View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

By Design or by Accident: The Legacy of Thailand's 1999 Education Reform and the Cultural Consequences of Internationalization

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: By Design or by Accident: The Legacy of Thailand's 1999 Education Reform and the Cultural Consequences of Internationalization
Language: English
Authors: Matthew Robert Ferguson (ORCID 0000-0003-3684-6684), Panya Lekwilai
Source: Cambridge Journal of Education. 2024 54(1):1-17.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 17
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Educational Change, Global Approach, Cultural Influences, Self Concept, English (Second Language), Second Language Learning, College Students, Student Attitudes, Language Usage, International Education, Educational Policy
Geographic Terms: Thailand, Thailand (Bangkok)
DOI: 10.1080/0305764X.2023.2230170
ISSN: 0305-764X
1469-3577
Abstract: The National Education Reform Act of 1999 sought to modernise Thai education at all levels. The core reforms included teacher training, to shift to student-centred pedagogy; de-centralisation of school and university administration; and integration of communication technologies. Among subsequent developments was the push for internationalising education. Two decades later, the children of 1999-2000 are graduating from university. The participants in this qualitative study grew up in international programmes, and are also now graduating from university. In this study, the findings suggest that Thai education is still defined by structural tradition. However, our participants express strongly held values about freedom of expression and individuality, which they associate with their internationalised experience. The results suggest a tension between cultural identity and the beliefs that our participants assimilated in international programmes. The results also provide reflections about the achievements of the 1999 Act, even if they were not directly achieved by the policy instruments it articulated.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1412384
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGyHrjjsZzW-T5mDDRTXpfDAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDA_cPFBHv2HKYDExIgIBEICBm7iNBp5UYJAmNIS6nrbJXXy6eUp_4nUxIH88dlXjAQoG0TUPDBjBM_pv0L4YHdv29P6n8F34ZC4PBaBXbU--ZFTquPDv3kLhr_nGFBOyaRz0dey6a1yA6YMOpMltspKJ2nS7VvYW_LrXUAWBOlbGE4aPt9S8qllP79bjrfHpkhjCN0gXEj_rpasVzz0NiwhY8kNkUaV_qvIRk1g5
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0175415397;caj01feb.24;2024Feb15.05:52;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0175415397-1">By design or by accident: the legacy of Thailand's 1999 education reform and the cultural consequences of internationalization </title> <p>The National Education Reform Act of 1999 sought to modernise Thai education at all levels. The core reforms included teacher training, to shift to student-centred pedagogy; de-centralisation of school and university administration; and integration of communication technologies. Among subsequent developments was the push for internationalising education. Two decades later, the children of 1999–2000 are graduating from university. The participants in this qualitative study grew up in international programmes, and are also now graduating from university. In this study, the findings suggest that Thai education is still defined by structural tradition. However, our participants express strongly held values about freedom of expression and individuality, which they associate with their internationalised experience. The results suggest a tension between cultural identity and the beliefs that our participants assimilated in international programmes. The results also provide reflections about the achievements of the 1999 Act, even if they were not directly achieved by the policy instruments it articulated.</p> <p>Keywords: international education; cultural identity; education leadership; qualitative inquiry; Thailand</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-2">Introduction</hd> <p> <emph>The economic, political, cultural and social crisis has caused all concerned to realize the expediency for the reform of Thai education. The urgently needed reform will undoubtedly redeem the country from the downward spiral, so that Thailand will arise in the immediate future as a nation of wealth, stability and dignity, capable of competing with others in this age of globalization.</emph> (National Education Act of B.E. 2542 ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref1">31</reflink>]), Office of the National Education Commission, Thailand).</p> <p>In this extraordinary preamble to Thailand's National Education Act of 1999, often cited as the most comprehensive reform since the founding of the formal education system, the stakes could not have been higher. At the time, Thailand was only two years removed from the most devastating economic crisis since the Second World War, with the SET losing 55% of its value (Graham et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref2">12</reflink>]). Forces of globalisation were in full flux, with world economies integrating and workers mobilising. And the dreams of the new internet were only budding in peoples' imaginations. The world was accelerating forward, and Thailand risked falling behind. The words of the Act are a stark acknowledgement that Thai education needed to change, and fast.</p> <p>Over the subsequent two decades, the legacy of the 1999 Act is open to question. Access to basic education is near universal, and resources to schools are dispatched across the country, although unequally (Lathapipat, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref3">22</reflink>]). The disparity of resources and access to quality education between Bangkok and the provinces is severe and well documented (Kuhonta, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref4">19</reflink>]; Lathapipat, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref5">21</reflink>], Lounkaew, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref6">24</reflink>]; Wongsurawat, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref7">45</reflink>]). The inequality of education, along the apparent urban/rural divide, represents long-standing structural inequities between the power and peasant classes (Ferguson, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref8">8</reflink>]), leading to vast discrepancies in economic opportunity, and stifling social mobility.</p> <p>That said, however, the 1999 Act unlocked greater autonomy for schools and universities through de-centralisation. This meant possibilities for re-positioning a school's mission, offering new programmes to attract more students, and generating independent revenue (Sangnapaboworn, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref9">36</reflink>]). One such strategy is the internationalisation of educational programming. In particular, this most frequently meant the deployment of English-language curricula, the recruitment of native-English speaking teachers, and the marketing of newly launched international schools and colleges (Kanjananiyot & Chaitiamwong, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref10">17</reflink>]).</p> <p>The children born in 1999–2000 started graduating university in 2021. This cohort of students was among the first in their country to start their schooling with some implementation of the 1999 reforms. Their schools were not as burdened by centralised constraints as they had been previously. This meant that for many, they went through programmes where English was the medium of instruction, and they learned with international teachers from a young age, as long as they had access. And of course they witnessed first-hand the technological revolution of the internet, computing technology, and social media that changed the world.</p> <p>This study features the voices of students from this generational cohort, from distinct contexts in Thailand. One group of students is about to graduate from an international liberal arts college in Bangkok, and its members come from the greater Bangkok metropolitan area. Another group of students is about to graduate from a university that uses English as a medium of instruction in Chiang Rai, the northernmost province of Thailand. Its students are not from Bangkok, but from more rural provinces across the country.</p> <p>The purpose of this study was three-fold. One was to gain insight into how the students perceive the influences of their internationalised education, and in particular the role of English in their lives. Second was to inquire into the differences in experiences between rural and urban-based Thai students and how they are perceived among this shared generational cohort. Thirdly and more broadly, we expect that the knowledge generated by this qualitative study provides reflections on the legacy of the 1999 National Education Act, considered a transformative reform for the development and global relevance of Thailand.