Quality Of Doctoral Degrees Questioned

[george]

ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATION

Quality of doctoral degrees questioned

Authorities urged to act to preserve standards

BANGKOK: -- The secretary general of the Office of National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA), Professor Somwang Phithiyanuwat, has raised concerns about the standards of doctoral degree courses being offered by various educational agencies in Thailand.

He says the number of such courses is mushrooming, and relevant authorities should take action before the courses fail to reach acceptable standards.

In an exclusive interview with The Nation's local news editor Chularat Saengpassa and reporter Wannapa Phetdee, Somwang also explains how the so-called Third Academic Assessment will introduce measures that will make the new national educational formula work in the long run.

Q : Why are the prime minister and ONESQA pushing for assessment results and linking this with budget allocations for educational institutes?

A : Prime Minister Abhisit is hoping that the Third Assessment should correspond with budget allocations in accordance with the categories of educational institutes under the new formula. For example, the University group should be given sufficient research funds while the Rajabhat Institute group, whose campuses usually serve local communities, should be given development funds for those local communities.

Looking back when there was the University Affairs Ministry - which was established to supervise undergraduate studies mainly on fiscal issues - universities were not then run through integral coordination [under the Education Ministry] as they are now. There is now an idea to restore the old system, but it has not been decided whether the Office of the Higher Education Commission (OHEC) will work on that, or a new agency will act as a buffer body to do the job - which is a system now used in Britain.

If we have this new body in place, the budget allocation will better match fiscal needs. The Budget Bureau will oversee the big picture and provide the money. The body's committee should comprise members of relevant agencies to efficiently allocate the budgets - based on assessment results.

Under the new formula, educational institutes will assess themselves in areas where they want to see changes. Rewards should be made available for outstanding undergraduate institutes to encourage competition.

Q : What are the criteria for the Third Assessment that will be used to evaluate all educational institutes in 2010?

A : The Third Assessment criteria, to be jointly designed by the ONESQA, OHEC, the Office of the Public Sector Development Commission (OPDC) and the Budget Bureau will depend around 80 to 90 per cent on institutes' performance, the quality of their graduates, [their] research and their cultural preservation, while the remaining 10 to 20 per cent will involve their work procedures and performances of rectors and members of their councils.

There is another budget-oriented assesssment system to be used with 13 independent [former-government] universities. Its criteria will be different from those used with government universities. A Cabinet decision was made two months ago that all four agencies are required to develop the independent universities by working out a new assesssment system. It will be different from the old one, because these universities can function more independently. This whole idea of a separate assessment system for independent universities was formulated since [the term of] former education minister Wijit Srisa-an [in the Surayud government].

The four agencies will soon hold a joint meeting to work on this new assesssment system.

Under the new national educational formula, undergraduate and graduate institutes are divided into four groups: Group 1 is universities whose work involves mainly research; Group 2 is institutes that produce graduates in essential professions; Group 3 is those that produce graduates with bachelor's degrees; and Group 4 are community colleges.

Each and every one of them needs to identify which group it belongs to, because categorisation will affect budget allocation and key performance indicators. Four fifths of assessment scores will be focused on the performance of these institutes.

For general assessments in schools at the basic level (15-year compulsory education from Grade 12 down to a three-year kindergarten period), the key performance indicator scores will be decreased - like at undergraduate level. Seventy-five per cent of the assessment scores will be based on students' academic qualities while the remaining 25 per cent [will be based on the performance of] school committees and school directors.

Q : It seems that many leading universities do not recognise the ONESQA's assessment standards? Why is that?

A : They may deem our assessments insufficiently challenging, because they have gone a long way [ahead of us]. The Third Assessment will be of a national standard. In Group 1, if this government still works on [after 2011], and if their assessment scores are high, universities in Group 1 will be allocated more money proportionally.

The new assessment standards will encourage better academic performances as a whole. Under the new assessment system, an international standard will also be applied. For example, research universities [in Group 1] whose researches are included in world rankings, with repeat numbers of publications of their research journals, or the number of citations of their works, will receive high assessment scores.

Q : What are the criteria in the Third Assessment for institutes in the other groups?

A : For Group 2, which are those producing doctors, nurses and engineers, or institutes like the Chulabhorn Research Institute or the Phramongkutklao College of Medicine [the Army's medical school], the criteria will be based on the number of graduates they produce who can later pass professional permits, because these students will automatically secure careers.

For Group 3, which produces students with bachelor's degrees in general fields, the criteria will be based on their contributions to society; on their efficiency in developing human resources and influencing the way of life in the provinces in which they are located. The Second Assessment evaluated these universities on similar criteria, but not enough.

The ONESQA will also emphasise the quality of [each university's] curriculum, and this will be a system to guarantee quality of teaching.

When the OHEC completes a post-audit assessment of the [various] curricula and can summarise how many curricula pass, the ONESQA will then base its own criteria on those of the OHEC.

It has been a question all over the world, how to standardise assessment of a national education system. It's been a problem in Britain, Europe and the US on what universal criteria should be applied to measure the standard of education.

Q : After the ONESQA's First and Second Academic Assessments, what has happened or what changes have they made to the development of education in Thailand?

