationalisation, Thailand must act now or risk lagging behind other countries in this field. Relevant agencies are starting to encourage the Education Ministry to seriously strengthen the country's transnational education (TNE).
In particular, they have urged the ministry to promote TNE by focusing on those educational fields in which the country has already gained acceptance, instead of pushing Thailand as an education hub, arguing that the latter strategy is too difficult to achieve, Sudhasinee Vajrabul, deputy secretary general of the Office of the Education Council (OEC), said yesterday. Sudhasinee was speaking after a meeting with representatives from the Commerce Ministry's Department of Trade Negotiations (DTN), the Office of Higher Education Commission, the Office of Vocational Education Commission, and universities.
They agreed that the ministry should promote Thailand as hub in the medical; nursing; tourism; service and hospitality; food; and agricultural fields. These fields were accepted internationally, so Thailand would be able to succeed more easily in promoting these specific fields, rather than relying solely on the education hub strategy, to which the overall quality of education and English language literacy in the country are important barriers, they said.
Sudhasinee said the OEC would present the proposals to Education Minister Woravat Auapinyakul for consideration next Monday(Dec26) to seriously push Thailand's TNE forward.
"Universities in Thailand have provided international education, which is part of TNE, but it is like fashion. Some universities have opened international programmes just to promote themselves, but they are unable to generate profit. International education in Thailand is seen as second-class international education. Thus, we have to seriously provide quality programmes to lure more foreign students," Dhurakij Pundit University (DPU)'s vice president, Prof Paitoon Sinlarat, said.
He recommended the universities add something special or unique to their international programmes that students could not learn in other countries, like indigenous drugs, to make their programmes more attractive.
In addition to offering English language instruction, Paitoon urged officials to promote Thai language and Thai studies among Asean countries to increase the country's influence in the region, which is similar to what China has done. The idea was backed by many participants at the meeting.
More people in Asean - especially in Vietnam - are studying the Thai language, according to information presented at the meeting.
DTN official Ronnarong Poonpipat said Thailand should promote four areas of education to drive TNE - distance or online education; international education that brings foreign students to study in the country; international education in which foreign universities open branches or offshore campuses in Thailand; and "flying teacher" programmes.
"The Asean Economic Community is coming in the next three years... If we don't prepare for changes in education, Thailand will become a new educational market for other Other countries which have prepared an aggressive TNE strategy," Sudhasinee said.
OEC secretary-general Anek Permvongseni said he planned to host a national conference on TNE to discuss the issue more thoroughly, and a regional conference with Asean countries to learn from their experiences in promoting TNE.
"Singapore and Malaysia have aggressively promoted TNE. We should learn from them."
Agreeing that disjointed educational policies formulated by different political parties when they come to power posed a crucial obstacle, the meeting's participants agreed to look for ways to develop more seamless policies.
Showing posts with label Thai culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thai culture. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Degrees for sale
OPINION
CHALK TALK
Degrees for sale : the cancer in our education system goes beyond
By Chularat Saengpassa
The Nation
Published on May 2, 2011
In the past week, nothing in the education world has been hotter than reports about degrees and diplomas for sale from the E-Sarn University . But just as authorities are frantic to find solid evidence against the university, it is worth asking about the twists in our education ethics, and perhaps our social values.
Frankly speaking, word had spread for quite a long time that people could buy degrees if they wanted too.
A private university, for example, had openly advertised that, "If you pay all tuition fees, you get a degree for sure".
Some other higher-educational institutes may be less open. Still it is widely known that many such institutes have introduced rather expensive courses to generate profits and help their students - so much so that a 'fail' grade is out of the question.
Are such practices a form of degree selling? The answer is perhaps "Yes".
Moreover, thesis services are indeed available for students who can afford them. With many graduate students struggling hard with thesis writing, they opted to turn to such services in a bid to ease their ordeal.
Apart from word of mouth, people offering such services have advertised their expertise on the Internet too. Thesis writers usually charged a graduate student between Bt25,000 and Bt500,000 each. They have charged people seeking a doctorate between Bt200,000 and Bt500,000 each.
In many senses, the service users should be called degree buyers too - because if students don't pay extra, they will not get the master/|doctorate degrees they want.
The Office of Higher Education Commission (Ohec) secretary-general Sumet Yaemnoon has said that it is depressing enough to see some universities let their students pocket degrees so easily, as if they did not care whether the students learned something or not.
"But things are getting worse. Now, the degree sellers have allowed the buyers to get the degrees without any need to sit classes," Sumet lamented.
Several people have said the E-Sarn University contacted them about degrees for sale with the tempting condition that they didn't have to sit classes at all.
Many had taken up the offer, as they knew higher degrees would pave the way for their career advancement.
With the doctorate degrees, they could even apply for posts as university lecturers and enjoy many money-making opportunities.
It is widely believed that not just the E-Sarn University but also many other universities have been involved in degree-selling.
If one Googles "degrees for sale", one will easily find an advertisement listing the price of genuine certificates and degrees.
The advertiser guarantees that the degrees are not forged, payers can even get student ID numbers and check their records with institutes in which they have been enrolled.
A bachelor's degree costs between Bt37,000 and Bt90,000. Payers can attend the conferral ceremony too. For a master's degree, it costs between Bt120,000 and Bt280,000.
By paying an additional fee of Bt7,000 the payer can attend the conferral ceremony as well.
The advertiser does not allow the payers to choose which institutes they want to be linked to, but points out that the buyers can select their preferred field after which they will be able to jump into for the career they want.
Buyers are also promised nice grades and other documents to back up claims they have really studied at the institutes.
All this is closely linked to the labour market. For decades, Thai employers warmly embraced those with degrees from foreign universities, regardless of their international rankings and the degree holders' actual knowledge.
Now, as the labour market opens to degrees from local universities, all who can afford the prices do everything to solidify their social |status.
And now the market complains about degree holders' inability to perform their jobs and how some turn to local wisdom or knowledge from lay persons who hold no university degrees.
In Thai society, as long as these values do not change, it is guaranteed that degrees for sale will be here for a long, long time.
CHULARAT SAENGPASSA
THE NATION
Chularat@nationgroup.com
CHALK TALK
Degrees for sale : the cancer in our education system goes beyond
By Chularat Saengpassa
The Nation
Published on May 2, 2011
In the past week, nothing in the education world has been hotter than reports about degrees and diplomas for sale from the E-Sarn University . But just as authorities are frantic to find solid evidence against the university, it is worth asking about the twists in our education ethics, and perhaps our social values.
Frankly speaking, word had spread for quite a long time that people could buy degrees if they wanted too.
A private university, for example, had openly advertised that, "If you pay all tuition fees, you get a degree for sure".
Some other higher-educational institutes may be less open. Still it is widely known that many such institutes have introduced rather expensive courses to generate profits and help their students - so much so that a 'fail' grade is out of the question.
Are such practices a form of degree selling? The answer is perhaps "Yes".
Moreover, thesis services are indeed available for students who can afford them. With many graduate students struggling hard with thesis writing, they opted to turn to such services in a bid to ease their ordeal.
Apart from word of mouth, people offering such services have advertised their expertise on the Internet too. Thesis writers usually charged a graduate student between Bt25,000 and Bt500,000 each. They have charged people seeking a doctorate between Bt200,000 and Bt500,000 each.
In many senses, the service users should be called degree buyers too - because if students don't pay extra, they will not get the master/|doctorate degrees they want.
The Office of Higher Education Commission (Ohec) secretary-general Sumet Yaemnoon has said that it is depressing enough to see some universities let their students pocket degrees so easily, as if they did not care whether the students learned something or not.
"But things are getting worse. Now, the degree sellers have allowed the buyers to get the degrees without any need to sit classes," Sumet lamented.
Several people have said the E-Sarn University contacted them about degrees for sale with the tempting condition that they didn't have to sit classes at all.
Many had taken up the offer, as they knew higher degrees would pave the way for their career advancement.
With the doctorate degrees, they could even apply for posts as university lecturers and enjoy many money-making opportunities.
It is widely believed that not just the E-Sarn University but also many other universities have been involved in degree-selling.
If one Googles "degrees for sale", one will easily find an advertisement listing the price of genuine certificates and degrees.
The advertiser guarantees that the degrees are not forged, payers can even get student ID numbers and check their records with institutes in which they have been enrolled.
A bachelor's degree costs between Bt37,000 and Bt90,000. Payers can attend the conferral ceremony too. For a master's degree, it costs between Bt120,000 and Bt280,000.
By paying an additional fee of Bt7,000 the payer can attend the conferral ceremony as well.
The advertiser does not allow the payers to choose which institutes they want to be linked to, but points out that the buyers can select their preferred field after which they will be able to jump into for the career they want.
Buyers are also promised nice grades and other documents to back up claims they have really studied at the institutes.
All this is closely linked to the labour market. For decades, Thai employers warmly embraced those with degrees from foreign universities, regardless of their international rankings and the degree holders' actual knowledge.
Now, as the labour market opens to degrees from local universities, all who can afford the prices do everything to solidify their social |status.
And now the market complains about degree holders' inability to perform their jobs and how some turn to local wisdom or knowledge from lay persons who hold no university degrees.
In Thai society, as long as these values do not change, it is guaranteed that degrees for sale will be here for a long, long time.
CHULARAT SAENGPASSA
THE NATION
Chularat@nationgroup.com
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Creative economy in Thailand sounds like an oxymoron
EXECUTIVE TALK
Creative economy needs protection
Published on March 3, 2011 The Nation
"Innovation is key to the golden age." This is how the media recently summed up a well-received and thoughtful speech by Bank of Thailand Governor Prasarn Trairatvorakul, in which he urged the country to focus on innovation as a key to future competiveness.
His comments were yet another sign of growing support for invention in Thailand. On a national level, we are being encouraged to take part in a creative economy. We are being told that this will help Thailand to out-innovate and out-create our country's strongest competitors.
The government is also backing up this effort to build a creative economy with financial support. Deputy Commerce Minister Alongkorn Ponlaboot recently announced a Bt7-billion investment in building Thailand's creative economy this year.
For aspiring entrepreneurs, the creative economy is much more than a political platform. It is - as one software innovator described it - a big step in the right direction that needs to be followed up by enforcement of intellectual-property rights created by the campaign.
"Encouraging the country to innovate is so important," says Thai Software Enterprises' managing director Somporn Maneeratanakul. "But protecting these innovations is equally important. Without good protection for intellectual property, what incentive is there to innovate? Can a creative economy excel without strong protection for the owners of innovations? In my experience, the answer is no."
Consider Somporn's situation. In 1997, he took a financial risk and invested in the copyrights to locally made software. He hired a team of programmers and researchers, established a sales team and began the process of building his business. Yet, 14 years later, Somporn still faces a software-piracy rate of 75 per cent of his product offering.
"With lower levels of software piracy," he says "we would have the resources to create and innovate at much higher levels. We would create more jobs, more wealth, more new ideas. But as it stands, we spend a lot of time and energy protecting our intellectual property."
This is not to take anything away from the strategy behind the government's creative-economy plan. It is, in principal, a sound initiative and our government leaders should be applauded for their focus on innovation and invention.
But for movements such as this to truly take root and develop into viable, wealth-producing, job-creating industries, Thailand must better focus on protecting the intellectual capital created by motivated entrepreneurs.
Given all that Thailand's innovators and creators sacrifice, the least we can do is to protect their innovations and respect their intellectual-property rights.
I fully agree that innovation is the key to the golden age. And I am optimistic about the potential for a creative economy. Thailand clearly has huge potential as a place to be creative. But let's also remember that protection of intellectual-property rights is a critical part of the equation. Without good protection for intellectual property, the golden age will remain something we can only hope to achieve.
Varunee Ratchatapattanakul is a consultant with the Business Software Alliance. She is an attorney specialising in intellectual-property rights.
Creative economy needs protection
Published on March 3, 2011 The Nation
"Innovation is key to the golden age." This is how the media recently summed up a well-received and thoughtful speech by Bank of Thailand Governor Prasarn Trairatvorakul, in which he urged the country to focus on innovation as a key to future competiveness.
His comments were yet another sign of growing support for invention in Thailand. On a national level, we are being encouraged to take part in a creative economy. We are being told that this will help Thailand to out-innovate and out-create our country's strongest competitors.
The government is also backing up this effort to build a creative economy with financial support. Deputy Commerce Minister Alongkorn Ponlaboot recently announced a Bt7-billion investment in building Thailand's creative economy this year.
For aspiring entrepreneurs, the creative economy is much more than a political platform. It is - as one software innovator described it - a big step in the right direction that needs to be followed up by enforcement of intellectual-property rights created by the campaign.
"Encouraging the country to innovate is so important," says Thai Software Enterprises' managing director Somporn Maneeratanakul. "But protecting these innovations is equally important. Without good protection for intellectual property, what incentive is there to innovate? Can a creative economy excel without strong protection for the owners of innovations? In my experience, the answer is no."
Consider Somporn's situation. In 1997, he took a financial risk and invested in the copyrights to locally made software. He hired a team of programmers and researchers, established a sales team and began the process of building his business. Yet, 14 years later, Somporn still faces a software-piracy rate of 75 per cent of his product offering.
"With lower levels of software piracy," he says "we would have the resources to create and innovate at much higher levels. We would create more jobs, more wealth, more new ideas. But as it stands, we spend a lot of time and energy protecting our intellectual property."
This is not to take anything away from the strategy behind the government's creative-economy plan. It is, in principal, a sound initiative and our government leaders should be applauded for their focus on innovation and invention.
But for movements such as this to truly take root and develop into viable, wealth-producing, job-creating industries, Thailand must better focus on protecting the intellectual capital created by motivated entrepreneurs.
Given all that Thailand's innovators and creators sacrifice, the least we can do is to protect their innovations and respect their intellectual-property rights.
I fully agree that innovation is the key to the golden age. And I am optimistic about the potential for a creative economy. Thailand clearly has huge potential as a place to be creative. But let's also remember that protection of intellectual-property rights is a critical part of the equation. Without good protection for intellectual property, the golden age will remain something we can only hope to achieve.
Varunee Ratchatapattanakul is a consultant with the Business Software Alliance. She is an attorney specialising in intellectual-property rights.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Buying Grades, Selling Souls
Bought grades, sold souls an all-access pass through the halls of higher learning
Published: 2/01/2011 at 12:00 AM Bangkok Post
Voranai Vanijaka
Want a bachelor's degree? One can be had for between 37,000 to 90,000 baht, depending on the institution. There's a service that will hack into a university's computer, insert your name on a degree and voila, you can even join the graduation ceremony.
Want a 3.5 GPA? No problem. A hacker can arrange it. Want to be on the honour roll? Just pay a little more.
In fact, your kids can even obtain a primary school certificate; that's only 5,000 to 8,000 baht.
Too dumb to do an MBA thesis? No problem. For anywhere between 120,000 and 280,000 baht, someone will write one for you.
