Does 'thai Culture' Have An Impact Upon The Quality Of Education In Thailand?

[Scott]

Thanks for noticing my figure IJWT....it's getting better....too damned hot to eat!

[featography]

One of the funniest things to me was that when visitors came to my school they would ask me "do you like Thailand?" "Do you like Thai food" and then walk next door to my Filipino coworker and grill them on teaching strategies...

LMAO I hear that. Now a days, when I make a new introduction (with Thai people) , I start off the questions; Welcome to Thailand, how long you been here? Do you like Thailand? Do you like Thai food?........ It always gets them laughing and relaxed enough to actually talk about something intelligent?

[elkangorito]

Sorry but this is a long post. My comments within quotes are in blue.

From Phetaroi.

Another great post! I like your thought process. Very logical...even when you're wrong! laugh.gif Actually, it's not a question of right or wrong...I'm only joking about that. There are probably parts of what both of us say that are correct.

I think the Youtube case you're referring to may be the one where the boy was refusing to participate (perhaps even stand) for the pledge because gay men were not being allowed to marry. As I recall, his father was gay...or something along those lines. It got an inordinate amount of play. The federal district courts have pretty much ruled along the lines that students may not be forced to participate in the Pledge, may not be forced to stand for the Pledge, but may be required to be silent during the Pledge, just as regular school discipline would often require silence and other students who wish to participate may not be distracted (oversimplification, but that's the basics).

At least 'Freedom of Speech' held true...unlike Thailand, where certain 'topics' are forbidden.

Your description of how the ABC is restricted is very interesting. At first I thought...sounds good! After rethinking it, is not government therefore controlling the media, and when you're controlling the media, does that really allow for free expression? Don't get me wrong...I'm not saying it's bad...maybe it's good. And I certainly can't say that an almost totally free press and media in America is making a responsible media or helping the country. I am always reminded of how Suharto used to be so in control of things in Indonesia, and then looked at how things went into a mini-collapse when he was deposed because no one was holding the country together. I always get a little nervous when someone says the government shouldn't hold together a certain structure in a society...because society by itself is not necessarily "good" in deeds and principles.

I think you misunderstood me. The ABC in Australia MUST provide a balanced view, even if that means speaking negatively about government &/or royalty.

2nd to the ABC is SBS (which was formerly a government run establishment), which provides exceptionally unique & very high quality reports due to a high quality of journalism. SBS does not rely on any other news service for it's specialised programs.

No, I don't think Australia is cultureless, and as I think I pointed out in my previous case, strong nations (like the US and Australia) usually have a fairly strong and robust culture because they naturally have a rather strong self-identity.

By comparison to many other countries, Australia is 'cultureless'. Having lots of BBQ's & enjoying parties is certainly not 'cultural. On the other hand, fighting for 'freedom' (worker's rights) is relatively 'cultural, as this notion is still alive & well in Australia. There is no cultural 'law', spoken or unspoken, in Australia.

I'm not sure the Thai desire to get rich is American-based culture. It may actually be more rooted in the history of Chinese culture in Thailand. Then pile the western world's consumerism on top of that.

Your comments about a "class system" here also interested me. I doubt there is any system where there is not a class system to one degree or another. I think the question is whether or not there is some mobility between classes. In the States there certainly is. In my extended family (and I do mean people I am actually related to) there is a range of class from truly poor to upper middle, yet we all came from the same ancestors. Why? The Emmons branch of the family were lazy trailer trash pigs. Period. My parents wanted to own a restaurant, my grandparents scrimped and saved to buy a very nice house, those and other things got us into lower middle. Change of class. It was always just assumed that I would go to college, and indeed, in a huge extended family, I was only the second to go to college. Change of class; by the time I retired my income was in the upper middle class range, and many people said, "Vince, you're beyond upper middle.

Now, how does that relate to Thailand? Thailand is less flexible, but not immobile. My partner is from Issan, but earned a B.S. and M.S. from Chulalongkorn, and has an excellent position in the Education Ministry. To me he's still poor, but compared to his family in a little moo bahn near Nakhon Ratchasima, he's changed class...and now the next generation are going to university at a rate of about 50%. There is an emerging middle class in Thailand...or at least in Bangkok...that was not here when I first began traveling here in 1987. Not all those people who are shopping and eating at Central World and Paragon are "rich". Consumerism has taken hold in the Thai mind...or again, perhaps I should say Bangkokian mind. In fact, that brings up an important point I wanted to mention -- one of the problems I see in Thailand (and at the heart of the Red Shirt movement) is the disparity in income and living conditions between large groups of people in Bangkok and the people upcountry.

You are cetainly correct in that 'class' exists in every society. The difference between societies is obvious...some societies insist (by 'culture') that 'class' exists. Other societies simply allow a difference between classes.

You may be very right about what the results of my plebiscite would be, but having worked with junior high to high school students my whole life, and having lived the college life, depth of thinking may not be what you are seeing. For example, when not prompted by you, do your students focus on the desired freedoms such as to "grow my hair longer if I'm over 20", or do they ever think about something that's actually important. Young people don't always realize what's important. Similar to your students, my parents were appalled when I grew a beard after getting out of high school; there were many hot discussions about it. Looking back, we were arguing about something that was so unimportant, particularly when thousands of young men my age were dying in Vietnam...we never talked about that.

I did not 'prompt' any of these people. They merely offered their opinion at some point. To me, this is incredibly important as the young Thai people of today will be the Thai people of tomorrow. If they have no say in their future due to indoctrinated 'culture', what will happen to them & to Thailand in a world that is 'globalised'? I would like to also add that these young people, with whom I spoke, also spoke against the obvious 'indoctrination' even though they admitted that they had to do it to 'keep the peace'. They felt threatened by these 'rules' & otherwise felt powerless against them.

Is this not 'repression'?

I guess the difference is whether you think culture should change quickly (and in today's world we seem to want everything to happen fast) or continue to slowly evolve. When I look back at the changes in American life since I was a child back in the 50s, I think the slower evolution in culture was preferable EXCEPT in those situations that were so very unjust -- such as Civil Rights for minorities. I think the preference to have things happen fast is why everything is today's world is perceived a "crisis", even though in reality, most things are just problems to be solved or adapted. It's always difficult to interpret the present when you are in it. I think for the 20-odd years I've been coming to Thailand, every crisis has really been a problem to be solved. Perhaps we are at a juncture that is truly a crisis.