A : The biggest impact that the ONESQA is proud of is the Abhisit government's policy, announced to the Parliament under Policy 3.1.8, that any school or university that does not pass the ONESQA's [new] standard assessment will be entitled to government subsidies until they pass the basic assessment requirements. The ONESQA is very proud that the government has accepted our assessment standards and has pledged to subsidise those schools, either private or state-run, that fail.

The other significant impact is that of 586 schools - dubbed the schools in coma - that failed the assessment test, 100 of them have received support from Matichon newspaper under its I See U project. The [remaining] 486 schools were later given support by the Education Ministry, ONESQA, the Office of Basic Education Commission, and the ThaiCom Foundation. These schools have been moralised and boosted after receiving this support.

The ministry recently handed a sum of money given up by parents in privileged schools to 577 of these schools. The money handover was initially criticised because it may have publicly shamed these schools, but it later proved beneficial to them.

Q : The Second Academic Assessment at undergraduate level - what's the latest progress on that?

A : It is expected to be completed with all 258 government and private universities and 67 supervised by the OPDC by the end of this year. Fourteen of them - privately-run, some community colleges and some Rajabaht campuses - that failed the test will be reassessed on both quality of graduates and research, after they are given a year in which to correct their weaknesses.

Q : What problems have been identified after both assessments?

A : Research, mostly. The scores are below half of what's required. In the ONESQA's First Assessment, one academic spent seven years on one research work. In the Second Assessment, it was four years per one piece of work. Under international standards, two research works have to be completed within one year.

Thailand's undergraduate study has not been developed, basically from students mainly wanting to get the knowledge, but merely wanting to obtain degrees to get jobs. This is different from universities in other countries, which have been established to produce students with knowledge, who are then able to conduct research on innovative topics.

The other factors are that government research funds are too small - less than 1.25 per cent of Gross Domestic Product, while the quality of teachers has dropped. Good students now choose not to become teachers, unlike previously.

Q : What solutions are there to the problems regarding research work in the undergraduate studies in Thailand?

A : More budget can boost research. An emphasis on encouraging graduate students to do more research. Doctoral studies should require candidates to present master plans before admission. In some European countries, candidates are given government funds to present master plans before admission. It's not that anyone with money can earn a PhD.

Approved research works should be published in world-renowned journals, focusing on conducting peer reviews. Any piece of work which may be published on websites but is not globally accredited will not be recognised by ONESQA.

Courses for master's degree studies in Thailand were widely opened five or six years ago and it is now the same with doctoral courses. Previously, there was one candidate per one semester per one faculty's department, but now there are 120 to 200 candidates, in both government and private universities.

This is problematic in ensuring the quality of research work, let alone thorough supervision [by advisors]. I have never seen this many candidates in other countries.

As the regulatory body, the Office of the University Council should designate seven standard conditions [for universities to follow] in opening doctoral courses and abolish them if they fail the criteria and inform the OHEC of the closure of these courses within 90 days.

The OHEC should conduct a post-audit evaluation of all doctoral courses and should be empowered to order those that fail to shut down. But coping with the problem in a Thai way, the matter has been dealt with through rather non-drastic measures. The Office of the University Council should take this into consideration and take action.

The OHEC is considering requiring members of the Office of the University Council to be evaluated, because of their influence in developing education in Thailand.

-- The Nation 2009-06-29

[Scott]

After reading the article, I am completely baffled at what they are doing. Perhaps the goal is to baffle?

At any rate, if someone can clarify/simplify it, please post.

[Artisi]

After reading the article, I am completely baffled at what they are doing. Perhaps the goal is to baffle?

At any rate, if someone can clarify/simplify it, please post.

Probably written by a PhD.

[Ijustwannateach]

I think that what has happened is that the grad depts appear overstuffed to the point that they risk losing credibility based on that alone... and there are other problems getting some of the Thai PhD programs in line with international standards and reality (quality of research, time of publication, etc.). Seems like some influential persons are setting up a red flag as a sea warning for those programs, lest Thai PhDs become (further?) devalued internationally.

[Scott]

At the risk of further showing my lack of knowledge in this area, aren't higher educational standards usually set by an independent academic body rather than the gov't?

Eons of time ago, I was involved in setting standards for a professional area and I don't recall any gov't intervention whatsoever. When it came to the process of licensing a group, the gov't was involved, but only in agreeing that it was a group that needed a license.

[PeaceBlondie]

My American buddy edits top-ranked Thai academic technical papers before they're submitted to be published in English-language professional journals. The papers are submitted to my buddy, for him to earn over 500 baht/hour, in professionally sounding English, with the normal grammatical mistakes of well-educated Thais: noun-verb agreement, misspelling, an adjective used as an adverb, passive voice. using wrong verb tense in reported speech, a/an/the omissions, etc.

What we wonder (both of us hold only an earned BA in liberal arts) is whether the research was done right. Validity, statistical significance, standard protocols, peer review, etc. Editors of the journals can spot these errors quickly.

The interview in the OP is mostly bureaucratic, not professional, in my humble opinion.

[Scott]

I agree 100% PB. When it comes to writing, I don't worry about the standard of English, but I do wonder about the validity of the studies, but that's based on my personal experience here in Thailand.

I have an elderly student, working on his Ph.D. and I help him with the written English--which is passable, but certainly not publishable. He, however, does his research very well and thoroughly. He uses his place of employment and since I've been around there for a long while, I know he's not B.Sing. He's one of the few, though.