EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE: WHAT EFFECT DOES IT HAVE ON THE EFL CLASSROOM?

Steven Graham Language Center

Udon Thani Rajabhat University shed_chelsea@hotmail.com

Abstract This paper looks at work conducted by the Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) and the influence it has over the way Thai teachers of English approach the teaching of English in Thailand. ONESQA has produced standards and key performance indicators for both basic and higher education. This paper concentrates on higher education and highlights problem areas where the author perceives there may be conflict between personal aims of individual teachers and the good and benefit of the teaching establishment and students. Suggestions are put forward to adapt existing external quality control measures to make internal quality control within higher educational establishments more relevant to tertiary providers of education and the diversified careers that Thai teachers of English face today. Introduction Thailand’s higher education can be traced back to King Chulalongkorn who saw the need for reform and modernisation in government bureaucracy and who incorporated elements from the west into the Thai education system. In 1917, the first law school, followed by a medical school, government administration school and an engineering school were officially amalgamated to form Chulalongkorn University. Since this time, there have been three specific periods of Thai higher education history, the Early Modernisation Period (1889-1931), The Post Revolution Period (1932-1949) and the Development Planning Period (1950 to date). The current period has seen planned development in five or six year economic plans leading to an enormous expansion in Thailand’s education system. According to Komolmas (1999), recent development plans from 1992 to 2007 have five competencies:

1. Excellence 2. Equity 3. Efficiency 4. Internationalisation of higher education 5. Privatisation of higher education

Whilst reflecting on the need for a global approach to increase Thailand’s competitive edge, Komolmas (1999) reports comments made by Mr. Anand Panyarachun, a

1

former Prime Minister, who laments on the crisis facing the Thai higher education system during celebrations to mark the 22nd anniversary of the foundation of the Ministry of University Affairs. He highlights:

1. Low academic standards, lower than those of Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

2. Graduates have poor command of the English language. 3. Lack of right understanding of basic concept of democracy among the

faculty, staff and students. 4. Faculty members being narrow minded cannot cooperate together. 5. Though the university is a community of scholars but the faculty have

slavish mentality. The National Education Act of 1999, Section 47 clearly states that a system of quality assurance comprising of internal and external systems be instigated for all levels of education. To this end, the establishment of the Office of National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) was promulgated by Royal Decree and became operational in November 2000. The Director of ONESQA, the eminent Dr. Somwung Pitiyanuwat, has for the last seven years been working tirelessly in order to objectively measure Thailand’s schools against key performance criteria. Last year in an interview with the Learning Post, Bangkok Post (Johnson 2006), Dr. Pitiyanuwat announced that 75% of Thailand’s 40,258 schools (of which 272 were higher education institutions) visited were in a “qualitative coma” and that results showed that students, “lack creative thinking and display no thirst for knowledge.” This situation is in direct contrast to Paris (1994) who informs us that schools should be producing critical thinkers with generic skills and competences, people who are problem solvers. In the 1980s before the idea of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) had reached Thailand, English language teaching could best be summed up by Saengboon (2004) who recounts how grammar translation and audio-lingual methods of instruction were de rigueur and it was only when he was a senior majoring in teaching English and French as foreign languages did he realise that he had not any exposure to “real” English when undertaking a speaking course run by a native speaker. CLT is arguably the most common method in use around the world today; however it is debatable as to whether it is the most appropriate for Thailand. According to Wongsothorn et al. (1996) cited in Saengboon (2004), current methods adopted by Thai EFL teachers include the communicative approach with an “eclectic orientation.” The Ministry of Education produced a document entitled Road Map and Measures for Expediting Education Reform in Thailand (Office of the Permanent Secretary for Education 2005) where it laid out a plan of action for the years ahead. Of particular interest was the pledge to, “Strengthen higher education institutions, allowing flexibility and accountability in their management systems.” This was further enhanced by the promise of the revamping of “monitoring and evaluation systems.” Professor Joann Crandell stated in ThaiTESOL Focus (Keyuravong 2002) that the focus on grammar in English instruction in Thailand was a common flaw as the

2

demand for English has moved away from the need to concentrate on verb tense in order to study to read texts. She emphasised the need for programs to adapt. Quality assurance implemented correctly is in a position to provide standards and Key Performance Indicators (KPI) in order to improve what Kells (1995) cited by Billing (2004) refers to two current trends in national evaluation schemes:

1. Schemes move towards more internally driven concerns, putting more emphasis on self evaluation, self-regulatory activity and the infrastructure for it.