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-3">Education reform and inequality</hd> <p>Modernising Thai education is a culturally charged subject. The story of Thailand's development is one that promotes its independence and exceptionalism against the threat of colonial encroachment, but also adopts and cultivates Western systems and symbols for economic relevance and cultural civilisation. Speaking of Siam in the mid-nineteenth century, Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref11">34</reflink>]) explains:</p> <p>There was an urgent need for Siam to modernize the country, and at that time, there was little choice but to become modernized according to Western standards as a strategy to avoid colonialization. This called for modernization of education to prepare highly skilled human resources, and a Western education system was, thus, introduced at that time. (p. 6)</p> <p>But meanwhile, this push for Western-style development produced a contradiction difficult to reconcile. The Princess relates the disquiet of her great-grandfather, King Rama V, considered the founder of modern Thai education: 'he was deeply concerned about how to modernise the country and yet to be able to maintain important Siamese traditions' (Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref12">34</reflink>], p. 8). Over time, the effort to hold two competing principles simultaneously – that of Western advancement and also of Thai exceptionalism – became a paradoxical yet necessarily bifurcated intellectual strategy for imagining the Thai state (Winichakul, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref13">43</reflink>]).</p> <p>Herein lies a lasting and uneasy tension that underpins reform and development efforts, all the way to and through the 1999 National Education Act. The legacy of the Act was that it opened the doors for educational institutions at all levels in order to deploy internationalisation strategies, including the adoption of English as medium of instruction. Even at the turn of the millennium, anxieties with respect to neo-colonial encroachment through the adoption of Western-style education persist. They trigger ages-long debate over the effectiveness of education reform, and the suitability of apparently foreign systems in the Thai context.</p> <p>Following the 1999 Act, Hallinger and Lee ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref14">14</reflink>]) describe the widely held contention that a 'continued reliance on traditional educational methods had become an impediment to the nation's social and economic development' (p. 139). With the urging of the Act, individual institutions were tasked with training their teachers to shift to student-centred approaches, and away from entrenched hierarchies in the school structure and classroom. It quickly became apparent that changing the culture of the school was hard, and resistance to reform intensified. According to Sangnapaboworn ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref15">36</reflink>]) speaking about the 1999 Act, many alleged that 'the education reform plan was "a copy" of models from other countries and not suitable for the Thai context' (p. 530). Consistent with this contention, several studies from Thai schools and universities in the last 20 years have documented a perceived lack of socio-cultural adaptability in the so-called Western systems, standards and pedagogical approaches (Kantamara, Hallinger, & Jatiket, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref16">18</reflink>]; Ferguson, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref17">6</reflink>]; Hallinger & Kantamara, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref18">13</reflink>]; Hayes, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref19">16</reflink>]; Lao, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref20">20</reflink>]). In spite of the perceived incompatibilities, internationalisation continued to gain momentum, in what Fry ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref21">11</reflink>]) described as an 'international education boom' in the years to come (p. 16). Because now, internationalisation was not only about modernising education: it was importantly about marketing and generating revenue for newly autonomous and independent institutions.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-4">Internationalisation</hd> <p>Thailand's first international schools were founded in the 1950s and catered to the expatriate and diplomatic community. Sixty-five years later, there are 176 international schools, 106 of them in Bangkok, populated by the children of Thailand's upper classes (Kanjananiyot & Chaitiamwong, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref22">17</reflink>]). This growth reflects the extraordinary demand for Western education, given the alternative of Thai public schools. It is also reflective of a paradox: the cultivation of Western symbols for the aggrandisement of one's status within Thai society (Ferguson, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref23">8</reflink>]). Both the financial and quality disparity between international and Thai schools intensifies social inequality in a deeply hierarchical culture (Phongpaichit & Baker, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref24">33</reflink>]). And, notably, it is evidence of the concentration of resources in Bangkok, and the relative neglect of the provinces (Kuhonta, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref25">19</reflink>]; Lounkaew, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref26">24</reflink>]). This familiar inequity represents an enduring prejudicial binary, culturally understood as urban civilisation versus rural backwardness (Winichakul, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref27">42</reflink>]). And with the boom in international programmes in the early 2000s, and the stark distinctions between them and traditional educational programming, another discursive binary emerges – <emph>international</emph> versus <emph>Thai</emph> education – which is now engrained in the public discourse. 'International' is high-quality, modern and student-centred. 'Thai' is old-fashioned, rigid and hierarchical (Ferguson, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref28">8</reflink>]). In a deeply unequal society, as Thailand is, labels factor heavily for how people identify their ascribed strata, in this case in terms of educational access.</p> <p>Another legacy of the 1997 economic crash was that elite families started looking for affordable university options that could offer an international education at home (Lavankura, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref29">23</reflink>]). With the shift to institutional autonomy, internationalisation was the way for higher education institutions to tap this emerging market, and to generate new streams of revenue. According to Kanjananiyot and Chaitiamwong ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref30">17</reflink>]), from 2001 to 2011, the number of international programmes offered by Thai universities rose from 31 to 335, or by 981% (p. 278). This rapid expansion was transformative in several ways. It sharpened the categorical distinction between international and Thai programmes. And with the tremendous tuition fees international programmes could demand, it proved a formidable cash cow, forcing all Thai programmes, including medical and law schools that work within strict governmental regulatory frameworks, to likewise offer international options.</p> <p>It also required new systems for quality assurance. As Kanjananiyot and Chaitiamwong ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref31">17</reflink>]) describe, there was an 'increased attention to the <emph>quality of internationalisation</emph> and the <emph>internationalisation of quality</emph>' (p. 275). This meant the institution of new QA regulatory frameworks, in alignment with regional and international partners, could open the door to innumerable memorandrum of understanding (MOU) agreements, more joint programmes and exchange possibilities, and an increase in international students on Thai campuses.</p> <p>In other ways, however, little changed. For most international programmes, it simply meant that English was used as the medium of instruction (Lao, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref32">20</reflink>]; Phan, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref33">32</reflink>]). There was no substantive change in pedagogical methods nor in programme administration. And because of the cost disparity between international and Thai programmes, many schools and universities became class-based, with international programme students representing the privileged, and Thai programme students on the same campus representing the second tier (Ferguson, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref34">8</reflink>]).