In my opinion, the Thai Ministry of Culture has limitless power. They ultimately control everything. If this Ministry were to be abolished tomorrow, Thailand would quite possibly be a very different place within 5 years from now.

In my mind, Thailand needs to change quickly in order to keep step with the rest of the world. Thailand has the choice of saying "No, we don't want this" & "Yes, we want that." If only certain people realised that trying to 'freeze time' only causes pain in an ever changing world.

You ask, "if 'morality' (I hate that word) & 'discipline' are taught to 'the masses', why is there violence in BKK?" Very good question. First of all, not sure why you hate morality...I'm sure you mean something different. The reason there is violence in my view is twofold. First, for the leaders of the Red Shirts, I think it is more about them wanting power now...it's "our turn". For the vast majority of the people demonstrating. it about the disparity in living standards between Bangkokians and upcountry. Second, and this goes back to my theory about abrupt versus evolutionary change...something in many Thais snapped (so to speak), and there is suddenly a feeling of desperation and "we want change now".

I hate the word 'morality' because it is used frequently by those seeking to attain the 'higher ground'. Much the same goes for 'religion' in that those who seek to be closest to 'god', may appear to be better than others. E.g. "Look at what I'm doing! If you are not doing this, you are 'beneath' me." This attitude sets the stage for 'emotional blackmail' to have extreme power.

The word 'morality' is like the word 'piousness'...both are used to 'shame' others into thinking in a different way.

Getting back to education, cultural momentum affects education, and education affects cultural momentum. I think you're very right about the wage issue. If we look at the perception many people have about Thai policemen, to me a lot of it gets down to poor pay.

I also think that you are totally correct in your observation that young people in Thailand need to be taught thinking skills. This issue has been coming up more in the past year here in Thailand. I think there is a realization that the need exists. And you want it fast...and that's okay. But as I discussed in my initial post, it didn't happen quickly in the West...it took Sputnik to get the ball rolling, and even then I have seen major changes in curriculum related to teaching thinking skills in just the past decade...and that's about 50 years after Sputnik.

It is not only I who want 'thinking skills' fast. One of my Thai colleagues recently complained bitterly about the inane questions used in some university entrance papers. This person, although still partially 'programmed' by 'culture', realises that 'thinking skills' do not relate to what colour tablecloth should be used on Mother's day.

Have a look at this amazing booklet;

Thai_Social.pdf

The book in no way references general respect from different people/nationalities. It's a totally bigotted 'Thai Ministry of Culture view' of things. The authors have no regard whatsoever for anybody or anything outside of Thailand. Basically, it's all about 'rules'. I don't know of any other country in the world that has produced a book on 'How to behave in <insert country>'.

The most interesting part is this;

"This book, designed to bring contemporary Thai behaviours to the attention of the general public, was written by famous authors based on information retrieved from published sources and old records. It is hoped that the book will provide useful reference material, particularly in respect of topics covered therein, and will help all the visitors to Thailand in prompt understanding, consideration and practice accordingly."

From Scott.

The term 'culture' is just the acceptable method that takes us as individual creatures to functioning members of a society. Culture is about how a group goes about doing this. For example:

1. We are by nature violent creatures. Without some sort of socialization process, we would hurt, kill and destroy things both living and non-living. Watch young children. To live with others this violence has to be tempered, but it's there in every culture in the world because it's part of human nature. Thailand today is a good example.

This is about 'respect', which is in every society (culture).

2. We are greedy by nature. We want and we want what we want when we want it. We even want things we don't really need or will ever use. We want things because other people have them. We covet. There is limited resources in the world and always has been. Culture lets us know who gets the greater share of these resources.

This is the ideal use of 'culture', provided it not not indoctrinated.

3. We are sexual creatures. We will screw anything and anybody we can and culture sets the limits on when this is acceptable. Leave a couple of teenagers alone for long enough (and that doesn't always have to be very long) and there will be an 'immoral' act.

Sexual desires/tendencies have always seemed to be 'immoral', if they happen outside of certain 'rules'. I totally disagree with these rules in that they 'promote' rebellious/immoral sexual acts.

4. Culture is dynamic and changing. Every new invention or situation results in an affect on culture and the culture must change. This can happen quickly or slowly, but it will happen.

Thailand needs to recognise this fact...sooner than later.

First there's culture, then there is religion and finally there are laws to reinforce all these things. Schools have been the primary vehicle for passing on the dominant culture.

In Thailand, one of the cultural norms is to 'not question' authority. Teachers are authority and thus questioning them (and education) is not encouraged. They say it is encouraged, but it isn't. Students who do it are poorly behaved. But we now have the internet and a lot of other things which make the effect on culture much faster and greater.

Finally, nationalism and culture and different. If you wrap culture in a flag, then you have nationalism.

With regard to nationalism, a point that I don't want to belabor, I am referring to the dominant culture. Countries seldom have one unifying culture. In the case of Thailand, for example, the people from the deep south have a culture that is quite different from other parts of the country. Nationalism acts to try and convince people we are all the same; except those bad people right across the border.

Unfortunately Scott, you have mentioned a very important point...'Thai culture' IS wrapped in the Thai flag & almost every Thai citizen will use 'nationalism' to 'look better' than the other guy. This is a perfect example of how emotional blackmail & ego is used to govern the 'common folk' in Thailand.

From Ijustwannateach.

Personally, I think the 'rote learning' issue is tied into the cultural issue in a much bigger way which makes it harder to characterise it as 'bad' or 'good'.

I think that most Thai students- of whatever apparent academic capability as measured by outside tests- do as well in their own contexts as students do anywhere, as long as you are judging them on what they are actually judged on by their own system. In other words, they are taught to know their place, show respect, and do what they are told. This is what the system measures them on. It doesn't value academic competence, honesty, creativity, or performance- or these things would be rewarded. What is rewarded is compliance, respect, and social cohesion. Being able to give (*or to appear to be able to give*) the 'right' answers to the 'right' questions as pre-determined by 'experts' demonstrates allegiance and collective unity easily. In this context, Thai students excel.