2. Schemes become less related to government influence, and more related to improvement, management and strategy, with more feedback from clients.

This paper will concentrate on these two trends and discuss how ONESQA with its external assessment using standards and KPI can influence the internal assessment of higher education institutions with a view to guiding teachers in assessment practice and the promotion and assessment of relevant teaching and learning methodologies for Thailand today. Quality Assurance in Education For some educational commentators it is a chicken and egg scenario. Which comes first, internal or external quality assurance? Millns (2004) insists that the majority of management systems, as well as improving value added and client satisfaction, try to meet other objectives such as meeting external standards and supporting professional development and continuous improvement. The British Army and the Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI) have adopted the Systems Approach to Training (Mellor’s Loop), detailed at length by Graham (in press).

Fig. 1 Systems Approach to Training

(Graham in press)

3

The main consideration by the British army as to why this was to be the chosen method of training was that it was deemed the most effective for the least cost. Whilst at first glance this system may seem inappropriate for civilian education requirements, once the military training terminology has been adapted to mainstream education language, this system provides a recognised process of internal and external assessment leading to the uniformity that is so important for military training as well as in assessment in civilian life. Total Quality Management (TQM) has been touted by Kimball (2004) and Pickering (1999) as a model taken from business for education quality assurance and the use of a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis is a way to measure where a school’s strategy is at the present time and is an effective way to measure key marketing competencies and has been investigated by Thomas (2003) and Wattananimitkul (2002). Both TQM and SWOT tend to be very customer/client orientated and it is the author’s opinion that there are more that should be considered when quantifying external assessment of a national education system. One of the easiest Quality Assurance Chains is that of the National Vocational Qualification in the United Kingdom. This reporting process starts with the Industry Lead Body overseeing the National Council for Vocational Qualifications, who in turn send out External verifiers to assess the Internal Verifiers who have assessed the Assessors who in turn have assessed the candidates.

Fig. 2 NVQ/GNVQ Quality Assurance Chain

(Ollin and Tucker 1994) When considering the characteristics that can be considered indicators of the quality of an educational establishment, it would be prudent to consider those put forward by Morris (1994) cited by Richards (2001):

1. There are clearly stated educational goals. 2. There is a well planned, balanced and organised program that meets

the needs of the students. 3. Systematic and identifiable processes exist for determining educational

needs in the school and placing them in order of priority.

4

4. There is a commitment to learning, and an expectation that students will do well.

5. There is a high degree of staff involvement in developing goals and making decisions.

6. There is a motivated and cohesive teaching force with team spirit. 7. Administrators are concerned with the teachers’ professional

development and are able to make the best use of their skills and experience.

8. The schools programs are regularly reviewed and progress towards their goals evaluated.

With these eight areas in mind, Richards (2001) explains how quality can become the focus of an educational establishment by concentrating on eight areas of interest.

1. A sense of mission. 2. A strategic plan. 3. Quality Assurance mechanisms 4. A sound curriculum 5. Flexible organisational framework 6. Good internal communications 7. Professional treatment of teachers 8. Opportunities for teacher development