A friend of mine owns a learning institute (one of the many in the country) that caters specifically to rich little boys and girls who are too stupid to write their own theses, but whose parents nevertheless love them very much. Business is always brisk. Want to have the title ''Dr'' precede your name? A doctoral thesis will cost you just a bit more.
Don't want to cheat too blatantly? Want to at least make the effort of pretending to go to school? No problem, a few Thai institutes of higher learning offer ''pay and pass'' programmes. As long as you pay your tuition, you will graduate.
Unofficial, but highly popular, eight- year programmes are also available so that they can milk as much money from parents as possible.
A colleague of mine, who I refer to as ''the walking encyclopaedia'', is currently writing doctoral theses for a few of the 111 banned politicians. They plan to make their return to politics with a PhD because it will look good to the voters. Business is brisk.
Pay to pass is old news. Hiring a ghost writer to complete a thesis is common, so is the straight-up purchase of a a degree. It's the same old story. The emergence of computer hackers who can give you a degree and put you on the honour roll is just a new twist.
In all of these cases, it is not the sons and daughters who are paying for the grades and degrees. It's the parents. It's not the students who sell the grades and degrees, it's the adults. And oftentimes, it's the teachers, the administrators and the institutions themselves making the profits.
Put all that together with the news in recent months that teachers are failing exams in basic subjects like maths and science, and that they are coming up with substandard questions for the O-Net exam, and what do we get?
Cheating and corruption is the norm at all levels of society, and incompetency is the sum of our failings.
Consequently, both the government and private sectors are replete with executives and ministers, managers and bureaucrats with snazzy overseas degrees on their walls and little of anything in their brains.
It is no wonder then that we are not ready to open our industries to foreign competition. We just don't have the skills or knowledge to compete, even with the fancy degrees. Of course, there are many genuinely brilliant and honest minds in Thailand. But we have to compete as a whole, not by the handful.
I recently finished my first semester of lecturing at a university. There are those students who are brilliant and meticulous. It was a joy to teach them. There are those students who are very creative, but bored to death with education. Give them a project that challenges them and gets their creative juices flowing, and they will dazzle. Give them an assignment or an exam that requires researches and study, and witness an exercise in mediocrity. It is then the job of the educator to find a way to stimulate them.
There are also those students who couldn't care less; those who cheat without batting an eye.
Why?
There's an old but true answer to that question, one that has no boundaries and is not specific to any culture.
From Bangkok to Timbuktu, we know that leaders need to set an example for their followers, that adults must provide an exemplary model that the young can emulate.
Ladies and gentlemen, a typical classroom is simply a mirror-image of the society at large.
Should we be surprised that the young prefer cheating, when the parents are only too eager to help them do so? Should we be shocked that students don't care about education, when teachers aren't qualified to educate?
Constitution Court judges vehemently deny (allegedly) being caught on tape (allegedly) involving them in an (alleged) exam leak scandal, and there's no investigation, no repercussions. Doctors, who have sworn an oath to heal without discrimination, declare that they will refuse to treat patients if a bill that will allow them to be sued for medical malpractice is passed.
Should we be baffled that students display no guilt or remorse when caught cheating?
Cheating politicians are allowed to run in by-elections and return to their posts. Half of the country supports a former prime minister who was found guilty of corruption and who fled the country. The other half supports a prime minister who condones the rampant corruption in his government.
Should we then be perplexed that students believe they could and should get away with cheating?
If, according to an Abac poll, 76.1% of Thais believe that corruption is OK, as long as the country prospers, does that mean adults and parents believe students' cheating is OK, as long as they pass and graduate?
If 16-year-old Orachorn Thephasadin Na Ayudhya (who now claims she is 17) believes that she should get away with hitting a van on the tollway and causing the deaths of nine people, should we only blame the girl and her well-connected family? Or should we recognise the fact that this is how society works _ and that is because we, the Thai people, work it that way?
If we want to solve Thailand's woes, overcome our failings and progress into the brave new world, we need to stop pointing fingers at others and start accepting responsibility for the things we do each and every day of our lives. There can't be a crisis among the younger generation unless the old generation instigates it.
No doubt, there will be those holier-than-thous who will insist, ''Not me! I'm not responsible for any of this! It's all of you! But not me!'' Well, fine.
As for the rest of us, we all have done things we wish we hadn't.
Just last week, I woke up thinking to myself of a deed (or misdeed) that occurred the previous night. I thought, ''Blast it, I hope there wasn't any CCTV around.''
The young will aspire to be whatever the adults show them they could or should be. We adults have set a very poor example.
There will be more mistakes, more failings, but at the end of it all, there are better things that we can do in life.
It's the second decade of the second millennium, and we could and should give the future of the Thai society a second chance by setting a better example for our children, stumbling along the way as we might.
Contact Voranai Vanijaka via email atvoranaiv@bangkokpost.co.th
Published: 2/01/2011 at 12:00 AM Bangkok Post
Voranai Vanijaka
Want a bachelor's degree? One can be had for between 37,000 to 90,000 baht, depending on the institution. There's a service that will hack into a university's computer, insert your name on a degree and voila, you can even join the graduation ceremony.
Want a 3.5 GPA? No problem. A hacker can arrange it. Want to be on the honour roll? Just pay a little more.
In fact, your kids can even obtain a primary school certificate; that's only 5,000 to 8,000 baht.
Too dumb to do an MBA thesis? No problem. For anywhere between 120,000 and 280,000 baht, someone will write one for you.
A friend of mine owns a learning institute (one of the many in the country) that caters specifically to rich little boys and girls who are too stupid to write their own theses, but whose parents nevertheless love them very much. Business is always brisk. Want to have the title ''Dr'' precede your name? A doctoral thesis will cost you just a bit more.
Don't want to cheat too blatantly? Want to at least make the effort of pretending to go to school? No problem, a few Thai institutes of higher learning offer ''pay and pass'' programmes. As long as you pay your tuition, you will graduate.
Unofficial, but highly popular, eight- year programmes are also available so that they can milk as much money from parents as possible.
A colleague of mine, who I refer to as ''the walking encyclopaedia'', is currently writing doctoral theses for a few of the 111 banned politicians. They plan to make their return to politics with a PhD because it will look good to the voters. Business is brisk.
Pay to pass is old news. Hiring a ghost writer to complete a thesis is common, so is the straight-up purchase of a a degree. It's the same old story. The emergence of computer hackers who can give you a degree and put you on the honour roll is just a new twist.
In all of these cases, it is not the sons and daughters who are paying for the grades and degrees. It's the parents. It's not the students who sell the grades and degrees, it's the adults. And oftentimes, it's the teachers, the administrators and the institutions themselves making the profits.
Put all that together with the news in recent months that teachers are failing exams in basic subjects like maths and science, and that they are coming up with substandard questions for the O-Net exam, and what do we get?
Cheating and corruption is the norm at all levels of society, and incompetency is the sum of our failings.
Consequently, both the government and private sectors are replete with executives and ministers, managers and bureaucrats with snazzy overseas degrees on their walls and little of anything in their brains.
It is no wonder then that we are not ready to open our industries to foreign competition. We just don't have the skills or knowledge to compete, even with the fancy degrees. Of course, there are many genuinely brilliant and honest minds in Thailand. But we have to compete as a whole, not by the handful.
I recently finished my first semester of lecturing at a university. There are those students who are brilliant and meticulous. It was a joy to teach them. There are those students who are very creative, but bored to death with education. Give them a project that challenges them and gets their creative juices flowing, and they will dazzle. Give them an assignment or an exam that requires researches and study, and witness an exercise in mediocrity. It is then the job of the educator to find a way to stimulate them.
There are also those students who couldn't care less; those who cheat without batting an eye.
Why?
There's an old but true answer to that question, one that has no boundaries and is not specific to any culture.
From Bangkok to Timbuktu, we know that leaders need to set an example for their followers, that adults must provide an exemplary model that the young can emulate.
Ladies and gentlemen, a typical classroom is simply a mirror-image of the society at large.
Should we be surprised that the young prefer cheating, when the parents are only too eager to help them do so? Should we be shocked that students don't care about education, when teachers aren't qualified to educate?
Constitution Court judges vehemently deny (allegedly) being caught on tape (allegedly) involving them in an (alleged) exam leak scandal, and there's no investigation, no repercussions. Doctors, who have sworn an oath to heal without discrimination, declare that they will refuse to treat patients if a bill that will allow them to be sued for medical malpractice is passed.
Should we be baffled that students display no guilt or remorse when caught cheating?
Cheating politicians are allowed to run in by-elections and return to their posts. Half of the country supports a former prime minister who was found guilty of corruption and who fled the country. The other half supports a prime minister who condones the rampant corruption in his government.
Should we then be perplexed that students believe they could and should get away with cheating?
If, according to an Abac poll, 76.1% of Thais believe that corruption is OK, as long as the country prospers, does that mean adults and parents believe students' cheating is OK, as long as they pass and graduate?
If 16-year-old Orachorn Thephasadin Na Ayudhya (who now claims she is 17) believes that she should get away with hitting a van on the tollway and causing the deaths of nine people, should we only blame the girl and her well-connected family? Or should we recognise the fact that this is how society works _ and that is because we, the Thai people, work it that way?
If we want to solve Thailand's woes, overcome our failings and progress into the brave new world, we need to stop pointing fingers at others and start accepting responsibility for the things we do each and every day of our lives. There can't be a crisis among the younger generation unless the old generation instigates it.
No doubt, there will be those holier-than-thous who will insist, ''Not me! I'm not responsible for any of this! It's all of you! But not me!'' Well, fine.
As for the rest of us, we all have done things we wish we hadn't.
Just last week, I woke up thinking to myself of a deed (or misdeed) that occurred the previous night. I thought, ''Blast it, I hope there wasn't any CCTV around.''
The young will aspire to be whatever the adults show them they could or should be. We adults have set a very poor example.
There will be more mistakes, more failings, but at the end of it all, there are better things that we can do in life.
It's the second decade of the second millennium, and we could and should give the future of the Thai society a second chance by setting a better example for our children, stumbling along the way as we might.
Contact Voranai Vanijaka via email atvoranaiv@bangkokpost.co.th
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Making Thailand a medical hub is "evil" and "crazy" policy
I'm glad someone of a high stature in Thai academic circles, like Dr. Ammar Siamwalla, has finally had the guts to speak up on this issue. But why has he waited so long? Was he intimidated during the time of Mr. Taksin? I for one who have to rely on "prakan sangkom" (social insurance) knows first hand the great difference in service in ordinary hospitals and hospitals catering for foreigners. I get the cheapest medicine and the doctors I see are overwhelmed by exceedingly long queues that they don't even have time to establish eye contact. How much more for poor people who have to rely on the "30 baht scheme" or whatever its new reincarnation in the Abhisit government? Never mind (mai pen rai). Thais have a high regard for doctors.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/10/30/national/Economist-calls-plan-to-attract-foreign-patients-&-30141164.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economist calls plan to attract foreign patients 'evil' and 'crazy'
Published on October 30, 2010
Prominent economist Ammar Siamwala yesterday called for the government to stop its plan to become a medical hub. He said the policy had already adversely affected the public health system by diverting resources, including physicians, from public hospitals to treat foreign patients instead of the poor in rural areas.
Being a medical hub "is the worst policy that the government could ever think up", he said.
Ammar was speaking at the 2010 Thailand Pharmaceutical Summit organised by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PReMA).
The medicalhub project, initiated in 2003 by the Thaksin Shinawatra government, included three facets: sickness prevention, spa services and Thai massage. It also promoted Thai herbalmedicine products.
Ammar said the policy had induced a lot of medical workers and physicians to quit public hospitals for private ones, where they can get higher salaries and benefits, causing a shortage of doctors and staff at rural hospitals.
He said the Public Health Ministry, which oversees public hospitals, could not compete with private hospitals.
"The ministry has already increased monthly salaries for medical workers and doctors at state hospitals but they still ask it to increase their salaries again and again. Never enough," he said. "How could the ministry compete with the private sector to attract medical workers?"
If the ministry decided to increase salaries enough to satisfy the medical workers, it would affect the National Health Security Fund and the Social Security Fund, as these two funds have to seek financial resources to support the salaries and allowances for medical workers.
"I would not suggest to the government the best way to go ahead with the plan. Instead I want the government to change its mind and stop this evil plan," he said.
He said some medical schools, such as the one at Siriraj Hospital, were seeking ways to increase the monthly salary for doctors to keep them in the publichealth system but also training them to provide premium medical services to foreign patients.
"Why should we welcome ill, rich foreign patients? This is so crazy," he said.
However, if the government is so stubborn as to go ahead with its medicalhub plan, he said it should collect fees from foreign patients to support the special fund for more medical workers and doctors at rural hospitals, which face a shortage of practitioners.
The Health Support Services Department, which oversees the government's medicalhub policy, is to conduct a public hearing on the idea. Ammar suggested that the department invite a patient network to participate in the public hearing.
Ammar also expressed concern over the high cost of treatment, especially among elderly people who suffer from chronic diseases such as diabetes.
He said most pharmaceutical companies were focusing on creating new technology and medicines to treat elderly patients who suffer from chronic diseases and selling these at high prices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Privacy Policy © 2009 Nation Multimedia Group
November 7, 2010 09:38 am (Thai local time)
www.nationmultimedia.com
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/10/30/national/Economist-calls-plan-to-attract-foreign-patients-&-30141164.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economist calls plan to attract foreign patients 'evil' and 'crazy'
Published on October 30, 2010
Prominent economist Ammar Siamwala yesterday called for the government to stop its plan to become a medical hub. He said the policy had already adversely affected the public health system by diverting resources, including physicians, from public hospitals to treat foreign patients instead of the poor in rural areas.
Being a medical hub "is the worst policy that the government could ever think up", he said.
Ammar was speaking at the 2010 Thailand Pharmaceutical Summit organised by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PReMA).
The medicalhub project, initiated in 2003 by the Thaksin Shinawatra government, included three facets: sickness prevention, spa services and Thai massage. It also promoted Thai herbalmedicine products.
Ammar said the policy had induced a lot of medical workers and physicians to quit public hospitals for private ones, where they can get higher salaries and benefits, causing a shortage of doctors and staff at rural hospitals.
He said the Public Health Ministry, which oversees public hospitals, could not compete with private hospitals.
"The ministry has already increased monthly salaries for medical workers and doctors at state hospitals but they still ask it to increase their salaries again and again. Never enough," he said. "How could the ministry compete with the private sector to attract medical workers?"
If the ministry decided to increase salaries enough to satisfy the medical workers, it would affect the National Health Security Fund and the Social Security Fund, as these two funds have to seek financial resources to support the salaries and allowances for medical workers.
"I would not suggest to the government the best way to go ahead with the plan. Instead I want the government to change its mind and stop this evil plan," he said.
He said some medical schools, such as the one at Siriraj Hospital, were seeking ways to increase the monthly salary for doctors to keep them in the publichealth system but also training them to provide premium medical services to foreign patients.
"Why should we welcome ill, rich foreign patients? This is so crazy," he said.