(Of course, there are exceptions- and there are students who *do* do well in terms of competence, honesty, creativity, and performance when they have some personal motivation to do so- but the system itself does not reward these attributes).

Why do Thai students behave in this manner? Because Thai teachers and the entire Thai cultural system are set up in this manner. Thai teachers are not supposed to be academically competent, honest, creative, or high-performing- or THEY would also be rewarded for it (and generally, with exceptions, they are not). What is rewarded is compliance, respect, and social cohesion. Being able to teach (*or to appear to be able to teach*) the 'right' material as pre-determined by 'experts' demonstrates allegiance and collective unity easily. In this respect, Thai teachers also excel.

This is what I have noticed as well.

So I feel it is misleading to characterise the Thai school system as 'problematic.' It does exactly what it is supposed to do, in its own context. The problems come in with the change in the needs of Thailand and its people and in the ability and the motivation of government- ANY government- to support these changes. Without very strong leadership and a lot of money to make sure the old guard are paid off to retire while the new system is developed (slowly! not in one of these one-year knee-jerks that have happened every year of the last decade!), no change will be possible. If change does become possible, it will happen slowly, probably over 25-30 years.

However, none of this will happen before a government appears that makes real educational change (and its funding, without corruption) a real priority. As far as I am aware, Thailand has never had such a government in the 10 years I have been involved with education here.

There is another, perhaps more controversial aspect to 'Thai culture,' which needs to be considered carefully in an educational context. In the 'Thai Culture Course' which a colleague was forced to pay to attend, he was told by a Thai cultural expert (a university professor) that many elements in what are now considered 'Thai Culture' were cobbled together by propaganda experts in the process of creating the 'Nation of Thailand,' which it is widely conceded by historians is a very recent construction not based on a generally shared regional history.

This propaganda has disturbingly emphasized Thainess basically as a source of all politeness, respect, and a sort of imaginary 'good old days' in which everyone showed respect and was happy- a time which, given the disturbing events of the 20th century, would have had to exist before Thailand itself was actually a national body. It supports latent racist beliefs, though it does not directly articulate them- by, for example, the notion of other regional national cultures as lacking these elements. The Thai language teachers seem to be the bastion of this kind of teaching in many schools, and frequently terrorise the students with an insistence on an over-exaggerated ritualism in shows of respect (more so than the Thai teachers of other subjects).

The students and their families are not fooled by this, nor are the teachers the only sources of historical or cultural information, of course. However, this indoctrinary approach to education in public schools reinforces the 'collective unity' aspect of the purpose of public education here as I outlined in the previous message- and has many disturbing elements which I am sure our readers can imagine for themselves in terms of nationalism gone overboard.

As you can imagine, I fully agree with your comments. The current Thai education system is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Ministry of Culture, who hold Thailand in the palm of their old, outdated & inappropriate hands. To me, 'rote learning' in Thailand has EVERYTHING to do with the indoctrinated & immovable 'culture'. When the 'old farts' die off, there may be some hope for this country & the younger generation, who appear to be already suffering.

[phetaroi]

I did not 'prompt' any of these people. They merely offered their opinion at some point. To me, this is incredibly important as the young Thai people of today will be the Thai people of tomorrow. If they have no say in their future due to indoctrinated 'culture', what will happen to them & to Thailand in a world that is 'globalised'? I would like to also add that these young people, with whom I spoke, also spoke against the obvious 'indoctrination' even though they admitted that they had to do it to 'keep the peace'. They felt threatened by these 'rules' & otherwise felt powerless against them.

Is this not 'repression'?

In my opinion, the Thai Ministry of Culture has limitless power. They ultimately control everything. If this Ministry were to be abolished tomorrow, Thailand would quite possibly be a very different place within 5 years from now.

In my mind, Thailand needs to change quickly in order to keep step with the rest of the world. Thailand has the choice of saying "No, we don't want this" & "Yes, we want that." If only certain people realised that trying to 'freeze time' only causes pain in an ever changing world.

I hate the word 'morality' because it is used frequently by those seeking to attain the 'higher ground'. Much the same goes for 'religion' in that those who seek to be closest to 'god', may appear to be better than others. E.g. "Look at what I'm doing! If you are not doing this, you are 'beneath' me." This attitude sets the stage for 'emotional blackmail' to have extreme power. The word 'morality' is like the word 'piousness'...both are used to 'shame' others into thinking in a different way.

The book in no way references general respect from different people/nationalities. It's a totally bigotted 'Thai Ministry of Culture view' of things. The authors have no regard whatsoever for anybody or anything outside of Thailand. Basically, it's all about 'rules'. I don't know of any other country in the world that has produced a book on 'How to behave in <insert country>'.

The most interesting part is this;

"This book, designed to bring contemporary Thai behaviours to the attention of the general public, was written by famous authors based on information retrieved from published sources and old records. It is hoped that the book will provide useful reference material, particularly in respect of topics covered therein, and will help all the visitors to Thailand in prompt understanding, consideration and practice accordingly."[/color]

Well, much of what you say I find myself not in disagreement with.

Although I didn't quote it, your description of the ABC was interesting to me. Are you saying the ABC in Australia is good or bad? The reason I ask is that when I hear that a government agency is dictating what is "fair and balanced", my antenna goes up immediately.

In re your comment about Thai kids needing to learn critical thinking skills, I completely agree that they -- like all people in the world -- need to learn critical thinking skills. In my school in the States, when I observed and evaluated a teacher, I always spent a great deal of time sorting out the degree at which the teacher did or did not work toward developing critical thinking skills. After all, teaching critical thinking skills is far more challenging than teaching a factoid. I think in my years there we made a lot of progress in assuring that critical thinking skills were a real part of our curriculum. Our school was one of the highest ranked schools in the US in terms of things like Mathcounts and Science Olympiad, etc. But the problem that I saw was that the critical thinking skills that so many of our students could use in an academic setting, didn't necessarily transfer to life in general. They were middle school students and they still did dumb middle school stuff. In the States, at least, the highest suspension/expulsion rates are in grades 7 and 8, and then in grade 9 the rates begin to drop off, and continue dropping through the rest of high school. I'm not so sure it's because of critical thinking, as much as it is the school of hard knocks. I never saw many middle or high school kids use the critical thinking skills much outside the classroom. Now in college, it's an odd mix of idealism and action versus some of the most stupid behavior you'll see at any age. I think the issue is not only getting students to think critically, but also getting them to think about things that are important. Becoming more effective in explaining why I should be able to have any hair style I want, doesn't do a dam_n thing for the country. As with most young people, it's all about...no, mostly about..."me" and "I".