Most, if not all tertiary educational establishments will have a mission statement; however, how many will carry the ethos of the statement through to the classroom? Wattananimitkul (2002) conducted a study into the mission statements of universities based on SWOT analysis. There is a need for further research as to whether the mission statement is truthfully carried through to the classroom. For this to happen correctly, a strategic plan based on the mission statement with built in quality assurance mechanisms is required to ensure a sound curriculum which can be modified and updated regularly using a good flexible organisational framework which results in good internal communications, the professional treatment of teachers and the opportunity for teacher development. Maxwell-Hyslop (1999) states that self-assessment can be a motivating force behind classroom action research due to the environment that is created to allow reflective learning and teaching to take place. The outcome is very teacher orientated; though some educational commentators believe that the nurturing of teachers is the best investment in education as this will filter down to the students. Putting theory into practice is where the problems start. If teachers were to look at their own institution truthfully, it is more than likely that problem areas could be readily identified and examples discussed. Human nature being what it is; those not conversant with the process will hinder the progress needed to produce the best academic service possible. That is why the whole framework must be flexible so that it can be easily adapted by teachers themselves. When considering the purpose of external assurance, most teachers would be of the belief that examination results are what outsiders look to for judgements of quality. McIntosh (1996) discusses what makes an effective school putting forward what he thinks is the real value of external assessment.

5

“The more the process allows for comparison with similar institutions the better. Only by external inspection being viewed with some trepidation by the institutions is it likely to have a beneficial effect – the gains are likely to come from the process of preparation and – assuming a good quality inspection – working together on recommendations rather than from the inspection itself.”

(McIntosh 1996) By developing teacher led self evaluation models which reinforce the external system, McIntosh believes that external evaluation has a positive effect. On the other hand, there may be those who are too frightened by the thought of assessment externally and do not want to take on the extra work and responsibility involved in preparing for this process. If they do not feel part of the process, then they may resent the extra work involved in preparing for inspection. This demonstrates how important the points made by Morris (1994) and Richards (2001) figure in a successful flexible framework of Internal Assurance to assist in the External Assurance process. In addition, McIntosh (1996) has highlighted the fact that working together on the recommendations, rather than from the inspection itself would benefit the whole process. This assumes a good quality external inspection and in the case of Thailand, this involves ONESQA. Quality Assurance in the Thailand’s Higher Education System There has been a real danger that with the quantitative increase in higher education that this could lead to a qualitative decline in standards (Watson 1981). Whilst discussing the decentralisation and education reform issues in Thailand, Gamage and Sooksomchitra (2004) warned that extensive and consistent support was needed to develop real reforms in education accompanied by in service training and technical assistance for school leaders so that management and planning skills could be updated to reflect the changes in their schools and more importantly in the classrooms. For a long time, Thailand adopted a teacher centred, didactic approach to learning (Office of Commercial Services 2002), so it is perfectly understandable that the change of teaching and learning approach has been to that of student centred in line with ONESQA KPIs. Thailand’s educational development depends mainly on local literature (Office of Commercial Services 2002) and due to the lack of international input on innovative teaching methods; there has been a decline in the quality of teachers. A way to counter this has involved newer knowledge brought to Thailand, for example by university staff trained overseas, being blended with traditional Thai knowledge to form a wisdom that is indicative of Thailand and enables it to play a part in the global community (Rhea 1995). This way, it is possible to accept new methodologies but at the same time to keep the Thai identity. Adopting quality assurance measures and integrating them into daily work will not have an adverse effect on Thai culture or the classroom. There are three main areas that are of special importance when developing a quality assurance system (Office of the Education Council 2006). These are:

6

1. Formulation of the System, Criteria and Methods for Quality

Assurance. 2. Internal Quality Assurance. 3. External Quality Assessment.

The Ministry of Education published the regulations concerning the first area of concern in 2003. Internal quality assurance is the responsibility of the institution and its governing agency and is to serve as a basis for external quality assessment by implementing a system of control, audit and assessment, whereas external quality assurance is the responsibility of ONESQA. Suttiprasit (2002) details the core processes of Thai higher education institutions based on the “Input – Process – Output model. There are many differences evident when comparing the various institutions’ systems, namely the format, documentation system and control processes. Many can be identified with their own name, for example, Chulalongkorn University (CU-QA84) and there are others who use the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO).

