Simulation of Fiscal Measures on Vocational Education in Thailand

Main Article Content

ธิติมา พลับพลึง

Abstract

This article presents a simulation of fiscal measures on vocational education for motivation creating and screening criteria for the poor. The samples were 607 head of households whose children were studying in the lower secondary level (Mathayom 3) in 16 schools from 4 provinces. A questionnaire was used as a tool for data collection and descriptive/chi-squared statistics were used in data analysis. It found that the fiscal measures on vocational education could build motivation in changing decision-making from general education level (Mathayom 4) to vocational education level (Por Wor Chor.1), accounting for 58 percent of the total students whose parents earlier chose the general education level (Mathayom 4). Parents highly agreed with both measures that provided Por Wor Chor. students with a monthly grant of 2,200 Baht as living costs. The requirements were that the grantee’s income shall not exceed 100,000 Baht per year or 8,300 Baht per month; his/her household shall lack liquidity and other conditions, while the scoring was ranked by priority. The committee on screening the poor students was elected from government agencies, both local and national levels, and the budgets for the measures operating were subsidied by the government’s budget. Local administrative organizations and Student Loan Fund allocated the grants according to each area’s quota (regional and provincial quotas) and the poor density ratio for each province. Therefore, the fiscal measures on vocational education should be tried out in Thailand to be implied as a policy for increasing the ratio of vocational students and provide poor households with the educational opportunity according to the government’s policy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section
บทความวิจัย (Research Article)

References

ดิเรก ปัทมสิริวัฒน์. (2551). การคลังเพื่อการศึกษา : สินเชื่อการศึกษาเพื่อพัฒนาทุนมนุษย์และลดความเหลื่อมล้ำ. มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์.
ธิติมา พลับพลึง. (2557). ความเหลื่อมล้ำของโอกาสการศึกษา ทรัพย์สินครัวเรือน และกรณีศึกษาทางเลือกการศึกษาสำหรับครัวเรือนยากจน. ปริญญานิพนธ์ปรัชญาดุษฎีบัณฑิต สาขาเศรษฐศาสตร์ สำนักวิชาเศรษฐศาสตร์และนโยบายสาธารณะ มหาวิทยาลัยศรีนครินทรวิโรฒ
สมเกียรติ ตั้งกิจวานิชย์ และ อารียา มนัสบุญเพิ่มพูน. (2550). การประเมินกองทุนเงินกู้ยืมเพื่อการศึกษา. สถาบันวิจัยเพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศไทย.
สมชัย ฤชุพันธุ์ และ ชลธาร วิศรุตวงศ์. (2544). รายงานวิจัยแนวทางการบริหารจัดการกองทุนเงินให้กู้ยืมเพื่อการศึกษา. กรุงเทพฯ : สกศ.
สำนักงานเลขาธิการสภาการศึกษา กระทรวงศึกษาธิการ. (2554). นโยบายและยุทธศาสตร์การปฏิรูปการศึกษาในทศวรรษที่สองด้านการพัฒนาอาชีวศึกษา. กรุงเทพฯ.
Behrman, J. R. & J. C. Knowles. (1999). Household Income and Child Schooling in Vietnam.The World Bank Economic Review, 13 (2), 211–256.
Cochran, W. G. (1953). Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Chapman B. et al. (2010). Thailand’s student loans fund : Interest rate subsidies and repayment burdens. Economics of Education Review, 29(2010), 685-694.
Cunha. F., and Heckman, J. (2007). The technology of skill formation. American Economic Review, 97(2), 31-47.
Cunha, F.,J.J Heckman, L.J. Lochner, and D.V. Masterov (2006). Interpreting the evidence on life cycle skill formation. In E. A. Hanushek and F. Welch (Eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, Chapter 12, pp. 697-812.
Amsterdam: North-Holland.Gurley-Alloway, T. (2009). More Than Money : Higher Education Decisions of Low-Income And Minority Students. Dissertation Doctor of Philosophy, The University of Texas At Arlington.
Fiszbein, A. and Schady, N. (2009). Conditional Cash Transfers Reducing present and Future Poverty.
Gurley-Alloway, T. (2009). More Than Money : Higher Education Decisions of Low-Income And Minority Students. Dissertation Doctor of Philosophy, The University of Texas At Arlington.
Heckman, J.J. (2000). Policies to foster human capital. Research in Economics 54(1), 3-56. With discussion.
Heckman, J.J. (2008). Schools, skills and synapses. Economic Inquiry. Forthcoming.
Heckman, J.J. and D.V. Masterov (2007). The productivity argument for investing in young children. Review of Agricultural Economics 29(3), 446-493.
Janvry, A. F. Finan, E. Sadoulet, D. Nelson, K. Lindert, B. de la Brière and P. Lanjouw (2005) “Brazil’s Bolsa Escola Program: The Role of Local Governance in Decentralized Implementation”, Social Protection Discussion Paper #0542, The World Bank, December.
Morley, Samuel and D. Coady, (2003). From Social Assistance to Social Development: targeted education subsidies in developing countries, (Center for Global Development and IFPRI, 2003).
Patrinos, Harry Anthony (2002). A Review of Demand-Side FinancingInitiatives in Education. World Bank Report No.26959, Working Paper (PDF) https://tinyurl.com/y9rexl3
Patrinos, Harry Anthony & Ariasingam, David Lakshmanan (1997). Decentralization of Education: Demand-Side Financing. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Pimpa, N. (2007). Reference groups and choices of vocational education : Case of Thailand. School of Education, RMIT University.
Pimpa, N. & Suwannapiron, S. (2008). Thai students ’ choices of vocational education : marketing factors and reference groups. Educational Research for Policy and Practice. Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp.99-107.Schultz, T.P. (2004). School subsidies for the poor: evaluating the Mexican Progresa
Poverty Program. Journal of Development Economics 74 (1), 199-250.
Stampini, M. and Tornarolli, L. (2012). The Growth of Conditional Cash Transfers in Latin America and the Caribbean: Did They Go Too Far? IDB Policy Brief n. 185. Washington D.C., USA: Inter-American Development Bank.
UNDP. (2014). Thailand Human Development Report 2007 Sufficiency Economy and Human Development. Bangkok, Thailand.