However, if the government is so stubborn as to go ahead with its medicalhub plan, he said it should collect fees from foreign patients to support the special fund for more medical workers and doctors at rural hospitals, which face a shortage of practitioners.
The Health Support Services Department, which oversees the government's medicalhub policy, is to conduct a public hearing on the idea. Ammar suggested that the department invite a patient network to participate in the public hearing.
Ammar also expressed concern over the high cost of treatment, especially among elderly people who suffer from chronic diseases such as diabetes.
He said most pharmaceutical companies were focusing on creating new technology and medicines to treat elderly patients who suffer from chronic diseases and selling these at high prices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Privacy Policy © 2009 Nation Multimedia Group
November 7, 2010 09:38 am (Thai local time)
www.nationmultimedia.com
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Development without Modernization
If I seem to have lost interest in my blog, it isn't so. It's just that as a foreigner, discretion is the better part of valor after witnessing how the Thai government ordered the "blunt hammer" of the Thai Army to shoot demonstrators. The subsequent handling of the government as shown by their ridiculous attempts at "reconciliation" has only ended in what may have been subconciously the Abhisit's government intention in the first place - to forget and deny. The Reds are a non-entity. The Reds are terrorists.
I am more and more convinced that in any society, the kind of education (indoctrination) will be an important indicator of its degree of democratization and determine the length of time it will take for the country to narrow that gap between the first and last scenario asserted by Abraham Lincoln: "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."
By 2050, 40 years from now, when it is predicted that parts of Bangkok will suffer from innundation from the combination of a 100 year cycle rainfall, and high tides, I am convinced that Thai education system will advance very little. I hope to be proven wrong.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/10/21/opinion/This-quick-fix-for-schools-is-failing-our-children-30140544.html
This quick fix for schools is failing our children
By The Nation, Published on October 21, 2010
Plan to declare English as second language in classroom ignores real problem: huge class sizes and outdated teaching methods
The debate on whether the Education Ministry should declare English as the second language in schools does not address the root cause of the problems in Thai schools. The real issue is the quality of teaching, not just of English but of all the subjects that students need to learn to be equipped for the future. Thai students already spend several hours on each subject per week in the classroom. What remains highly debatable, however, is whether schools give their students the quality time essential to learning.
The attempt to declare English as the second language in the classroom is an admirable thing and shows we are concerned over the low quality of learning. Knowledge of English undoubtedly broadens students' opportunities for learning. But it does not take a grand ambition to place English as the second language to solve the problem. Educators can tackle the issue effectively if they themselves are willing to learn and remain open-minded.
Every Thai student already studies English, but the average level of proficiency is highly questionable. Many teachers have not received training to improve their skills, or access to new knowledge. Some simply don't have the language skills to teach English. This means that many of our students are stuck with unqualified teachers day in, day out.
Although educators often claim they want to prepare students for the fast-changing world, most Thai schools still operate in the same way as their predecessors half a century ago. Typically, up to 50 students are crammed into one classroom and subjected to robotic learning by rote. Teaching methods have barely changed over the years. One change we can expect to see, though, is a drop in the quality of teachers, as their low pay means that teaching is no longer a coveted profession.
The authorities are scrambling for a quick fix. Instead of getting to the root of the problem, they prefer to announce a big-budget programme under a "sexy" title. But spending money alone will not guarantee satisfactory results. It is a shame that money is being lavished on education but producing nothing for our kids.
Rather than debating the terms of our English teaching, educators should take a direct route to improving learning by, first, focusing on limiting the class size for each subject. This puts the priority on ensuring every student receives sufficient attention from teachers. The method of learning by rote does not inspire students to excel at subjects for which they show aptitude. The current classroom environment fails when it comes to promoting either multidimensional learning or students' self-esteem. Students are often judged simply on their ability to memorise lessons, meaning that those with other talents can feel discouraged and left out.
Teachers should also receive constant training, because we owe it to our students to provide them with the best possible schooling. Improvements could also be made if public schools drew more on the resources of progressive or international schools, which are more up to date with techniques.
Meanwhile, an open-minded attitude is essential among teachers and school principals; learning is a never-ending process. Efforts to get retiree native English-speakers to assist in Thai schools have been unsuccessful largely because of the cold reception from teachers who are more concerned about their turf and ego than their students. These teachers should be sacked.
Teaching our children to become good "global citizens" should also be on the agenda. For instance, they should be taught about conserving energy and the impact they can have on the environment. But responsibility and citizenship are not sufficiently addressed. Instead, youngsters only hear adults asking for their rights but refusing to be accountable.
And most importantly, students should be given belief in their capacity and ability. Rather than promoting youngsters' self-actualisation, schools tend to punish students who don't perform well in the robotic model of learning. Meaningful knowledge is sidelined in favour of teaching students to fit into a mould by achieving good grades.
Thai students need to learn more about their geography and history to see how this physical and cultural background has shaped them. This will then enable them to understand themselves better. In contrast, currently they are usually forced merely to memorise information without learning how to think with it.
I am more and more convinced that in any society, the kind of education (indoctrination) will be an important indicator of its degree of democratization and determine the length of time it will take for the country to narrow that gap between the first and last scenario asserted by Abraham Lincoln: "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."
By 2050, 40 years from now, when it is predicted that parts of Bangkok will suffer from innundation from the combination of a 100 year cycle rainfall, and high tides, I am convinced that Thai education system will advance very little. I hope to be proven wrong.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/10/21/opinion/This-quick-fix-for-schools-is-failing-our-children-30140544.html
This quick fix for schools is failing our children
By The Nation, Published on October 21, 2010
Plan to declare English as second language in classroom ignores real problem: huge class sizes and outdated teaching methods
The debate on whether the Education Ministry should declare English as the second language in schools does not address the root cause of the problems in Thai schools. The real issue is the quality of teaching, not just of English but of all the subjects that students need to learn to be equipped for the future. Thai students already spend several hours on each subject per week in the classroom. What remains highly debatable, however, is whether schools give their students the quality time essential to learning.
The attempt to declare English as the second language in the classroom is an admirable thing and shows we are concerned over the low quality of learning. Knowledge of English undoubtedly broadens students' opportunities for learning. But it does not take a grand ambition to place English as the second language to solve the problem. Educators can tackle the issue effectively if they themselves are willing to learn and remain open-minded.
Every Thai student already studies English, but the average level of proficiency is highly questionable. Many teachers have not received training to improve their skills, or access to new knowledge. Some simply don't have the language skills to teach English. This means that many of our students are stuck with unqualified teachers day in, day out.
Although educators often claim they want to prepare students for the fast-changing world, most Thai schools still operate in the same way as their predecessors half a century ago. Typically, up to 50 students are crammed into one classroom and subjected to robotic learning by rote. Teaching methods have barely changed over the years. One change we can expect to see, though, is a drop in the quality of teachers, as their low pay means that teaching is no longer a coveted profession.
The authorities are scrambling for a quick fix. Instead of getting to the root of the problem, they prefer to announce a big-budget programme under a "sexy" title. But spending money alone will not guarantee satisfactory results. It is a shame that money is being lavished on education but producing nothing for our kids.
Rather than debating the terms of our English teaching, educators should take a direct route to improving learning by, first, focusing on limiting the class size for each subject. This puts the priority on ensuring every student receives sufficient attention from teachers. The method of learning by rote does not inspire students to excel at subjects for which they show aptitude. The current classroom environment fails when it comes to promoting either multidimensional learning or students' self-esteem. Students are often judged simply on their ability to memorise lessons, meaning that those with other talents can feel discouraged and left out.
Teachers should also receive constant training, because we owe it to our students to provide them with the best possible schooling. Improvements could also be made if public schools drew more on the resources of progressive or international schools, which are more up to date with techniques.
Meanwhile, an open-minded attitude is essential among teachers and school principals; learning is a never-ending process. Efforts to get retiree native English-speakers to assist in Thai schools have been unsuccessful largely because of the cold reception from teachers who are more concerned about their turf and ego than their students. These teachers should be sacked.
Teaching our children to become good "global citizens" should also be on the agenda. For instance, they should be taught about conserving energy and the impact they can have on the environment. But responsibility and citizenship are not sufficiently addressed. Instead, youngsters only hear adults asking for their rights but refusing to be accountable.
And most importantly, students should be given belief in their capacity and ability. Rather than promoting youngsters' self-actualisation, schools tend to punish students who don't perform well in the robotic model of learning. Meaningful knowledge is sidelined in favour of teaching students to fit into a mould by achieving good grades.
Thai students need to learn more about their geography and history to see how this physical and cultural background has shaped them. This will then enable them to understand themselves better. In contrast, currently they are usually forced merely to memorise information without learning how to think with it.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Reliving early culture shocks
As my life in Thailand accumulates more memories as the distance between the first discomfiting culture shock of arrival and the present moment increases, I feel more confident, adept, and at home in Thai culture. Although one does not truly feel at home and experience recurring bouts of living the sentence of a perpetual outsider, it is the growing familiarity with predictable patterns and responding to those patterns in a predictably acceptable manner that make life in my adopted country a somewhat satisfying experience. This sense of predictability, despite little grasp of meaning, is the key to navigating the lived life in Thailand with relative ease. Part of the experience of exile is the acute sense of displacement that stems from a realization that by living in the interstices of a foreign culture one cannot share or completely understand the underpinning values or logic of the Thai way of life.
Of course one makes mistakes, and during those times of blunder the strangeness of life reappears with a vengeance acutely felt with deep regrets and strident questioning again about why Thailand is Thailand.
In the reporting of the on-going “civil coup” to overthrow the existing government, I felt a palpable sense of déjà vu of my experience in the first unsettling months upon arrival in the early 90s. When reading the English newspaper Bangkok Post, I was completely shocked by the incomprehensibly shallow and sometimes sheer nonsense that pass for news such as a reductionist quotation attributed to politicians, or high ranking civil servants or a description of what transpired. That sense of déjà vu returned when I read newspaper accounts of the PAD led “civil coup” to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Samak.
Here are some reports based on the Bangkok Post, August 30th, 2008 edition (the only hard copy edition that I could obtain from my wife's office) that once again pushed the limits of my credulity on the nature of Thai reality in the unfolding drama between PAD’s stubborn struggle for the moral high ground (in their continuing occupation of the Government House) and the Prime Minister, who is forced to muster all his cunning and experience so as not to lose any of his tenuous credibility in this fight between “good” versus “evil”, depending on where you stand in the political spectrum.
1. Headlines: Violence erupts – wait a minute.... the accompanying photo only shows demonstrators outside the Metropolitan Police Bureau lying prone on the ground as they tried to take cover from tear gas on Friday evening, August 29th. “Police denied firing the tear gas”. Not a single policeman is shown amidst the puff of tear gas smoke beating up the demonstrators.
NOTE: Lying prone on the ground is the worst possible method of protecting oneself against tear gas especially when there is no wind to dissipate the high concentration. The best possible way is to run away as far as possible from the cloud of smoke. According to Wikipedia, CS gas (tear gas) is generally accepted as “non-lethal”. “The chemical reacts with moisture on the skin and in the eyes causing a burning sensation and the immediate forceful and uncontrollable shutting of the eyes. Reported effects can include tears streaming from the eyes, running nose full of mucus, burning in the nose and throat areas, disorientation, dizziness and restricted breathing. In highly concentrated doses it can also induce severe coughing and vomiting. Almost all of the immediate effects wear off in a matter of minutes.”
If we read the Note inside the box “Day of Scuffles” it reads: “A total of 25 PAD supporters and one police officer were injured during clashes at the Makhawan bridge and Government House. About 20 people sustained minor injuries during the scuffle at Metropolitan headquarters ”. (bold font added)
In my opinion, even if the police fired the teargas, they had every right to disperse the big crowd who could have over run the police headquarters - see below 1a.
1a. in the back page 14, inside the box “Day of Scuffles”, we read that at 7PM “About one thousand PAD supporters rally in front of Metropolitan Police headquarters demanding police return their belongings seized during the Makkhawan bridge raids".
Why were PAD demonstrators so insistent about the return of their belongings when they were indeed blocking Makkhawan bridge for more than 90 days? Huh? This is unbelievable in the annals of demonstration behavior! The demonstrators are acting like spoiled children whose main concern is retrieval of their trivial belongings! Have they forgotten all of a sudden their avowed purpose to overthrow the government? Could it be that their seized belongings cost more than the amount claimed by rumors paid to (some) them to join the demonstrations?
2. Still in the back page 14, is a photo that is described as “Golf clubs, Molotov cocktails, pepper spray and slingshots are among items police seized from the anti-government protest site near Makkhawan bridge yesterday (photo taken by Natthiti Ampriwan). The photo shows at least 50 to 60 golf clubs. Considering that golf is a hobby for the upper middle class to the very rich, are we to conclude that PAD demonstrators are avid golfers on the side, and that perhaps the idea for toppling the Samak government was first broached in a round of golf? It would even be more incredulous to imagine that PAD specifically bought second hand golf clubs from KlongThom as defensive weapons. Or perhaps, the riot police planted these golf clubs, as riot police are also fond of playing golf during off demonstration season.
3. Still in the back page 14, the main (largest photo by Apichit Jinakul) shows a group of police, one shown with his right foot stepping on the back of the neck area of an injured demonstrator. None show carrying guns on their holsters. Two other policemen are pointing their batons on the demonstrator who appears to be bloodied. But there is no anger in their faces. Did the demonstrator charge the police? Or did the police beat up the demonstrator unprovoked? We have no way of knowing the context of this dramatic picture that suggests police brutality!
4. "The Civil Court suspended its injunction to evict the PAD from Government House, saying execution of the order might inflict further damage."
Why the wishy washy stance of the Court? In Thailand, the law can apparently be arbitrarily applied. I don’t recall any magnanimous scruples by the authorities during the 1976 Thammasat clash, 1991 put down of demonstrations in Democracy Monument, Tak Bai, and Krue Sue Mosque incidents. If the decision of the court is affected by outside pressure and therefore shifts to wiggle its way out of firm enforcement, then we may as well forget the rule of law in this country.
5. On page 2, “Electric shocks, sparks, drainage lids deter police” is another piece of incomprehensibly illogical reporting.
This refers to the story of PAD’s use of various kinds of weapons to ward off police from entering Government House.
5a. “At Gate 7 of Government House, where hundreds of police were deployed and prepared to break into the compound, PAD guards tied a long wire to the metal gate and charged it with electricity from a portable battery. When police moved closer, they charged the electricity to generate electric sparks at the gate. ‘Police were scared of the sparks and immediately backed off’, a PAD guard said proudly.
This shows that police have not been trained in disarming the simplest improvised weapon. Do they have no basic equipment like gloves, ropes to dismantle the wiring by pulling at the wire? Thai policemen have no basic understanding of principles of electricity? How much training did this contingent of riot control police receive?
5b. “PAD protesters covered a section of Phitsanulok road with tarpaulins and poured liquid detergent on it to make the surface slippery”.
And the police did not use their sense of smell to determine it was detergent? Why did the police not pull the tarpaulin off the road?