I'm rambling, but here is my bottom line on Thai kids needing to learn critical thinking skills. Do they need it? Yes, definitely. Is it going to make much difference in Thai society? Perhaps over many years, but I have strong doubts it will make any significant difference for decades and decades.

As I have read your posts over time, it's clear that you're a pretty interesting fellow and a deep thinker. And there are a handful of other similar people on this forum. But when I read posts in various Thai education forums, most of what I see is pure and rather adolescent drivel. I wish there were more people posting like you.

Oh, PS -- I read the pamphlet. I was expecting to find something almost evil. I didn't. And, I have seen similar pamphlets in the States.

Also, in regard to your hating the word morality, I think what you're really saying is that you don't hate morality as much as you hate how people use the concept against others. Am I cirrect?

Edited April 16, 2010 by phetaroi

[culicine]

I agree that Thai culture has a profound effect on education. It starts before toilet training and continues to death. You cannot avoid it or beat it. It affects all teachers and students. Western backgrounds are irrelevant.

Perhaps. But I readily find students finding the odd mistake I make on the board and readily pointing them out. I highly doubt they would do this with a Thai teacher. They know not to correct them for fear of losing face. I happily make the correction and move on. Until Thia teachers can openly accept being corrected and having open and frank discussions, then not much will change. Knowledge here is treated as some static, unchanging entity which it isn't. It is something to be mastered - teachers here are the masters whereas the students are the apprentices. The transmission model of teaching prevails. It should be said that there are not just Thai notions, but was the prevalent teaching method in the west many many years ago. Thus, Thailand's government education system is still lagging behind the Western systems by a long stretch. I guess things will change as attitudes and culture change - culture again is not static, but this is not something readily accepted by Thais.

[phetaroi]

Perhaps. But I readily find students finding the odd mistake I make on the board and readily pointing them out. I highly doubt they would do this with a Thai teacher. They know not to correct them for fear of losing face. I happily make the correction and move on. Until Thia teachers can openly accept being corrected and having open and frank discussions, then not much will change. Knowledge here is treated as some static, unchanging entity which it isn't. It is something to be mastered - teachers here are the masters whereas the students are the apprentices. The transmission model of teaching prevails. It should be said that there are not just Thai notions, but was the prevalent teaching method in the west many many years ago. Thus, Thailand's government education system is still lagging behind the Western systems by a long stretch. I guess things will change as attitudes and culture change - culture again is not static, but this is not something readily accepted by Thais.

Much of what you say is correct.

Much of what you say is correct.

Much of what you say is correct.

I've said that 3 times hoping that you won't go bonkers over what I'm about to say.

What if Thai society wants it that way?

Do the Thais not have the right to decide what kind of education system they have?

Must they do it the Western way...which you clearly imply?

I'm not saying that's good or not good. I'm just asking.

[PeaceBlondie]

They don't have to do it 'our' way. But the way they teach doesn't teach Thais well at all.

[Kitsch22]

They don't have to do it 'our' way. But the way they teach doesn't teach Thais well at all.

For some (Western) value of "well".

[LuckyLew]

YES the Thai culture has an impact on the quality of education in Thailand

NO it will not change any time soon

[Kitsch22]

Perhaps. But I readily find students finding the odd mistake I make on the board and readily pointing them out. I highly doubt they would do this with a Thai teacher. They know not to correct them for fear of losing face. I happily make the correction and move on. Until Thia teachers can openly accept being corrected and having open and frank discussions, then not much will change. Knowledge here is treated as some static, unchanging entity which it isn't. It is something to be mastered - teachers here are the masters whereas the students are the apprentices. The transmission model of teaching prevails. It should be said that there are not just Thai notions, but was the prevalent teaching method in the west many many years ago. Thus, Thailand's government education system is still lagging behind the Western systems by a long stretch. I guess things will change as attitudes and culture change - culture again is not static, but this is not something readily accepted by Thais.

Much of what you say is correct.

Much of what you say is correct.

Much of what you say is correct.

I've said that 3 times hoping that you won't go bonkers over what I'm about to say..

Don't worry; that is what is known as "Proof by Bellman's Theorem".

But much of what he says is incorrect (or, perhaps, inappropriate), as well.

What if Thai society wants it that way?

Do the Thais not have the right to decide what kind of education system they have?

Must they do it the Western way...which you clearly imply?

I'm not saying that's good or not good. I'm just asking.

Well, I will dare to say that much of it is not good. Not good here in Thailand and not good over there in the West. The education that everybody needs is about basic knowledge. 90% of its utility lies in a sound uncomplicated numeracy, fluent literacy and a good working command of (the individual's own) language. Nearly everything beyond that which is really needed to lead a productive working life can be (and is best) learned on the job.

Society needs a relatively thin crust of extremely able advanced analytical thinkers together with a rather more deep stratum (typified by the professions and the upper ranks of the civil service) of workers having the benefit of a much more detailed and specialised knowledge together with experience in decision-making.

But in most ordinary jobs free thinking, originality and a tendency to present a challenge to authority are disadvantages (from the point of view of the wise capitalist employer).

The fact is that the ordinary policeman, bank teller, copy typist, shop assistant, factory worker, agricultural labourer, truck driver, sex tourist or alcoholic expat needs no more than an ability to follow (with minimal deviations) paths that are already well worn and very clearly signposted.

For at least 75% of the students in the average Thai government school, the majority of the time that they expend in an attempt to learn the English language (whether under the traditional Thai system or under any enormously more unwittingly self-satisfied Western system) is effectively wasted because they will seldom if ever need to use what little they learn.

