Thai Activist Eyes Court Action Over 'Tea Money' Move

[webfact]

EDUCATION

Activist eyes court action over 'tea money' move

SUPINDA NA MAHACHAI,

SAOWANEE NIMPANPAYUNGWONG

THE NATION

Minister threatened with NACC case over legalising school donations

BANGKOK: -- An activist yesterday vowed to take Education Minister Suchart Tadathamrongvej before the Administrative Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) over his controversial move to legalise the acceptance of "tea money" by famous schools.

Building Thailand Club president Amnuay Sunthornchote demanded that Suchart declare his decision to abandon his donation-for-school-seat policy within three days.

"If not, I will lodge a complaint against him with the Administrative Court next week. I will also complain to the NACC to ensure he faces criminal action, too," Amnuay said.

He said Suchart's policy would encourage discrimination against people on the basis of financial status.

"The policy will also destroy good values in Thai society. If the policy is implemented, rich children will grow up feeling that money can buy everything while cash-strapped children will feel inferior and unfairly treated," he added.

He said complaints would also be filed against Chinnapat Bhumirat, secretary-general of the Office of the Basic Education Commission (Obec).

"I will sue all schools that implement the donation-for-school-seat policy as well," Amnuay said.

On Monday, Suchart drew immediate criticism after he issued a policy for famous schools to accept donations transparently from parents, and in return recruit their children.

Despite criticism, the education minister yesterday stood by his decision and lashed back at his critics.

"The critics just don't accept the reality," he said. He pointed out that children do not really have equal educational opportunities anyway, because children of the well-off are able to go to quality institutions such as well-equipped international schools, while those from poor families do not have that opportunity.

"We must accept the fact that state subsidies for schools are not adequate for the delivery of quality educational services. Therefore, we must allow the schools to accept donations. The donations will be accepted transparently and spent for the benefit of all students. The donations are not bribes," he insisted.

In his opinion, donations by willing well-to-do parents would benefit schools and all of their students, including those from cash-strapped families.

Suchart said the number of school seats would be increased to accommodate donors' children, without any adverse impact on those children whose parents did not volunteer financial contributions.

Chinnapat said Suchart's policy could be implemented under Obec regulations, such as the one governing special classrooms, which allow the collection of high tuition fees.

However, Satri Wittaya School director Jamnong Jamjanwong said she was very cautious about the latest admission policy. She said she would seek approval from the school's board and the board of the local Educational Service Area Office before implementing it.

"We will need to inform parents in advance, too," she said, adding that any rush might lead to problems.

-- The Nation 2012-02-15

[looping]

Thai education policy: Keep the poor, poor!

Seems strange that the rich Thais, who can afford an international education, prefer these famous Thai schools which (I've heard) have facilities but still lack good quality teachers. I guess if it looks good...

[dsprtliving]

This man seems to be suffering under the delusion that "donated" tea money actually ends up as funds to improve the quality of education at said schools.

[jonclark]

Aplogies for the bad langugae but Suchart is a prick. This is lazy politrics at it's absolute worse. The only value this policy instills is that money is king and money can buy you privilage and favour. An elitist policy from an elitist government.

How about this for an idea Suchart do your <deleted>**ing job and lobby central government for more funds so that schools don't need to ask parents for money, ensure that current legislation is enforced and ability not cash determine which school Thailands children go to.

Thailand your children are your future, invest in them, it's the best investment you will ever make.

P.S Callgary - don't bother responding to this - can't be arsed reading your nonsense.

[rkidlad]

Thai education policy: Keep the poor, poor!

Seems strange that the rich Thais, who can afford an international education, prefer these famous Thai schools which (I've heard) have facilities but still lack good quality teachers. I guess if it looks good...

Yeap, the parents at my school are real high rollers. The school for some reason has a great reputation, and the parents pay top dollar. It's disgusting how much the school skimp to make a few Baht here or there. You don't have to look very closely to see the school is way below standard.