5c. “Rumours about a police crackdown on the PAD had spread every day. Other protesters collected old sewage shaft lids left inside government compounds to use as shield against police batons or rubber bullets”.
A sewage shaft lid probably weighs approximately 10 kilograms (22 lbs). With a nifty trick of knots from a relatively big diameter rope, the lid can be transformed into a makeshift shield indeed. But how long can an Asian sized body carry a 22 lbs shield, much less, use it effectively to parry a baton charge without being hindered by its sheer weight?
5d. “Police reported that various kinds of weapons – machetes, bullets, golf clubs, iron bars, and batons – were found at the PAD’s demonstration sites. They could not confirm if the weapons belonged to PAD. Even if they did, the PAD protesters would not be troubled by their loss, as they believe they can always find other ingenuous ways to protect themselves.”
Did these weapons materialize (Star Trek style) in the PAD’s demonstrations sites? If the police planted them surely that would have been quite an effort not only in terms of collecting these weapons, but also carrying them to the sites. I find the logic totally incomprehensible. If the Americans found WMD in Iraq, would they stupidly dither and say there was no proof that the WMD were Saddam’s?
6. Foreign Minister Tej Bunnag’s damage control. On page 12 “the week in Review” Tej Bunnag in explaining to the international community the invasions of the PAD starting on August 22nd till their seizure of the Government House: “What happened definitely affected Thailand’s tourism and economy, but we would like other countries to understand that this situation is part of the progress on democratic growth in Thailand. We will have to wait and see what will happen next”, Mr. Tej said”.
Progress on democratic growth in Thailand? A civil coup is progress??? Immediately below “the week in Review” is a half page block article “In Print” by Kamol Hengkietisak “PAD’s aggressive move condemned” ends his report on PAD’s tactics: by quoting Matichon ‘The PAD’s long demonstration – more than 90 days now – may have weakened its members and made them want to finish the game early. But the uncivilized use of force not only alienates the general public, it makes it hard for the PAD leaders to find a graceful way out.’ What’s more, concluded Matichon, the misstep cheapens the PAD image to that of an ordinary violent mob.
Can the actions of a violent mob be considered 'progress'?
7. Page 3, at the bottom: “Protesters say police attack proves PM can’t be trusted”
“Mr. Anont, who has no right hand…. Asked police not to use force, but was pushed to the ground. When he fell, police trampled on him and hit him in the head with batons, said Mr. Anont, who comes from Yala.”
"Napat Pitiworawong, 42, said she pleaded with police not to dismantle the PAD stage, but was pushed to the ground and beaten. She covered the back of her neck with her hands while police beat her on the back. They did not care that they were hurting women. They also used pepper spray that burned me and me me choke for a long time. Police saw the demonstrators as criminals, but this violent act makes the demonstrators angry and now they hate the police and the government” she said.
If you are supposedly fighting for a cause with ahimsa, then you must be ready to receive the blows from the police batons and the blood flowing from your cracked skulls as your badge of courage and moral superiority. You were already warned that the stage has been blocking the road for 90 days. A people who want to be treated kindly by the police after they have disobeyed the rule of law and flaunt that disobedience for 90 days or more, are not practicing ahimsa but opportunistic provocation, pure and simple.
The kid gloves (super lenient) approach by the government was extended even further on Sept 1, when Pol Col Jongrak Chuthanon, deputy police commissioner-general ordered metropolitan police to carry only shields and refrain from carrying batons or any other arms when dealing with protesters. This act has stretch disbelef beyond all bounds. Yes, this may help reduce tensions, but how can police carry out their role if they have nothing to defend themselves? This is another amazing first in the annals of demonstration history, unarmed police trying to control a potentially serious riot situation.
Be that as it may, an alien reading the news and following the continuing saga here in Thailand will be hard put to comprehend the nature of Thai behavior and the logic of recent events that can be described as an array of incomprehensible displays of stupidity, arrogance, incompetence, obstinacy, heavy manipulation, unbelievable leniency by the authorities, undemocratic and childish behavior of certain groups who claim to represent the majority of Thais, arbitrary application of the rule of law by wishy washy courts and confusing media reporting. Orwell's mouth would have opened in approval by the word construction of the Thai media.
Perhaps, in our own struggle to make sense of this dire situation that will have long lasting effects on the “progress of democracy” in Thailand we should always remind ourselves that behind all this stupendous absurdity is the constant threat of real violence, a blood thirst of unsatisfiable proportions based on simmering resentments, unresolved injustices and fear of an uncertain future as the country’s most important symbols and institutions are found wanting in defining its role in leading a "modern" Thailand into the 21st century. These recent events are not disconnected to the way Thailand has "plugged in" to the glorious promises of wealth and prosperity in the era of globalization. They are in fact a direct result of the contradictions of capitalist growth, traditional authority and growing democratic sentiments. Those who feel threatened by the loss of control, influence, and power are not wont to let go.
The point of no return perhaps has already been crossed. Thailand may have to go through another violent period so that anachronistic structures may be cleansed. Whatever will unfold in the coming days unfortunately may not necessarily be helping the cause of democratic progress in Thailand because of the divisive angry mood, the spatial polarization in loyalties, the muddled issues, and the strong conservative impulse to retain traditional aspects of authority and ways of resolving conflict. May the Buddha quench all the anger in men’s hearts so that everyone can find a way out of this impasse.
Of course one makes mistakes, and during those times of blunder the strangeness of life reappears with a vengeance acutely felt with deep regrets and strident questioning again about why Thailand is Thailand.
In the reporting of the on-going “civil coup” to overthrow the existing government, I felt a palpable sense of déjà vu of my experience in the first unsettling months upon arrival in the early 90s. When reading the English newspaper Bangkok Post, I was completely shocked by the incomprehensibly shallow and sometimes sheer nonsense that pass for news such as a reductionist quotation attributed to politicians, or high ranking civil servants or a description of what transpired. That sense of déjà vu returned when I read newspaper accounts of the PAD led “civil coup” to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Samak.
Here are some reports based on the Bangkok Post, August 30th, 2008 edition (the only hard copy edition that I could obtain from my wife's office) that once again pushed the limits of my credulity on the nature of Thai reality in the unfolding drama between PAD’s stubborn struggle for the moral high ground (in their continuing occupation of the Government House) and the Prime Minister, who is forced to muster all his cunning and experience so as not to lose any of his tenuous credibility in this fight between “good” versus “evil”, depending on where you stand in the political spectrum.
1. Headlines: Violence erupts – wait a minute.... the accompanying photo only shows demonstrators outside the Metropolitan Police Bureau lying prone on the ground as they tried to take cover from tear gas on Friday evening, August 29th. “Police denied firing the tear gas”. Not a single policeman is shown amidst the puff of tear gas smoke beating up the demonstrators.
NOTE: Lying prone on the ground is the worst possible method of protecting oneself against tear gas especially when there is no wind to dissipate the high concentration. The best possible way is to run away as far as possible from the cloud of smoke. According to Wikipedia, CS gas (tear gas) is generally accepted as “non-lethal”. “The chemical reacts with moisture on the skin and in the eyes causing a burning sensation and the immediate forceful and uncontrollable shutting of the eyes. Reported effects can include tears streaming from the eyes, running nose full of mucus, burning in the nose and throat areas, disorientation, dizziness and restricted breathing. In highly concentrated doses it can also induce severe coughing and vomiting. Almost all of the immediate effects wear off in a matter of minutes.”
If we read the Note inside the box “Day of Scuffles” it reads: “A total of 25 PAD supporters and one police officer were injured during clashes at the Makhawan bridge and Government House. About 20 people sustained minor injuries during the scuffle at Metropolitan headquarters ”. (bold font added)
In my opinion, even if the police fired the teargas, they had every right to disperse the big crowd who could have over run the police headquarters - see below 1a.
1a. in the back page 14, inside the box “Day of Scuffles”, we read that at 7PM “About one thousand PAD supporters rally in front of Metropolitan Police headquarters demanding police return their belongings seized during the Makkhawan bridge raids".
Why were PAD demonstrators so insistent about the return of their belongings when they were indeed blocking Makkhawan bridge for more than 90 days? Huh? This is unbelievable in the annals of demonstration behavior! The demonstrators are acting like spoiled children whose main concern is retrieval of their trivial belongings! Have they forgotten all of a sudden their avowed purpose to overthrow the government? Could it be that their seized belongings cost more than the amount claimed by rumors paid to (some) them to join the demonstrations?
2. Still in the back page 14, is a photo that is described as “Golf clubs, Molotov cocktails, pepper spray and slingshots are among items police seized from the anti-government protest site near Makkhawan bridge yesterday (photo taken by Natthiti Ampriwan). The photo shows at least 50 to 60 golf clubs. Considering that golf is a hobby for the upper middle class to the very rich, are we to conclude that PAD demonstrators are avid golfers on the side, and that perhaps the idea for toppling the Samak government was first broached in a round of golf? It would even be more incredulous to imagine that PAD specifically bought second hand golf clubs from KlongThom as defensive weapons. Or perhaps, the riot police planted these golf clubs, as riot police are also fond of playing golf during off demonstration season.
3. Still in the back page 14, the main (largest photo by Apichit Jinakul) shows a group of police, one shown with his right foot stepping on the back of the neck area of an injured demonstrator. None show carrying guns on their holsters. Two other policemen are pointing their batons on the demonstrator who appears to be bloodied. But there is no anger in their faces. Did the demonstrator charge the police? Or did the police beat up the demonstrator unprovoked? We have no way of knowing the context of this dramatic picture that suggests police brutality!
4. "The Civil Court suspended its injunction to evict the PAD from Government House, saying execution of the order might inflict further damage."
Why the wishy washy stance of the Court? In Thailand, the law can apparently be arbitrarily applied. I don’t recall any magnanimous scruples by the authorities during the 1976 Thammasat clash, 1991 put down of demonstrations in Democracy Monument, Tak Bai, and Krue Sue Mosque incidents. If the decision of the court is affected by outside pressure and therefore shifts to wiggle its way out of firm enforcement, then we may as well forget the rule of law in this country.
5. On page 2, “Electric shocks, sparks, drainage lids deter police” is another piece of incomprehensibly illogical reporting.
This refers to the story of PAD’s use of various kinds of weapons to ward off police from entering Government House.
5a. “At Gate 7 of Government House, where hundreds of police were deployed and prepared to break into the compound, PAD guards tied a long wire to the metal gate and charged it with electricity from a portable battery. When police moved closer, they charged the electricity to generate electric sparks at the gate. ‘Police were scared of the sparks and immediately backed off’, a PAD guard said proudly.
This shows that police have not been trained in disarming the simplest improvised weapon. Do they have no basic equipment like gloves, ropes to dismantle the wiring by pulling at the wire? Thai policemen have no basic understanding of principles of electricity? How much training did this contingent of riot control police receive?
5b. “PAD protesters covered a section of Phitsanulok road with tarpaulins and poured liquid detergent on it to make the surface slippery”.
And the police did not use their sense of smell to determine it was detergent? Why did the police not pull the tarpaulin off the road?
5c. “Rumours about a police crackdown on the PAD had spread every day. Other protesters collected old sewage shaft lids left inside government compounds to use as shield against police batons or rubber bullets”.
A sewage shaft lid probably weighs approximately 10 kilograms (22 lbs). With a nifty trick of knots from a relatively big diameter rope, the lid can be transformed into a makeshift shield indeed. But how long can an Asian sized body carry a 22 lbs shield, much less, use it effectively to parry a baton charge without being hindered by its sheer weight?
5d. “Police reported that various kinds of weapons – machetes, bullets, golf clubs, iron bars, and batons – were found at the PAD’s demonstration sites. They could not confirm if the weapons belonged to PAD. Even if they did, the PAD protesters would not be troubled by their loss, as they believe they can always find other ingenuous ways to protect themselves.”
Did these weapons materialize (Star Trek style) in the PAD’s demonstrations sites? If the police planted them surely that would have been quite an effort not only in terms of collecting these weapons, but also carrying them to the sites. I find the logic totally incomprehensible. If the Americans found WMD in Iraq, would they stupidly dither and say there was no proof that the WMD were Saddam’s?
6. Foreign Minister Tej Bunnag’s damage control. On page 12 “the week in Review” Tej Bunnag in explaining to the international community the invasions of the PAD starting on August 22nd till their seizure of the Government House: “What happened definitely affected Thailand’s tourism and economy, but we would like other countries to understand that this situation is part of the progress on democratic growth in Thailand. We will have to wait and see what will happen next”, Mr. Tej said”.
Progress on democratic growth in Thailand? A civil coup is progress??? Immediately below “the week in Review” is a half page block article “In Print” by Kamol Hengkietisak “PAD’s aggressive move condemned” ends his report on PAD’s tactics: by quoting Matichon ‘The PAD’s long demonstration – more than 90 days now – may have weakened its members and made them want to finish the game early. But the uncivilized use of force not only alienates the general public, it makes it hard for the PAD leaders to find a graceful way out.’ What’s more, concluded Matichon, the misstep cheapens the PAD image to that of an ordinary violent mob.
Can the actions of a violent mob be considered 'progress'?
7. Page 3, at the bottom: “Protesters say police attack proves PM can’t be trusted”
“Mr. Anont, who has no right hand…. Asked police not to use force, but was pushed to the ground. When he fell, police trampled on him and hit him in the head with batons, said Mr. Anont, who comes from Yala.”
"Napat Pitiworawong, 42, said she pleaded with police not to dismantle the PAD stage, but was pushed to the ground and beaten. She covered the back of her neck with her hands while police beat her on the back. They did not care that they were hurting women. They also used pepper spray that burned me and me me choke for a long time. Police saw the demonstrators as criminals, but this violent act makes the demonstrators angry and now they hate the police and the government” she said.
If you are supposedly fighting for a cause with ahimsa, then you must be ready to receive the blows from the police batons and the blood flowing from your cracked skulls as your badge of courage and moral superiority. You were already warned that the stage has been blocking the road for 90 days. A people who want to be treated kindly by the police after they have disobeyed the rule of law and flaunt that disobedience for 90 days or more, are not practicing ahimsa but opportunistic provocation, pure and simple.
The kid gloves (super lenient) approach by the government was extended even further on Sept 1, when Pol Col Jongrak Chuthanon, deputy police commissioner-general ordered metropolitan police to carry only shields and refrain from carrying batons or any other arms when dealing with protesters. This act has stretch disbelef beyond all bounds. Yes, this may help reduce tensions, but how can police carry out their role if they have nothing to defend themselves? This is another amazing first in the annals of demonstration history, unarmed police trying to control a potentially serious riot situation.
Be that as it may, an alien reading the news and following the continuing saga here in Thailand will be hard put to comprehend the nature of Thai behavior and the logic of recent events that can be described as an array of incomprehensible displays of stupidity, arrogance, incompetence, obstinacy, heavy manipulation, unbelievable leniency by the authorities, undemocratic and childish behavior of certain groups who claim to represent the majority of Thais, arbitrary application of the rule of law by wishy washy courts and confusing media reporting. Orwell's mouth would have opened in approval by the word construction of the Thai media.
