Success Or Failure of the Thai Higher Education Development—Critical Factors in the Policy Process of Quality Assurance

sustainability Article Success or Failure of the Thai Higher Education Development—Critical Factors in the Policy Process of Quality Assurance Chitralada Chaiya * and Mokbul Morshed Ahmad Department of Development and Sustainability (DDS), School of Environment, Resources and Development (SERD), Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Pathumthani 12120, Thailand; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +66-831-879-358 Abstract: Understanding the factors affecting the policy process of quality assurance is important for assessing the development of higher education. Here, we used a qualitative research approach, along with an analysis of policies and a literature review, to investigate the national policy process. The factors of quality assurance relating to improving the quality of higher education and SDGs in Thailand since the introduction and implementation of a national policy on quality assurance between 1999 and 2019 were also analyzed. Content area experts in Thailand were directly interviewed, and the obtained data were analyzed in terms of the Act. Through the analysis, we identified three main processes affecting education quality assurance between 1999 and 2019; namely, policy formulation, policy implementation, and policy evaluation. Our findings reveal that, although the policy was defined as an act during the policy formulation process, its implementation and evaluation have been limited by critical factors, such as the achievement of graduates, university ranking, and the Citation: Chaiya, C.; Ahmad, M.M. country’s competitiveness. We conclude that prioritizing the quality assurance policy and facilitating Success or Failure of the Thai Higher relevant factors are essential to improving the development of higher education in Thailand. Education Development—Critical Factors in the Policy Process of Keywords: national policy; higher education; education and development; educational policy; policy Quality Assurance. Sustainability studies; SDGs 2021, 13, 9486. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su13179486 Academic Editors: Jordi Colomer 1. Introduction Feliu and Wadim Strielkowski Previous studies have suggested that a strong relationship between education and poverty paves the way for the development of the population, households, communities, Received: 16 May 2021 and social orders. Additionally, low levels of education and poor aptitude procurement Accepted: 18 August 2021 hamper economic growth, thus preventing poverty reduction (McNamara, P. et al., 2019) [1]. Published: 24 August 2021 Education adds to the development of equity and reduction of destitution. Education pro- vides individuals with knowledge and abilities, which fosters the reduction of income in- Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral equalities, allowing individuals to learn and develop aptitudes that improve their efficiency with regard to jurisdictional claims in and make them less vulnerable to risks. It has been calculated that one year of education published maps and institutional affil- increases wage income by 10% (Montenegro, C.E. and Patrinos, H.A., 2014) [2]. On the iations. other side, impoverished individuals are often powerless against adverse events occurring in adulthood. The quantity of extreme climate events and other natural catastrophes— including storms, floods, droughts, earthquakes, and landslides—is expected to rise in the near future (Lutz et al., 2014) [3]. However, equitable education expansion can decrease Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. income disparities (Abdullah et al., 2015) [4]. Accordingly, “Education for All (EFA)” was Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. proclaimed by the World Education Forum (WEF) in Dakar, Senegal, at the 2000 follow-up This article is an open access article to the emerging Sustainable Development Goals (proposed in May 2015). The UN con- distributed under the terms and sented to have the full result of the WEF as Goal 4 for the agenda 2030, which had been the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// broadest and most profound ever, with respect to education policy. At the higher education creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ level, universities have a unique position in society. There are wide variations in the world, 4.0/). and the dissemination of universities has served as a driving force in both global, national, Sustainability 2021, 13, 9486. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179486 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2021, 13, 9486 2 of 29 and local innovation, economic development, and social welfare aspects. As such, universities play a critical role in the achievement of and engagement with the SDGs. Universities have a role in educating about, innovating, and solving the problems of SDGs, creating current and future SDGs, developing systems, and demonstrating how to support bringing the SDGs to corporate governance and cross-sectoral cultures; overall, leading the way towards answering the SDGs (UNESCO, 2017) [5]. The ability of a university to recruit par- ticipants involved in future revenue and success in the labor market, provide better quality training, and better network access has been well-documented (Douglas, W., 2014) [6]. In addition, the SDG Index and Dashboards Report 2017 introduced the overall Sustainable Development Goals Score Index. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were ranked and divided into three key indicators for each target: good, medium, or poor. The report found that, although Thailand is ranked 55th out of 157 countries overall, when considering the sub-metrics from a total of 83 data sets collected, the performance indicators can be classified as consistent with the SDGs: The results were 34 good indicators, 29 moderate indicators, and 18 poor performance indicators, while two indicators were not available. For the SDG Goal 4 “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”, the net primary enrollment rate should be 98.1%, the lower secondary completion rate should be 78.4%, and the literacy rate should be 98.1% (Sachs, J. and Schmidt-Traub et al., 2020) [7]. Expanding tertiary education may promote faster technological catch-up and improve a country’s ability to maximize its economic output (Bloom, D.E., Canning, D. and Chan, K., 2006) [8] A one-year increase in education resulted in an 11% increase in income, and the private institutes average global is 9% a year (George, P. and Harry A.P.). The return on investment for social rate is 16% in low-income countries (Pradhan et al., 2018) [9] (2018) [10]. However, the quality of higher education has been shown to be a particularly vicious problem, involving policy- making, and debate over the quality of higher education has led to efforts to determine the effects of such a complex issue; in particular, relating to dealing with the nefarious problems posed by external factors such as economic growth, knowledge, rapidly changing academic work environments, diverse student groups with changing needs and expecta- tions, and governmental action agendas that define institutional funding and reputation (Krause, 2012) [11]. Regarding the importance of higher education, the growing demand for it, and educational quality issues, a revolution in the quality of higher education, called the quality revolution, has expanded over the last three decades (El-Khawas, 2013) [12]. Quality assurance is indispensable for developing higher education, providing a policy tool for bringing insights (Neave, 1998) [13]. The quality of higher education increases student learning outcomes and promotes economic development (El-Khawas, 2013) [12]. Quality assurance policies also encourage students and parents to invest in the quality of education (OECD and UNESCO, 2005) [14]. Quality assurance also promotes responsible practice in the use of public and private funding (Stenstaker and Harvey, 2010) [15]. In addition, the impact of international standards has been increasing in this era of globalization, as well as the need for transparency and public accountability. This is a new challenge for higher education, which requires a strong quality assurance system (Salmi, J. et al., 2002) [16]. For all of these reasons, models of educational quality assurance have been posed, such as European models, the United States model, and the British model. Since the end of the 20th century, every country in the world has made efforts to comply with quality assurance processes and standards, which form part of the field of basic quality assurance (Wells, 2014, p. 21) [17]. Therefore, new public policies regarding quality development have been integrated into the policy of many countries (Dill and Beerkens, 2010) [18]. Many of these countries have formulated national policies to enhance the quality of education. To guarantee the quality of education, the policies and procedures involved must contribute to the development and continuous improvement of quality. Quality assurance in higher education in Thailand started as a policy in 1999, under the National Education Act, and has been updated there- after through three legislative acts. Before it was launched, internal quality assessment Sustainability 2021, 13, 9486 3 of 29 mechanisms were created for the preparation of future quality assurance, using the index of Chiang Mai University as a guideline, in 1996 (Working Group on Educational Quality Indicator Development, 1998) [19], which were addressed in the National Education Act 1999. Recently, after two decades under

Load more