At the end of the day, parents can tell their friends that their child go to this school. This seems to be way more important than actually sending their child to a school where they'll get a proper education with decent facilities.

[CalgaryII]

Building Thailand Club president Amnuay Sunthornchote

Not sure which Oppositional element this so-called club is from.

Is it an instant creation for the purpose of laundering this issue, along the lines of all those "networks' that magically appeared after Ms. Y's election, protesting everything under the sun?

"The critics just don't accept the reality

To use self-righteous indignitation to characterize oneself as being above this "reality", doesn't fly.

Better to accept the reality, shine a light on it and be constructive about dealing with it.

Better to expose and channel these funds for the benefit of the school, instead of 'lining the Directors pockets"

The Opposition's penchant for running to the judges instead of constructively offering solutions is noted, yet again.

He pointed out that children do not really have equal educational opportunities anyway, because children of the well-off are able to go to quality institutions such as well-equipped international schools, while those from poor families do not have that opportunity.

"We must accept the fact that state subsidies for schools are not adequate for the delivery of quality educational services. Therefore, we must allow the schools to accept donations. The donations will be accepted transparently and spent for the benefit of all students. The donations are not bribes," he insisted.

Correct.

So now that we have some realistic facts on the table, lets see how we can make reality work better for all stakeholders, and not just the pockets of a few.

Edited February 15, 2012 by CalgaryII

[Reasonableman]

Building Thailand Club president Amnuay Sunthornchote

Not sure which Oppositional element this so-called club is from.

Is it an instant creation for the purpose of this issue, along the lines of all those "networks' that magically appeared after Ms. Y's election, protesting everything under the sun?

"The critics just don't accept the reality

To use self-righteous indignitation to characterize oneself as being above this "reality", doesn't fly.

Better to accept the reality, shine a light on it and be constructive about dealing with it.

Better to expose and channel these funds for the benefit of the school, instead of 'lining of the Directors pockets"

The Opposition's penchant for running to the judges instead of constructively offering solutions is noted, yet again.

He pointed out that children do not really have equal educational opportunities anyway, because children of the well-off are able to go to quality institutions such as well-equipped international schools, while those from poor families do not have that opportunity.

"We must accept the fact that state subsidies for schools are not adequate for the delivery of quality educational services. Therefore, we must allow the schools to accept donations. The donations will be accepted transparently and spent for the benefit of all students. The donations are not bribes," he insisted.

Correct.

So that we have some realistic facts on the table, lets see how we can make reality work better for all.

Not correct. As we all know, it's simple, not complicated.

[scorecard]

Thai education policy: Keep the poor, poor!

Seems strange that the rich Thais, who can afford an international education, prefer these famous Thai schools which (I've heard) have facilities but still lack good quality teachers. I guess if it looks good...

Yeap, the parents at my school are real high rollers. The school for some reason has a great reputation, and the parents pay top dollar. It's disgusting how much the school skimp to make a few Baht here or there. You don't have to look very closely to see the school is way below standard.

At the end of the day, parents can tell their friends that their child go to this school. This seems to be way more important than actually sending their child to a school where they'll get a proper education with decent facilities.

Just made a similar post on the other thread running on this subject.

Same scenario, school is popular because it has big beautiful marble sign and great gardens, but nothing more. Headmaster arrives every day in his chauffeur driven merc. Actual education is well below standard.

Corruption, nothing more, nothing less.

[jonclark]

"Critics just don't accept the reality"

If that is the heart of the argument - not accepting the reality, well lets just apply that to another situation and see if it holds up there - drugs. But before I do that lets just make one thing clear - Both corruption (tea money) and drugs benefit the few (those who receive the money) whilst at the same time they stifle and cripple the development of young people and the country, that is the common element here

The reality is drug use will continue to be prevalent in Thai (and all other) societies despite the best government efforts to stamp it out. That is the reality. So lets legalize all forms of drugs so that the flow of drug money is transparent and we the government can use that money to help hospitals provide better care to their patients.

or to quote and expand on callgaryl

"Better to accept the reality, shine a light on it and be constructive about dealing with it.