Fig. 3 Input – Process – Output Model (Suttiprasit 2002)

External assessment is intended to be every five years; however, a yearly report is the normal time-span for institutions to forward data for consideration. There are also extra reports, for example, Self Assessment Reports (SARs) for those that are government establishments, which deals more with procedural matters. ONESQA sees the relationship between internal assurance and external assessment as follows:

7

Fig. 4 Internal Assurance and External Assessment Relationship

(Pitiyanuwat 2007a) Pitiyanuwat (2007a) states that internal quality assurance is to be regarded as part of the educational administration and must be a continuous process. This may prove difficult when teachers at educational establishments do not comprehend the relationship between external quality assurance, internal quality assurance and the classroom. Pitiyanuwat expands by hoping that teachers will understand and adopt a culture where using evaluation data from internal and external sources, to provide quality improvements in educational quality and standards becomes the norm. According to Kanjanapanyakom (2004), there needs to be a better understanding of quality assurance. Teachers should be encouraged to share knowledge, “… in order to create continuous learning and cooperation for better quality education.” The applicability of performance standards to English language teaching has been simplified by Edmundson and Fitzpatrick (1998) who emphasised two frameworks they considered crucial to the operation of performance management. Performance Standards

1. Quality 2. Quantity 3. Time 4. Cost

Performance Objectives

1. Specific 2. Measurable 3. Agreed 4. Realistic 5. Time bound

8

These frameworks can work effectively internally and externally and when looking at the work of ONESQA, could prove useful in the implementation process. In its second round of assessments, ONESQA has adopted seven Quality Standards and forty eight KPIs of which there are nine that are unique indicators. Pitiyanuwat (2007b) confirms that Quality Standards can be described as:

1. Effectiveness 2. Administration 3. Learning 4. Quality assurance

divided into the seven categories:

1. Quality of Graduates 2. Research and Innovations 3. Academic Services 4. Arts and Cultures Preservation 5. Organisation and Human Resources Development 6. Curriculum and Institution 7. Quality Assurance System

The first four standards are result orientated whilst the next three are process orientated. The author is of the opinion that the process orientated standards need to be the main area to be assimilated into internal quality assurance so that the product is of the desired level of quality. The full details of all forty eight KPIs are contained in the Appendix. The principle behind this system of quality assurance is the improvement of higher educational establishments in conjunction with educational decentralization in Thailand (Pitiyanuwat 2007c). In accordance with the National Education Act 1999, standards are to emphasize diversity and student centered learning and is the responsibility of central authorities. The development of internal quality assurance is the responsibility of the educational institutions themselves with input from communities and parents. External assessment is the responsibility of a public organization and the educational administrators are responsible for how the outcomes are to be used. White (1998) insists that quality assurance is concerned with outcomes; however, it is process quality and its effectiveness that leads to sustainable quality outcomes. The process can be seen as internal and the product external. Once this is accepted by those conducting the process, there may well be a better understanding of why it is conducted in the first place, leading to motivation to complete the tasks and better quality classroom education. Critiques of the Current System and Discussion There are many challenges facing Thai higher education establishments in its implementation of quality assurance management. Kanjanapanyakom (2004) has summarised them as follows:

9

1. An atmosphere of fear and uncertainty due to budgeting, sources of funding and academic freedom.

2. There is a need to find the balance between internal assessment and the monitoring of quality and external requirements by ONESQA.

3. Communication is needed to show how quality assurance mechanisms have resulted in changes and improvements in programs, courses and as a result, in the classroom.

4. Thai institutions need to be more international in line with globalisation if they wish to compete.

5. Computer literacy and foreign language proficiency need to be made available for the masses, not for a selected few as in the past.

6. Thai academics have yet to strike a balance between the existing form of direct in-class contact and the new form involving use information technology.

