|
|
 |
A class of bright-eyed and eager Thai primary schoolers, members of arguably the most important group of students in the country. Starting next year, children like these throughout Thailand will be learning a promising, but largely untried new curriculum. |
If all goes according to schedule, primary schools throughout the country will begin implementing the government’s new curriculum next April in primary years one and four. Years two and five will follow the next year, with three and six following suit the following year. (The secondary school curriculum will undergo a similar transformation, the subject of several previous learning post features.)
The new curriculum is in many ways a radical departure for the old. What students learn will no longer be strictly controlled by the central authorities. Instead, it will be largely be up to individual schools. The Ministry of Education has produced a detailed set of standards and benchmarks (including behavioural objectives) for schools to meet, but how they meet them is largely their own business.
Is this what is needed to free Thai students from their mindless adherence to rote learning, or is it a recipe for disaster?
It is difficult to say at this moment, but there are places where we can get some indication. Several hundred primary schools around the country have already begun implementing their versions of the year one and four curricula.
Recently, learning post visited one of them, the Sanambin (Airport) School in the city of Khon Kaen. What we discovered is very much a mixed bag. On the positive side, we found widespread acceptance of the need for change among administrators and teachers and general approval of the Ministry’s new set of standards and benchmarks. Efforts to tailor the curriculum to local needs and an unprecedented campaign to inform and involve parents has increasingly won their understanding and support as well.
But while most teachers seem willing, even eager, to design new courses and adapt their teaching styles to a more child-centred approach, they bemoan the fact that they have received very little outside help in doing so. “Right now we’re walking in the dark,” is a typical teacher comment. “We can’t say what we’ve accomplished. We can’t say we’re using a child-centred approach.”
Since pilot schools such as Sanambin are among those deemed most ready to implement the new curriculum, such comments have ominous implications for the nation-wide launch next April. That’s unfortunate because, as our visit to the Khon Kaen school illustrates, many of the elements for positive change are in place.
Open enrolment
 Archarn Udomsak Akkasorn, assistant principal for academic affairs — SUNEE CANYOOK |
The Sanambin School enrols approximately 3,000 students. It has a very open enrolment, accepting students from far beyond its normal catchment area, including some with physical and learning disabilities.
According to Archarn Udomsak Akkasorn, the school’s assistant principal for academic affairs, the school has nine blind students and five autistic children.
“We give them love,” he explains with obvious pride. “When they’re walking around, you can’t tell that they’re blind because they can walk around school comfortably. They look like regular students. Everybody helps them, treats them equally.”
Sanambin is fortunate to have a relatively large teaching staff, so contact hours are not excessive. “What we need most is news buildings,” says A. Udomsak. “Our classes are very big, over 50, sometimes 60. This number is beyond what the government supports,” he says, “but when we report to our authorities, they nod and say the budget will come later.”
Gaining parental acceptance
As assistant principal for academic affairs, A. Udomsak oversees the curriculum development process at the school. “Curriculum writing is very, very difficult,” he says. “It requires endless adjustments and adaptations.”
While some help was available in the form of ministry training seminars, he says, one of the most productive sources of assistance has been the parents themselves. “Before the school break,” A. Udomsak explains, “we sent questionnaires to parents asking what their expectations are. What do they want their children to be good at?”
The top four responses, he says, were the Thai language, English, science and math. “We now use their wishes as our guiding vision in developing our curriculum,” he says.
There was some initial parental resistance to the new curriculum, A. Udomsak says. “Because schools have their own curriculum,” he explains, “there are no set textbooks or class materials. Parents were concerned how students would be able to learn without textbooks.
“We asked them to contribute 200 baht per semester in order that teachers could produce tasksheets. They were glad to do that. They had no problem about that because at the end of the term, students took home the tasksheets they had accumulated. One good thing, parents said, was that the students didn’t have to carry a heavy schoolbags to school.”
Another reason the parents were so accepting, A. Udomsak says, is the new way of doing things gave them a much better understanding of what their children were learning. A good example, he says, is a recently complete science unit dealing with soil composition.
“Under the old curriculum,” he explains, “we bought our samples from BKK. Last term, we asked students to ask their parents to find some sample stones from their homes and bring to school. Next we asked each of them to put stones together and take them back for their parents to smash.
