Fear of Failure with Experimentation Thai

Cultural Effects on Education

Peter J. C. Covey, MBA, TEFL
Language Center
Udon Thani Rajabhat University
Udon Thani, Thailand
E-mail: ajarnpeter@gmail.com
Thailand TESOL/Pan-Asian Consortium International Conference
January 26 - 28, 2007
Bangkok, Thailand

Abstract
In Thai culture there is a psychological barrier to experimentation, and that is called
the fear of failure. In this paper we will explore the other cultural factors that bear
upon the teacher, the strategies that the society has adopted, and then suggest
courses of action that the teacher can take to overcome some of the perceived
limitations that Thai culture tries to impose on its members. The purpose here is to
become aware of the cultural forces at play, so that the teacher can begin to work
around them in pursuit of a more effective educational environment.

Language Learning
Language is acquired by trial and error, by experimentation with sounds, structures,
words, and ideas.
The key idea is sounds. Unless you are singing, language is a sound. Consider how
babies learn language. They first of all have to hear it. Then they begin to mutter it.
They are imitating the sounds they hear. (Donart 2006).

A person must hear a language in order to learn to speak it. That is why deaf
children seldom learn to speak.
The learner must directly participate in the process. Speaking is a physical
process using the human body to make sounds. The sounds must simply be in an
acceptable order, of acceptable duration, and with acceptable variations in the voice.
There is no perfect answer, that is, there is no correct answer, only an acceptable
answer. But getting speech into the range of acceptability requires practice, and
practice means trial and error, in short experimentation.
Speaking is far less precise than writing. The speaker only needs to voice a word
within an acceptable range of tones, stress, and sounds. Great variation is permitted.
As long as the sounds are within the box then the person will be understood. If the

sounds are outside the box, then the result is nonsense. In many cases the listener is
required to perform error correction through an understanding of context.
Language is personal, immediate, and physical. The physical aspects are
mastered over time by trial and error. No one gets it perfect the first time. Many
native speakers never get it right. However, they can still communicate effectively.
So getting it perfect is perfect nonsense, because perfection is a myth.

There is no perfect in language.

There is no single correct answer.
The written language is a translation of the spoken language into symbols.
Here, the rules are far more stringent and far more deterministic. Spelling is highly
deterministic, as is grammar. Grammar becomes a factor only after all the ideas of
the speaker/writer are converted into words then strung together in a sentence.
Grammar is the finishing touch that happens at the end of a complex process.
Consider these two sentences:
1.

I go shopping yesterday.

2.

Yesterday, I go shopping tomorrow.

Sentence 1 holds a complete idea. Grammar corrections will not improve the
completeness of the idea. (Grammar adds nothing.). Sentence 2 is ambiguous;

grammar rules will do nothing to cure the defects in this sentence. (Grammar fixes
nothing.)
Teaching English grammar is a waste of time (Donart 2006).
Udon Thani Rajabhat University, Thailand
In the Language Center at Udon Thani Rajabhat University (UDRU), Udon Thani,
Thailand, we deal with adult and near-adult learners of English as a foreign language
(EFL). When they come to us they have been inculcated with the principles of Thai
culture. Furthermore, they have developed a number of strategies for dealing with
the conflicts that Thai cultural creates.
Rajabhat Universities, overall, are part of the public school system in Thailand. At our
school we draw students almost exclusively from the public primary and secondary
schools. While there are several private schools in our area, seldom do we get
students from them. In the public school system students have been exposed to
roughly 1,000 to 2,000 hours of English instruction.
We also teach students in the Extension Program. These students are more mature,
many of whom are already parents. Most of them work for a living, and a number of
them operate their own businesses.

During the summer recess, English teachers from the village schools come to the
Language Center for workshops to help them improve their teaching skills. Only
about 10% studied English as their major. About 90% studied something else. Most
common is Physical Education and Home Economics. These teachers dont speak
English, and therefore their students cannot hear English.
When UDRU students come into the Language Center, we administer a uniform
Placement Test provided by the Ellis 3.2 computer based language learning
system. That means that we have a language lab running the Ellis 3.2 software.
The lab was donated to the university by the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET).
The placement results are revealing. Students (the products of the Thai educational
system) routinely score as Beginners. With 1,000+ hours of English instruction they
should score as High Intermediate or Advanced learners. Their score profiles are
given below. Here we report on 325 students who took the test June 2006. Although
as of this writing we have tested over 2,000 students. The results reported below are
completely consistent with the larger test population.
Placement Results for 325 Students Evaluated in June 2006.