7. Facing the challenge of cost effectiveness versus quality and efficiency.

All seven challenges need to be addressed in order for the external quality assessment measures to be a resounding success. Once quality assurance has been understood by all those it affects, then the remaining challenges can be overcome with training and experience. Internal assurance will run in tandem to external assessment so that it will be possible to see a difference in the classroom as a result of measures adopted as part of quality assessment policy conducted by ONESQA. Harris (2005) reminds us that once teachers are working in an institution, it is vital that they remain motivated and that underperformance is addressed. “Jobs for life” and inactive posts do not foster an accountable work ethic. On the other hand, it is difficult to remain motivated if teachers feel that the collection of data for assessment purposes is job threatening and an extra commitment that is unpaid and in their view unwanted. Therefore it is important to make the collection of quality assurance data simple but systematic to demonstrate how the organisation is performing against pre conceived indicators (Millns 2004). Whilst describing the benefits of a Quality Management and Information and Planning System and the integration of managing quality in its totality, Shawyun (2005) emphasises that quality assurance in most institutions is seen as a “burden required by law,” and that teachers only pay “lip service” and adopt a “piecemeal approach” rather than planning it into a well prepared system of management. Only by integrating quality assurance into teachers’ daily lives will it be possible to reap the full benefits on offer. Higher education should be the main way for a country to support its national development and to create a more equitable society (Thamrongthanyawong 2005). Academic programs must comply with international standards and criteria and encourage research so as to develop knowledge compatible with both international and local contexts. A lack of basic research to enhance the institution and their students is addressed by Graham (2007) where the benefit of insight from Thai teachers of English seems to be restricted to those demonstrating their Masters and Doctoral thesis’ rather than

10

teachers being published widely for the good of the teaching community about concerns in the classroom. Increased quality assurance workload without reward may stifle those who are in the best position to research and publish. This view is echoed by Kirtikara (2005) who is of the opinion that when qualifying for an academic position such as Assistant Professor, Thai teachers submit Thai-based lecture notes and texts for academic promotion and choose to ignore research. In addition, Thai university students learn English just to pass examinations and subsequently abandon English texts altogether. Kirtikara concludes by stating that, “These self inflicted wounds and the suicidal promotion policy have yet to be abolished.” Those teachers that are task orientated and who have been trained both to deal quickly with procedural and discipline problems in the classroom and to apply certain questioning techniques in large classes are successful, according to Nitsaisook and Postlethwaite (1986). Taking this one stage further, these are the teachers who are able to embrace new education reforms and would, in the opinion of the author, be successful when it came to the integration of a quality assurance system and their work with students in the classroom.

Fig. 5 Spiral Path

(Cheng 2001)

To maximise total quality in education, Cheng (2001) considers three waves of quality assurance and comprehensively offers a series of differing models and describes a spiral path that is cyclical in nature and that would apply to most quality assurance models that contained internal assurance, external assurance and the imagination to plan for the future. An integrated mix of internal and external quality control measures taking into account what the future may bring seems prudent. At present, nobody in Thailand is responsible for internal quality control (Pitiyanuwat 2007d); however, the use of external assurance standards is seen as a good benchmark. This may not bode well for the future as internal quality assurance is a major part of the overall process and is needed so that teachers can integrate their quality assurance practices with their teaching, benefiting the students. After all,

11

internal quality assurance is the heart of quality assurance, not external quality assurance (Pitiyanuwat 2007d). To be fully professional, Thomas (2003) states that we must commit ourselves to the ethos of our educational establishment, reflecting on ourselves and the context of our institution. This, and taking into account the broader economic and political spectrum, will enable teachers to use the lessons learned during the process of both internal and external assessment to modify and enhance their classroom work. The Author Steven Graham teaches at the Language Center, Udon Thani Rajabhat University and holds an MA TESOL from Sheffield Hallam University. Having successfully completed a military career, he has recently been working in Thailand, specialising in Management, English for Specific Purposes and Teacher Training.

12

References Billing, D. (2004). International comparisons and trends in external quality

assurance of higher education: commonality or diversity? Higher Education, 47, 113-137.

Cheng, Y. C. (2001). Paradigm shifts in quality improvement in education: Three waves for the future. Paper presented at the International Forum on Quality Education for the Twenty-first Century, Beijing.

Edmundson, E., & Fitzpatrick, S. (1998). Performance standards in learning and teaching. ELT Management(25), 9-11.

Gamage, D. T., & Sooksomchitra, P. (2004). Decentralisation and school based management in Thailand. International Review of Education(50), 289-305.