</p> <p>Even with focused scrutiny on Thai programmes for their stubborn allegiance to tradition and hierarchy, there is little evidence of a widespread shift to student-centred learning, as the 1999 Act articulated (Suyaprom & Manmee, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref35">40</reflink>]). There are reports of cases where efforts are being made to re-orient school organisational cultures, so that teachers could be more meaningfully engaged in professional development (Hallinger et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref36">15</reflink>]), and where young Thai teachers are experimenting with student-centred pedagogy with promising results (Tandamrong & Parr, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref37">41</reflink>]). However, Tandamrong and Parr ([<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref38">41</reflink>]) note that there remain 'significant cultural and institutional obstacles to effective implementation of the LCE [Learner-Centered Education] mandate' (p. 15), due in large part to organisational structures in Thailand that reinforce subordinate and superior relationships.</p> <p>Following the 2014 coup, the military government of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) outlined 12 core values for Thai schools to promote. They include <emph>being grateful to parents and teachers, being disciplined and respecting the elderly and seniority</emph>, and <emph>treasuring the preciousness of Thai traditions</emph> (National News Bureau of Thailand (NNT), [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref39">29</reflink>]. For many, this edict reflected old thinking, anathema to the values of student-centred learning. Despite reform efforts and intensified competition from international programmes, the same paradoxes persist, with a dedicated resistance to foreign influences that threaten Thainess.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-5">English language learning</hd> <p>English was most widely introduced to Thailand in 1824, with the arrival of American missionaries during the reign of King Rama III (Foley, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref40">10</reflink>]; Methitham & Chamcharatsri, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref41">26</reflink>]). It was also the period of Western colonial expansion in Southeast Asia. Against the imminent threat of British imperialism, and also the impetus for modernising the Kingdom (Baker, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref42">1</reflink>]), King Rama III and his successor King Rama IV adopted English into the royal palace. In the nineteenth century, English was exclusively taught and learnt among the royal family and social elites (Buripakdi, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref43">2</reflink>]). It was during the reign of King Rama V (1868-1910) that English became a feature of the new Thai education system. English was eventually made a compulsory subject in the 1921 curriculum (Chamcharatsri, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref44">3</reflink>]; Foley, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref45">10</reflink>]). For basic education, it was initially required at the Grade 5 level. In 1996, it was made compulsory at Grade 1. Similarly, English became compulsory in higher education, no matter the major programme. Following the 1999 Act, the number of compulsory English course credits increased from 9 to 12 (Wongsothorn et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref46">44</reflink>]), including six for general English and another six for academic or specific purposes (Foley, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref47">10</reflink>]).</p> <p>Nevertheless, Thai students' proficiency in English remains low. A number of studies highlight factors explaining this woe, such as the lack of qualified teachers (Dhanasobhon, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref48">5</reflink>]; Yunibandhu, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref49">46</reflink>]), poorly motivated students (Noom-Ura, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref50">30</reflink>]) and teacher-centred pedagogy with grammar-based instruction (Simpson, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref51">38</reflink>]). They also note the tremendous workloads of teachers, with the added burden of new QA requirements and hours of reporting and paperwork (Noom-Ura, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref52">30</reflink>]).</p> <p>The disparities in English teaching quality and performance are again most pronounced between urban and rural contexts. Schools and universities in Bangkok often benefit from rich resources for English education such as instructional materials, well-developed learning environments, and qualified native-speaking teachers. Schools in rural areas, on the other hand, are not as well resourced, and they often struggle to draw qualified teachers (Hayes, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref53">16</reflink>]). Recruiting qualified foreign teachers is challenging for several reasons, such as lack of lifestyle amenities and non-competitive wages. And this has a spiralling effect, for better and for worse. Students who attend urban English programmes are more socio-economically privileged compared to those who attend rural ones (Lathapipat, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref54">21</reflink>]; Muensorn & Tepsuriwong, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref55">28</reflink>]), so they pay higher tuition fees, which produces better facilities and higher wages, and attracts more qualified teachers (Lounkaew, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref56">24</reflink>]). And the opposite is true for rural-based institutions, often resulting in a sub-par experience. Given this, the legacy of English as a privilege for urban elites remains, even if with expanded access.</p> <p>In the next sections, we feature the voices of students from one urban-based and one rural-based university, both of which use English as a medium of instruction. These students were born at the time of the 1999 National Education Act, and grew up in schools adapting to the urgings of the reform. They are now about to graduate with an undergraduate degree. They represent a unique generational cohort: those who were the first in their families to grow up in English programmes, and experience pedagogical approaches associated with international education. We sought to gain insight about the legacy of the Act, and to reflect on whether the urgent needs of the time are represented in these children of 1999–2000.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-6">Methodology</hd> <p>Ferguson ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref57">7</reflink>]) provides a conceptual framework for researching internationalisation in Thai higher education. It encompasses the fraught negotiation of Thailand's anti-colonial spirit with the simultaneous cultivation of Western modernity. It also includes the equally fraught negotiation of Thai exceptionalism with the rigid constraints of Thai culture and tradition, often considered a crutch for development. In the Thai context, international education is not about progressive ideals such as humanism or cosmopolitanism. Instead, Ferguson ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref58">7</reflink>]) says that internationalisation is about gaining recognition in the education market, and supplying 'symbols that garner greater social capital for the individual' (p. 83). Therefore, the aim of internationalisation efforts is primarily revenue-driven, and the outcomes are a set of strategically cultivated symbols for the purpose of elevating one's status in an unequal society.</p> <p>Through this lens, we conducted a comparative qualitative case study, interviewing students from a Bangkok-based university and a rural-based university. The multi-case research design integrates dimensions of both a grounded theory and a discourse analysis. The primary aim is to gather perspectives of student-participants who grew up with internationalised education, and in the grounded theory tradition, to see what themes emerge inductively from the data (Smith & Davies, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref59">39</reflink>]). Using two cases does not demonstrably improve generalisability, but it enhances confidence that the emerging theories are transferable to other like-cases (Miles et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref60">27</reflink>]). The Bangkok/rural cases provide a purposeful construct for comparing the three principle objectives of our inquiry: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref61">1</reflink>) to identify the motivations and uses for English in different contexts in Thailand, and to understand the status of English as a symbol of sophistication and class in their lives; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref62">2</reflink>) to learn the perceptions or biases that exist across geographies among this generational cohort; and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref63">3</reflink>) to gain reflections on identity formation and social change as a result of their internationalised educational experience. These three objectives reflect dimensions of the internationalisation of Thai education. And as widespread internationalisation arose from de-centralisation, the findings can offer compelling theories that are pertinent to the legacy of the National Education Act of 1999.