Better to expose and channel these funds for the benefit of the hospital, instead of 'lining of the drug dealers pockets"

I don't adhere to this idea in the slightest as drugs are a blight on society and the young. But if you accept the reality that drug use, like tea money and corruption will continue it is the most logical solution. Indeed we might well be inferring that drugs are 'acceptable with such a policy, likewise by allowing tea money to be used to secure a place at school we are also inferring that corruption is acceptable.

What is reality and what is acceptable are two different things. And that is what is at the heart of this argument

Edited February 15, 2012 by jonclark

[CalgaryII]

scorecard, #8 ^

Same scenario, school is popular because it has big beautiful marble sign

Isn't that the truth.

I know from direct experience when I was teaching (past tense)

Great facade, shitty classrooms and facilities.

I recall walking my Thai Lady past the University which I attended in Canada.

A highly regarded educational institution.

The Thai lady couldn't believe the fact we couldn't find a grandiose sign to take photo's in front of.

Shocked her sensibilities.

Edited February 15, 2012 by CalgaryII

[CalgaryII]

jonclark, #9 ^

If that is the heart of the argument - not accepting the reality, well lets just apply that to another situation and see if it holds up there - drugs

Comparing apples and oranges just doesn't work in most cases, including this one.

As your analysis clearly demonstrated.

[Ferangled]

How do any of you expect the current government to stop this system of under the table bribes to schools when it is so ingrained into the Thai mindset. Let's be honest this isn't a system monopolised by the education sector, it is a trend that runs through the entire Thai society. The point that most seem to miss is that this system hasn't been created by the current minister, he's trying to address the problem, he didn't make the situation.

At least they are bringing this issue to light and trying to govern it. If it is made transparent at least there's a chance that the money won't end up in the pockets of the "chauffeur driven headmaster", but might actually be used to do something constructive for the school.

It's not like donations to state schools aren't made in the west, they are, many survive on these and fund raisers because government funding is inadequate. There are schools all over US and UK with sports halls, playing fields, science labs etc named after wealthy patrons and be sure their children wouldn't be refused entry into said schools. I see nothing wrong with that at all; it's to the benefit of the general populace of the school and local community.

What I do find despicable is that left as it stands this custom of under the table bribery leaves parents vulnerable to exploitation from teachers with no idea how their "donation" money is to be spent.

All the while parents are willing to borrow money so that Somchai can go to the school with the shiny sign, this sort of corruption will exist in Thailand. It's the same as the 10000s of Thai's up to their ears in debt with mobile phones worth 3 months salary, and cars worth 10 years salary, purely so that they can gain face and perceived social standing... the fact is you can still make a call with a 500 bt phone, still drive to work with a 50,000 bt truck so why are there so many Thais with 20,000 bt iPhones and 1,000,000 bt Fortuners that can't afford these luxuries? This issue goes alot further than just education...

Edited February 15, 2012 by Ferangled

[jonclark]

jonclark, #9 ^

If that is the heart of the argument - not accepting the reality, well lets just apply that to another situation and see if it holds up there - drugs

Comparing apples and oranges just doesn't work in most cases, including this one.

As your analysis clearly demonstrated.

LOL - only accepting reality which is what your chum surchart wants us all to do.

Edited February 15, 2012 by jonclark

[rubl]

"We must accept the fact that state subsidies for schools are not adequate for the delivery of quality educational services. Therefore, we must allow the schools to accept donations. The donations will be accepted transparently and spent for the benefit of all students. The donations are not bribes," he insisted.

In his opinion, donations by willing well-to-do parents would benefit schools and all of their students, including those from cash-strapped families.

Suchart said the number of school seats would be increased to accommodate donors' children, without any adverse impact on those children whose parents did not volunteer financial contributions.