Perhaps, in our own struggle to make sense of this dire situation that will have long lasting effects on the “progress of democracy” in Thailand we should always remind ourselves that behind all this stupendous absurdity is the constant threat of real violence, a blood thirst of unsatisfiable proportions based on simmering resentments, unresolved injustices and fear of an uncertain future as the country’s most important symbols and institutions are found wanting in defining its role in leading a "modern" Thailand into the 21st century. These recent events are not disconnected to the way Thailand has "plugged in" to the glorious promises of wealth and prosperity in the era of globalization. They are in fact a direct result of the contradictions of capitalist growth, traditional authority and growing democratic sentiments. Those who feel threatened by the loss of control, influence, and power are not wont to let go.
The point of no return perhaps has already been crossed. Thailand may have to go through another violent period so that anachronistic structures may be cleansed. Whatever will unfold in the coming days unfortunately may not necessarily be helping the cause of democratic progress in Thailand because of the divisive angry mood, the spatial polarization in loyalties, the muddled issues, and the strong conservative impulse to retain traditional aspects of authority and ways of resolving conflict. May the Buddha quench all the anger in men’s hearts so that everyone can find a way out of this impasse.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
The dismal state of Thai education – one Acharn’s point of view.
To those unfamiliar with the Thai education system especially at the university level, the term “Acharn” is the equivalent to “sensei” in Japanese – i.e., a teacher or professor. The difference is that here in Thailand the term carries an honorific connotation especially if one is associated with the more prestigious state universities.
What qualifies me to criticize the state of Thai education? Do I have motives other than to shed light on the problem, or do I have any ulterior motives, perhaps an axe to grind to avenge some injustice that may have been visited on me as a foreign lecturer?
I have been involved in the Thai University education system in one form or another as a ……. for nearly 9 years, in both undergraduate and graduate level in two of the top most state universities of the country. Moreover, I had also been involved in academic administration at the professional training level in an institute that is closely associated with universities locally and abroad.
I can assure you that the purpose for writing this piece is primarily to document and lay bare my thoughts that have grown from my frustration both as a father seeing my Thai daughters’ innate curiosity and sense of wonder progressively and irreversibly ebbing over the years and as a foreign Acharn struggling to earn his keep and finding the purpose of life within the Thai educational system. It is hoped that these thoughts can make a tiny contribution to the debate on how to improve the dire state of Thai education.
Many foreigners who have taught in Thailand have witnessed the weak educational backgrounds of students, their poor English skills and more importantly, their inability to think and think critically. In my view, the inability to think critically and engage in discussion is attributed wrongly to poor English skills. A deficiency in English language skills is used as a convenient excuse for not being able to understand the subject matter at hand. I wish to argue however that the inability to grasp a concept is not dependent solely on language skills if the curious and adept mind had been trained to think in its native language. Absent that, no amount of catching up in Western languages (through expensive tutoring) will have an impact in facilitating the raising of intellectual standards.
I am not a linguist, but I have been assured that trying to understand Buddhist Dhamma as it is written in Thai would require no less a concentrated effort to comprehend at an intellectual level (much easier I suppose than actually practicing its tenets in life) as would trying to make sense of a philosophical treatise by a Western philosopher. From experience, the problem of Thai students going one evolutionary step above the basic literacy tenets of “read and write” to “grow, to develop some intellectual sinew” (Templeton, 2007:283) stems much deeper than having an acceptable or high level of English skills. Even if Thai students chose to use Thai these same students cannot demonstrate that they can clearly formulate their thoughts, much less write intelligibly. This is not a jaundiced observation of a foreigner who may have felt wronged or imagined receiving shabby treatment by Thai superiors (another story) but was in fact told so by an esteemed Thai colleague in a prestigious university. Writing and thinking can be honed independent of the language chosen to express thoughts in the mind.
Another unforgettable experience I’ve encountered in a reputable graduate program was to discover that most Thai graduate students would take an hour to read a single page from an assigned article in an English journal, taking a protracted amount of time referring back and forth to a dictionary as if word for word translation could facilitate comprehension of concepts that they were ill prepared to grasp (even at the basic minimum level) in the first place. The argument that the weakness in thinking skills among Thai students is somehow related to poor English language skills further loses its cogency when I ask students from other nationalities in class. For example, whenever I ask Vietnamese students whose English skills are as rudimentary as their Thai counterparts, they are able to formulate an intelligible answer either with the assistance of their compatriots who fill in the missing English words that they are at a loss or through their persistent attempts to find the English translation of their thoughts created in their native language from the dictionary. It is clear from the “keywords” in the ensuing translation that their thinking went through a “processing phase” rather than merely information recognition that would have at best regurgitated the information back to the lecturer. The latter would have been identifiable with my Thai graduate students who were likely to have perfect recall of the passage (even its text location) but could not explain what it meant. Thai students were more often than not at a loss to interpret the meaning, the interrelationship(s) of the idea(s) with prior concept(s), and/or its significance for the subject matter at hand. In plain terms, Thai students seem to be unable to make the rich mental connections that would “connect the dots” into some recognizable pattern. Of course this does not prove that Vietnamese students are brighter than Thai students. We would have to control the selection (& admissions) process for that in order to say something more definitive than this reporting. And we would also have to consider the rare exception among Thai graduate students who show motivation and originality, which does indeed occur though rarely.
It is even more frustrating when I teach undergraduate students who are less mature than those in graduate school. Few show interest while others sit impassively or doze off in class where the lessons require conceptual understanding, analytical thinking and synthesis. It is therefore the kind of class that is the complete opposite of what they have been traditionally exposed to, namely rote learning* that produces a state of mind that is more accustomed to superficiality (mai tong kit lerk, mai tong lai la eyat) that is then expressed in a demeanor that is the closest incarnation of Kundera’s “unbearable lightness of being”. I honestly suspect that this quintessential Thainess remains as one of the most incomprehensibly disarming traits that intrigue the jaded and cynical farangs who first arrive on this land of smiles. I require the students to bring a dictionary so that we can consult it together for new words that come up during discussion. When a new English word comes up however, most take a lackadaisical approach to opening the dictionary evoking what appears as total disinterestedness in the task at hand. During discussions, students are visibly distracted by a lethargy that in this type of university would be inconceivable to attribute to malnutrition. On the contrary, I am convinced more than ever that it is strong evidence of malnutrition of the mind.
*Can one ask a critical question in a Law School exam?
That the practice of asking critical questions (in relation to critical thinking) is supremely alien to the experience of Thai students is aptly demonstrated in this vignette. Some law students from Thammasat University complained to the daily newspaper Thai Post that a question that appeared in their final exam on March 11, 2007 made them feel uncomfortable. The seemingly innocuous question that was considered discomfiting asked: "If you are a judge and you were invited by coup makers to work for them for a salary more than you receive now, will you accept the work or not and why?" No doubt the context of such a question was suggestively subversive to those loyal to the military government that deposed the Thai Rak Thai party (TRT) of Mr. Taksin because the question was asked by Pongthep Thepkanjana, a special lecturer in the Law Dept of Thammasat University who no less was also the Deputy TRT Party leader. Were it not for the full backing of the chairman of the Thammasat University Lecturer Council, Kittisak Prokkati on grounds of academic freedom the case would have pushed Thailand to one of its laughable heights of political folly. (Nation, 2007a)
One would surely be guilty of making the foolish conclusion that there is something “inherently” wrong with Thais - that they are unable to carry an intelligent conversation or think in a critical manner. This is pure rubbish. This is clearly disproven by Thai students who are educated abroad as could be typical in the old or new elite families. Indeed, they not only speak English fluently but are equally as able as their western counterparts to hold their own in intellectual discussion, banter and debate. But these are few and far between. It is a rare Thai, student or otherwise who can rise above inane pop culture, their narrow inwardly focused “Thainess”, keep up to date with developments in neighboring countries, and particularly with gray area issues that cannot be approached with absolutist style of thinking (e.g., secret CIA prisons in Thailand, global terror, global warming, peak oil, Iran’s nuclear program, etc.). In short, finding a Thai student with a “going global” mindset is difficult indeed. Again, I wish to make myself crystal clear that this is by no means a derogatory remark on Thais nor is this to suggest inherent inferiority. Similar if not worse cases of ignorance and in the extreme, xenophobia, can be found in other countries, such as America where the minds of many students and the “average” person have been addled and brainwashed by simplistic truisms published by the popular press.
Since the vagaries of keeping body and soul together have led me to a job saddled with the formidable task of forming the minds of future leaders in Thai society the challenge is therefore how to educate Thai students to the level of excellence required for survivability in this intensely competitive global world of the future that is here upon us now. An even greater and seemingly impossible goal is how to stimulate in these young minds a love, passion and an excitement for knowledge; knowledge for knowledge’s sake. The smug belief in Thai exceptionalism and “self-sufficiency” is no longer tenable. Many Thais (rural and urban alike) have already tasted the Promethean fire of capitalist development. It seems increasingly unlikely that a country that has had a long streak of good luck over the last half a century in terms of material development may continue to be providentially endowed with good fortune by beneficent “spirits”. As recent events have shown the underpinning political and social values are far from fully formed or adequate to carry Thailand forward towards a society of self-regulating and self-acting individuals living in a true democracy. The foundations of “democratic literacy” can only be built on solid ground by an enlightened education system that will produce independent thinking and politically mature Thai citizens. As Suthichai Yoon argued (2001), “a civil society can only come about if we get our education policy right.” The way forward can be found through citizenry engaging in debate and discussion without recourse to mindless exhortation to “unity” from above, mob rule or senseless violence as a way out when words and thinking fail to illuminate the path.
Education reform is perhaps one issue that Thai parents agree on and are concerned with. Thai families with the wherewithal have deliberately chosen not to send their kids to the moribund Thai education system. Instead they opt to make invaluable contributions to the educational coffers to the growing number of expensive local private schools and those in Australia, New Zealand and the UK.
We also hear clear expression of concerns from Thai leaders and bureaucrats. For example, on the occasion of the 22nd anniversary celebration of the Ministry for University Affairs’ foundation, Mr. Anand Panyarachun, a former Prime Minister, addressed a large gathering of academics on the question of quality of higher education. Some of the key points raised (Komolmas, 1999):
• low academic standards. lower than those of Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan
• graduates have poor command of the English language
• lack of right understanding of basic concept of democracy among the faculty, staff and students
• faculty members being narrow-minded cannot cooperate together
• though the university is a community of scholars but the faculty have slavish mentality
Nine years later, in March 2008, among the items in the “worrying report” by Ampon Kittiampon, permanent secretary of the National Economic and Social Development Board on the state of Thai society during the fourth quarter of 2007 (October to December) is the quality of education* that continues to fall in the key areas of reading, mathematics and science (Daily Xpress, 2008).
*Low quality education = Low quality politicians
Suthichai Yoon (2001) wrote in an editorial piece the following:
"In 2001, in the heady days of the first term of Prime Minister Taksin, there was much hope in the earnest new education minister, Kasem Wattanachai who declared on his first day of work that that the quota of "privileged" students being allowed to enter primary and secondary schools must be curbed.
We now are saddled with an education system that ignores the vital values of transparency and honesty - that teaches students that creative thinking and imaginative exchanges of ideas are equivalent to risk-taking which should be avoided at all costs. Is there any doubt, then, that the quality of our national politics remains so deplorable? Did it surprise anybody when Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra complained the other day that he had difficulty locating good, qualified candidates for the Cabinet "because we don't have enough of a supply of good and wise people to pick from"? "
In a seminar on education reform sponsored by the Ministry of Education in Pattaya in 2006, caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang addressing teachers and students from 2,000 schools criticized rote learning and defended the use of open-ended questions (Nation, 2006a). Teachers were told that they should let students explain their selection of reading material and report what it is about, so as to improve their skill in catching the gist of the contents. Reading comprehension was said to be lacking among university students due to limited practice at lower educational levels (Nation, 2006a).
From whence does this state of affairs come from? There are deep historical reasons for the dire state of Thai education that have congealed and solidified into intractable institutional structures that would require strong political will to overturn. Let us not forget that Thailand did not experience the psychic dislocations and humiliations of having been colonized by Western powers. By maintaining its independence the elites and rulers were able to fashion the historical trajectory and development policies of their country with much greater independence than nationalist leaders of newly independent states who carried a heavy psychological, political, institutional and economic baggage from the colonial into the post colonial era. Not having to go through a nationalist anti-colonial movement, there is no equivalent of the momentous breaking-of- chains revolutionary event in Thai mentality. It should come as no earthshaking surprise that one of the accumulated tendencies arising from the continuity in Thailand’s fortuitous history resulted in conservative education policies that sought to reinforce the triumvirate symbols of Thainess – Nation, Religion and King. This meant the continuing stifling influence of the sakdina (feudal hierarchical social structure) mentality combined with the heavily centralized system of government that ensued from the reforms brought about by Chulalongkorn as the last bulwark against invasion by the British and French colonial powers when he run out of buffer concessions. To this day and perhaps for the generations of Thais that lived through the 20th century, mental capacities as well as initiative in terms of independent thinking, reasoning and volition were stunted. Thais were ruled by a succession of paternalistic rulers with varying degrees of enlightenment and ignorance (monarchs, military dictators) who issued edicts, orders and proclamations. In essence, the elites thought for the people. It was not in the rulers’ interest that their subjects had the capacity to think independently for themselves but to accept the natural order of things as foreordained by (wrongful) dhammic interpretations of merit and karma from previous lives. Anything foreign and alien to elite definition of “Thainess” was shunned and considered irrelevant, even dangerous. Subjects listen, obey and willingly accept their fate. The freedom of slaves in the last part of the 19th century was bestowed through an edict rather than fought for in an heroic act of rebellion.
The vestiges of the long tradition of absolute monarchy refused to vanish completely even after it was ended by an elite led rebellion (rather than a popular one). Authority that emanated from righteous rule morphed into an unprecedented form of control by military dictators using the repressive methods of authoritarian militarism. Field Marshal Plaek Phibun Songkram pretentions included large doses of absolutism behind his modernizing façade (remember his cultural edicts?). When the Prapass/Thanom dictatorship took power and restored the monarchy to support their legitimacy, the young monarch was quick to use the opportunity to restore traditional rituals and ceremonies of old to reestablish the preeminent ideological position of the monarchy in people’s mind. This benign, enlightened but paternalistic monarch cultivated its symbolic image to the hilt by righteous rule and adept use of the media that disseminated widely the propaganda that tireless benevolent rule helped improve the lives of the poor in rural areas. The monarch’s moral stature grew rapidly that he is often called upon to intervene at major historical junctures to restore stability whenever the country is pushed to the brink of chaos and bloodshed. He has earned the moral power and authority to bring together the most warring and blood thirsty leaders to compromise for the good of the country.
The seeds of a fledgling democracy fell however on feudal and authoritarian tainted grounds. The response to the refreshing beginning of freedom in the early 70s was unprecedented violence after the liberating manifestation of cathartic release of people’s pent up grievances proved to be a serious threat not only the status quo but also the imperial power of the US that had encroached into Thailand as part of its foolish and costly belief in the domino theory of communism in Southeast Asia.