</p> <p>The themes and stories that emerge also produce rich insight into the trajectory of Thai society, not only in terms of capacity, but also in terms of values, beliefs and worldview, which is a secondary yet important dimension to this inquiry. It is predicted that the student-participants engage in familiar discourses related to internationalisation and Thainess, and the historical-cultural tensions between them. In addition to enhancing reliability, the Bangkok/rural multi-case design provides data for analysis between distinct geographic populations (Miles et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref64">27</reflink>]). Discourse analysis observes how participants construct their worldview, how they interpret their experiences, and how this process is accomplished and/or undermined (Silverman, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref65">37</reflink>]). This is germane to the present study, as educational development in Thailand is often construed through fault lines such as geography and class, and the unequal deployment of resources between Bangkok and the provinces.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-7">Data collection</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0175415397-8">Target group</hd> <p>The students from both cases share some common experiences. They were all born in 1999 or 2000. They are all proficient in the English language, and had attended English programmes growing up. They are also all near the completion of a four-year undergraduate programme that uses English as the medium of instruction, which for both universities is a primary recruitment asset. The student participants are representative of different academic disciplines, including Liberal Arts, Sciences, Media and Communication, and Business. The students of the Bangkok university all originate from Bangkok and the surrounding area, while those from the rural-based university originate from more remote regions across Thailand. There was no control for factors such as gender or sexual orientation.</p> <p>A general call was sent out to institutional email addresses. In total 10 students from the Bangkok-based university consented to participate, and seven from the rural-based university. Each participant gave informed consent, and understood that their anonymity would be strictly protected. They were notified that they could withdraw at any time without consequence. Ethics approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board, Institute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University (Ethics Certificate No. 2020/08–356).</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-9">Procedure and instruments</hd> <p>Grounded theory requires several rounds of data collection in order to identify patterns that can be noted and coded (Smith & Davies, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref66">39</reflink>]). In this study, there were three phases to the data collection procedure. The first was to gain an overview from each case independently (Macnaghten & Myers, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref67">25</reflink>]). Two focus group sessions were conducted, one in each of the respective cases. They lasted approximately 90 minutes each. While the focus group questions were structured, the instrument permitted conversation, and for participants to expand on the responses of others. It also established a level of rapport among the participants and with the researchers (Smith & Davies, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref68">39</reflink>]). The interview protocol included three themes, the first being about language learning background and the role of English in their lives; the second theme questions addressed status and prestige associated with international education and English speaking in Thai society; and the third theme questions asked for reflections on cultural identity as Thai speakers of English.</p> <p>The second phase of the procedure was in-depth interviews, which were conducted with three participants from each of the cases (six in total), who had also taken part in the focus groups. The in-depth interview protocols followed the same format as that of the focus group, but they aimed to draw more specificity, context and depth of data. The participants were given the opportunity to elaborate on ideas from the focus group sessions. The interviews ranged between 40–60 minutes.</p> <p>In the third and final phase, one follow-up focus group was conducted, bringing together the participants from both cases. Eleven students participated in the session, including the six interviewees from phase two, and five others who participated in phase one. The six remaining participants had withdrawn at this stage. In this 90-minute session, the same protocol was used once again for structure; however, throughout the session, the researchers cited data from phase one and phase two, and then asked the focus group to respond. The aim was to gain further reflection from the participants about what the data meant, and to see if they were consistent with their experience. This elicited new perspectives and provided a chance for participants to reflect on previous responses. Data collection at more advanced stages of a grounded theory study becomes more structured as the research becomes more focused (Dey, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref69">4</reflink>]). The purpose of integrating data from the previous phases into this final round of data collection was to confirm and further enrich emerging patterns, and harden the theoretical categories in the coding procedure.</p> <p>This session was also a unique opportunity to have students from different geographies in Thailand mix and share experiences as one cohort, rather than as discrete groups. Guided by the conceptual framework, this mixed session gave the researchers an instrument to observe the discursive strategies by which the participants engage with the questions and with each other in the joint format, and to see whether the participants spoke with a unified or divergent voice.</p> <p>Data was collected during lockdown due to the global pandemic; therefore, the focus groups were conducted via Zoom. This also made the mixed focus group possible, as travelling across geographies for an in-person session was neither practical nor feasible. Some in-depth interviews were conducted in person, lockdown restrictions allowing.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-10">Analysis and presentation</hd> <p>The data from each phase of the procedure was transcribed and subjected to three rounds of coding. Firstly, the transcriptions were subjected to an initial round of In-Vivo coding, with the researchers highlighting excerpts that resonated with the objectives of the study. The In-Vivo codes were then categorised into themes that emerged consistently across the data (Saldaña, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref70">35</reflink>]). The themes were then grouped with the corresponding objective. At this point, we could assess where responses were particular to an objective, or in other instances where they overlapped objectives (Miles et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref71">27</reflink>]). Four themes had pronounced relevance and are presented in the following section. They include <emph>The Importance of English, Openness, Status</emph> and <emph>Cultural Change</emph>. The data collected from each instrument was analysed independently to identify any unique distinctions associated with geography. Participants are frequently quoted in their own words, and they are identified as <emph>Bangkok-based</emph> or <emph>rural-based</emph> participants. The entire data collection was then aggregated and analysed as a whole in order to identify a voice representative of the generational cohort (an adapted method described in Ferguson, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref72">8</reflink>]; Ferguson & Konstanz [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref73">9</reflink>]). We claim the results as follows represent authentic voices, with important insights to be engaged in the subsequent Discussion.