If we must accept the fact that state subsidies for school are not adequate for the delivery of quality educational service, we should also ask how the h_ll the Ministry of Education's budget of THB 420.4 billion is actually used.

Donations to a certain school do not automatically benifit all students, maybe only those lucky enough to be enroled in that particular school. Students of cash-strapped parents (aka the poor) will benefit if they are lucky enough to manage to get enroled in a school with well-to-do parents (aka the rich) donating.

It is suggested to increase the number of school seats to accommodate donor's children without advers impact on children of parent who do not volunteer financial contributions (aka again the poor).

Now tell me again the current government is riding high on a popular mandate from a larger part of the poor who have been oppressed by the 'amart'? Did I miss something, or is this a Thai thing which as a farang I cannot understand

(Having been in Thailand long enough I expect the (Thai) answer to my question to be yes)

Edited February 15, 2012 by rubl

[Ferangled]

Clearly the issues of drug use and donations to schools are totally different, how can you take one person's suggested solution to a certain problem and twist it to apply to a completely different topic?! Regulating donations to state schools and legalising "drugs" are not the same at all.

That said taking your own arguments you make a good case for the legalisation of controlled substances - "The reality is drug use will continue to be prevalent in Thai (and all other) societies despite the best government efforts to stamp it out. That is the reality. So lets legalize all forms of drugs so that the flow of drug money is transparent and we the government can use that money to help hospitals provide better care to their patients."

I find it difficult to argue against this stance as clearly and by your own admission making them illegal has had the opposite effect, it criminalises large elements of society and forms the basis for a highly lucrative unregulated business. Legal means regulated, taxed and controlled, illegal clearly means the opposite in reality.

Let's not even start on what is deemed acceptable drug use and what isn't, it's only through social conditioning and legality that alcohol is seen as an acceptable drug when the medical facts show it to be much more harmful than many "illegal" substances. If anything the fact that many of these drugs are illegal makes them more appealing to the younger generation's instinct to rebel against the establishment. I digress...

[Canada]

....could just accept the reality that this is Thailand and this is how Thailand does things.

Corruption goes deep in this country, is accepted by most Thais and factored into the cost of doing things. The only things suggested in this statement by this "minister" is that they move to make the corruption "transparent", and "legal". Both of these actions represent a move in the wrong direction in my opinion, but my opinion is not important to anyone but myself. I do not have the right to vote in this country and the reality of "democracy" in any country is that it only really provides the illusion of the possibility of change or fairness. Money rules in all communities here on planet earth. The only real difference between the so-called communities is the level of transparency of this fact.

Asian society has been around for a while and seems to work fine for them. Why is it that some of us visitors here insist on criticizing their society or bitching and complaining about it.... would you have it the same as home??? Maybe you should go there.... personally, I like it here.

[scorecard]

....could just accept the reality that this is Thailand and this is how Thailand does things.

Corruption goes deep in this country, is accepted by most Thais and factored into the cost of doing things. The only things suggested in this statement by this "minister" is that they move to make the corruption "transparent", and "legal". Both of these actions represent a move in the wrong direction in my opinion, but my opinion is not important to anyone but myself. I do not have the right to vote in this country and the reality of "democracy" in any country is that it only really provides the illusion of the possibility of change or fairness. Money rules in all communities here on planet earth. The only real difference between the so-called communities is the level of transparency of this fact.

Asian society has been around for a while and seems to work fine for them. Why is it that some of us visitors here insist on criticizing their society or bitching and complaining about it.... would you have it the same as home??? Maybe you should go there.... personally, I like it here.

Some truth in what you say.

Personally I have more to look at. I have children and grandchildren born here, and I hope that when my grandchildren are adults there is much much less corruption, much much more respect for and equal application of the law, and something much closer to equal education opportunities, for all Thais.

Let me stress that I'm not asking that Thailand be the same as a typical western country, in fact I very much enjoy living in Thailand, over 3 dedcades, and I have PR.