Graham, S. (2007). Teachers must publish research. Retrieved 7th August 2007, from http://www.bangkokpost.net/education/site2007/ioau0707.htm

Graham, S. (in press). Writing, chemistry and the four skills: An ongoing process. Professional and Academic English.

Harris, K. (2005). Ensuring quality: managing teachers' performance. ELT Management(36), 15-17.

Johnson, B. J. (2006). School doctors make house calls. Retrieved 26th

October 2007, from http://www.bangkokpost.net/education/site2006/cvoc3106.htm

Kanjanapanyakom, R. (2004). Thai experience with quality assurance. Retrieved 28th October 2007, from http://www.fulbrightthai.org/knowledge/read.asp?id=14&type= knowledge

Kells, H. R. (1995). Building a national evaluation system for higher education: Lessons from diverse settings. Higher Education in Europe, 20(1-2), 18-26.

Keyuravong, S. (2002). English language instruction in universities is about to get an overhaul. ThaiTESOL Focus, 15(1), 10.

Kimball, J. (2004). Moving from performance appraisal to performance management. ELT Management(35), 5-8.

Kirtikara, K. (2005). One century of modernization and four decades of industrialisation of Thailand: Mental and social exclusion by education and the rise and fall of languages. ThaiTESOL Focus, 18(1), 2-13.

Komolmas, P. M. (1999). New trends in higher education towards the 21st

century in Thailand. Retrieved 20th October 2007, from http://www.journal.au.edu/abac_journal/jan99/article1.html

Maxwell-Hyslop, H. (1999). School self-assessment: How do you think we are doing? ELT Management(28), 17-18.

McIntosh, N. (1996). Maintaining high quality: Ideas that travel. ELT Management(22), 8-11.

Millns, T. (2004). Quality learning. ELT Management(35), 3-4. Morris, P. (1994). The Hong Kong school curriculum. Hong Kong: Hong

Kong University Press. Nitsaisook, M., & Postlethwaite, T. N. (1986). Teacher effectiveness research:

An example from Thailand. International Review of Education(32), 423-438.

Office of Commercial Services. (2002). Teacher development for quality

13

learning: The Thailand education reform project (No. ADB TA 3585- THA). Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.

Office of the Education Council. (2006). Education in Thailand 2005/2006. Bangkok: Office of the Education Council.

Office of the Permanent Secretary for Education. (2005). Road map and measures for expediting education reform in Thailand. Retrieved 22nd

October 2007, from http://www.onec.go.th/publication/49077/sara_49077.htm

Ollin, R., & Tucker, J. (1997). The NVQ and GNVQ Assessor Handbook (2nd

ed.). London: Kogan Page Limited. Paris, D. C. (1994). Schools, scapegoats and skills: Education reform and the

economy. Policy Studies Journal, 22(1), 10-22. Pitiyanuwat, S. (2007a). School assessment in Thailand: Roles and

achievements of ONESQA. Retrieved 23rd October 2007, from http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/96kn087727812265/?p=c22 1c5c9936642bf89053ab856526153&pi=0

Pitiyanuwat, S. (2007b). The standards and key performance indicators of external quality assurance for higher education in Thailand. Retrieved 23rd October 2007, from http://192.139.188.172/INQAAHE/INQAAHE_Papers.pdf

Pitiyanuwat, S. (2007c). The standards and key performance indicators of external quality assurance for higher education in Thailand. Retrieved 23rd October 2007, from http://192.139.188.172/INQAAHE/INQAAHE_Presentations.pdf

Pitiyanuwat, S. (2007d, 08 May). Thai QA sets new world standard and universities. Bangkok Post, p. L2.

Rhea, Z. M. (1995). Changing manifestations of wisdom and knowledge in Thailand. Prospects, 25(4), 669-682.

Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Saengboon, S. (2004). Second language acquisition (SLA) and English language teaching (ELT). PASAA, 35, 11-34.

Shawyun, T. (2005). Quality assurance and strategic implementation in educational institutions: A holistic alliance? Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia, 3(1), 24-40.