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-11">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0175415397-12">Importance of English</hd> <p>While there is almost universal agreement among the participants that English is important to learn, its practical use varies widely. For most, English is not used in the home, nor is it used commonly among friends. In day-to-day Thai life, English is not important, with the exception of for two Bangkok-based participants. One has a mixed family, and English was highly valued in the home. The participant also had expatriate neighbours, and English was used. Another participant's mother had lived in America for a period of time, so English was frequently spoken in the home growing up.</p> <p>'Kids in the centre', says one Bangkok-based participant, 'are usually more motivated when it comes to learning and stuff, because they see it [English] in their future'. She goes on to say: 'But for kids in the rural areas, they probably don't see that many examples in their life.' A rural-based student affirms this: 'My province does not have great attractions, so the only chance that I have to speak English is in the classroom.' While English is not widely seen as important in Thai life, it is recognised and reinforced by family as necessary in school, and key to improving employment prospects, especially in tourist destinations. 'In parts of the provinces', says one rural-based student, 'English is important because the main economy in Thailand is tourism.'</p> <p>Several participants noted that their first encounters with English were through American cartoons and movies. They also perceived American entertainment to be superior to Thai shows. 'All of the fun stuff was in English', one Bangkok-based participant said. 'The western cartoons are more advanced compared to Thailand. Ever since <emph>Titanic ...</emph> Leonardo DiCaprio looks pretty cool. Maybe those stars are such a role model to me, I guess.' Another student said she only consumes English-language media and entertainment 'like the lifestyle books that I read, humour, memes, comedy, stuff like that. I'm more confident to listen or to use them in English rather than Thai.'</p> <p>Many participants express greater trust in English-language content. One Bangkok-based participant said that the most useful information is published in English. She says, 'Even if I try to find in Thai, they usually are really obscure'. Reliability and credibility are associated with English-language content. 'When I want to get some information, most of the time I use English to search for information', says a rural-based participant. 'My parents can't use English. When they search for something, it's always in Thai. There are some limitations for them.'</p> <p>For Bangkok-based participants, the importance of English is more immediate, as besides being a tourist hub, the city is also the one major urban centre where international events, such as school competitions and other entertainments, are frequently held. The value of English is intensified in this cosmopolitan city. It is a source of frustration for one rural-based participant: 'I have so many friends who are currently studying in Bangkok, and they, you know they get the chance to participate in many events that are located in Bangkok. And most of the time, those events don't come to us, in Chiang Rai.'</p> <p>All participants express pride in their ability to speak English. It is a personal accomplishment, and it is a skill they work to improve. It is also a source of family pride. Parents are proud of the fact that their children can speak English with foreigners. 'To me, it doesn't really matter', says one Bangkok-based participant about how they can speak English, 'but to them [parents], because they couldn't really access this kind of education or speak English, they are proud to have someone in the family who is able to do it'.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-13">Openness</hd> <p>Some participants associate Thai culture with politeness and formality. The Bangkok-based participant previously mentioned who comes from a mixed family relates this:</p> <p>When I meet someone who was brought up in a family that is really about Thainess, that restrictiveness and conservativeness, they are very respectful. I like that about them. But I also feel a little like, sad, because they have to grow up in a really restrictive environment.</p> <p>Politeness is described by some as core to their cultural identity, regardless of the language they speak. One rural-based participant says: 'When we speak English, we always concern about politeness. I think it's because of Thainess. Every time I speak to a teacher or anyone I've just met, I always ask "is my English polite enough?"' But then, values like politeness are seen as restrictive. Another rural-based participant says that 'in Thai education, freedom is limited, so this generates conflicts between the international world and Thainess'.</p> <p>Several students recounted distinct experiences between Thai teachers and international teachers. 'The English teachers were always kind to me, compared to the Thai teachers,' says one Bangkok-based participant. 'The Thai teachers were kind of mean, actually. They have that perception of the rules they have to follow.' Another Bangkok-based participant says that in Thailand, 'following orders is normal. But in this day, for us English speakers that are exposed to foreigners, they always ask your opinion. What do you think? Express yourself more.' A rural-based participant shares this sentiment. They can be more expressive in English than they can be in Thai: 'When we are surprised, we will shout <emph>Oh God! Oh Shit!</emph> Like Americans.'</p> <p>While participants express value in Thai politeness, some still see it as problematic for learning. According to one Bangkok-based participant, 'international ideas or ideology is really more like about expressing yourself or to speak up. But in Thai, it covers all of this up.' There is some difficulty reconciling this tension between Thainess and their experience in international education. One rural-based student suggests: 'I don't think Thainess can go with international studying. Because if we forget how Thai we are, so what are we then?'</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-14">Status</hd> <p>Thai people see English speakers as superior over other people who don't know English. It's a language that is really dominant around the world. It's the language that the colonizers use ... so it feels like if you know it, then you must be so powerful. You must be very knowledgeable to get an education based on English.</p> <p>Participants agree that English, and English-language education, is associated with higher status and prestige in Thailand, as stated above by a Bangkok-based participant. Growing up, one rural-based student said: 'People perceived me as the most sophisticated student in class just because I am the best student in English class. All of them considered me as a sophisticated person.' Another Bangkok-based student said that 'we in the English program, we got a lot more privileges', over those in Thai programmes. If one studies in a Thai programme, it suggests that the family 'doesn't have enough money to support you to attend a like, bilingual school that has English teachers'. A student from the rural-based university described her intention to be an Education major at another university, but decided against it because it was not an international programme. If she had followed her first choice, she would have worried that she 'wouldn't get to know more about English enough'.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-15">Cultural change</hd> <p>'Because studying here with the international community', one rural-based participant says, 'you meet more people with different cultures. A lot of people might think if we adapt western culture, we might lose our identity, our traditions. But I think that's wrong.' Another rural-based participant echoes this: 'Internationalised education doesn't only bring us academic knowledge, but also brings us the internationalised society.' The student goes on to say:</p> <p>Because I've learned English, I know that England has a monarchy. But the monarchy is still equal to people. Because I've learned English, I'm interested in English history, because of international education.</p> <p>Several participants express values for fairness and freedom of expression, which they attribute to international education. One Bangkok-based student recalled his high school Thai teachers who would lecture them:</p> <p>They would talk about the English teachers, and say that they are too nice. The Thai teacher would say that the English Program students lack respect, lack Thainess. They would say that the English teachers change us, blah blah, blah. But thinking about it, it did make us different. My English Program was the first generation in the school. So I was the first class that had an English programme, so yes, I think it does bring change in the culture.</p> <p>As a result, some participants feel somewhat at odds with their culture. Parents think they are less polite because they are more opinionated and outspoken. 'I think that I'm more confident', says one Bangkok-based participant. 'But for my parents, they sent their kids to the international school or university because they just want their children to be able to speak English.'