Mid-Year Economic Review 2002

EDUCATION

Trapped by the same old system

Post Reporters

EDUCATION

Not much has changed for those at the bottom of the heap

For five years now, illiterate elderly farmers in places like Surin, Surat Thani and Suphan Buri, have been asking a similar question, for which there is no easy answer.

Many of their educated children, who were laid off and returned home after the economic crisis began in 1997, discovered they could not earn a living in their villages, despite the fact that each village was blessed with an abundance of food in the fields.

Wasn't education supposed to prepare their children with enough knowledge and skill so they could survive, especially in the surroundings into which they were born?

Farmers were not the only ones asking that question. Increasing numbers of parents are having doubts as to the true merit of formal education in the country, believing the curriculum is gearing their sons and daughters for one path in life, and one only: that of serving the needs of big business and industry.

The Lanna Music Festival fuses fun with learning. Professionals help students master complex compositions.

But what do their children do when the jobs dry up?

Urban and better-educated parents face a different set of problems. The rigid, rote-learning school system, they feel, has largely destroyed their children's creativity and imagination. Like rural boys and girls, urban children have never been taught how to think, but rather what to remember.

Demand for educational reform started some 30 years ago, but failed to gain the attention of politicians. During the economic boom, the pressure for reform was heightened as society asked for a more open and liberal educational system, to serve the needs of a more open and liberal society. At the same time, the business sector, dissatisfied by the lack of skilled labour to serve the needs of the booming business sector, requested a greater focus on science and technology.

The government of Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, led by its education minister, Sukhavich Rangsitphol, believed technology was the answer to educational reform calls and set aside a huge budget during the economic boom to install tens of thousands of computers in schools across the country.

It was a rather ironic waste of money. Over 8,000 computers now sit idly collecting dust in schools where no one who knows how to use them or maintain them. This year, the present government invested yet more money to put more technology into schools.

Critics have tried to convince politicians that technology and money do not really get at the heart of Thailand's educational problems. What matters, they say, is the quality of teachers, the learning process itself, and having a curriculum that serves the needs of society.

It wasn't until 1998 that the National Education Act was passed, thanks to the 1997 People's Constitution. An ideal law that upholds the philosophy of education, it makes the process of learning the priority, rather than the Education Ministry's top-down policies and control. The Act was designed to decentralise the Ministry's tight grip, thus allowing community participation in its decisions.

Teaching crisis: Only one teacher was left to take charge of dozens of pupils in all classes at Nong Samrong School in May.

The intention of the constitution was that parents and the community be involved in drafting a curriculum that fits the needs and the nature of the community. Teachers would be evaluated by the community, not by centralised authorities. If not satisfied with the conventional system, parents could establish their own educational facilities to provide appropriate schooling for their children.

The law was perceived as a blessing, coming as it did during a time when public frustration with the mainstream education system had reached new heights, and was also being partially blamed for the country's inability to protect itself from the economic crisis.

Three years have passed since the Act was passed and concerned parents have been patiently waiting for real change in the system to reflect its philosophical aim. But the path to liberal education has not been as smooth as many hoped.

The National Education Act called for the establishment of the Office of the National Education Commission, tasked with drafting the rules and regulations that will make the Education Act a reality in practice. However, the debates and the discussion that have ensued in the wake of the establishment of this office have been seen more as a power struggle by the Education Ministry wanting to once more take control, rather than any real attempt at reform. Amendments have been made, some charters added, others cut or rewritten, and there is a general feeling that real reform will be sidelined, and that it will be business as usual.

As a result, some of the leading scholars among the initial group of those studying the reform, such as Dr Prawet Wasi and Dr Ekavit Na Thalang, became disillusioned and gave up.

But despite the government's reluctance, many individual groups are determined to move on.

Thus far, alternative forms of education have yet to receive legal approval despite the fact there are hundreds of these establishments, both large and small, already operating across the country, according to the Foundation for Education for Life and Society.

These alternatives, including home-schooling, have expanded the learning process beyond mathematics, literature and biology, touching on the immense range of knowledge available among religious groups, traditional medicine practitioners, and the local wisdom within communities.

In the North, one alternative school teaches Lanna handicrafts, language and culture, in order to preserve that precarious Northern heritage. A community college established by Pramote Nakorntap offers non-degree courses for the public wanting to expand their horizons. The "Midnight University" of Prof Nithi Eosriwong is a forum that aims to stimulate the thought process, rather than grant degrees.

Meanwhile, the Education Ministry, in response to the Act, has tried to shake off its sluggishness with the introduction of several pilot projects. One was the child-centred learning project, introduced in some schools, albeit with not much success. One of the problems with this approach has been the quality of the teachers _ groomed in a conservative educational system, most teachers' understanding of the child-centred approach was only skin-deep, and only a few schools made a smooth transition.

One of the most significant pilot projects introduced this academic year was the introduction of a new curriculum, wherein some 30% was designed to accommodate and incorporate local wisdom, which differs from region to region.
But many NGOs criticised the effort, saying the ministry had not invited public participation in drafting the curriculum.

In general, there has not been any dialogue between the Ministry, NGOs and local communities to work out the specifics of educational reform.

Parts of the Act have been blatantly ignored by the ministry. For example, Article 14 specifies that the government must provide financial support to parents and communities for home-schooling, but thus far, no support has been forthcoming.

Disillusioned, farmers from several provinces met recently to discuss educational reform at an NGO forum, and some were so disheartened they began to consider taking their children out of school.

"What's the point of sending them to school," one farmer asked, "when education has never helped our children appreciate farming? Instead, it has turned our boys and girls away from their own roots."