Skill

Listening
Vocabulary
Grammar

Median Median
Test
Learner
Score
Lever
Max=605 Max=12

170
215
240

3
5
5

Lowest Lowest
Test
Learner
Score
Level

95
15
130

2
1
2

Highest Highest
Test
Learner
Score
Level

385
395
385

9
9
9

Interpreting the results:

The grammar score is most revealing. The very poorest student still scored 130 while
the median score was 240. Everyone learned some grammar during their years in
primary and secondary school. However, vocabulary and listening scores tell a
different story. Some students learned grammar and almost nothing else.
Levels 2-4

Listening and Speaking: Can understand common expressions, and

questions; can grasp the main ideas from speech about familiar topics if
uncomplicated and spoken clearly and slowly; has limited but emerging
conversational ability; can ask questions to obtain basic information; can express
thoughts with difficulty on a limited range of topics.
Levels 4-6

Reading and Writing: Deals well with simple reading materials, and
may be able to grasp main ideas from developed texts if the topics, vocabulary and
grammar are mostly familiar; may be able to write ideas on many familiar topics,
though errors may make writings somewhat difficult to understand.

Greens-how - English Instruction in Thailand

The character of English instruction in Thailand is best appreciated by watching
English lessons given by Thai teachers on the national educational television
station. Seldom does one hear English actually spoken. The instructor spends
substantially all his/her time speaking in Thai. On those occasions when the teacher
voices an English word, it is common to hear Thai-ified English replete with errors in
word stress, ending consonants, and tone markers that are essential for spoken
English to be understood.
The purpose of a national educational television station is to reach the remote areas
of the country and deliver subjects that are otherwise beyond the reach of local
people. This includes English, and particularly spoken English sounds.
That this mission is defective is best appreciated by actually watching TV
programming. The examples below were drawn from about five minutes total
programming aired on the evenings of January 2, and January 9, 2007.
Spoken
IPA

deI
dIz
kQ:mel
kQ:mel
wajr
pQz
grins haU

Apparent
Word
day
deez
camel
camel
wah-yer
pazz
greens-how

Intended
IPA

DeI
DIz
:kQml
:kQmls
:wtr
pQTs
grinhaUs

Intended
English
they

Inside Listener
the Box? Correction
No
Context

these

No

Context

camel

Yes

None

camels

No

Context

water

No

Context

paths

No

Context

greenhouse No

Impossible

Notice how often the listener is required to correct the speakers (teachers) defective
speech. The effect is to shift responsibility onto the listener for the speakers errors.
However, there is one major problem with this strategy. In order for the listener or
reader to correct errors through context, he/she must understand about 98% of
what is being communicated.
Students cannot guess the meaning of an unknown word from context if the
surrounding text is too difficult. Hu and Nation (2000) suggest that students need to
know about 98% or more of the other words in the text (1 new word in 50) before
successful guessing can take place. At the rate of 1 new word in 10 the probability of
guessing the meaning of an unknown word is close to zero. (Waring 2002).

That our students cannot understand the spoken word and therefore score low on
the placement test, and that they cannot guess new words very easily, demonstrated
by relatively low vocabulary scores, sums up the state of English education by the
public systems in Thailand. The focus on grammar doesnt teach much English.