[Sisaketmike]

I've learnt alot just from reading this thread .

So which Titanium member is writing the better posts? Thanks for the free 'Thai culture awareness Course'. I'll pray for you tonight.

I even developed my brain by approximately 0.00000001 %. Thanks to the Titans.

[Sisaketmike]

Scott and I are a lot alike, except he has a better figure....

But you're both arrai na?

[Sisaketmike]

They are separate, indeed. And look different. Neither has a blond pony-tail, but I do.

What a cool message, I'll pray for you too.

[Scott]

Thanks, I don't know about the other two, but I accept help wherever I can get it!

[phetaroi]

...The education that everybody needs is about basic knowledge. 90% of its utility lies in a sound uncomplicated numeracy, fluent literacy and a good working command of (the individual's own) language. Nearly everything beyond that which is really needed to lead a productive working life can be (and is best) learned on the job.

Society needs a relatively thin crust of extremely able advanced analytical thinkers together with a rather more deep stratum (typified by the professions and the upper ranks of the civil service) of workers having the benefit of a much more detailed and specialised knowledge together with experience in decision-making.

But in most ordinary jobs free thinking, originality and a tendency to present a challenge to authority are disadvantages (from the point of view of the wise capitalist employer).

The fact is that the ordinary policeman, bank teller, copy typist, shop assistant, factory worker, agricultural labourer, truck driver, sex tourist or alcoholic expat needs no more than an ability to follow (with minimal deviations) paths that are already well worn and very clearly signposted.

For at least 75% of the students in the average Thai government school, the majority of the time that they expend in an attempt to learn the English language (whether under the traditional Thai system or under any enormously more unwittingly self-satisfied Western system) is effectively wasted because they will seldom if ever need to use what little they learn.

No offense, but you're an odd poster. I went back and read many of your posts on various topics for decided to respond. It would appear to me that you are quite an intelligent man. You write extremely well. And I think, too well to be a man who only had a "basic knowledge" education. Perhaps I'm wrong.

I think you miss the essence of education. A well-rounded education really has two purposes.

One is the purely functional aspect of fulfilling some particular work role in a society. You even mention some of the roles that works for (ordinary policeman, bank teller, copy typist, shop assistant, factory worker, agricultural labourer, truck driver). That kind of education was fine for my grandfathers. One worked in a factory as a mid-level "foreman". All he had to know was how to make the shop that made the gaskets operate efficiently. My other grandfather was a farmer. All he had to know was how to milk the cows and operate the (at that time) rather simple farm equipment. They weren't limited that much, because in the society in which they worked, there weren't than many options. In the early 1900s in a small town in the US, most people led pretty simple lives. In my generation, things began changing. Yes, I could have stayed in small-town America and did a factory-type job. Or I could go to community college and get a better "job". Or I could go to college and become a professional. To open up my options I needed far more than a "basic knowledge" education. And for me it happened to be teaching, and later school administration. And guess what, while I did learn an awfully lot "on the job", I was a far better teacher because I had pursued an understanding of education research, trends in education, and so forth. Meanwhile, some other teachers relied on "learning on the job", teaching the way their teachers had. Oh, they did okay. They were great with the kids who were easy to teach. The fact that their failure rates were high...well, "it's the kids fault; I taught it, they didn't learn it", etc. To them, teaching was a job. While to me it was a profession.

A couple of weeks ago I noticed along the soi (Suk 24) a new food vendor. Age...oh...18? Selling flavored shaved ice. Nothing wrong with it. He will probably do that, or something like that, for the next 40 years, and probably continue living in the slums of Klong Toey. I wonder what he is capable of? I wonder if he wonders what he is capable of? He probably went to school and learned the basics.

Don't get me wrong...the basics are important. And I don't care if someone learns the basics by phonics or whatever. But there is more to life than "the basics". You're probably right that, the "sex tourist or alcoholic expat needs no more than an ability to follow (with minimal deviations) paths that are already well worn and very clearly signposted". What wasted lives.

My father wasn't a sex tourist or an expat, but he was an alcoholic. Before he died, and after, I heard many comments about him...mostly very well meaning. He was often described as a "nice guy", "quiet but nice", "a gentle drunk". He left behind all the wreckage of a broken marriage and a comment by many that "you know, your dad coulda been something". And they didn't even know how voracious an appetite he had for reading sophisticated novels. Some teacher turned him on to that love of literature. But mostly he suffered from a "basic education".

[Scott]

Much of this basic knowledge is OK, but what about upward mobility? How do we know who is good and good at what? What about changes in the job market?

It would seem that people might be happier and better off if they have options available and those options require a well-rounded education and an ability to think analytically.

Nothing wrong with people who are happy with a particular job, even if others might see it as mundane.

[Ijustwannateach]

I think that the model of education here works excellently for reinforcing the status quo. Whether that status quo is truly admirable or not is another type of discussion.

What I can say for sure: it doesn't prepare students to operate in international environments of academic strength, integrity, and innovation. It prepares them very well to be in Thailand as it is today and has been for many years.

Who is making the choices about what is good for Thais and Thailand? Ah, well, that's another matter, probably best discussed elsewhere.

But as I said to a student today: it's good that you're working hard, taking extra classes, and preparing for a foreign university, so you can get out of here and make something of your life.

He seemed to agree.

[rametindallas]

Personally, I think the 'rote learning' issue is tied into the cultural issue in a much bigger way which makes it harder to characterise it as 'bad' or 'good'.

I think that most Thai students- of whatever apparent academic capability as measured by outside tests- do as well in their own contexts as students do anywhere, as long as you are judging them on what they are actually judged on by their own system. In other words, they are taught to know their place, show respect, and do what they are told. This is what the system measures them on. It doesn't value academic competence, honesty, creativity, or performance- or these things would be rewarded. What is rewarded is compliance, respect, and social cohesion. Being able to give (*or to appear to be able to give*) the 'right' answers to the 'right' questions as pre-determined by 'experts' demonstrates allegiance and collective unity easily. In this context, Thai students excel.

(Of course, there are exceptions- and there are students who *do* do well in terms of competence, honesty, creativity, and performance when they have some personal motivation to do so- but the system itself does not reward these attributes).