All so called prosperous democratic, first world countries have problems. Just one example: countries where there is a good chance of being mugged and robbed on the street. Surely it would be desirable for that to change, both for the sake of the locals in that country and for visitors, whether long-term, or tourists.

You wrote ....Corruption goes deep in this country, is accepted by most Thais and factored into the cost of doing things...

Well I challenge your comment .... is accepted by most Thais.....

Here's one small example: Every year I participate in interviews (about 40 minutes each) for the students (freshies) who have applied to study (programs taught in English) at the university where I lecture part-time. It's one of the so called prestigious unis.

The applicants all have an individual interview (the panel is always 2 Thai lecturers and 1 farang lecturer), all in English.

There are lots of questions. One standard question, every year, is .....What would you change if you had a chance to do something big for Thailand? My guess is that 90% of the kids say...stop corruption.

Many of them are quite naive and go on to tell stories about members of their family / families of close friends who are deeply involved in corruption, some comment that they are frightened their dad, mum, uncle, friend's mum, etc., might go to jail.

Additionally, There are always lots of comments about how Thailand must stop corruption or become a fourth world country, etc.

Edited February 15, 2012 by scorecard

[jonclark]

Clearly the issues of drug use and donations to schools are totally different, how can you take one person's suggested solution to a certain problem and twist it to apply to a completely different topic?! Regulating donations to state schools and legalising "drugs" are not the same at all.

That said taking your own arguments you make a good case for the legalisation of controlled substances - "The reality is drug use will continue to be prevalent in Thai (and all other) societies despite the best government efforts to stamp it out. That is the reality. So lets legalize all forms of drugs so that the flow of drug money is transparent and we the government can use that money to help hospitals provide better care to their patients."

I find it difficult to argue against this stance as clearly and by your own admission making them illegal has had the opposite effect, it criminalises large elements of society and forms the basis for a highly lucrative unregulated business. Legal means regulated, taxed and controlled, illegal clearly means the opposite in reality.

Let's not even start on what is deemed acceptable drug use and what isn't, it's only through social conditioning and legality that alcohol is seen as an acceptable drug when the medical facts show it to be much more harmful than many "illegal" substances. If anything the fact that many of these drugs are illegal makes them more appealing to the younger generation's instinct to rebel against the establishment. I digress...

Donations to schools - its such an innocent sounding phrase. Conjures images of smiling parents handing over money to the school, safe in the knowledge that the money will be used to improve the library, pay for the new computers, repairs to the school roof, etc. In reality it goes straight into the school directors pocket. Because lets be honest at the end of the day who will be the one authorizing the school accounts which go to the MoE??

If schools need to raise money do it the old fashion way, something along the lines of a school fair or fate, students wash cars, launder clothes and raise money through sponsored activities.

That way all students have a chance to participate and have a stake in their school, their education and its' development. If schools need parents to donate money ask all parents for a donation once all the children have been accepted. The size of the donation is at the discretion of the parents. So we end up with free and fair access to education. A child's access to education should not be dependent on a large sum of money passing hands, prior to them actually attending school.

Donations to schools are bribes to accept some students at the expense of others and that is wrong.

As i said in my previous post the issue here is not if something is real or unreal , but acceptable or unacceptable. Both drugs and bribes for school places are unacceptable, legalizing either of them in no way makes them more acceptable.

[Ferangled]

If a problem exists turning a blind eye to it doesn't improve the situation, bringing it into the public eye, addressing it and trying to regulate it can.

Would you prefer that noone raised the issue and it just carried on behind closed doors? If we can't see it and noone discusses it then that's just fine and dandy....

"Donations to schools - its such an innocent sounding phrase. Conjures images of smiling parents handing over money to the school, safe in the knowledge that the money will be used to improve the library, pay for the new computers, repairs to the school roof, etc. In reality it goes straight into the school directors pocket. Because lets be honest at the end of the day who will be the one authorizing the school accounts which go to the MoE??"