</p> <p>Reflecting more generally, some students are conscious of wider social implications. According to one rural-based participant, 'most social movements usually start in the West. And we kind of adapt those strategies in our society.' Another rural-based student continues: 'We would like to be like those people from developed countries ... [I]t will make a lot of old people get angry or get upset because they are not used to this kind of manner.'</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-16">Discussion</hd> <p>A key observation from the discourse analysis is that there was little observable bias based on geography among this student cohort. The only distinction, which is a predictable one, is that there is greater access and opportunity for using English in Bangkok than there is in the provinces. This is a source of frustration among the rural-based participants. However, it does not present here as cultural bias in terms of urban sophistication and rural backwardness. These long-observed cultural prejudices did not present in this study, as they did among university executives reported in Ferguson ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref74">8</reflink>]). However, as all of the participants grew up and studied in international programmes, using English as a medium of instruction, they expressed a similar voice in tone and substance, which produced unique findings for the three principle research objectives discussed below.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-17">Motivations and uses for English in different contexts in Thailand</hd> <p>Among this generational cohort, English is uniformly valued, even if its importance and necessity vary. Due to disparities in terms of access and opportunity between Bangkok and the provinces, there are differences in the ways urban and rural students perceive the importance of English (<emph>'those events don't come to us, in Chiang Rai'</emph>). Bangkok is a cosmopolitan city, where English is commonly used and international events are held, so using English is a part of life. For the rural-based students, English is used only for academics, with the exception of those who may encounter tourists. It is also important for entertainment and media consumption. They associate English-language pop culture with being cool (<emph>'all of the fun stuff was in English'</emph>). Also, they tend to believe that English-language media content is reliable. Regardless of apparent disparities in opportunity, all of the participants perceive that English is important to their futures, and an overall benefit to their lives. It is also a point of pride among their families that they can speak English and communicate with foreigners, not only because it demonstrates the result of their learning. It symbolises an advancement for their children as they can associate with English-speaking people.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-18">Status of English as a symbol of sophistication and class</hd> <p>English is often associated with power and sophistication. In one instance, a participant described expressing Thai manners through English (<emph>'Is my English polite enough?'</emph>). But more commonly, participants associated English with freedom of expression, whereas they associated Thai language with rules and formality. There is an awareness of English as a colonial artefact (<emph>'it's the language that the colonisers use'</emph>), but it is not viewed by the participants as imperialistic. In other words, they do not perceive English as a cultural threat by an imperial hegemon to Thai life. Alternatively, English is perceived as a language that expresses power, but within a very particular Thai cultural framework. This paradoxical nuance is re-enforced in schools and universities, among those in Thai and international colleges. Students who speak English, and those who are in international programmes, apparently enjoy special status in the school culture (<emph>'we in the English program, we got a lot more privileges'</emph>). This is a vivid illustration of how one cultivates Western symbols for the elevation of one's position within Thai society. The discursive construct places Thai programmes as ordinary and the international programmes as privileged, bequeathing students with social standing. This is a point of some demonstrable angst among the participants. While they acknowledge that they gain social capital from speaking English, they resist distinguishing themselves as superior. We interpret this discomfort as illustrative of a paradox hard to reconcile among a generational cohort who seeks to move beyond old prejudices (<emph>'if we forget how Thai we are, so what are we then'</emph>).</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-19">Identity formation and social change as a result of international education</hd> <p>English is not just a skill to learn. Its acquisition comes with a set of values according to the participants. Consistently, students associated Thai education as restrictive, formal and even precarious (<emph>'the Thai teachers were kind of mean, actually'</emph>). In contrast, English programmes are described as fun and free. This discursive binary is well entrenched among our participants. Moreover, it reflects a preference, not only academic but also ideological. The student-centred approaches they experienced in English classes valued expression and autonomy (<emph>'for us English speakers that are exposed to foreigners, they always ask your opinion. What do you think?'</emph>). They have assimilated values such as freedom of expression and individualism, which seemingly conflict with other areas of Thai life; this includes opinions about sacred institutions like the monarchy, which is strictly protected by stringent speech laws in Thailand ('<emph>I know that England has a monarchy. But the monarchy is still equal to people'</emph>). On the one hand, the participants invoke the binary of Thai versus English, restriction versus expression. But on the other, they struggle to reconcile their own sense of cultural self.</p> <p>They simultaneously express pride and frustration with Thai culture. They reflect on how international education has shaped their worldview, to some dismay of their families (<emph>'it will make a lot of old people get angry'</emph>), but that does not change the fact that they are Thai. Instead it reflects that what it means to be Thai may be changing, as rigid discursive formulations of cultural identity are apparently de-stabilised by processes like internationalisation.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-20">Conclusion</hd> <p>The results reported here are limited to the voices featured in this qualitative study. Other contexts and stakeholders, including teachers and lecturers, would add other dimensions. Also, we ought not overstate the argument that internationalisation and English-language education alone have changed young Thais. This generational cohort has witnessed the evolution of internet technology and the revolution of mobile devices. They have lived through two political coups d'état, which were culturally and socially divisive. They also saw the death of King Rama IX, who had reigned for 70 years, and was widely seen as a stabilising force in the country. These events, global and domestic, are surely formative in the lives of this generation, for which further inquiry would provide a more complete picture.</p> <p>That said, we derive three conclusions from this grounded theory research study. First, we would argue that the 1999 Act was effective in achieving some of its aims, but maybe not by the mechanisms it sought to implement. The embedded culture of tradition and hierarchy in Thai education remains. However, de-centralisation and institutional autonomy led to widespread internationalisation at all levels of Thai education, for reasons of economic solvency rather than modernisation. So whether by design or by accident, the Act set in motion a popular trend towards international education and programming, which our participants were the first generational cohort to experience.</p> <p>The second conclusion is that internationalisation produced a schism in the system. Students internalised the Thai/international binary, associating one with formality and another with freedom, and thereby gravitating to international education because there, they have permission to express themselves. This has implications beyond academics, as the values they associate with international education transfer to other areas of public life.