CURRENT AND DESIRABLE STATES OF INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL MANAGEMENT IN THAILAND TOWARD BECOMING AN ASEAN EDUCATION HUB

Main Article Content

Waraporn Lohawattanakij
Chatupol Yongsorn
Jantarat Phutiariyawat

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the current and desirable states of international school management in Thailand to support the country’s potential to become an education hub in the ASEAN region. A quantitative research design was employed. The sample consisted of 148 Thai administrators working in international schools throughout Thailand, determined using the Krejcie and Morgan sampling table and selected through simple random sampling to ensure representation across all regions. The research instrument was a questionnaire developed based on four conceptual frameworks: School-Based Management (SBM), Total Quality Management (TQM), Internationalization at Home (IaH), and the core components of an Education Hub. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including mean, standard deviation, along with the Modified Priority Needs Index (PNI modified) technique. The findings revealed that the overall current state of international school management in Thailand was at a “high” level (equation = 4.30, S.D. = 0.56), while the desirable state was rated at the “highest” level (equation = 4.70, S.D. = 0.40). Among the seven dimensions, “Continuous Improvement and Accountability” demonstrated the strongest performance (PNI modified 0.01), reflecting well-established quality assurance systems, operational transparency, and a sustainable improvement culture. Conversely, the areas with the highest priority needs were “Participatory Management and Human Resource Development” as well as “Learning Environment and Whole-School Development” (PNI modified 0.13) indicating the necessity of enhancing staff engagement, strengthening systematic professional development, promoting instructional innovation, and improving technological infrastructure aligned with international standards. Overall, the results suggest that Thailand’s aspiration to become an ASEAN education hub requires clear and coherent national policies, supportive mechanisms for international private-sector partnerships, strengthened regional and global educational networks, and sustained long-term strategic planning. These integrated efforts are essential to enhance the capacity of international schools as key drivers in elevating Thailand's international education system competitiveness and positioning the nation as a prominent education hub within the ASEAN region.

Article Details

How to Cite
Lohawattanakij, W. ., Yongsorn, C. ., & Phutiariyawat, J. . (2025). CURRENT AND DESIRABLE STATES OF INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL MANAGEMENT IN THAILAND TOWARD BECOMING AN ASEAN EDUCATION HUB. Journal of MCU Nakhondhat, 12(12), 188–196. retrieved from https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JMND/article/view/296234
Section
Research Articles

References

ธีรวุฒิ เอกะกุล. (2543). ระเบียบวิธีวิจัยทางพฤติกรรมศาสตร์และสังคมศาสตร์. อุบลราชธานี: สถาบันราชภัฏอุบลราชธานี.

ศรีอำไพ อิงคกิตติ. (2567). ธุรกิจโรงเรียนนานาชาติ. LH Bank. เรียกใช้เมื่อ 1 สิงหาคม 2567 จาก https://shorturl.asia/oezWu

สำนักงานคณะกรรมการส่งเสริมการศึกษาเอกชน. (2567). รายงานประจำปี 2566. กรุงเทพมหานคร: สำนักงานคณะกรรมการส่งเสริมการศึกษาเอกชน.

Beelen, J. & Jones, E. (2015). Redefining internationalization at home. Retrieved December 24, 2024, from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20877-0_5

Caldwell, B. J. & Spinks, J. M. (2013). The Self-Transforming School. London: Routledge.

Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Hallinger, P. & Lee, M. (2016). Mapping the terrain of educational leadership and management in East Asia. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 19(3), 262-282.

Julie, V. (2021). Internationalization and the Changing Paradigm of Higher Education in the GCC Countries. Journal of Economic literature, 5(2), https://shorturl.asia/TLOZG

Knight, J. (2011). Education Hubs: A fad, a brand, an innovation? Journal of Studies in International Education, 15(3), 221-240.

Lee, J. & Knight, J. (2014). Three types of education hubs: Student, talent and knowledge. Retrieved August 20, 2024, from https://shorturl.asia/VroSY

OECD. (2021). Education at a Glance 2021: OECD indicators. Retrieved December 15, 2024, from https://shorturl.asia/1AvFP

Sallis, E. (2014). Total quality management in education. (4th ed.). London: Routledge.

Soulé, H. et al. (2024). Rethinking Internationalization at home: Policy and practice challenges. Higher Education Research & Development, 43(1), 1-15.

UNICEF. (2021). Teachers at the heart of education recovery. Retrieved December 15, 2024, from https://shorturl.asia/KLUjd