Johnnys Story
Johnny is a student at Big Village School. Johnnys mother is Jane, and his father is
John. Johnnys teacher is Mrs. Jones, and the principal at Big Village is Mr. James.
Mrs. Jones has been teaching English at Big Valley for several years. Mr. James is
proud of her because all her students get good grades. This pleases Mr. James, and
it also pleases Johnnys mother Jane and his father John.
Teacher Jones uses textbooks and workbooks provided by the Department of
Education. Some of the workbooks are new, and some have already been used. The
books come from well respected publishers. There are many examples of vocabulary
and grammar. The books are designed so that each student, alone and on his/her
own enters answers in the workbook.
When Teacher Jones conducts her English classes, she speaks Thai most of the time.
Thats because her English is very poor, and she is afraid of teaching her students
poor English. Sometimes one of her students has contact with English speaking
foreigners, and that student may actually speak better English than the teacher. So
she avoids asking questions in English because the students might laugh at her poor
English. But that is a false fear, because the students know better than to laugh at
their teacher. They know that they must pretend to understand what she is trying to
teach them. And the best way to do this is say nothing. They just fill in their
workbooks.
The school system is wonderful. Teacher Jones status in the community is high, and
she makes sure that all her students pass her course. She is the only one who
determines the grades of each student, so it is easy for her to make sure that
everyone passes. The tests she gives are mostly multiple choice so they are easy to
grade. It doesnt take much of her time. She also likes it because she can focus on
grammar most of the time. Grammar is easy to teach. There is always one correct
answer and this is easy for her to explain using the Thai language. Teaching
grammar means that she can avoid speaking English and still teach.
Principal James is pleased with this system too, because he doesnt have to get
involved. When all students pass, people in the community see him as a good
person. If all students pass, then he is a good principal, Big Valley is a good school
and he has many good teachers.
Student Johnny was put in a group of students who stay together for many years.
They are his close friends. They form a group bond. They are his extended family at
school, and the bond may last a lifetime. Johnny makes sure that he does not bring
shame on his group, it would be the same as bringing shame on his family. That
means that Johnny makes sure that his workbook is always filled in. If he cannot get
a workbook from one of last years students, a workbook that is already filled in,
then he goes to see members of his group for help. Someone in the group has the
answers for the workbook.

Teacher Jones and Principal James are Johnnys surrogate parents at school. When
Teacher Jones sees the workbooks turned in by her students, it is obvious which
workbooks are from last year, because all the exercises are completed. And it is
obvious to Teacher Jones when one student gets his/her answers from another
student because the wrong answer is identical down to every letter and every
punctuation mark. It is of little concern to her that the answers are nonsense
English. The main thing is that each student turns in something, right or wrong. After
all, she is their surrogate mother, and they are her adopted children. She lives in a
culture where discipline is avoided, so she is reluctant to scold her children.
Teacher Jones sometimes comes up with new ideas for her students. But if those
new ideas mean that students will no longer use the materials selected by the
Department of Education, then she will not do it. Her rejection of the choices made
by the Department of Education would be viewed, not on their merits, but as
insubordination to higher authority. After all, the executives in Bangkok are higher in
status than she is, and she wouldnt ever consider criticizing their actions.
Furthermore, her experiment might fail, and that would bring shame on her school,
her principal and upon herself. So she correctly reasons, that there is everything to
lose and nothing to gain by departing from the prescribed path of teaching.
Johnnys mother Jane is happy because her son gets good grades. Father John is
happy too. However, Johnnys mother and father also know that he seldom studies.
Instead he spends his time playing computer games when he is not visiting with his
friends. Mother and father know that Johnny copies his homework from other
students just like they did when they went to school. Its called information
sharing. Johnny knows, deep down inside, that he is a poor student. But never
mind, if father has the right connections and Johnny can graduate from university,
he will get a good job.
When Johnny takes objective performance tests, his scores are low. But that means
somethings wrong with the tests, because Johnny is a good person, Teacher Jones
is a good person, Principal James is a good person, and Johnnys parents are good
people.
When Johnny comes to Udon Thani Rajabhat University, he has already developed a
set of strategies for dealing with the educational system. Here he will join a new
group. This group will stay together for his four years at Rajabhat. Just like in
primary and secondary school, the group is his extended family and that means he
will work hard to help his family members get through their studies, just as they will
help him get through with information sharing.
Johnnys Thai teachers at the university understand the system and many go along
with it. But that is not true of all his Thai teachers, and it isnt true of his farang
teachers, who dont know the system, and if they do, certainly dont agree with it.
Thats when the Johnnys fantasy world begins to unravel.
Johnny must now learn to learn.