Why do Thai students behave in this manner? Because Thai teachers and the entire Thai cultural system are set up in this manner. Thai teachers are not supposed to be academically competent, honest, creative, or high-performing- or THEY would also be rewarded for it (and generally, with exceptions, they are not). What is rewarded is compliance, respect, and social cohesion. Being able to teach (*or to appear to be able to teach*) the 'right' material as pre-determined by 'experts' demonstrates allegiance and collective unity easily. In this respect, Thai teachers also excel.

So I feel it is misleading to characterise the Thai school system as 'problematic.' It does exactly what it is supposed to do, in its own context. The problems come in with the change in the needs of Thailand and its people and in the ability and the motivation of government- ANY government- to support these changes. Without very strong leadership and a lot of money to make sure the old guard are paid off to retire while the new system is developed (slowly! not in one of these one-year knee-jerks that have happened every year of the last decade!), no change will be possible. If change does become possible, it will happen slowly, probably over 25-30 years.

However, none of this will happen before a government appears that makes real educational change (and its funding, without corruption) a real priority. As far as I am aware, Thailand has never had such a government in the 10 years I have been involved with education here.

Observing 'Thainess' and trying to understand it for 12 yrs., I agree with this.

[Ijustwannateach]

I have removed several off-topic posts, mainly because they seemed to be getting closer to flames as well as being off-topic. I think the topic under discussion is fairly well sign-posted; if you wish to address personal comments to other posters, please use the PM function (keeping the forum rules- which still apply to PMs- in mind, of course).

[mark45y]

Pibulsonggram era? I don’t think this can be emphasized enough. It was a total change in Thai culture in a very short period of time. I think it points out the ease with which the Thai culture can be manipulated. It has continued to be manipulated in ways I can’t discuss here.

Old Thailand comes across as a very conservative monk like society with Victorian morals and ethics.

It simply isn’t true. Some time in the late 1930’s Thailand changed dramatically. Nationalism and culture and morals and a whole bunch of other stuff.

I have met very few educated Thais who have any idea of history anyplace let alone Thailand that reflects any kind of reality.

Given what happened in the space of 10 years as far as culture modification goes anything is possible in Thailand in a short period of time. It is not like anything is truly ingrained in the culture. We are really only talking one generation.

But I think you are putting the cart before the horse. From what I have read you all assume that education has something to do with the future of Thailand.

The great majority of Thai people are content to be influenced by a few.

Necessity has always been the mother of invention.

Thailand has always had most of what it needs. It is only recently that rampant consumerism has created demands that were not able to be satisfied by traditional methods.

People are beginning to question the unquestionable. Education is not going to be able to react quick enough to quench the thirst and I don’t see any Lee Kuan Yew’s on the horizon.

In any other Asian country I would think the change might be violent. But the Thai’s are just too silly.

Look at the red shirts and yellow shirts. Both of those would have ended up with major bloodshed almost any other place in the world. Not here. The police, army and protesters lack the seriousness to really implement change. Look at the stock market and the value of the Baht if you doubt me. Look at the number of Thai’s who get degrees in marketing.

It is not the lack of educational opportunity that has led to the lack of innovation in Thai society. It is the lack of motivation.

Does Thai culture have an impact of the quality of education? What Thai culture? Thai’s don’t know anything about their culture. Thai nature would be a far better term. Does Thai nature have an impact of Thai education. They get as much education as they can tolerate. Putting off instant gratification for some future goal is not big on the list of Thai priorities.

Educational experiences in America or Australia are hardly relevant to Thailand. The first American killed in Vietnam years before the conflict wrote in a report that America should stay out of Vietnam and that any involvement would end in disaster. It didn’t take a brain trust to figure that out. I would think the same is true of Thailand and our western ideas about education. By changing the educational system you will create more problems than you solve. Let them stay silly it has served the national interest for years.

Educate a few people necessary to run the country in America, Switzerland and England and let the rest learn how to make pretty drawings. Look at what happened the last time some educated army officers took over the country. Better the devil you know than the one you don’t.

[elkangorito]

My comments in blue. I have deleted paragraphs from your initial post.

Does Thai culture have an impact of the quality of education? What Thai culture? Thai’s don’t know anything about their culture. Thai nature would be a far better term. Does Thai nature have an impact of Thai education. They get as much education as they can tolerate. Putting off instant gratification for some future goal is not big on the list of Thai priorities.

I reckon that 'Thai Nature' (as you put it) is in essence, 'Thai Culture'. The argument about 'instant gratification' is quite 'black & white'. Thailand does not need to take a 'black or white' stance in this regard. Actually, such a stance would be highly detrimental to Thailand. On the other hand, Thailand could simply adopt the 'useful' measures of the western world & refuse to adopt the useless measures.

Educational experiences in America or Australia are hardly relevant to Thailand. The first American killed in Vietnam years before the conflict wrote in a report that America should stay out of Vietnam and that any involvement would end in disaster. It didn’t take a brain trust to figure that out. I would think the same is true of Thailand and our western ideas about education. By changing the educational system you will create more problems than you solve. Let them stay silly it has served the national interest for years.

Educate a few people necessary to run the country in America, Switzerland and England and let the rest learn how to make pretty drawings. Look at what happened the last time some educated army officers took over the country. Better the devil you know than the one you don’t.

We are talking about educational experiences of the 'present' & not of the 'past', although little has changed 'culturally' between the 'present & 'past' in Thailand.

It is silly to compare the Vietnam War with Thailand & it's educational system. Even though you allude to a similarity (a lack of understanding), the similarity can't compare to the present. If you still insist upon any kind of comparison, the current education system in Thailand does not in any way, address the needs of Thai citizens in 'the world of today'. Education is strictly classified into;

1] The masses. These people are subject to whatever is dished out to them disregarding who dishes it out.

2] The rich. These people can 'buy' their way 'into or out of' many situations.

3] The poor. These people can only hope that education is possible.

The ultimate point is that Thai people are subject to certain 'cultural rules' BEFORE they even begin any form of formal education. These rules certainly do have a strong input into their education & as such, into their future. Those who do not follow the rules or who are not rich enough to avoid the rules, will suffer.