That's the whole point, it goes straight into the school directors pocket, so shouldn't someone try to outline this system and change it, rather than just ignoring it?! That's what happens now and has been happening for years, what will happen if all donations have to be declared, put through the books and the use of the money scrutinized?

Is it a perfect solution? No, but it's better to try and change it than just ignore it.

[jonclark]

If a problem exists turning a blind eye to it doesn't improve the situation, bringing it into the public eye, addressing it and trying to regulate it can.

Would you prefer that noone raised the issue and it just carried on behind closed doors? If we can't see it and noone discusses it then that's just fine and dandy....

"Donations to schools - its such an innocent sounding phrase. Conjures images of smiling parents handing over money to the school, safe in the knowledge that the money will be used to improve the library, pay for the new computers, repairs to the school roof, etc. In reality it goes straight into the school directors pocket. Because lets be honest at the end of the day who will be the one authorizing the school accounts which go to the MoE??"

That's the whole point, it goes straight into the school directors pocket, so shouldn't someone try to outline this system and change it, rather than just ignoring it?! That's what happens now and has been happening for years, what will happen if all donations have to be declared, put through the books and the use of the money scrutinized?

Is it a perfect solution? No, but it's better to try and change it than just ignore it.

Totally understand what you are saying. But by legalizing donations those 'better' schools will be actively seeking larger and larger donations to admit students. Thereby progressively squeezing out over a number of years the percentage of students who are equally able but less financially well off, until eventually you have a two tier state school system. Effectively 'semi-privatly funded state schools' and 'state schools'.

Directors will be fighting tooth and nail to get into schools which have a better name as they will know there is more money to be skimmed from parent donations. I don't think even you believe that the school directors will declare the real amount handed over by parents. A very large % will end up in the directors pocket and their direct supervisors at the MoE with perhaps 10% of parents money, a token amount if you like trickling back down to students. Which makes the whole issue of educational development null and void.

Its similar to the top cop at the local police station, he pays a 'promotion fee' to run that station, over the duration of his tenure he skims money from the fines / bribes paid to the police to recoup his money plus his fee. That is what will happen in schools.

What I would prefer to see is the MoE providing proper funding for all education and outlawing (not encouraging) all forms of bribes for school places. If schools need donations then as I said previously the donation, should be at the discretion of the parents and asked for after the school term has started when it is too late to remove the child from school or money can be raised as a whole school fund raising campaign.

Edited February 15, 2012 by jonclark

[ralphlsasser]

A "donation" for a student to get a seat in class is nothing more than a bribe to line the directors pocket.

[Pseudolus]

""The policy will also destroy good values in Thai society. If the policy is implemented, rich children will grow up feeling that money can buy everything while cash-strapped children will feel inferior and unfairly treated," he added."

there is a typo in this statement;

Should read... .. " rich children grow up knowing that money can buy everything"

[JohnAllan]

Suchart seems to view his job as schools liaison, not minister. High time for a mini - and quick - reshuffle.

[JohnAllan]

If a problem exists turning a blind eye to it doesn't improve the situation, bringing it into the public eye, addressing it and trying to regulate it can.

Would you prefer that noone raised the issue and it just carried on behind closed doors? If we can't see it and noone discusses it then that's just fine and dandy....

"Donations to schools - its such an innocent sounding phrase. Conjures images of smiling parents handing over money to the school, safe in the knowledge that the money will be used to improve the library, pay for the new computers, repairs to the school roof, etc. In reality it goes straight into the school directors pocket. Because lets be honest at the end of the day who will be the one authorizing the school accounts which go to the MoE??"

That's the whole point, it goes straight into the school directors pocket, so shouldn't someone try to outline this system and change it, rather than just ignoring it?! That's what happens now and has been happening for years, what will happen if all donations have to be declared, put through the books and the use of the money scrutinized?