“This made the parents curious why they had to do so. Next we asked them to bring some leaves from around their homes to school. They had to bring the stones back home to be re-smashed if they weren’t fine enough.
This,” continues A. Udomsak, “caused the parents to become even more curious. What did we want from the smashed stones and leaves? Of course, we got soil. The conclusion from this lesson was that soil differs from place to place, and that explains why different kinds of plants grow well in some places but not in the others.
“The lesson successfully created parents’ interest because they had never experienced anything like this. We then took the opportunity to invite all parents for a meeting at school and informed them about the curriculum. The following meetings took place in their children’s classes. By getting involved in the classes, the parents saw what they could contribute. For example, in some cases, they helped putting in a new floor,” A. Udomsak smiles with clear satisfaction.
Year one: promise and challenge
It only takes a single visit to a primary school classroom to bring out the promise and the challenge of working with students at this critical point in the learning process. Mentally alert and eager to learn, they delight in showing off their favourite song “AAA apple!”
The room is packed with more than 50 students with every available space taken. The teacher is forced to use a microphone to be heard and opportunities for individual attention are severely limited.
 Archarn Sukhon Chanphodhi, prathom one head teacher |
“We’ve changed in some ways, says pratom one head teacher, Sukhon Chanphodhi. We’ve moved away from the textbooks we used to depend on to tasksheets. We incorporate more activities in lessons to encourage students to take part and act out more. Sometimes, we wonder if we’re asking them to do too much or beyond their capability.
“For example, we asked them to lead the reading alone in front of the class, or we ask them to carry out tasks. We have a poorly stocked library, so we turn to books we can find in classes. We have our students help themselves and find reading materials by themselves,” A. Sukhon comments.
“We have provincial supervisors as our consultants. A. Sukhon observes. “The school has organised invited trainers from the Provincial Primary Education Office (PPEO). But so far, we’ve had no training about “child-centred” teaching.
“We help ourselves. We understand that “child-centred” means having them learn what they like to learn. We try to provide activities, but our classes are very big. There’s no space to move. We then take them down to the school ground — discipline problems arise. We cannot control 50 students there like we can in classrooms.”
Year four: bumpy transition
Whether a curriculum is new or old is of little concern to first-year students because they have never known anything else. Beginning in year four, however, is another matter. Here students have had three years of learning under the old system and, according to their teachers, the transition to the new curriculum at year four is hardly seamless.
“The biggest problem for pratom four,” says Archarn Somluck Chaisakul, “is the transition from the old curriculum to the new one. It’s a big jump, especially in English. When they were in pratom three, they studied two periods a week. In pratom four the time allotted to the subject, the content, the teaching methods change considerably. This is a big burden for the students.”
Archarn Malee Yaemkaew questions whether abruptly introducing the new curriculum in year four is a good idea. Perhaps it would be better to introduce it one year at a time, she says.
 Curriculum writing has become a big part of the job of these year four teachers. Prathom four teams: (back row) Archarn Somluck Chaisakul, Archarn Urairat Tiwungsoen; (front row) Archarn Malee Yaemkaew, Archarn Pornthip Wiengsamutr and Archarn Sunita Thongnut. |
Other problems cited by year-four teachers are much the same as those for year one teachers. “We have to fill in the content framed by the Basic Education Curriculum from Bangkok,” says Archarn Pornthip Wiengsamutr. But they don’t give us content or resources. We have too much freedom.”
Fortunately, says A. Somluck they can get a lot of support and encouragement from the school administrators. “The schools’ administrators are broad-minded in allowing us to fill in the content and to seek knowledge from any sources available. Even though we lack resources, we enjoy our teaching. And we do get many ideas from Khon Kaen University and other sources. However, we did feel discouraged when the people from Bangkok said that we’re giving too much and too advanced.”
In the Ministry’s court
Clearly, the Ministry of Education is going to have to get more involved in assisting teachers prepare for the nation-wide launch of the new curriculum next year. With human resources apparently in short supply, it might be useful to seriously look into simple, but dependable information technology. A well-monitored Internet forum for pratom one and four teachers would be a useful start. The teachers we talked with are downright enthusiastic about the idea, once we explained to them what an Internet forum was.
terryfrd@ksc15.th.com |