Sittiprasit, P. (2002, September). Assuring quality and standards of Thai higher education Institutions: Meeting the challenges of the education reform era. Paper presented at the Second International Forum on Educational Reform: Key Factors in Effective Implementation, Bangkok.

Thamrongthanyawong, S. (2005). Dilema and agenda on Thai higher education. Thai Higher Education Review, 3(12), 10-14.

Thomas, H. (2003). The arguments for and the meaning of quality. ELT Journal, 57(3), 234-241.

Thomas, M. (2003). Developing an institutional audit: Assessing e-learning needs in a language center. ELT Management(34), 21-27.

Watson, K. (1981). The higher education dilemma in developing countries: Thailand's two decades of reform. Higher Education(10), 297-314.

Wattananimitkul, W. (2002). Revisiting the missions and educational strategic management of universities. Retrieved 02 November 2007, from http://www.worldedreform.com/intercon2/wannarat.pdf

14

White, R. (1998). What is quality in English language teacher education? ELT Journal, 52(2), 133-139.

Wongsothorn, A., Sukamolsun, S., Chinthammit, P., Ratanothayanonth, P., & Noparumpa, P. (1996). National profiles of language education: Thailand. PASAA, 26, 89-103.

15

APPENDIX

Standards and Key Performance Indicators of External Quality Assurance for Higher Education in Thailand

Standard 1 Quality of Graduates Graduates are intellectual, capable of self-learning and self-development, as well as working with others. They possess professional skills and knowledge in addition to research skills, demonstrating the conscience and ethics of good citizens of global society. 1.1 Percentage of Bachelor graduates who can secure jobs and who can be self employed within one year. 1.2 Percentage of Bachelor graduates who work in their major field of study. 1.3 Percentage of Graduates getting their starting salaries by the standard. 1.4 Levels of satisfaction of employers, business operators and graduate users. 1.5 Number of students who graduated not more than 3 years ago who are recognized academically, professionally or ethically. Furthermore, those who receive academic awards or other awards related to the quality of graduates at the national or international level within the past 3 years. 1.6 Number of theses, dissertations or students’ academic work receiving awards at the national or international level within the past 3 years. *1.7 Percentage of articles based on the Master graduates theses that are published in proportion to the total number of the Master graduates’ theses. *1.8 Percentage of articles based on the Doctoral graduates’ dissertations that are published in proportion to the total number of the Doctoral graduates’ dissertations. Standard 2 Research and Innovation Research and innovations lead to the creation and development of highly skilled human resources, the creation and development of new bodies of knowledge which expand the borders of knowledge, and the applicability of intellectual property. They are important factors which develop the quality, effectiveness and competency of Thai people and develop Thai society into a society of learning, knowledge and wisdom, calculating a culture of utilizing knowledge in determining the trends of development as well as enhancing the country’s competitiveness. 2.1 Percentage of research and innovations published, disseminated and /or used at national and international levels in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers.

16

2.2 Amount of research and innovation funds in proportion to the total number of fulltime lecturers. 2.3 Amount of external research and innovation funds in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers. 2.4 Percentage of full-time lecturers receiving internal research or innovation funds in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers. 2.5 Percentage of full-time lecturers receiving external research or innovation funds in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers. *2.6 Percentage of research articles cited in refereed journals and national or international databases (e.g. ISI, ERIC) in proportion to the total number of fulltime lecturers. *2.7 Number of research and innovations registered as intellectual property or patented in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers within the past 5 years. Standard 3 Academic Services Academic and professional services are rendered useful and serve as reliable academic and professional resources, presenting appropriate and relevant guidelines which enhance the security and strength of society and the international community. They also promote the university’s academic and professional roles in developing a learning and knowledge society with responsibility for the public 3.1 Percentage of academic and professional service activities and projects responding to the needs of society, developing and strengthening society and the international community in proportion to the total number of full-time lectures. 3.2 Percentage of full-time lecturers serving as thesis advisors and thesis committee members in other institutions and serving as academic and professional committee members at the national level in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers. 3.3 Use of knowledge and experience derived from academic and professional services to develop teaching, learning and research. 3.4 University expenses incurred in case and in kind in providing academic and professional services to society in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers. *3.5 Number of academic and professional services centers, nationally or internationally recognized. *3.6 University revenues generated from providing academic and professional services in the name of the university in proportion to the total number of fulltime lecturers. *3.7 Level of success in providing academic and professional services according to the university’s mission.