</p> <p>The third conclusion is the quandary of labels. The neo-colonial paradoxes of Thai pride and independence against Western modernity and civilisation persist. The participants are frustrated by narrow constructions of Thainess, connoting stereotypes of identity. They recognise the privilege and status they gain from their international education within Thai culture; however, they actively and discursively strive to move beyond reductionist constructions of Thai versus international, urban versus rural, rich versus poor. Thai identity is a point of pride, and our participants are expanding the possibilities for what it means. If these results are evidence, the 1999 Act likewise expanded the possibilities for what education looks like in Thailand, and set the trajectory of educational development in the country going forward.</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-21">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <hd id="AN0175415397-22">Availability of data and materials</hd> <p>The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. This is to ensure that confidentiality and anonymity of the participants featured in this study is protected.</p> <ref id="AN0175415397-23"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref42" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Baker, W. (2012). English as a lingua franca in Thailand: Characterisations and implications. Englishes in Practice, 1 (1), 18 – 27.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref43" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Buripakdi, A. (2012). On professional writing: Thai writers' views on their English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22 (2), 245 – 264. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2012.00311.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref44" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Chamcharatsri, P. B. (2013). Perception of Thai English. The Journal of English as an International Language, 8 (1), 21 – 36.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref69" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Dey, I. (2007). Grounded theory. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 80 – 94). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref48" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Dhanasobhon, S. (2006). English language teaching dilemma in Thailand. <ulink href="http://www.curriculumandinstruction.org/index.php?lay=show&ac=article&Id=539134523&Ntype=7">http://www.curriculumandinstruction.org/index.php?lay=show&ac=article&Id=539134523&Ntype=7</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref17" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Ferguson, M. R. (2015). Learn by yourself together: Getting Thai students in the door for self-access language learning. Asian EFL Journal, 84, 48 – 65.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref57" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Ferguson, M. R. (2018). Simulacra, simulation, and the internationalization of higher education in Thailand. Thammasat Review, 21 (1), 71 – 92. https://doi.org/10.14456/tureview.2018.4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Ferguson, M. R. (2021). Internationalizing higher education with Thainess: a narrative case study of a rural-based university in Thailand. International Journal of Leadership in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2021.1882702</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref73" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Ferguson, M. R. & Konstanz, D. A. (2022). Young people, big voices, Bangkok Noi: A participatory street photography project for connecting youth to a traditional community in a changing Bangkok. Journal of Cultural Geography, 39 (2), 272 – 292. https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2021.1998993</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Foley, J. A. (2005). English in ... Thailand. RELC Journal, 36 (2), 223 – 234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688205055578</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fry, G. W. (2002, September 2-5). The evolution of educational reform in Thailand. Paper presented at the Second International Forum, Education Reform: Key factors in effective Implementation,</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Graham, R., King, R., & Bailes, J. (2000). The value relevance of accounting information during a financial crisis: Thailand and the 1997 decline in the value of the baht. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 11 (2), 84 – 107. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-646X.00057</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hallinger, P., & Kantamara, P. (2000). Educational change in Thailand: Opening a window onto leadership as a cultural process. School Leadership & Management, 20 (2), 189 – 205. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430050011425</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hallinger, P., & Lee, M. (2011). A decade of education reform in Thailand: Broken promises or impossible dream? Cambridge Journal of Education, 41 (2), 139 – 158. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2011.572868</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hallinger, P., Piyaman, P., & Viseshsiri, P. (2017). Assessing the effects of learning-centered leadership on teacher professional learning in Thailand. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 464 – 476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.07.008</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hayes, D. (2010). Language learning, teaching and educational reform in rural Thailand: An English teacher's perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 30 (3), 305 – 319. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2010.495843</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kanjananiyot, P., & Chaitiamwong, C. (2018). The internationalization of Thai higher education over the decades: Formidable challenges remain! In G. Fry (Ed.), Education in Thailand: An old elephant in search of a new mahout. Education in the asia-pacific region: Issues, concerns and prospects <fronttag class="backTag" contenteditable="false"> source</fronttag> (Vol. 42, pp. 271 – 321). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7857-6_11</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kantamara, P., Hallinger, P., & Jatiket, M. (2006). Scaling-up educational reform in Thailand: Context, collaboration, networks, and change. Planning and Changing, 37 (1), 5 – 23.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kuhonta, E. M. (2003). The political economy of equitable development in Thailand. American Asian Review, 11 (4), 69 – 108.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lao, R. (2015). A critical study of Thailand's higher education reforms: A culture of borrowing. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lathapipat, D. (2013). The influence of family wealth on the educational attainments of youths in Thailand. Economics of Education Review, 37, 240 – 257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.07.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lathapipat, D. (2016). Inequality in education and wages. In P. Phongpaichit & C. Baker (Eds.), Unequal Thailand: Aspects of Income, Wealth, and Power (pp. 43 – 54). Singapore : NUS Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lavankura, P. (2013). Internationalizing higher education in Thailand: Government and university responses. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17 (5), 663 – 676. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315313478193</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lounkaew, K. (2013). Explaining urban-rural differences in educational achievement in Thailand: Evidence from PISA literacy data. Economics and Education Review, 37, 213 – 225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.09.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Macnaghten, P., & Myers, G. (2007). Focus groups. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 65 – 79). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Methitham, P., & Chamcharatsri, P. B. (2011). Critiquing ELT in Thailand: A reflection from history to practice. Journal of Humanities, Naresuan University, 8 (2), 57 – 68. https://<ulink href="http://www.academia.edu/">www.academia.edu/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4 th ed.). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Muensorn, A., & Tepsuriwong, S. (2009). Vocabulary learning strategies by Thai primary school students. rEflections, 12, 12 – 24. https://<ulink href="http://www.tci-thaijo.org/">www.tci-thaijo.org/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National News Bureau of Thailand (NNT). (n.d.). The twelve core values for a strong Thailand. <ulink href="http://122.155.92.12/nnt%5fen/Core%5fValues/">http://122.155.92.12/nnt%5fen/Core%5fValues/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Noom-Ura, S. (2013). English-teaching problems in Thailand and Thai teachers' professional development needs. English Language Teaching, 6 (11), 139 – 147. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n11p139</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Office of the National Education Commission (Thailand). (1999). National education act of B.E 2542. https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Thailand184.