[PeaceBlondie]

el kangorito: I personally prefer your method on commenting within the quote in another color - even if technically it breaks a forum rule. I've never mastered the art of the +QUOTE button, either.

[phetaroi]

Pibulsonggram era? I don’t think this can be emphasized enough. It was a total change in Thai culture in a very short period of time. I think it points out the ease with which the Thai culture can be manipulated. It has continued to be manipulated in ways I can’t discuss here.

Old Thailand comes across as a very conservative monk like society with Victorian morals and ethics. It simply isn’t true. Some time in the late 1930’s Thailand changed dramatically. Nationalism and culture and morals and a whole bunch of other stuff.

I have met very few educated Thais who have any idea of history anyplace let alone Thailand that reflects any kind of reality.

Given what happened in the space of 10 years as far as culture modification goes anything is possible in Thailand in a short period of time. It is not like anything is truly ingrained in the culture. We are really only talking one generation.

But I think you are putting the cart before the horse. From what I have read you all assume that education has something to do with the future of Thailand.

The great majority of Thai people are content to be influenced by a few.

...

People are beginning to question the unquestionable. Education is not going to be able to react quick enough to quench the thirst ...

In any other Asian country I would think the change might be violent. But the Thai’s are just too silly.

Look at the red shirts and yellow shirts. Both of those would have ended up with major bloodshed almost any other place in the world. Not here. The police, army and protesters lack the seriousness to really implement change. Look at the stock market and the value of the Baht if you doubt me. ...

It is not the lack of educational opportunity that has led to the lack of innovation in Thai society. It is the lack of motivation.

Does Thai culture have an impact of the quality of education? What Thai culture? Thai’s don’t know anything about their culture. Thai nature would be a far better term. Does Thai nature have an impact of Thai education. They get as much education as they can tolerate. Putting off instant gratification for some future goal is not big on the list of Thai priorities.

Educational experiences in America or Australia are hardly relevant to Thailand. The first American killed in Vietnam years before the conflict wrote in a report that America should stay out of Vietnam and that any involvement would end in disaster. It didn’t take a brain trust to figure that out. I would think the same is true of Thailand and our western ideas about education. By changing the educational system you will create more problems than you solve. Let them stay silly it has served the national interest for years.

Educate a few people necessary to run the country in America, Switzerland and England and let the rest learn how to make pretty drawings. Look at what happened the last time some educated army officers took over the country. Better the devil you know than the one you don’t.

Hmmmmmmm. For you a rather odd post. I'm not used to you being so condescending and outspoken in your criticisms of Thailand.

I think that you oversimplify when you seem to imply that there is "one Thailand"...either the new Thailand (post 1932) or the old Thailand (shades of pre 1932). I remember not so long ago traveling through Florida, which is mostly an extremely modern state. And then I got off the interstate and onto some back roads and...whoa...I discovered that "old Florida" still existed; there were still towns that were very much pre-1950s Florida. I think Thailand (and many other countries) is a little bit like that. There's the physical/infrastructure difference between Bangkok and some Issan village. But there's also a very different mindset. When I see the youngish (like mid-teen to early 30s) Thais on the Skytrain with their Blackberries and other gadgets, carrying around a digital SLR, dining in the modern restaurants, I see not people who are necessarily "rich", but who are part of the growing middle class. And their perspective is that they have arrived on the international stage. Their thinking about "life" must be so much different than the thinking that goes on by a peasant in Chiang Rai Province.

I agree with you about the problem Thais have understanding their own history. It is difficult to separate fact from fiction. Several years ago I found what looked like a good history of Thailand written by a Thai PhD. Let's put it this way, a similar book on American history would have said that Millard Fillmore and George Washington were both great Presidents. It is difficult to understand history, interpret history, and apply history if one cannot distinguish between success and failure. But before someone says something along the lines of those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it, I'll offer my own corollary that those who dwell on history are doomed to repeat it.

In terms of changing national thinking, I'm not sure that it's just Thailand where thinking can be changed in a fairly short period of time. I think that's far more common in many countires than perhaps we think. It only takes one charismatic leader to make a sea change of difference. I don't know of one American who in 2000 realistically thought there would be a Black American president in their life time...and I say that as an educator who worked with people who were mostly on the progressive side of things.

I think you're wrong by saying that, "From what I have read you all assume that education has something to do with the future of Thailand". One of the major factors that led to the 1932 revolution was Thais who had been educated in the West. I agree that education in most countries is (and probably should be) slow to change. Periods of rapid social change in most countries are just as likely to bring about disaster, as are periods where status quo renders no change and pressure builds. Evolutionary change is more well-though-out and usually leads to a better conclusion.

I think it is too early to know what degree of violence will "end" the current situation, or what the result will be. Violence in Thai politics is not that unusual, but thankfully it is typically rather brief. And when it does happen, I think it truly shocks Thais. I was here just a few weeks after the 1992 upheaval. I happened to be walking past the Royal Hotel and some Thai college students asked me if I knew what the videos were that were being shown. Of course I did...it had all been on CNN. Perhaps they were atypical, but the ones I talked too were astounded that something like that could happen in Thailand. I asked them what should happen to Mr. Suchinda. "Oh, mai pben rai. It's over now."

You say that you think Thais have a lack of motivation. I think it's more correct to say that Thais have a totally different motivation(s) than Westerners. I think that Gore Vidal (a writer I don't even like) put it very well when he wrote: "What westerners take to be Thai apathy is the Buddhist con-confrontational approach to life, which is totally unlike that of those who worship the Judeo-Christian God, forever in dubious battle on the plains of heaven with Lucifer. Because of this constant rage in heaven, we tend to mirror it here on earth where it is taken for granted that nation must constantly fight nation, class class, family family...although the Thai Buddhists have had their share of wars and incursions, crimes and alarums, they cope with needless pain in ways different from ours...A society based on the teaching of the Buddha is bound to be very different from one based upon a furious God dueling with a wily devil...Sensibly, the Thais have tried to take what is necessary for them to survive without ever surrendering their ancient equilibrium...."