The UDRU Classroom Reality

Objective placement assessment does not quite match our empirical assessment in
the classroom. The placement results suggest that students can understand simple,
familiar questions and respond with simple sentences. When we first get them,
however, students are extremely reluctant to participate. Often they respond NO
when asked a simple question, meaning, I dont want to answer. During early
speaking assignments, they will read their speech without inflection or enthusiasm.
And while this is not true of all students, it is true of most.
Here we can only comment upon activities in the UDRU Language Center, not on
whats happening in other parts to the university. Our teachers experiment
continuously. Some have moved completely away from fixed student books, while
others are somewhere in between the same for everyone and student unique
assignments. Student unique assignments is our way of breaking the information
sharing strategy that students have learned from their teachers in elementary and
secondary school. Farangs call it cheating.
To understand student learning strategies, we now look to factors other than
language skill that they bring to the classroom, namely Thai culture.

Five Basic Principles of Thai Culture

Every culture has basic ideas that it instills into its members. Hofstede (2001) was
the first researcher to systematically examine a wide range of cultures and try to
identify then quantify their attributes. His original research was done in the late
1960s and early 1970s. It had a tremendous impact on the entire field of study.
High power distance is one of Hofstedes original criteria, which we call the Status
Gap. Thais go to great lengths to establish and widen the status gap.
High uncertainty avoidance is another of Hoftstedes criteria. Here we see this as a
strategy, not a basic principle or goal of the culture.
Collectivism in ordinary terms is a form of community ownership of assets. That is
definitely NOT a Thai goal or cultural principle. What Hoftstede really meant was a
kind of paternalism with high emotional burdens that carry beyond the blood family
into the inner circle.
The Harmony Principle
Harmony optimization is an essential feature or goal of Thai culture. Harmony and
the perception of harmony are indistinguishable as a cultural goal.
Harmony is a key value which needs to be maintained at all costs, implying that
professors must not be criticized by their students. Mller (2006). Criticism is
disharmonious, it causes conflict within the harmony unit.

Family harmony is a critical force. The family extends to the groups at school and at
work. Before taking any action, a person must consider the harmony impact of that
action. If harmony will be disrupted, then the action must be changed or abandoned.
Thais base their relationships on trust and emotion. Conflict between individuals is
kept to a minimum or is avoided if possible. Thais prefer to have stable social
relationships and maintain surface harmony (Rohitratana 1998).
The quest for harmony breeds nepotism. By mixing the blood family with the work
family harmony is optimized because criticism is suppressed and promotion based on
merit is also suppressed. Suppressing competition among family members
promotes the illusion of harmony.
The Status Gap (Bhun Khun) Principle
Thai culture has a dominant superior-inferior concept. Hofstede (2001) calls this
power distance. Thais accept a hierarchical authority system and unequal power
distribution. They view superiors as father (parental) figures in their family (Mckenna
1995).
Students in Thailand perceive themselves as not being equal to their professors
(Mller 2006).
There is a point where status turns from negative to positive. Negative status means
that a person is in the lower status ranks, such as children, students, young persons
generally.
Positive status comes automatically with age. One gets it for free. If two persons
are otherwise equal, age alone will break the tie. Position, especially a position that
carries an official title, also carries positive status. In Thailand, the King has the
highest level of positive status.
One might equate negative status with an inferiority complex and positive status with
a superiority complex.
If students have negative status, and teachers positive status, when does the
transition come about? First year university students are not all status negative, but
a large number are. Adult Extension students are more often status positive. They
have experienced the real world, have jobs, are often parents, and in many cases
have positions of responsibility in the community. They are simply older.
As a person climbs the social hierarchy, status becomes more positive and the status
gap increases between those entering at the bottom (children) and the maturing
person. The status gap concept does not come about by accident. It is drilled into
everyone from the moment of birth. The system of names for siblings incorporates
status concepts. No person is allowed to be unaware of where he/she fits in the
status system. This status consciousness prevails in all social relationships. It is
8