Is it a perfect solution? No, but it's better to try and change it than just ignore it.

Totally understand what you are saying. But by legalizing donations those 'better' schools will be actively seeking larger and larger donations to admit students. Thereby progressively squeezing out over a number of years the percentage of students who are equally able but less financially well off, until eventually you have a two tier state school system. Effectively 'semi-privatly funded state schools' and 'state schools'.

Directors will be fighting tooth and nail to get into schools which have a better name as they will know there is more money to be skimmed from parent donations. I don't think even you believe that the school directors will declare the real amount handed over by parents. A very large % will end up in the directors pocket and their direct supervisors at the MoE with perhaps 10% of parents money, a token amount if you like trickling back down to students. Which makes the whole issue of educational development null and void.

Its similar to the top cop at the local police station, he pays a 'promotion fee' to run that station, over the duration of his tenure he skims money from the fines / bribes paid to the police to recoup his money plus his fee. That is what will happen in schools.

What I would prefer to see is the MoE providing proper funding for all education and outlawing (not encouraging) all forms of bribes for school places. If schools need donations then as I said previously the donation, should be at the discretion of the parents and asked for after the school term has started when it is too late to remove the child from school or money can be raised as a whole school fund raising campaign.

It's also highly likely that future tea money donations will need to line another [government] pocket, or two. After all, TiT . . .

[Ferangled]

I think the fact that worldwide the education system is based on financial criteria eludes people. The rich have always had the option of sending their children to private schools, the poor don't. Regardless of what happens in the state school system, the rich always have the option of sending their children to privately run, privately funded schools, generally with much better facilities, better paid teachers and a better standard of education. On this basis the system is already corrupt to the core and not just in Thailand!

In my personal opinion the only free/ state funded school system that caters for the ability of students and not the wealth of parents is that of the grammer schools in the UK. It doesn't matter how much money your parents have, if you can't pass the entrance exam, you're not offered a place. Funny that these are constantly under fire from people for being elitist and unfair! You can never please everyone I guess...

As it stands given a choice (and I realise I'm fortunate to have one but then again I work hard for it) between paying unregulated tea money for places at state schools, or paying for private education, my children are being privately educated in Thailand. What does puzzle me is that I pay far less per year than some of the figures that have been banded around as "tea money" entry into state schools... if these figures are to be believed why would these parents not enroll their children into private education instead?

I don't have all the answers and don't pretend to understand this issue inside out but am very interested in the subject of education in Thailand as a whole, mainly as a parent who wants the best for my children and have major concerns about the standard of education both in Thailand and back in the UK.

[thequietman]

If a problem exists turning a blind eye to it doesn't improve the situation, bringing it into the public eye, addressing it and trying to regulate it can.

Would you prefer that noone raised the issue and it just carried on behind closed doors? If we can't see it and noone discusses it then that's just fine and dandy....

"Donations to schools - its such an innocent sounding phrase. Conjures images of smiling parents handing over money to the school, safe in the knowledge that the money will be used to improve the library, pay for the new computers, repairs to the school roof, etc. In reality it goes straight into the school directors pocket. Because lets be honest at the end of the day who will be the one authorizing the school accounts which go to the MoE??"

"That's the whole point, it goes straight into the school directors pocket, so shouldn't someone try to outline this system and change it, rather than just ignoring it?! That's what happens now and has been happening for years, what will happen if all donations have to be declared, put through the books and the use of the money scrutinized?"

Is it a perfect solution? No, but it's better to try and change it than just ignore it.

i understand your point but the money will just be taken a different way. outside school grounds, money paid straight to the director can be made through a small business for services rendered. there is no way to stop this. unless ofcourse they start to punish these directors with jail time. ain't gonna happen.

Edited February 15, 2012 by thequietman

[JohnAllan]

More students, mean more seats, mean more teachers, and yet more tea money. The proverbial vicious circle, Suchart. Or no more teachers, in which case, it also doesn't work to anyone's benefit - except the school's, and perhaps some members of government.