[PeaceBlondie]

Put aside what you learned in the USA. Almost everything. Get out of BKK. Have 15 extended conversations about education with Thais that didn't go to uni. Interview my partner's 77-year old mother in Muang Thai (she's not fully sane). Interview ten Thai administrators in Thai. You might understand.

[mark45y]

The difference between culture and nature.

There is a difference between culture and nature. Nature gets into ethnic stereotypes. People in hot climates versus people in cold climates. Culture is what kind of clothes people wear. One of the main reasons America speaks English instead of Viking is wool clothes. If the Vikings had worn seal skins they would probably not have all died out before their colony got established. It is an example of how culture sank a new colony. They couldn’t cope.

It is the nature of the Thai people to be happy and giving because they always had enough to eat. Look at the ground anywhere in Thailand and you see food thrown away. You don’t see this in Africa.

Scottish men and Thai men both wore skirts. Now Thai men don’t wear skirts. Did Thai men wear underwear under their skirts? Who knows? Everyone knows Scottish men don’t. Scottish women never had a tradition of renting themselves out to visiting travelers. Thai women always did. Both cultures are still consistent with this behavior but Thailand tends to say it is not part of their culture. Anything that is traditionally Thai that does not fit with traditional Victorian culture is denied. I think the question should be why has so much of Victorian culture been absorbed into Thai culture but not Victorian education or work ethics.

[mark45y]

What will motivate education in Thailand?

There were many Americans in South East Asia after WW II for a variety of reasons. Most having to do with trade. Education was not a main purpose but during the American occupation (as in many Americans with guns, building things and killing people either locally or a short distance away) of South East Asia education and infrastructure followed. In Thailand the Japanese built roads and the Americans (and to a smaller extent the Australians) built communications. This was the time that the communications fortunes were built in Thailand. The Americans also funded the police and provided them with millions of dollars of equipment for drug interdiction among other things. Around the military bases in addition to entertainment facilities they established schools and medical facilities. This took place from 1965 to 1975. I think the Thai’s kicked the Americans out because the local peasants were getting too uppity because of the increased education and funding.

In any event it is this period of time that saw the initial push of Thailand into what it is today. The children born during that period are about ready to take over running the country.

It is true that the military that changed the country in 1932 were educated in France. But they must have got it wrong. The lessons learned were not what they put into practice. I don’t think France in the 1930’s was a hotbed of fascism and nationalistic fervor. Seems to me it was more left bank and the lost generation pining about roses and senseless wars.

I don’t think one can compare Hemingway and Gertrude Stein with Phibun. It doesn’t fit.

The Japanese that came during WW II stayed industrially as did the Americans and began the industrial revolution in Thailand.

The Eastern Seaboard, little Detroit and the ports are an example of that.

I think that is the driving change in Thailand. Basic industry is changing Thailand. The Chinese and Koreans are also here in force.

Currently the Thais are renting their economy. Some day they will figure out it may be better to own it. The red shirts may be figuring this out.

When that happens there will be a need for educated people to build things as opposed to having tea parties to pass along tea money to rent other countries brainpower.

Who builds the airports, sky trains, oil refineries, and on and on? It is not the Thai’s.

Why do Thai people want to speak English? To communicate with their boss at Chevron, that’s why.

I live on the East coast of Thailand and see the hundreds of businesses that depend on foreigners to make money. These are Thai businesses that service foreign managed companies. They have a real need to speak English on a daily basis and pay good money to teach their employees to do so. I also know where the engineers come from and it is not Thailand.

The education I see is results based education. The company needs people who speak English. If the teacher does not provide results the company does not continue the program

Industry will drive education. There will eventually be a Bill Gates of Thailand who begins to educate his employees to make something innovative. This is only economic common sense. Education is industry driven and not the reverse.

[phetaroi]

Put aside what you learned in the USA. Almost everything. Get out of BKK. Have 15 extended conversations about education with Thais that didn't go to uni. Interview my partner's 77-year old mother in Muang Thai (she's not fully sane). Interview ten Thai administrators in Thai. You might understand.

It's just not that simple, and here's why:

Who are the loud voices calling for change in the Thai education system?

Mostly Westerners.

Who are the educators who are most actively frustrated because of what is seen as Thailand's stodgy education system?

Mostly Westerners, and among them, mostly TEFL English teachers.

Who is working with the Thai Education Ministry to update technology education?

Mostly computer and software companies that have a base in America and want to establish a base for their products.

Western teachers express frustration because the Thais won't listen.

Thais won't listen because Western teachers don't know "the Thai way".

And it's that interface that is the problem.

And it's also not that simple because of the many exchange programs where Thai educators at the Education Ministry level are working on projects in America, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, and so forth...not all Western countries, but all countries that don't do it "the Thai way". The Thais who are looking at educational change, are mostly looking at Western models of education. Some schools here have mission statements (sigh) that sound just like Western mission statements...although I am fully aware what they say and what they do may be two different things. The testing phenomenon here is really based on similar programs in the West.

It's overly simplistic to say that Thailand is A and American (or the West) is Z. Human nature doesn't work that way. Maslow's hierarchy concept works for every culture, although you have to adjust it for cultural differences.

Talk to Thais about education. I've done that for years, from the agricultural attache at the Thai embassy in Washington, to my Thai roommate in America, to Thai families living in America so their children can get an American education, to a large family in Chiang Mai (most of whom did not go to college), to an official at the Education Ministry, to a Thai principal friend over in Thonburi. I'll skip talking to one of your nutty in-laws (remember, you're the one who questioned their sanity). I'll substitute the two boys who were educated for half of their life in Thailand and half in America (including at my school there), who are now adults back here in Thailand.

Edited April 18, 2010 by phetaroi

[PeaceBlondie]

My in-laws say their mother is baa.

You haven't demonstrated here that you know about primary, secondary and tertiary education in Thailand. They won't listen to farang. We had a seminar in Lamphun, with a professor of education from Australia who thought my mainly Midwestern USA accent was British. They paid her no attention.

I think I got more experience about Thai education in two years in Thai schools, than you have. But I'm often mistaken. You probably dress nicely.

[phetaroi]

They won't listen to farang.

You're a farang, aren't you?

[PeaceBlondie]

Yes. And I doubt they'd accept advice from a farang who's fluent in advanced Thai.