physically reinforced by the wai procedure that is practiced many times throughout
the day, every day. Where the hands are placed during a wai is a barometer of the
status position that the wai-ing person considers the wai-to person to hold. So
every day, Thais are constantly evaluating the status gap in their social relations.
The Paternalism Principle
Thais see themselves as members of a family. In many ways, this is a variation of
utopian societies where everyone is brother or sister. Thais commonly introduce
their friend as the sister or brother even when there is no blood relationship. It is
difficult, in fact, to find out if two persons are actually related by blood, as this does
not seem to be an important distinction.
The sense of family accrues to a persons inner group. Calling a person brother or
sister indicates that the person is a part of the inner group. The system of school
classes is particularly important for police and military academies. The class members
seem to stick together throughout their professional careers.
Thai subordinates usually accord respect and feel obligations to their superiors as a
father figure in the family (Mckenna 1995). Teachers are surrogate parents of the
students. As such, the teacher is responsible for the students success, just as a
parent is responsible for a childs behavior.
Rohitratana (1998) said Due to paternalism and dependence, the concept of a flat
structure in an organization, which entails speedy decisions cannot effectively take
place. The reason is that only those at the top can possibly make decisions; that is
their obligation, to operate as fathers.
Thais perceive the role of leader as a controller rather than a colleague. This may
be called superior-inferior concept, which is dominant in Thailand. (Thanasankit
2000).
Paternalism creates obligations for everyone. High status persons such as teachers
are responsible for the success of low status persons such as students. Low status
persons are obligated to show respect to higher status persons.
Paternalism breeds nepotism (and cronyism) by making it easier to achieve harmony
by placing ones relatives (or classmates) in positions of responsibility, without regard
to ability. An otherwise objective enterprise can be converted into a paternal one
though nepotism. Objective decision making can be converted into emotional
decision making by nepotism alone, that is, goals of the inner circle supplant goals of
the greater organization, such as a school, government, or business.
The message for students is clear: Merit and personal achievement are not very
important, and therefore, not worth the effort.

The Group Goals (Kam Lang Jai) Principle

In Thailand, society constructs its reality as group or social interest rather than
individual interests. (Thanasankit 2000)
Whether the group is a blood family, a school family, or a work family, the goals of
the group take precedence over the goals of the individual. Within the group
members are obligated to help each other. When it comes to school assignments,
those with the answers are obligated to share them with others. This is the process
of information sharing. A person who withholds information is not a good person
because he/she is ignoring his/her obligations to the group. A person who is lazy can
count on the group to carry him through because it is their obligation to do so.
This entire system of group goals changes as a person reaches a high status
position. Group goals and information sharing are common among status equals. But
as the status gap increases, group goals vanish. The sense of community is
overcome by selfishness. Knowledge is power, and if you are no longer obligated to
share knowledge, then it is withheld from others.
One premise of Thai education is that PhD candidates who are sent abroad to study
(often at state expense) will return to Thailand and share their knowledge as part of
a knowledge cascade principle thereby helping lower status persons. However this
is not what actually happens. Getting a PhD is a tremendous boost to ones status,
creating a very wide status gap. Hoarding knowledge maintains status. The long
absence of the PhD candidate and the great jump in status, effectively excludes that
person from the inner group of old. Group goals no longer operate as a principle. At
that point its all about ME and not about US.
The Fear of Failure Principle
It is assumed in Thai culture that there is always a correct answer. That correct
answer is known by and dispensed by persons with high social status. When asked to
perform before a person of high status, it is not acceptable to make a mistake.
When a mistake is made, only bad consequences come from the effort, among which
are Loss of Face and loss of status.
Students have been trained by their culture to take the learning situation at a deeply
personal level. They do not see themselves on a quest for knowledge and truth, but
rather on a quest for status and security. One source of security is having the
correct answer. They carry heavy emotional baggage into the classroom. Their
relationship with their teacher is partly an emotional one that comes from
paternalism. Therefore, anything they attempt carries a high emotional penalty for
failure. If task performance is defective (and it will almost always be in a learning
situation) then it can be the cause of embarrassment with a potential for Loss of
Face.
The surrogate parent is also part of the problem, because a failure by a student is
automatically perceived as a failure of the teacher.
10