With this cursory background, it’s no wonder then that it was not in the general interest of the elites to change the education system in Thailand. It benefitted them to have a politically juvenile population of workers and citizens who would not question the status quo nor demand more than their meager share of the profits of a rising industrial economy. Is it any wonder that in the present time the budgetary structure of the Ministry of Education has a highly lopsided almost 80 percent set aside for administrative costs - 15-17 percent goes to teachers' salaries and the rest to construction and the purchase of hardware. Only 3.5 per cent is devoted to actual educational development (Suthichai Yoon, 2006). Is it any wonder why with great frustration I witnessed my two daughters’ natural curiosity and sense of wonder in nursery school grew progressively dimmed as they progressed through elementary and high school (enrolled in one of the best private religious schools in Bangkok)? When their grades were not improving in math and science I inquired if they ask questions in class when they did not understand. Little did I know then about how the Thai system smothers curiosity when I was told “if I ask, the teacher will get angry with me”. Children thus quickly learn to dissimulate by not listening in rapt attention but by distracted talkativeness or mute silence in class. In the process of appearing to understand their sense of wonder of the universe dies. I think this is the intellectual equivalent of “soul murder” that the psychologist Leo Buscaglia referred to when a child is abused emotionally. And since there is no democratic forum in the school for parents to complain (that will cause the responsible to lose “face”) the only coping mechanism is for children who understand precisely that their teachers did not master the lesson plan themselves to internalize the self same methods of teachers – which is by memorization. Now I understand why educational reformists are calling for a change from “teacher centered” to “student centered” education. In my wildest dreams, I may still be proven correct that we should change the “wai kru” (honoring teachers) to “wai naksuksa” (honoring students) ceremony since they are after all the future leaders of this country. Now, that would be truly radical!
It is also no wonder that most Thai teachers place no value whatsoever on critical thinking and keeping an open mind. As Cleary (2007) put it perhaps not too exaggeratedly: “From the first grade, students are taught to "repeat after me", recite a few sums, and believe every word that comes out of their teachers' mouths in quiet obedience. Should one of them even dare to question a teacher, he will be on the receiving end of a boot out the door.” Ignorance is bliss. In my undergraduate classes for example, I get blank expressions when I ask “why” type of questions to stimulate students to think critically. I got slightly less blank expressions but still silence when once I intentionally challenged my students to think that rather than blaming the Burmese (as Thais are wont to do from reading the account of their history books) to reflect instead on whether the sacking of Ayutthaya by the Burmese could have been the result of poor thinking skills and faulty planning by Thai soldiers at that time? The same as the Thai Lao border skirmish in the 1980s where the much better equipped Thai army could not defeat the ragtag Laotian soldiers. I thought I was stirring a hornet’s nest by raising a rather provocative question but received instead cold indifference. It is the same telltale predictable reaction. How do I encourage a love of reading when in an informal poll of students in class only a handful even read the opinion pieces (e.g. editorials) in Thai language newspapers?
The most frustrating part about having to teach undergraduates or graduate students for that matter is the realization that Acharns are on the receiving end of a deeply flawed antiquated education system that begins from day one in kindergarten school. The prospect of having to take the responsibility to repair the damage wrought on students’ minds is overwhelming and can strain the most dedicated of Acharns who by trial and error (& sleepless nights) attempts all kinds of innovations to present an entertaining “dog and pony show” in class so that students don’t lose interest because the subject matter is beyond them. I have already made the decision that I am not going to be a party to the dumbing down of the lessons but instead try to simplify the explanation in the simplest language possible in English. Immaturity plus incompetence in students maybe a surefire formula to inspire challenge among dedicated Acharns but at the same can be a source of great disappointment if no amount of effort on the Acharn’s part can spark the passion for learning in these implacable students.
It has been reported that the real problem originates in the government high schools where it is impossible for any student to fail any subject. The refusal to apply firm standards by teachers in perhaps a misguided wishy-washy manifestation of the Buddhist “middle path” as in the practice of giving students three or four tries at their exams until teachers get frustrated enough to them an easy project and pass them to go to the next level (Bangkok Post, 2004). It would appear that the problem is particularly acute in public high schools in the provinces. According to a report by the Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) fifty-five per cent of secondary schools across the country, mostly small-scale government-run institutions, have failed national educational standard requirements. The remaining forty-five percent of the schools are either prestigious or located in Bangkok or other urban areas (Nation, 2005). The same report revealed that most students lacked analytical skills and failed to meet requirements in basic academic proficiency: the average score of six graders in mathematics was 44 per cent, 42 per cent in science, and below 50 per cent in Thai. Ninth graders need extra tutorials because they cannot achieve reading comprehension on their own, and vocational school students have to be given basic training by their employers (Nation, 2005).
Additional relevant observations that I have picked up first hand are the following:
• the proclivity of Thai university administration officials to put more emphasis on showy* physical infrastructure investments (i.e., new buildings) and non-essential technology (like high tech library systems) over investments to build first class libraries (replete with books, data bases, electronic journals) and laboratories. In the contest of appearance versus substance, appearance always wins in Thailand (“phak chee roy na”). There is a suggestion that the predilection for these bulky investments are underpinned by the budget approval procedures of the Budget Bureau, although it is also not unknown to hear whispers of lucrative commissions received under the table for huge construction projects (compared to say buying books). There should then be some kind of university ombudsman in the Ministry of Education who is responsible for investigating complaints of wrongdoing by high level university or institute administrators. Still, I cannot help but imagine what the alternative would be like: ordinary buildings but first class libraries – how much difference that would play in nudging the Thai academic illuminati” to stay abreast and make a substantive (not to say the least, original) contribution to advancing the state of the art in their respective fields of study!!! Thailand’s academic world may have leapfrogged the situation in 1964 when Smythe’s (1964) characterized scholarship in Thailand as “arid, stunted and tradition bound” but there is still a yawning gap in terms of achieving a critical mass of “progressive-minded, scholarly oriented” (p.371) academics holding court in a more intellectually open and questioning academia that would fan further the “intellectual fires” (p. 372) more coincident to the level of Thailand’s wealth and democratic opening 44 years later.
• The emphasis on science (in the name of increasing Thailand’s competitiveness) has become so prominent (I would guess even at high school level) that it has, according to Suwanna Satha-anan, a professor of philosophy, suffocated the humanities to a point that is potentially dangerous, trapping people in linear modes of thinking that she describes as “the one truth” (Nation, 2004). The mechanical mode of thinking cannot be ameliorated if reading skills to deepen substantive knowledge of theories and synthesis of conceptual debates leave a lot to be desired. Hence, the default is to undertake quantitative analysis devoid of theoretical content or relevance. I fondly recall an esteemed colleague (also a foreigner who graduated from a prestigious American Ivy League University) who was consulted by a thesis advisee if there was another statistical model that he could use that could improve the R-square (correlation coefficient) of the logistic regression model he was using for his master’s thesis.
• Inadequate reward or incentive system for Acharns in the university. Research funding has improved with the availability of the Kanchanapisek Research Fund, but unless there is a corresponding critical mass of library materials for scholars to read to keep up to date and advance the state of knowledge, research usually gets bogged down in baseline data collection of the rankest empiricist mode devoid of theoretical significance. I remember for example a huge longitudinal survey conducted by our school in which the design of the survey instrument was settled by a “committee” approach that predictably resulted in a meaningless hodgepodge of unrelated questions that had no theoretical framework. My foreign colleague and I promptly withdrew from membership fearful that whatever good name we had might get soiled from this pointless empirical research. This state of affairs unfortunately reinforces the gross disparity in the international research division of labor – local universities conduct the data collection (& earn money) but the interpretation, synthesis and implications for theory (the intellectual valued added) are conducted by their western counterparts abroad.
• Promotion standards must be intimately linked with research rather than administrative experience in organizing seminars or short course training, or obtaining external funds. Those Acharns who excel in and prefer this type of endeavors must be put in an administrative career track rather than an academic career track for the sake of equity.
• Acharns should be expected to show by example that education is a lifelong learning process. Tales of Acharns never again opening a book once they return to Thailand from their Phd training abroad are unfortunately true as borne out by an incident I witnessed of a Thai colleague (a senior Acharn of director level) reading forlornly one of the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” series while waiting in an Australian airport for a return trip to Bangkok. I consoled myself that at least this Acharn was not reading “Reader’s Digest”. This is again directly related to the weak structure of incentives that promote research excellence and the supporting infrastructure of at the very least, a near world class library so that Acharns can keep up to date with the state of the art in their fields.
• One conundrum that works against teaching in English is Thai national pride and a belief in a self-contained country that is able to function without the use of the English language. It is therefore difficult to convince Thai students of the value of using English by appealing to the abstract reality of globalization and fierce global competition without the full support at the highest levels of the Education Ministry and the leaders of the country. This comes at a time when the Sino-Thai tycoons and captains of industry are no longer in the forefront (or have the interest in) of strengthening and deepening Thai industrialization but instead concentrate on the service sector while surrendering the backbone of Thai industrialization to multinationals (Eckardt, 2008). There appears to be little thought given to the putative value of English in the future careers of students, particularly in the instrumental value of the humanities for the future in terms of employability in the coming new structure of jobs (whose configuration will increasingly be determined by multinational investors) as well as the role of the humanities in helping them achieve personal meaning and satisfaction in their lives and careers. Let it be said however, that we should squarely face the possibility that Thailand will end up being a “failed state” if education reform fails.
*“phak chee roy na” – or the fine Thai art of garnishing.
This practice of prettifying is mysteriously ingrained in the Thai psyche. An editorial published in the Nation, entitled “Education reform is the top priority” published Jan 1, 2002 clearly illustrates the foolishness of what may have been good but misguided intentions:
“Nothing sums it up better than the disclosure in a recent international survey - that we have one of the biggest education budgets, only to use the money like fools, wasting it on fences, signs and flag poles.”
So is there any hope for successful remedial effort to reverse the damage wrought by Thai education at the university level? First and foremost, the structural obstacles have to be addressed first by serious political will to overhaul (not simply reform) the educational system which has been paralyzed not only by backward philosophies and standards but also by a “corruption-prone and inefficient bureaucracy” (Yoon, 2001). All the lofty objectives befitting a modern education system more suited to the new millennium have been enunciated in the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999 that “incorporated all of the hopes for the future” (Nation, 2007b). This act provided a roadmap for drastic education reform (Yoon, 2001):
First, enhance learners' quality of life by enabling them to pursue lifelong learning, and to develop their analytical and critical thinking as well as practical work. (italics added)
Second, improve the structure and method of educational administration along with management of resources to better serve people in local communities.
Third, improve the system for teacher training and improve teaching standards.
Fourth, standardise and improve the quality of education through rigorous evaluation and monitoring.”
What will it take to realize the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999? Note however that the first objective presupposes that there is a welcoming environment in place for “critical thinking”. Can reform objectives solve its contradictory goals* with long established authoritarian and paternalistic patterns in Thai culture? It is to be expected that further industrialization will rend asunder the hold of tradition on the minds of people. However continuous attachment to the present Thai model of taking advantage of globalization by providing services to multinationals may eventually find limits in the ability of Thais to exercise effective control of its development direction (Pasuk and Baker, 2008). Absent the “creative destruction” of further cycles of rapid capitalist development, where will the pressure to “modernize” Thai society come from? There is however a real danger that the push for an enlightened citizenry may prove the undoing of the development model of Thailand which has been based on a docile cheap and not-so-cheap anymore labor which do not have a voice in terms of labor rights.
There is little known about nurturing environment that starts in the home where values are engrained (including the love of learning) and those that put into perspective the insistent consumerist advertisements in this age of globalization. We know little of the internal dynamics of Thai families in value formation. How do we spark the interest of students if they come from environments where parents themselves do not have education or were mis-educated by the same system that needs to be changed? What example can parents give to stimulate the love and passion for learning in their children if they themselves do not have it? Can Thais look back to a past that was steeped in scholarship like Vietnam? And what can be done to change the cultural and political milieu so that it encourages a thoughtful and more enquiring citizenry?
I am not an expert on educational reform. The way out of this dismal state of affairs has been argued to require strong, courageous and committed leadership to push for educational reforms (Nation, 2006b). Powerful vested interest with a stake in the status quo will not only resist but attempt to waylay any moves (Surachai Chupaka, 2002). Education reforms were a start-and-stop affair under the Thaksin administration where five education ministers came and went during its five and a half years in power which thus consequently failed to come up with coherent education reform programs (Nation, 2007b). I do know that this is a very complex and difficult objective, where planning strategies must be clear cut and phased realistically from the very beginning to reduce resistance to change, provide adequate resources and prevent the chaos of trying to achieve too much too soon (Nation, 2007c).
*How will contradictions be resolved? By exhortation or revolution in Thai society?
Stephen Cleary (2007) wrote of contradictions in the objectives of education reform in that it goes against the grain of Thai traditional values:
“The education authorities often contradict themselves. An official statement by Onec (National Scheme on Education) in 2002 read: "Thai people shall adopt desirable values and behaviour in accordance with the traditional ways of life". Meaning that not only should Thai students sit down, shut up and obey the teacher, they ought to also instinctively honour their elders and abide by everything they say.”
Let me end with these few tentative thoughts. Because of the complexity of educational reform that is interlinked to many aspects of the political economy and existing power structures of Thailand I am pessimistic about the future. But the undoing of the gains of Thailand in the past half a century of “development” precisely from the failure to improve the educational system is to think the unthinkable considering the social chaos and instability that may result.
I will do my best to persevere in my chosen profession although I must start from the realization and acceptance of my own limitations to alter history, or to change people's attitudes. Galileo’s saying that “you cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself” may be comforting for the present. Try and try as you may - but what if you consistently find that there is nothing?
References:
Bangkok Post (2004), “Lax Standards hurting education”. December 12.
Brimble, P. and Richard F. Doner (2007), University–Industry Linkages and Economic Development: The Case of Thailand, World Development, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 1021–1036.
Cleary, Stephen (2007), “Don't panic, the kids are all right after all”, The Nation, June 23.
Daily Xpress(2008), “Wake up call for Thai Society”, March 11, The Nation
Eckardt, James (2008), “Downfall of the Sino-Thai families”, Nation, July 8.
Komolmas, Prathip M. , “New Trends in Higher Education Towards the 21st Century in Thailand”, www.journal.au.edu/abac_journal/jan99/article1.html
Nation (2002), “Education reform is the top priority”, January 1.
Nation (2004), “Much to learn from the humanities”, August 26.
Nation (2005), “55% of secondary schools fail grade”, November 5.
Nation (2006a), “Kids urged to read a lot”, May 7.
Nation (2006b), An 'F minus for education reform, June 6.
Nation (2007a), “Pongthep backed over coup question”, April 4.
Nation (2007b), “Education reforms must continue”, February 24.
Nation (2007c), Decentralisation key in education reforms, August 1.
Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker (eds.) (2008), Thai Capital After the 1997 Crisis, Bangkok: Silkworm Books.
Smythe, H.H. (1964), “Scholarship in Thailand: Arid, Stunted and Tradition Bound”, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 35, Issue 7, pp. 367-372, October.
Surachai Chupaka (2002) “Education reform is lying in tatters”, The Nation, Jan 23.
Sutichai Yoon (2001), Education reform: Does this gov’t have the Will?, The Nation, Opinion, February 22.
Suthichai Yoon (2006), “Why doesn't education get mega-project priority?” The Nation, June 8.
Templeton, Charles (2007), “A Personal Word”, in Hitchens, C., The Portable Athiest, Da Capo Press, 282-286.
What qualifies me to criticize the state of Thai education? Do I have motives other than to shed light on the problem, or do I have any ulterior motives, perhaps an axe to grind to avenge some injustice that may have been visited on me as a foreign lecturer?
I have been involved in the Thai University education system in one form or another as a ……. for nearly 9 years, in both undergraduate and graduate level in two of the top most state universities of the country. Moreover, I had also been involved in academic administration at the professional training level in an institute that is closely associated with universities locally and abroad.
I can assure you that the purpose for writing this piece is primarily to document and lay bare my thoughts that have grown from my frustration both as a father seeing my Thai daughters’ innate curiosity and sense of wonder progressively and irreversibly ebbing over the years and as a foreign Acharn struggling to earn his keep and finding the purpose of life within the Thai educational system. It is hoped that these thoughts can make a tiny contribution to the debate on how to improve the dire state of Thai education.
Many foreigners who have taught in Thailand have witnessed the weak educational backgrounds of students, their poor English skills and more importantly, their inability to think and think critically. In my view, the inability to think critically and engage in discussion is attributed wrongly to poor English skills. A deficiency in English language skills is used as a convenient excuse for not being able to understand the subject matter at hand. I wish to argue however that the inability to grasp a concept is not dependent solely on language skills if the curious and adept mind had been trained to think in its native language. Absent that, no amount of catching up in Western languages (through expensive tutoring) will have an impact in facilitating the raising of intellectual standards.
I am not a linguist, but I have been assured that trying to understand Buddhist Dhamma as it is written in Thai would require no less a concentrated effort to comprehend at an intellectual level (much easier I suppose than actually practicing its tenets in life) as would trying to make sense of a philosophical treatise by a Western philosopher. From experience, the problem of Thai students going one evolutionary step above the basic literacy tenets of “read and write” to “grow, to develop some intellectual sinew” (Templeton, 2007:283) stems much deeper than having an acceptable or high level of English skills. Even if Thai students chose to use Thai these same students cannot demonstrate that they can clearly formulate their thoughts, much less write intelligibly. This is not a jaundiced observation of a foreigner who may have felt wronged or imagined receiving shabby treatment by Thai superiors (another story) but was in fact told so by an esteemed Thai colleague in a prestigious university. Writing and thinking can be honed independent of the language chosen to express thoughts in the mind.
Another unforgettable experience I’ve encountered in a reputable graduate program was to discover that most Thai graduate students would take an hour to read a single page from an assigned article in an English journal, taking a protracted amount of time referring back and forth to a dictionary as if word for word translation could facilitate comprehension of concepts that they were ill prepared to grasp (even at the basic minimum level) in the first place. The argument that the weakness in thinking skills among Thai students is somehow related to poor English language skills further loses its cogency when I ask students from other nationalities in class. For example, whenever I ask Vietnamese students whose English skills are as rudimentary as their Thai counterparts, they are able to formulate an intelligible answer either with the assistance of their compatriots who fill in the missing English words that they are at a loss or through their persistent attempts to find the English translation of their thoughts created in their native language from the dictionary. It is clear from the “keywords” in the ensuing translation that their thinking went through a “processing phase” rather than merely information recognition that would have at best regurgitated the information back to the lecturer. The latter would have been identifiable with my Thai graduate students who were likely to have perfect recall of the passage (even its text location) but could not explain what it meant. Thai students were more often than not at a loss to interpret the meaning, the interrelationship(s) of the idea(s) with prior concept(s), and/or its significance for the subject matter at hand. In plain terms, Thai students seem to be unable to make the rich mental connections that would “connect the dots” into some recognizable pattern. Of course this does not prove that Vietnamese students are brighter than Thai students. We would have to control the selection (& admissions) process for that in order to say something more definitive than this reporting. And we would also have to consider the rare exception among Thai graduate students who show motivation and originality, which does indeed occur though rarely.
It is even more frustrating when I teach undergraduate students who are less mature than those in graduate school. Few show interest while others sit impassively or doze off in class where the lessons require conceptual understanding, analytical thinking and synthesis. It is therefore the kind of class that is the complete opposite of what they have been traditionally exposed to, namely rote learning* that produces a state of mind that is more accustomed to superficiality (mai tong kit lerk, mai tong lai la eyat) that is then expressed in a demeanor that is the closest incarnation of Kundera’s “unbearable lightness of being”. I honestly suspect that this quintessential Thainess remains as one of the most incomprehensibly disarming traits that intrigue the jaded and cynical farangs who first arrive on this land of smiles. I require the students to bring a dictionary so that we can consult it together for new words that come up during discussion. When a new English word comes up however, most take a lackadaisical approach to opening the dictionary evoking what appears as total disinterestedness in the task at hand. During discussions, students are visibly distracted by a lethargy that in this type of university would be inconceivable to attribute to malnutrition. On the contrary, I am convinced more than ever that it is strong evidence of malnutrition of the mind.
*Can one ask a critical question in a Law School exam?
That the practice of asking critical questions (in relation to critical thinking) is supremely alien to the experience of Thai students is aptly demonstrated in this vignette. Some law students from Thammasat University complained to the daily newspaper Thai Post that a question that appeared in their final exam on March 11, 2007 made them feel uncomfortable. The seemingly innocuous question that was considered discomfiting asked: "If you are a judge and you were invited by coup makers to work for them for a salary more than you receive now, will you accept the work or not and why?" No doubt the context of such a question was suggestively subversive to those loyal to the military government that deposed the Thai Rak Thai party (TRT) of Mr. Taksin because the question was asked by Pongthep Thepkanjana, a special lecturer in the Law Dept of Thammasat University who no less was also the Deputy TRT Party leader. Were it not for the full backing of the chairman of the Thammasat University Lecturer Council, Kittisak Prokkati on grounds of academic freedom the case would have pushed Thailand to one of its laughable heights of political folly. (Nation, 2007a)
One would surely be guilty of making the foolish conclusion that there is something “inherently” wrong with Thais - that they are unable to carry an intelligent conversation or think in a critical manner. This is pure rubbish. This is clearly disproven by Thai students who are educated abroad as could be typical in the old or new elite families. Indeed, they not only speak English fluently but are equally as able as their western counterparts to hold their own in intellectual discussion, banter and debate. But these are few and far between. It is a rare Thai, student or otherwise who can rise above inane pop culture, their narrow inwardly focused “Thainess”, keep up to date with developments in neighboring countries, and particularly with gray area issues that cannot be approached with absolutist style of thinking (e.g., secret CIA prisons in Thailand, global terror, global warming, peak oil, Iran’s nuclear program, etc.). In short, finding a Thai student with a “going global” mindset is difficult indeed. Again, I wish to make myself crystal clear that this is by no means a derogatory remark on Thais nor is this to suggest inherent inferiority. Similar if not worse cases of ignorance and in the extreme, xenophobia, can be found in other countries, such as America where the minds of many students and the “average” person have been addled and brainwashed by simplistic truisms published by the popular press.
Since the vagaries of keeping body and soul together have led me to a job saddled with the formidable task of forming the minds of future leaders in Thai society the challenge is therefore how to educate Thai students to the level of excellence required for survivability in this intensely competitive global world of the future that is here upon us now. An even greater and seemingly impossible goal is how to stimulate in these young minds a love, passion and an excitement for knowledge; knowledge for knowledge’s sake. The smug belief in Thai exceptionalism and “self-sufficiency” is no longer tenable. Many Thais (rural and urban alike) have already tasted the Promethean fire of capitalist development. It seems increasingly unlikely that a country that has had a long streak of good luck over the last half a century in terms of material development may continue to be providentially endowed with good fortune by beneficent “spirits”. As recent events have shown the underpinning political and social values are far from fully formed or adequate to carry Thailand forward towards a society of self-regulating and self-acting individuals living in a true democracy. The foundations of “democratic literacy” can only be built on solid ground by an enlightened education system that will produce independent thinking and politically mature Thai citizens. As Suthichai Yoon argued (2001), “a civil society can only come about if we get our education policy right.” The way forward can be found through citizenry engaging in debate and discussion without recourse to mindless exhortation to “unity” from above, mob rule or senseless violence as a way out when words and thinking fail to illuminate the path.
Education reform is perhaps one issue that Thai parents agree on and are concerned with. Thai families with the wherewithal have deliberately chosen not to send their kids to the moribund Thai education system. Instead they opt to make invaluable contributions to the educational coffers to the growing number of expensive local private schools and those in Australia, New Zealand and the UK.
We also hear clear expression of concerns from Thai leaders and bureaucrats. For example, on the occasion of the 22nd anniversary celebration of the Ministry for University Affairs’ foundation, Mr. Anand Panyarachun, a former Prime Minister, addressed a large gathering of academics on the question of quality of higher education. Some of the key points raised (Komolmas, 1999):
• low academic standards. lower than those of Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan
• graduates have poor command of the English language
• lack of right understanding of basic concept of democracy among the faculty, staff and students
• faculty members being narrow-minded cannot cooperate together
• though the university is a community of scholars but the faculty have slavish mentality
Nine years later, in March 2008, among the items in the “worrying report” by Ampon Kittiampon, permanent secretary of the National Economic and Social Development Board on the state of Thai society during the fourth quarter of 2007 (October to December) is the quality of education* that continues to fall in the key areas of reading, mathematics and science (Daily Xpress, 2008).
*Low quality education = Low quality politicians
Suthichai Yoon (2001) wrote in an editorial piece the following:
"In 2001, in the heady days of the first term of Prime Minister Taksin, there was much hope in the earnest new education minister, Kasem Wattanachai who declared on his first day of work that that the quota of "privileged" students being allowed to enter primary and secondary schools must be curbed.
We now are saddled with an education system that ignores the vital values of transparency and honesty - that teaches students that creative thinking and imaginative exchanges of ideas are equivalent to risk-taking which should be avoided at all costs. Is there any doubt, then, that the quality of our national politics remains so deplorable? Did it surprise anybody when Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra complained the other day that he had difficulty locating good, qualified candidates for the Cabinet "because we don't have enough of a supply of good and wise people to pick from"? "
In a seminar on education reform sponsored by the Ministry of Education in Pattaya in 2006, caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang addressing teachers and students from 2,000 schools criticized rote learning and defended the use of open-ended questions (Nation, 2006a). Teachers were told that they should let students explain their selection of reading material and report what it is about, so as to improve their skill in catching the gist of the contents. Reading comprehension was said to be lacking among university students due to limited practice at lower educational levels (Nation, 2006a).
From whence does this state of affairs come from? There are deep historical reasons for the dire state of Thai education that have congealed and solidified into intractable institutional structures that would require strong political will to overturn. Let us not forget that Thailand did not experience the psychic dislocations and humiliations of having been colonized by Western powers. By maintaining its independence the elites and rulers were able to fashion the historical trajectory and development policies of their country with much greater independence than nationalist leaders of newly independent states who carried a heavy psychological, political, institutional and economic baggage from the colonial into the post colonial era. Not having to go through a nationalist anti-colonial movement, there is no equivalent of the momentous breaking-of- chains revolutionary event in Thai mentality. It should come as no earthshaking surprise that one of the accumulated tendencies arising from the continuity in Thailand’s fortuitous history resulted in conservative education policies that sought to reinforce the triumvirate symbols of Thainess – Nation, Religion and King. This meant the continuing stifling influence of the sakdina (feudal hierarchical social structure) mentality combined with the heavily centralized system of government that ensued from the reforms brought about by Chulalongkorn as the last bulwark against invasion by the British and French colonial powers when he run out of buffer concessions. To this day and perhaps for the generations of Thais that lived through the 20th century, mental capacities as well as initiative in terms of independent thinking, reasoning and volition were stunted. Thais were ruled by a succession of paternalistic rulers with varying degrees of enlightenment and ignorance (monarchs, military dictators) who issued edicts, orders and proclamations. In essence, the elites thought for the people. It was not in the rulers’ interest that their subjects had the capacity to think independently for themselves but to accept the natural order of things as foreordained by (wrongful) dhammic interpretations of merit and karma from previous lives. Anything foreign and alien to elite definition of “Thainess” was shunned and considered irrelevant, even dangerous. Subjects listen, obey and willingly accept their fate. The freedom of slaves in the last part of the 19th century was bestowed through an edict rather than fought for in an heroic act of rebellion.
The vestiges of the long tradition of absolute monarchy refused to vanish completely even after it was ended by an elite led rebellion (rather than a popular one). Authority that emanated from righteous rule morphed into an unprecedented form of control by military dictators using the repressive methods of authoritarian militarism. Field Marshal Plaek Phibun Songkram pretentions included large doses of absolutism behind his modernizing façade (remember his cultural edicts?). When the Prapass/Thanom dictatorship took power and restored the monarchy to support their legitimacy, the young monarch was quick to use the opportunity to restore traditional rituals and ceremonies of old to reestablish the preeminent ideological position of the monarchy in people’s mind. This benign, enlightened but paternalistic monarch cultivated its symbolic image to the hilt by righteous rule and adept use of the media that disseminated widely the propaganda that tireless benevolent rule helped improve the lives of the poor in rural areas. The monarch’s moral stature grew rapidly that he is often called upon to intervene at major historical junctures to restore stability whenever the country is pushed to the brink of chaos and bloodshed. He has earned the moral power and authority to bring together the most warring and blood thirsty leaders to compromise for the good of the country.
The seeds of a fledgling democracy fell however on feudal and authoritarian tainted grounds. The response to the refreshing beginning of freedom in the early 70s was unprecedented violence after the liberating manifestation of cathartic release of people’s pent up grievances proved to be a serious threat not only the status quo but also the imperial power of the US that had encroached into Thailand as part of its foolish and costly belief in the domino theory of communism in Southeast Asia.