Since your maths, and logic, Khun Suchart, are flawed by Thainess, did your parents utilise the tea money system to get you into a[n] [in]famous Thai school? Or did you have to struggle through regardless? Or did you, in fact, not actually spend much time in the great Thai education system, relying instead on western education?

[thequietman]

I think the fact that worldwide the education system is based on financial criteria eludes people. The rich have always had the option of sending their children to private schools, the poor don't. Regardless of what happens in the state school system, the rich always have the option of sending their children to privately run, privately funded schools, generally with much better facilities, better paid teachers and a better standard of education. On this basis the system is already corrupt to the core and not just in Thailand!

In my personal opinion the only free/ state funded school system that caters for the ability of students and not the wealth of parents is that of the grammer schools in the UK. It doesn't matter how much money your parents have, if you can't pass the entrance exam, you're not offered a place. Funny that these are constantly under fire from people for being elitist and unfair! You can never please everyone I guess...

As it stands given a choice (and I realise I'm fortunate to have one but then again I work hard for it) between paying unregulated tea money for places at state schools, or paying for private education, my children are being privately educated in Thailand. What does puzzle me is that I pay far less per year than some of the figures that have been banded around as "tea money" entry into state schools... if these figures are to be believed why would these parents not enroll their children into private education instead?

I don't have all the answers and don't pretend to understand this issue inside out but am very interested in the subject of education in Thailand as a whole, mainly as a parent who wants the best for my children and have major concerns about the standard of education both in Thailand and back in the UK.

not true. 22 years ago in the UK, the grammar school that i attended routinely took "donations" from families of students that failed the entrance exam. similarly, they also took good sports students into the school who clearly werent the brightest buttons in the box.

this was not exclusive to my school but also to the other grammar schools in towns and cities nearby.

[Ferangled]

I think the fact that worldwide the education system is based on financial criteria eludes people. The rich have always had the option of sending their children to private schools, the poor don't. Regardless of what happens in the state school system, the rich always have the option of sending their children to privately run, privately funded schools, generally with much better facilities, better paid teachers and a better standard of education. On this basis the system is already corrupt to the core and not just in Thailand!

In my personal opinion the only free/ state funded school system that caters for the ability of students and not the wealth of parents is that of the grammer schools in the UK. It doesn't matter how much money your parents have, if you can't pass the entrance exam, you're not offered a place. Funny that these are constantly under fire from people for being elitist and unfair! You can never please everyone I guess...

As it stands given a choice (and I realise I'm fortunate to have one but then again I work hard for it) between paying unregulated tea money for places at state schools, or paying for private education, my children are being privately educated in Thailand. What does puzzle me is that I pay far less per year than some of the figures that have been banded around as "tea money" entry into state schools... if these figures are to be believed why would these parents not enroll their children into private education instead?

I don't have all the answers and don't pretend to understand this issue inside out but am very interested in the subject of education in Thailand as a whole, mainly as a parent who wants the best for my children and have major concerns about the standard of education both in Thailand and back in the UK.

not true. 22 years ago in the UK, the grammar school that i attended routinely took "donations" from families of students that failed the entrance exam. similarly, they also took good sports students into the school who clearly werent the brightest buttons in the box.

this was not exclusive to my school but also to the other grammar schools in towns and cities nearby.

I guess we all have different experiences and corruption obviously runs rife in all countries! In my case we had to sit an exam called an 11+, without passing this, you weren't considered for enrollment into any grammar school in the area...

Out of interest how did you come to find out about these "donations"? Were they kept behind closed doors or was it out in the open and obvious to all?

[lannarebirth]

The Justice Minister should be out anyday now trying to legislate "tea money" into the court system. Not to benefit any specific individuals mind you but to enhance the capabilities of the courts to better serve ALL the public. Yeah, that's the ticket!

Edited February 15, 2012 by lannarebirth