Strategies Employed in Observance of Thai Cultural Principles

A principle that seems to be missing is an appreciation of the real world, the physical
universe in which we live and the demands that it imposes on cultures. Our students
know very little about the world outside their province. They know little about world
geography, culture, language, or economics.
Competition and achievement are hallmarks of European cultures learned at great
cost over many centuries. (Mahbubani 2004). These cultures learned long ago that
the pursuit of truth resulted in competitive superiority and high achievement. The
idea of one correct answer was overtaken by mountains of physical evidence to the
contrary. Truth suppression eventually ended. Ideas are evaluated upon their merits.
Judgments based on merit have proven to be hindered by nepotism, and as a result,
nepotism is shown not to work as well as advancement based on ability.
In order to maintain Thai cultural principles, which often conflict with one another,
and in reaction of the demands of the physical world, Thais employ a system of
avoidances.
Truth Avoidance (Loss of Face) Strategy
Loss of Face, and therefore ego is to be avoided at almost all costs. It is
disharmonious, and often violates the Status Gap Principle. To maintain these higher
principles, the social member must ignore the truth. Truth Avoidance is thus deeply
rooted in Thai culture.
Lying is acceptable when it is perceived to avoid Loss of Face. When the truth is
known, and the lie is exposed, then Loss of Face is the automatic consequence.
Therefore lying to avoid Loss of Face is high risk behavior, but if the lie is successful,
then both the truth and the risk have been avoided.
When the lie fails, that is, the truth is known, it becomes the duty of the truth
knower to pretend that the truth does not exist. When Johnny turned in his
workbook with obviously copied answers, it was the teachers duty to ignore this
truth and pretend that Johnny actually did the work himself.
The culturally sensitive person will let the lie go unnoticed. This promotes harmony
and avoids criticism. The avoidance of asking disharmonious questions and the
avoidance of situations that can cause Loss of Face, help reduce the risk of truth
discovery.
Truth avoidance requires a kind of conspiracy in order to be successful. It is an
essential strategy in a utopian, everything is wonderful society.

11

Criticism Avoidance Strategy

Criticism can bring shame on the group and cause its members to lose face, thus
violating the Harmony principle. In return for criticism avoidance, teachers are
expected to take responsibility for student success or failure (Mller 2006).
Criticism is a direct assault on status, and violates the Status Gap principle. Criticism
by its very nature lowers status. If the criticizer is a person of lower status, the
Status Gap will narrow. If the criticizer is a person of high status, shame and Loss of
Face will be heaped upon the lower status person. In this case, the Status Gap will
widen between this pair, but will have many negative effects on the position of the
criticized person.
(Thanasankit 2000)
Face saving and criticism avoidance values play a very important role during
elicitation meetings. Komin (1990) states that the face is identical with ego and is
very sensitive. Since Thais give tremendous emphasis to face and ego, preserving
one anothers ego is the basic rule of all Thai interactions both on the continuum of
familiarity unfamiliarity, and the continuum of superior-inferior, with difference only
in degree. Therefore, conflicting with superiors may translate as not saving or
respecting their superiors face. This type of behavior is not uncommon in Thailand. A
person who presents the ideas and gets criticism for those ideas will take the
criticism toward himself/herself not the ideas themselves. Thus criticism is
constructed as an insulting situation (Mulder 1978).

Decision making comes from the top. It is the duty of those at the top to make
decisions and the duty of those below to carry them out. It is not acceptable to
criticize decisions coming from the top, regardless of merit. When decisions are held
to public scrutiny the typical strategy is to form a committee to evaluate the decision.
Ideally, the committee will remain anonymous so that the responsible person can
claim that the decision was made not by him/her but rather by the committee. The
anonymous committee perfects the cycle of criticism avoidance.
Question Avoidance
Questions have bad side-effects. They open the door for failure because the person
to whom the question is directed may not know the answer. To not know the
correct answer causes Loss of Face, it is an implied criticism. With Loss of Face
comes a reduction in status. Questions can often be disharmonious.
The strategy therefore, is to not ask any questions, or else ask only safe questions.
Uncertainty Avoidance (Kreng Jai)
Thai people have high uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede 2001).
Thais want certainty in their lives and in their social relationships, not just for the
individual but also within the community (Thanasankit 2000). This is understandable
12

in light of the high emotional content of social relationships including work

relationships. A quest for acceptable answers avoids uncertainty in almost every
regard.
Memorization of the accepted answer is an excellent uncertainty avoidance strategy.
Students are good memorizers for this reason.
Memorization may be interpreted as obedience towards trainers. Quite interestingly
in this context is Thailands somewhat extreme position on the Professors
Responsibility for Student Success item. The strong belief in status differences in
Thailand apparently has created a feeling of dependence from teachers, which in
return establishes teachers responsibility towards students. (Mller 2006)

Teacher, its your job to tell me what to say, so I can get an A.

