MoE’S 20-Hour Training Program:
A Devastating Requirement by Jimmy Lee

Dusit Rajabhat University, one of the institutes offering the training program, wrote:

“The Teacher and Educational Personnel Council Act (BE 2546) stipulates that teacher profession shall be a regulated profession. Thailand’s Teacher Council created the training program to equip foreign teachers teaching in schools in Thailand with knowledge and understanding of Thai culture and teacher professional code of ethics…”

Is the training program on Thai Culture and Teacher Professional Code of Ethics necessary?

I would say “yes” BUT it should NOT be a requirement of securing a teaching license, and should NOT be a costly obligation of foreign teachers. Common sense tells us that it’s quite pathetic for an educated foreign applicant who is obviously presently living in Thailand not to KNOW and UNDERSTAND basic Thai culture. He’s an “educator” for God’s sake! Knowing a foreign country’s culture doesn’t need to be a subject of any training program. I’d say giving these foreign TEACHER applicants a list of “do’s and don’ts” and probably a brochure called “Thai Culture: An Introduction” (just in case they are so dumb not to be aware of what is happening around them in Thailand) will do. And HOW, may I ask, will THAILAND’S TEACHER COUNCILORS evaluate the foreign applicants? Will it be through their common practice of administering a 100-point multiple choice type of test? Will it be a series of demonstration on how to “wai”, “wear traditional costumes”, “give and receive gifts” or “eat spicy food”? Or will a simple certificate of completion attesting that you have satisfactorily passed the training program do the trick?

Moreover, understanding a foreign country’s culture requires full community immersion. It takes time for any foreigner to truly understand a culture different from his own. A 20-hour training program is obviously not enough to learn what a foreigner needs to know OUTSIDE the training facility. It’s plain stupidity to disregard the importance of REAL LIFE experiences knowing that the foreign applicants have already been living in Thailand for a considerable time. The training program is unthought-of, impractical and useless scheme to “regulate the teaching profession in Thailand.”

Simply put it this way: Knowing and understanding other culture is NOT something that you need to study just to get a license for the job…it is something that you need to learn through experience while you are on the job.

Now the “teacher professional code of ethics” is something, again, that does not involve training. It is something that can be read ANYWHERE and then later practiced in the community. The most hilarious thing of this obtuse measure is that most of the participants are teachers themselves. Even an educator without any teaching degree knows his/her ethical boundaries…it is the ACT of a person that needed to be evaluated and not what they know. And if there are any special TEACHER ETHICAL CODES that needed to be known and understood by the foreign applicant, wouldn’t it be wise and expense-free to give this responsibility to his/her respective school?

One may find the MoE new requirements as justifiable but it should NOT be at the expense of the foreign applicant. If the idea is to ensure that foreign teachers demonstrate proper attitude towards teaching in Thailand considering the importance of cultural sensitivity, then an IN-SERVICE professional development program should take the place of that unrealistic 20-hour training program.

Will the training program on Thai Culture and Teacher Professional Code of Ethics regulate the teaching profession in Thailand?

The answer is NO.

One of the reasons these new requirements are being implemented is the goal of the MoE to “regulate the teaching profession in Thailand.” What triggered the MoE to regulate the teaching profession is their FEAR that Thai youths are being educated by a growing number of unqualified and “criminal” foreigners. The problem is the MoE seems unconsciously feels the end justifies the means. And by doing so, it is the qualified and worthy foreign educators who are being burdened with many unreasonable and unjustified strict requirements rather than the real culprits. This desperate move also shows how untrusting they are to school employers in hiring the right teachers. Therefore, the regulating of teaching profession in Thailand depends on the school’s implementation of MoE’s policies. If hiring of unqualified teachers is still being practiced by the schools then the problem lies on these schools’ employers. If hiring of unqualified teachers is a result of the high demand of teachers and/or unavailability of qualified educators then there is an irregularity in MoE’s policy making and implementing strategies.

For instance, there are so many uncertainties of MoE’s policies on hiring foreign teachers. Even some Thai employers are unaware of these NEW policies. It also appears that these NEW policies are for the chosen few. The training program, for example, remains a blur in the teaching industry: Why are foreign applicants working in some government and private universities, secondary and elementary schools exempted? Why can’t the schools administer the tests themselves? Why do some schools avail the program for only 4,000 Baht while others pay 8,000 Baht? What clear measures does MoE have in case many foreign applicants failed in the tests of “Thai culture and professional ethics” and “professional education”? Isn’t it more sensible to create a REVIEW course on Professional Education instead of a costly and impractical training program on Thai culture and professional ethics? Clearly, these MoE policy loopholes are good excuses of under the table negotiations.