With this cursory background, it’s no wonder then that it was not in the general interest of the elites to change the education system in Thailand. It benefitted them to have a politically juvenile population of workers and citizens who would not question the status quo nor demand more than their meager share of the profits of a rising industrial economy. Is it any wonder that in the present time the budgetary structure of the Ministry of Education has a highly lopsided almost 80 percent set aside for administrative costs - 15-17 percent goes to teachers' salaries and the rest to construction and the purchase of hardware. Only 3.5 per cent is devoted to actual educational development (Suthichai Yoon, 2006). Is it any wonder why with great frustration I witnessed my two daughters’ natural curiosity and sense of wonder in nursery school grew progressively dimmed as they progressed through elementary and high school (enrolled in one of the best private religious schools in Bangkok)? When their grades were not improving in math and science I inquired if they ask questions in class when they did not understand. Little did I know then about how the Thai system smothers curiosity when I was told “if I ask, the teacher will get angry with me”. Children thus quickly learn to dissimulate by not listening in rapt attention but by distracted talkativeness or mute silence in class. In the process of appearing to understand their sense of wonder of the universe dies. I think this is the intellectual equivalent of “soul murder” that the psychologist Leo Buscaglia referred to when a child is abused emotionally. And since there is no democratic forum in the school for parents to complain (that will cause the responsible to lose “face”) the only coping mechanism is for children who understand precisely that their teachers did not master the lesson plan themselves to internalize the self same methods of teachers – which is by memorization. Now I understand why educational reformists are calling for a change from “teacher centered” to “student centered” education. In my wildest dreams, I may still be proven correct that we should change the “wai kru” (honoring teachers) to “wai naksuksa” (honoring students) ceremony since they are after all the future leaders of this country. Now, that would be truly radical!
It is also no wonder that most Thai teachers place no value whatsoever on critical thinking and keeping an open mind. As Cleary (2007) put it perhaps not too exaggeratedly: “From the first grade, students are taught to "repeat after me", recite a few sums, and believe every word that comes out of their teachers' mouths in quiet obedience. Should one of them even dare to question a teacher, he will be on the receiving end of a boot out the door.” Ignorance is bliss. In my undergraduate classes for example, I get blank expressions when I ask “why” type of questions to stimulate students to think critically. I got slightly less blank expressions but still silence when once I intentionally challenged my students to think that rather than blaming the Burmese (as Thais are wont to do from reading the account of their history books) to reflect instead on whether the sacking of Ayutthaya by the Burmese could have been the result of poor thinking skills and faulty planning by Thai soldiers at that time? The same as the Thai Lao border skirmish in the 1980s where the much better equipped Thai army could not defeat the ragtag Laotian soldiers. I thought I was stirring a hornet’s nest by raising a rather provocative question but received instead cold indifference. It is the same telltale predictable reaction. How do I encourage a love of reading when in an informal poll of students in class only a handful even read the opinion pieces (e.g. editorials) in Thai language newspapers?
The most frustrating part about having to teach undergraduates or graduate students for that matter is the realization that Acharns are on the receiving end of a deeply flawed antiquated education system that begins from day one in kindergarten school. The prospect of having to take the responsibility to repair the damage wrought on students’ minds is overwhelming and can strain the most dedicated of Acharns who by trial and error (& sleepless nights) attempts all kinds of innovations to present an entertaining “dog and pony show” in class so that students don’t lose interest because the subject matter is beyond them. I have already made the decision that I am not going to be a party to the dumbing down of the lessons but instead try to simplify the explanation in the simplest language possible in English. Immaturity plus incompetence in students maybe a surefire formula to inspire challenge among dedicated Acharns but at the same can be a source of great disappointment if no amount of effort on the Acharn’s part can spark the passion for learning in these implacable students.
It has been reported that the real problem originates in the government high schools where it is impossible for any student to fail any subject. The refusal to apply firm standards by teachers in perhaps a misguided wishy-washy manifestation of the Buddhist “middle path” as in the practice of giving students three or four tries at their exams until teachers get frustrated enough to them an easy project and pass them to go to the next level (Bangkok Post, 2004). It would appear that the problem is particularly acute in public high schools in the provinces. According to a report by the Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) fifty-five per cent of secondary schools across the country, mostly small-scale government-run institutions, have failed national educational standard requirements. The remaining forty-five percent of the schools are either prestigious or located in Bangkok or other urban areas (Nation, 2005). The same report revealed that most students lacked analytical skills and failed to meet requirements in basic academic proficiency: the average score of six graders in mathematics was 44 per cent, 42 per cent in science, and below 50 per cent in Thai. Ninth graders need extra tutorials because they cannot achieve reading comprehension on their own, and vocational school students have to be given basic training by their employers (Nation, 2005).
Additional relevant observations that I have picked up first hand are the following:
• the proclivity of Thai university administration officials to put more emphasis on showy* physical infrastructure investments (i.e., new buildings) and non-essential technology (like high tech library systems) over investments to build first class libraries (replete with books, data bases, electronic journals) and laboratories. In the contest of appearance versus substance, appearance always wins in Thailand (“phak chee roy na”). There is a suggestion that the predilection for these bulky investments are underpinned by the budget approval procedures of the Budget Bureau, although it is also not unknown to hear whispers of lucrative commissions received under the table for huge construction projects (compared to say buying books). There should then be some kind of university ombudsman in the Ministry of Education who is responsible for investigating complaints of wrongdoing by high level university or institute administrators. Still, I cannot help but imagine what the alternative would be like: ordinary buildings but first class libraries – how much difference that would play in nudging the Thai academic illuminati” to stay abreast and make a substantive (not to say the least, original) contribution to advancing the state of the art in their respective fields of study!!! Thailand’s academic world may have leapfrogged the situation in 1964 when Smythe’s (1964) characterized scholarship in Thailand as “arid, stunted and tradition bound” but there is still a yawning gap in terms of achieving a critical mass of “progressive-minded, scholarly oriented” (p.371) academics holding court in a more intellectually open and questioning academia that would fan further the “intellectual fires” (p. 372) more coincident to the level of Thailand’s wealth and democratic opening 44 years later.
• The emphasis on science (in the name of increasing Thailand’s competitiveness) has become so prominent (I would guess even at high school level) that it has, according to Suwanna Satha-anan, a professor of philosophy, suffocated the humanities to a point that is potentially dangerous, trapping people in linear modes of thinking that she describes as “the one truth” (Nation, 2004). The mechanical mode of thinking cannot be ameliorated if reading skills to deepen substantive knowledge of theories and synthesis of conceptual debates leave a lot to be desired. Hence, the default is to undertake quantitative analysis devoid of theoretical content or relevance. I fondly recall an esteemed colleague (also a foreigner who graduated from a prestigious American Ivy League University) who was consulted by a thesis advisee if there was another statistical model that he could use that could improve the R-square (correlation coefficient) of the logistic regression model he was using for his master’s thesis.
• Inadequate reward or incentive system for Acharns in the university. Research funding has improved with the availability of the Kanchanapisek Research Fund, but unless there is a corresponding critical mass of library materials for scholars to read to keep up to date and advance the state of knowledge, research usually gets bogged down in baseline data collection of the rankest empiricist mode devoid of theoretical significance. I remember for example a huge longitudinal survey conducted by our school in which the design of the survey instrument was settled by a “committee” approach that predictably resulted in a meaningless hodgepodge of unrelated questions that had no theoretical framework. My foreign colleague and I promptly withdrew from membership fearful that whatever good name we had might get soiled from this pointless empirical research. This state of affairs unfortunately reinforces the gross disparity in the international research division of labor – local universities conduct the data collection (& earn money) but the interpretation, synthesis and implications for theory (the intellectual valued added) are conducted by their western counterparts abroad.
• Promotion standards must be intimately linked with research rather than administrative experience in organizing seminars or short course training, or obtaining external funds. Those Acharns who excel in and prefer this type of endeavors must be put in an administrative career track rather than an academic career track for the sake of equity.
• Acharns should be expected to show by example that education is a lifelong learning process. Tales of Acharns never again opening a book once they return to Thailand from their Phd training abroad are unfortunately true as borne out by an incident I witnessed of a Thai colleague (a senior Acharn of director level) reading forlornly one of the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” series while waiting in an Australian airport for a return trip to Bangkok. I consoled myself that at least this Acharn was not reading “Reader’s Digest”. This is again directly related to the weak structure of incentives that promote research excellence and the supporting infrastructure of at the very least, a near world class library so that Acharns can keep up to date with the state of the art in their fields.
• One conundrum that works against teaching in English is Thai national pride and a belief in a self-contained country that is able to function without the use of the English language. It is therefore difficult to convince Thai students of the value of using English by appealing to the abstract reality of globalization and fierce global competition without the full support at the highest levels of the Education Ministry and the leaders of the country. This comes at a time when the Sino-Thai tycoons and captains of industry are no longer in the forefront (or have the interest in) of strengthening and deepening Thai industrialization but instead concentrate on the service sector while surrendering the backbone of Thai industrialization to multinationals (Eckardt, 2008). There appears to be little thought given to the putative value of English in the future careers of students, particularly in the instrumental value of the humanities for the future in terms of employability in the coming new structure of jobs (whose configuration will increasingly be determined by multinational investors) as well as the role of the humanities in helping them achieve personal meaning and satisfaction in their lives and careers. Let it be said however, that we should squarely face the possibility that Thailand will end up being a “failed state” if education reform fails.
*“phak chee roy na” – or the fine Thai art of garnishing.
This practice of prettifying is mysteriously ingrained in the Thai psyche. An editorial published in the Nation, entitled “Education reform is the top priority” published Jan 1, 2002 clearly illustrates the foolishness of what may have been good but misguided intentions:
“Nothing sums it up better than the disclosure in a recent international survey - that we have one of the biggest education budgets, only to use the money like fools, wasting it on fences, signs and flag poles.”
So is there any hope for successful remedial effort to reverse the damage wrought by Thai education at the university level? First and foremost, the structural obstacles have to be addressed first by serious political will to overhaul (not simply reform) the educational system which has been paralyzed not only by backward philosophies and standards but also by a “corruption-prone and inefficient bureaucracy” (Yoon, 2001). All the lofty objectives befitting a modern education system more suited to the new millennium have been enunciated in the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999 that “incorporated all of the hopes for the future” (Nation, 2007b). This act provided a roadmap for drastic education reform (Yoon, 2001):
First, enhance learners' quality of life by enabling them to pursue lifelong learning, and to develop their analytical and critical thinking as well as practical work. (italics added)
Second, improve the structure and method of educational administration along with management of resources to better serve people in local communities.
Third, improve the system for teacher training and improve teaching standards.
Fourth, standardise and improve the quality of education through rigorous evaluation and monitoring.”
What will it take to realize the objectives of the National Education Act of 1999? Note however that the first objective presupposes that there is a welcoming environment in place for “critical thinking”. Can reform objectives solve its contradictory goals* with long established authoritarian and paternalistic patterns in Thai culture? It is to be expected that further industrialization will rend asunder the hold of tradition on the minds of people. However continuous attachment to the present Thai model of taking advantage of globalization by providing services to multinationals may eventually find limits in the ability of Thais to exercise effective control of its development direction (Pasuk and Baker, 2008). Absent the “creative destruction” of further cycles of rapid capitalist development, where will the pressure to “modernize” Thai society come from? There is however a real danger that the push for an enlightened citizenry may prove the undoing of the development model of Thailand which has been based on a docile cheap and not-so-cheap anymore labor which do not have a voice in terms of labor rights.
There is little known about nurturing environment that starts in the home where values are engrained (including the love of learning) and those that put into perspective the insistent consumerist advertisements in this age of globalization. We know little of the internal dynamics of Thai families in value formation. How do we spark the interest of students if they come from environments where parents themselves do not have education or were mis-educated by the same system that needs to be changed? What example can parents give to stimulate the love and passion for learning in their children if they themselves do not have it? Can Thais look back to a past that was steeped in scholarship like Vietnam? And what can be done to change the cultural and political milieu so that it encourages a thoughtful and more enquiring citizenry?
I am not an expert on educational reform. The way out of this dismal state of affairs has been argued to require strong, courageous and committed leadership to push for educational reforms (Nation, 2006b). Powerful vested interest with a stake in the status quo will not only resist but attempt to waylay any moves (Surachai Chupaka, 2002). Education reforms were a start-and-stop affair under the Thaksin administration where five education ministers came and went during its five and a half years in power which thus consequently failed to come up with coherent education reform programs (Nation, 2007b). I do know that this is a very complex and difficult objective, where planning strategies must be clear cut and phased realistically from the very beginning to reduce resistance to change, provide adequate resources and prevent the chaos of trying to achieve too much too soon (Nation, 2007c).
*How will contradictions be resolved? By exhortation or revolution in Thai society?
Stephen Cleary (2007) wrote of contradictions in the objectives of education reform in that it goes against the grain of Thai traditional values:
“The education authorities often contradict themselves. An official statement by Onec (National Scheme on Education) in 2002 read: "Thai people shall adopt desirable values and behaviour in accordance with the traditional ways of life". Meaning that not only should Thai students sit down, shut up and obey the teacher, they ought to also instinctively honour their elders and abide by everything they say.”
Let me end with these few tentative thoughts. Because of the complexity of educational reform that is interlinked to many aspects of the political economy and existing power structures of Thailand I am pessimistic about the future. But the undoing of the gains of Thailand in the past half a century of “development” precisely from the failure to improve the educational system is to think the unthinkable considering the social chaos and instability that may result.
I will do my best to persevere in my chosen profession although I must start from the realization and acceptance of my own limitations to alter history, or to change people's attitudes. Galileo’s saying that “you cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself” may be comforting for the present. Try and try as you may - but what if you consistently find that there is nothing?
References:
Bangkok Post (2004), “Lax Standards hurting education”. December 12.
Brimble, P. and Richard F. Doner (2007), University–Industry Linkages and Economic Development: The Case of Thailand, World Development, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 1021–1036.
Cleary, Stephen (2007), “Don't panic, the kids are all right after all”, The Nation, June 23.
Daily Xpress(2008), “Wake up call for Thai Society”, March 11, The Nation
Eckardt, James (2008), “Downfall of the Sino-Thai families”, Nation, July 8.
Komolmas, Prathip M. , “New Trends in Higher Education Towards the 21st Century in Thailand”, www.journal.au.edu/abac_journal/jan99/article1.html
Nation (2002), “Education reform is the top priority”, January 1.
Nation (2004), “Much to learn from the humanities”, August 26.
Nation (2005), “55% of secondary schools fail grade”, November 5.
Nation (2006a), “Kids urged to read a lot”, May 7.
Nation (2006b), An 'F minus for education reform, June 6.
Nation (2007a), “Pongthep backed over coup question”, April 4.
Nation (2007b), “Education reforms must continue”, February 24.
Nation (2007c), Decentralisation key in education reforms, August 1.
Pasuk Phongpaichit and Chris Baker (eds.) (2008), Thai Capital After the 1997 Crisis, Bangkok: Silkworm Books.
Smythe, H.H. (1964), “Scholarship in Thailand: Arid, Stunted and Tradition Bound”, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 35, Issue 7, pp. 367-372, October.
Surachai Chupaka (2002) “Education reform is lying in tatters”, The Nation, Jan 23.
Sutichai Yoon (2001), Education reform: Does this gov’t have the Will?, The Nation, Opinion, February 22.
Suthichai Yoon (2006), “Why doesn't education get mega-project priority?” The Nation, June 8.
Templeton, Charles (2007), “A Personal Word”, in Hitchens, C., The Portable Athiest, Da Capo Press, 282-286.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