Information Sharing
Information sharing vs. cheating. In many cultures these are one and the same
thing, but not in Thai culture. Cheating can occur when students are placed in
examination seating with proctors (invigilators) present. Basically its cheating
only if you get caught.
Mller (2006) reported that Thai students scored high on Cheating not allowed
when asked this question. On the surface this contradicts our empirical observations.
On the other hand, it is exactly what one expects of a Thai student. We expect them
to give the accepted answer. To do so is entirely consistent with truth avoidance
otherwise it would bring shame on the Thai people and cause them to lose face.
So what is the difference between information sharing and cheating in the Thai
mind. Cheating is when you get caught doing something you know you are not
supposed to do and it causes you or someone else to lose face. Information sharing
is helping your emotionally bonded extended family members deal with the task at
hand. Information sharing is lending a helping hand to those in need.

The Consequences of Truth Avoidance

There is obviously something missing in Thai principles and strategies. There is no
accounting for the realities of the physical world and the biology of its inhabitants. In
those countries where it gets cold, truth avoidance is not a viable strategy. The
person who ignores the truth dies. Ignore the weather and you will starve if you
dont freeze to death first. There are severe penalties for ignoring the real world.
If your country has had a series of wars, there were severe penalties for a failure to
invent, understand, discover, and plan. There are rewards for those who discover,
understand and observe the truth. They succeed and prosper. And it has long been
known by these people that real learning is an essential component of success.

13

In the tropical zone, things are different. Countries fall into one of two categories.
Those that had European educational, legal, and governmental systems imposed on
them, such as Vietnam, India, and Singapore, and those that didnt, such as
Thailand. Burma, Laos, and Cambodia got pushed behind by internal factors, not by
the effects of a European institutions.
The price that Thailand will pay for its continued observance of truth avoidance is to
forever be in second, or third or fourth, etc. place in the global race for success. The
reason is quite simple. A truth avoider will not deal as effectively with the real
world as will the truth pursuer.

The truth avoider will be inclined to avoid a problem rather than

solve a problem. He will be the loser more often than the winner in
the international competitive race for success.
Thai nationals who are granted Doctorate Degrees, within or outside the country,
have a real dilemma. The granting of the degree of Doctor, places them very high in
the status system. It gives them great positive status. If they conduct research,
which is the purpose of getting a PhD. degree it will require them to ask questions.
Research is about questioning the status quo, it is about the discovery of truth and
the publication of the results for the world to see and in turn criticize.
For the Thai researcher, the pursuit of truth violates truth avoidance, asking
questions violates question avoidance, proposing a hypothesis challenges
uncertainty avoidance, coming up with a conclusion different from accepted belief
is itself criticism of that belief. Harmony is disrupted, truth will change the status of
people in the society, including the status of the researcher, paternalism is
challenged, and there is the forever fear of failure because the researcher might be
right which means someone else failed, or the researcher might be wrong which
means he/she failed. In any event, the researcher will always be criticized by
someone, somewhere, on something.
Therefore, for the Thai PhD. there is absolutely nothing to be gained, and much to
be lost by doing research.
If meritocracy, rather than nepotism, becomes the norm of Asian societies, it would
mean a tremendous unleashing of the brainpower found there. (Mahbubani 2004)

Thai Cultural and Language Learning

Thai culture is inherently stacked against effective language learning. The proof is on
TV and confirmed by the test scores.
Information sharing means that students do not do their own homework.
Information sharing means that a person never needs to learn to learn.

14

Teachers failing to voice the sounds of the target language means that students
cannot learn those sounds, and hence the target language.
Teachers who are held accountable by the society for student success will
automatically pass students without regard to student accomplishment.
Individual achievement is not a cultural goal therefore there is no duty placed upon
the student to accomplish anything.

Overcoming Barriers
(Mahbubani 2004):
There is a monumental struggle going on within the souls of many Asians to decide
what kind of identity they want for their future. They are trying to find the best from
their own cultural roots and the best from the West.

Change is happening everywhere. Thailand is about half way from an agrarian

society to an urban society. As this change continues there will be a move away from
village limitations. The Thai middle class is growing. The number of Thais with a
better education is growing. All these changes notwithstanding, the culture changes
more slowly. For the teacher, to advance an educational objective, cultural barriers
to learning must be softened. Here are a few ideas with that in mind.
Dealing with the Status Gap

No teacher should ever fear that the gap will disappear.