In order to properly “regulate the teaching profession” in Thailand, the MoE represented by the Thailand Teacher Councilors need to identify the real issues, investigate them to document the problems, prioritize pressing concerns, and devise a very practical, sensible and effective implementing strategy. With the alarming negative MoE’s reputation, the number of qualified, competent and sincere foreign applicants wanting to teach in Thailand is dwindling especially in some public schools.

One disappointing gesture of MoE towards proper regulating of the teaching profession is the NON-STRICT implementation of compensation standard set by the MoE and the Department of Labor themselves (if there really is one) to all schools in Thailand. The “it depends on the school” attitude does not help in regulating the teaching profession. In fact, it undermines the noble profession. Imagine a qualified, competent and sincere foreign teacher receiving the same if not a lower salary of that of a skilled foreigner with no degree at all. And then a school who is simply satisfied of showing the students and their parents that it has foreign teachers will easily hire a “backpacker” who accepts a “just right” minimum salary. And the story goes on and on until it has become an accepted trend of “salary bargaining” in some schools especially those in the government. The MoE and the Labor department should impose heavy fines to these schools. The Immigration, on the other hand, should not only strictly enforce deportation of foreign applicants with no work permits but also blacklist the schools, the language centers and the manpower agencies that abuse the system.

Obviously, the MoE, the Immigration and Labor Departments are NOT gradually dealing with the real problems concerning foreign teachers and how these affect Thailand’s educational system. There is a need of these responsible offices to investigate the following claims:

a) Foreign applicants with no Bachelor degrees or teaching certificates are still allowed to teach by some “ill-budgeted” government and private schools, institutes, colleges and universities especially in rural areas. As a result, a big number of foreign “teachers” with tourist visas continue to grow. Thus further undermining the bigger goals of MoE for an improved language education, the Immigration department of eradicating nuisance foreigners, the Labor department of proper documentation of foreign workers, and the government’s tax collector of taking its rightful share from both employers and employees.

b) Some government and private schools view the processing of Non-B Visa and work permit of their foreign teachers as complicated, daunting, expensive and confusing. As a result, some resort to availing for Human Resource Agencies’ services in providing them with foreign teachers. However, most if not all of these Human Resource Agencies lurking in the city of Bangkok do not process any of their foreign teachers’ work permits. Other schools handily asked any language centers and institutes to provide them with foreign teachers. Thus the burden of processing their work permits is shifted to these “small-time” businesses. Without realizing the impact on quality education, some schools are simply happy with the idea that there are “temporary” foreign teachers working in their school while these foreign teachers may not easily care whether transfer of learning and genuine education exist. This is the consequence of the number of teacher turnovers.

c) Regulating the number and quality of foreign teachers in Thailand does not only involve strict requirements thrown at foreign applicants. It also involves the school’s strict implementation of what is legally prescribed as from foreign teachers’ qualifications to their proper salary and benefits.

d) The problem of “poor performance” of students in the English language taught by some foreign teachers is NOT the result of “unqualified” foreign teachers. School management, language curriculum, system/policies and relationship with the foreign teaching staff should also be taken into consideration. There are some schools that regard both qualified and skilled foreign teachers as merely just LABORERS and not part of the system. In fact, some foreign teachers’ ideas on curriculum design and policies in their respective schools are disregarded. In some public schools, they are told what to teach and what not to do in the classroom. ON the other hand, there others who give ALL the liberty to foreign teachers to TEACH whatever they want not considering the FLOW of learning and proper teaching techniques and strategies. Effective activities introduced by foreign teachers are also limited in the classroom. Some schools are afraid to do challenging extra-curricular activities unless it’s an English Camp.

There are probably more devastating surprises to come from the MoE and the Immigration department. If these concerned government officials won’t listen to the voice of foreign teachers, Thailand’s goal to uplift its language and general education remains a status quo.


Online References:

http://www.ajarn.com/trainingprogramforforeignteachers.htm

http://www.ksp.or.th/upload/301/files/570-8429.pdf

http://foreprof.ksp.or.th/

http://foreprof.ksp.or.th/foreign-test.pdf