17

Standard 4 Art and Cultures Preservation Thai identity, art, culture, wisdom and local wisdom which are parts of Thai heritage are preserved, developed, disseminated, and integrated into the teaching and learning processes, research, academic and professional services. Thai wisdom is to be created and promoted to be the foundation of the development of the body of knowledge which can be internationalized. 4.1 Percentage of activities preserving, developing and enhancing Thai identity, art and culture in proportion to the total number of full-time students. 4.2 Percentage of University expenses incurred in case and in kind in the preservation, development and enhancement of Thai identity, art and culture in proportion to the total operation budget. *4.3 Number of pieces of work resulting in the development of the body of knowledge and the creation of the standards of art and culture. *4.4 Effectiveness of the preservation, development and enhancement of Thai identity, art and culture. Standard 5 Organization and Human Resources Development Based on good governance, education is to be administered and managed with the participation of all members of the organization as well as its stakeholders. Focus is placed on decentralization, monitored by systematic and continuous policies, planning, leadership, and human resource development. Information systems are to be used in teaching, learning, research and administration with the aim of establishing academic excellence and financial security. The use of money is to be worthy, autonomous, flexible, transparent and can be audited. 5.1 University council and executives have the vision that drives the mission, and that reflects its policies and objectives, leading to the goal of good administration, with participative management style, emphasizing empowerment, transparency, and adaptability, as well as the means to sustain the institution to compete in the international arena. 5.2 Develop the institution to become a learning organization by making use of both internal and external audits. 5.3 The strategic plan is aligned with national strategies. 5.4 Sharing of both internal and external resources. 5.5 Capability of database systems for management, teaching, learning, and research. 5.6 Fixed assets in proportion to the total number of full-time students. 5.7 Operating expenses in proportion to the total number of full-time students.

18

5.8 Percentage of net income in proportion to the total operation budget. 5.9 Percentage of full-time lecturers participating in academic conferences or presenting academic works home and abroad. 5.10 Budget per head for full-time lectures’ development at home and abroad in proportion to the total number of full-time lectures. 5.11 Percentage of full-time supporting staff who received development in professional knowledge and skills at home and abroad. Standard 6 Curriculum and Instruction Curriculum are developed to be updated, flexible and relevant to the learners’ and society’s needs. The teaching and learning process focuses on the development of learners’ qualities, focusing on self-learning according to their needs and interests through the use of different teaching techniques and resources. Learning evaluation conducted in real situations and the results used for learners’ development. Human resources, budgets, infrastructure, facilities and cooperation from inside and outside the organization are pooled to organize extra-curriculum and educational activities to attain the highest level of effectiveness of educational management. 6.1 Percentage of curriculums meeting the standard criteria in proportion to the total number of curriculums. 6.2 Number of full-time students in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers. 6.3 Percentage of full-time lecturers holding Doctoral degrees or equivalent in proportion to the total number of full-time lecturers. 6.4 Percentage of full-time lecturers holding academic titles. 6.5 Compliance with professional teaching ethnics. 6.6 Learning process with emphasis on student-centered approach, and the promotion of student development. 6.7 Student’s satisfaction in teaching effectiveness and learning facilities and support. 6.8 Percentage of students participated in student development activities or projects per student. 6.9 Operating expenses in the library system, computers and information center in proportion to the total number of full-time students. Standard 7 Quality Assurance Systems Internal quality assurance means quality development, auditing and assessment. It is a part of the educational administration process that leads to the continuous

19

development of education quality and standard and serves the external quality assurance. 7.1 There exist an internal Quality Assurance system and mechanism that bring about continuous development of education quality. 7.2 Effectiveness of the Internal Quality Assurance. * unique indicator

(Adapted from Pitiyanuwat 2007b)

20