No matter what a teacher does, his/her status will always be higher than that of any
student. Therefore, the teacher is freed from any requirement to do things to prove
that he/she is of higher status than the student.
Put away the microphone and loud speaker. Do not hide behind the Overhead
Projector (OHP).
Talk to your students individually at every opportunity. Avoid talking at them from a
standing position at the front of the classroom with microphone in hand.
Seat your students in a U. That way everyone sits on the front row. In huge
classes, there will be two rows at the most.
Ask questions of each and every student, many times over.
Pass out papers individually to each student.
Praise students when they do good work.

15

Dealing with Uncertainty Avoidance (Kreng Jai)

Teach them that mistakes are OK. Mistakes are normal.
Teach them to strike-thru wrong answers and keep on going. Make them throw
away the liquid paper. Whiting out something takes lots of time and has absolutely
no educational value.
Teach them that there are no perfect answers.
Teach them to say I dont know.
Dealing with Information Sharing
Penalize copying.
Make each homework assignment student unique.
Dealing with Truth Avoidance (Loss of Face)
Write down your class rules.
Make jokes of comparison between the teacher and a cultural stigma such as the
buffalo. The teacher is more handsome/beautiful than a buffalo. The teacher is
smarter than a buffalo. The buffalo is better at plowing the field. The buffalo is
bigger than the teacher. The buffalo eats more than the teacher does. The
buffalo can carry a heavier load than the teacher can. The teacher makes mistakes,
the buffalo never makes mistakes. .etc. (Notice how much vocabulary you can get
out of a buffalo). (Have each student think up a new comparison between the
teacher and the buffalo.)

Teachers can have fun too.

When students lie, put them on buffalo row at the front of the class. Force them to
lose face in front of their friends for violations of the rules.
Dealing with Question Avoidance
Require everyone to answer questions.
Dealing with Criticism Avoidance
Praise good work in public.
If its bad, say so, but criticize it in private.
16

References
Donart, A. (2006): Teaching English grammar is a waste of time, Bangkok Post,
October 3, 2006 (www.bangkokpost.net/education/site2006/nf3oc0306.htm)
Hofstede, G. (2001): Cultures Consequences. Comparing Values, Behaviours,
Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. Second Edition. Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hu, M. and P. Nation. (2000): Unknown vocabulary density and reading
comprehension, Reading in a Foreign Language 13, (1): 403-43.
Komin, S. (1990): Psychology of The Thai People: Values and Behavioral Patters,
NIDA (Natinal Institute of Development Administration), Bangkok, Thailand
Komin, S. (1990): Culture and Work-related Values in Thai Organizations,
International Journal of Psychology 25, pp. 681-704
Mahbubani, K. (2004): Can Asians Think?, Third Edition, Marshall Cavendish Editions,
Singapore
Mckenna, S. (1990): The cultural transferability of business and organizational reengineering: Examples from Southeast Asia, The TMQ Magazine, 7(3), pp.
12-16
Mulder, N. (1978): Life in Thailand: An Interpretation, Duang Kamol, Bangkok,
Thailand
Mller, C., M. Nuebauer, and G. Apfelthaler (2006):A Cross Cultural Comparison of
Attitudes Towards Learning and Teaching Across Asian and European
Countries, IFSAM VIIIth World Congress 2006, September 28-30, 2006,
Berlin, Germany.
Rohitratana, K. (1998): The role of Thai values in managing information systems; a
case study of implementing an MRP systems, in Avgerou, C. (eds) (1998)
Proceedings of the Fifth International Working Conference of IFIP WG 9.4
Implementation and Evaluation of Information Systems in Developing
Countries, February 18-20, London School of Economics and Political Science
and Asian Institute of Technology Bangkok, IFIP, pp. 118-201.
Thanasankit, T. and Corbitt, B. (2000): Cultural Context and its Impact on
Requirements Elicitation in Thailand, EJISDC (The Electronic Journal on
Information Systems in Developing Countries 1, www.ejisdc.org) (2000)
Waring, R. (2002). Basic Principles and Practice in Vocabulary Instruction, The
Language Teacher 2002

17