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Phan, L. H. (2017). Transnational education crossing 'Asia' and 'the West': Adjusted desire, transformative mediocrity, neo-colonial disguise. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315759098</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Phongpaichit, P., & Baker, C. (2016). Introduction: Inequality and oligarchy. In P. Phongpaichit & C. Baker (Eds.), Unequal Thailand: Aspects of income, wealth, and power (pp. 1 – 31). NUS Press Pte Ltd. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1xxzt4.7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, H. R. H. (2018). History and development of Thai education. In G. Fry (Ed.), Education in Thailand: An old elephant in search of a new mahout. Education in the asia-pacific region: Issues, concerns and prospects (Vol. 42, pp. 271 – 321). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7857-6_1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. (2nd ed.). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sangnapaboworn, W. (2018). The evolution of education reform in Thailand. In G. Fry (Ed.), Education in Thailand: An old elephant in search of a new mahout. Education in the asia-pacific region: Issues, concerns and prospects (Vol. 42, pp. 517 – 554). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7857-6_21</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Silverman, D. (2011). Interpreting qualitative data: A guide to the principles of qualitative research (4th ed.). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Simpson, J. (2011). Integrating project-based learning in an English language tourism classroom in a Thai university [ Doctoral dissertation, Australian Catholic University]. ACU Research Bank. https://doi.org/10.4226/66/5a961e4ec686b</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, K., & Davies, J. (2010). Qualitative data analysis. In L. Dahlberg & C. McCraig (Eds.), Practical Research and Evaluation : A Start-to-Finish Guide for Practitioners (pp. 145 – 158). Los Angeles, USA : Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446268346</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Suyaprom, S., & Manmee, T. (2018). Education Reform in Thailand 4.0: A True Story or a Soap Opera. Asian Political Science Review, 2 (2), 88 – 95. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3304838</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tandamrong, A., & Parr, G. (2022). Negotiating learner-centered education as a national mandate: A case study of EFL teachers in Thai universities. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1 – 17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2022.2025543</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Winichakul, T. (2000). The quest for "sivilai": A geographical discourse of civilizational thinking in the late nineteenth and early twentieth-century Siam. Journal of Asian Studies, 59 (3), 528 – 549. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911800014327</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Winichakul, T. (2010). Coming to terms with the West: Intellectual strategies of bifurcation and post-Westernism in Siam. In D. Chakrabarty (Ed.), The ambiguous allure of the West (pp. 135 – 151). University of Hong Kong Press: Hong Kong.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wongsothorn, A., Hiranburana, K., & Chinnawongs, S. (2002). English language teaching in Thailand today. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22 (2), 107 – 116. https://doi.org/10.1080/0218879020220210</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wongsurawat, W. (2011). Education reform and the academic performance of public and private secondary school students in Thailand. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 10 (1), 17 – 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-010-9093-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yunibandhu, R. (2004). Problems faced by Thai students making the transition from the Thai school system to the international school system. Chulalongkorn University. https://doi.nrct.go.th/ListDoi/listDetail?Resolve_DOI=</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Matthew Robert Ferguson and Panya Lekwilai</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref70"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1412384
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: By Design or by Accident: The Legacy of Thailand's 1999 Education Reform and the Cultural Consequences of Internationalization
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Matthew+Robert+Ferguson%22">Matthew Robert Ferguson</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3684-6684">0000-0003-3684-6684</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Panya+Lekwilai%22">Panya Lekwilai</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Cambridge+Journal+of+Education%22"><i>Cambridge Journal of Education</i></searchLink>. 2024 54(1):1-17.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 17
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Change%22">Educational Change</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Global+Approach%22">Global Approach</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Influences%22">Cultural Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept%22">Self Concept</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+%28Second+Language%29%22">English (Second Language)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Second+Language+Learning%22">Second Language Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Students%22">College Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Attitudes%22">Student Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Usage%22">Language Usage</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22International+Education%22">International Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Policy%22">Educational Policy</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Thailand%22">Thailand</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Thailand+%28Bangkok%29%22">Thailand (Bangkok)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/0305764X.2023.2230170
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0305-764X<br />1469-3577
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The National Education Reform Act of 1999 sought to modernise Thai education at all levels. The core reforms included teacher training, to shift to student-centred pedagogy; de-centralisation of school and university administration; and integration of communication technologies. Among subsequent developments was the push for internationalising education. Two decades later, the children of 1999-2000 are graduating from university. The participants in this qualitative study grew up in international programmes, and are also now graduating from university. In this study, the findings suggest that Thai education is still defined by structural tradition. However, our participants express strongly held values about freedom of expression and individuality, which they associate with their internationalised experience. The results suggest a tension between cultural identity and the beliefs that our participants assimilated in international programmes. The results also provide reflections about the achievements of the 1999 Act, even if they were not directly achieved by the policy instruments it articulated.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1412384
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1412384
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/0305764X.2023.2230170
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 1
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Change
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Global Approach
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cultural Influences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English (Second Language)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Second Language Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Usage
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: International Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Policy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Thailand
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Thailand (Bangkok)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: By Design or by Accident: The Legacy of Thailand's 1999 Education Reform and the Cultural Consequences of Internationalization
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Matthew Robert Ferguson
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Panya Lekwilai
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0305-764X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1469-3577
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 54
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Cambridge Journal of Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1