Thailand first attempt to engage in comprehensive higher education reform was in the end of 1980s when the Ministry of University Affairs prepared the first 15-year Higher Education Plan, covering 1990 - 2004. The atmosphere at that time was one of economic buoyancy and international competitiveness. But during this period, the economy underwent a deep recession followed by a long recovery period. The global and regional marketplaces also suffered a dramatic transformation during this period. Thailand faces increasing economic competition from its neighbors.
A new Constitution was promulgated in 1997 and the first National Education Act (NEA) was enacted in 1999. The NEA is considered to be the country’s master legislation on education and provides a comprehensive vision for education reform. But despite several efforts over the last ten years, reform in the higher education has been largely piecemeal. Two decades later, a strong message has re-emerged about the need to overhaul Thai higher education and shift its direction to promote higher quality, efficiency and effectiveness, if the country is to move forward with renewed confidence, to evolve into a knowledge-based economy and to enhance national competitiveness in the regional and global arenas.
Over the course of last year, Government has conducted a comprehensive retrospective of higher education performance and has laid out a new vision ensconced in the Second 15-Year Long Range Plan for Higher Education (2008-2022). This plan for higher education transformation covers all key aspects of higher education management, including administrative systems, teaching and learning, research promotion and higher education finance. Its main aim is providing citizens with the skills and capabilities necessary to raise national competitiveness.
The Second 15-Year Plan consists of two major parts:
The first part covers macro scenarios and the global/local socioeconomic environment impacting Thai society and the Thai higher education system. Its areas of exploration include: labor market trends in the local economic structure, globalization, information technology development, political decentralization, concerns over conflict management/resolution, the changing role of youth in a post modern-post industrialization world and His Majesty the King’s philosophy on “sufficiency economy.”
The second part of the plan deals specifically with issues related to the higher education system: the articulation with secondary and vocational education, managing the proliferation of higher education institutes, changing university governance and administration, enhancing national competitiveness, adequately financing higher education, staff and personnel development, strengthening university networks, responding to social conflicts in Southern Thailand and higher education infrastructure development.
The current reform goals focus on expanded access and improvements in quality and relevance through a tiered service-delivery system. Higher education institutions have been categorized into 4 groups, each with distinct missions and goals: (a) Community Colleges, (b) Liberal Arts Universities, (c) Specialized/Comprehensive Universities, and (d) Research/Graduate Universities (Table 2-3). Higher education institutions are encouraged to conduct a self-assessment based on key performance indicators and classify themselves under one of these four categories. This classification system will allow higher education establishments, at least in principle, to embrace a clearly defined mission that can better serve their students. Moreover, this approach could foster a more harmonious growth in the subsector that responds to diverse national economic growth and social development needs more efficiently through specialization. Government financing will be allocated on the basis of a funding formula specific to each institutional tier.
TABLE 2-3: CATEGORIES OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS UNDER THE LONG-RANGE PLAN
Source: Ministry of Education, 2007
The Second 15-Year Plan is on one hand anchored on the principle of institutional autonomy, in order to foster institutions to develop efficient planning and management systems that are responsive to societal and individual demands and expectations. The directives and measures specified in the Second 15-Year Plan are now being translated into institutional long term development plans and yearly action plans. On the other hand, systemic performance will be enhanced through better governance structures, effective financing instruments, wellarticulated standards and efficient university networking.
This two-pronged approach is a significant innovation in higher education administration. Its ambition is to (a) expand access to a new generation of students and steer them to careers that fulfill their individual goals and national needs, (b) promote excellence in higher education service delivery that is relevant to labor market demands, (c) foster more efficient and more equitable resource allocation mechanisms, and (d) create an institutional
environment where higher education institutions are empowered to pursue their vision, within a quality assurance and accreditation framework that sets high standards and holds institutions accountable for results. The three chapters that follow provide an account of the current state of affairs along these dimensions.
No comments:
Post a Comment