IN RECENT YEARS universities across the world have been going through enormous pressures to transform. From the United Kingdom to the United States, from South Korea to Singapore, the call to become a "World-Class University" is loud and clear.
In broad terms, becoming a so-called "World Class University" means strengthening the university's capacity to do research and produce advanced knowledge. In the more limited definition, this term denotes an intense competition for universities to raise their standing in international leagues through such tables as the Times Higher Education Supplement or the Shanghai Jiao Dong World Universities Ranking.
Thailand has jumped on this global bandwagon. The Thai government has proposed a "National Research University" project to prepare local universities to gain "World Class" status. Nine universities were selected to participate in this programme - Chulalongkorn, Chiang Mai, Kasetsart, King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi, Khon Kaen, Mahidol, Prince of Songkhla, Suranaree University of Technology and Thammasat.
Undoubtedly, improving the quality of higher education is necessary, especially since Thailand aspires to become the "Educational Hub" of the Asean region. It is also very timely. The 2015 timeline that Thailand has committed to liberalise its economy and participate in the Asean Economic Community means even greater pressure for universities to perform better.
In educational terms, the hope is that higher quality universities will attract more foreign students to Thailand, while a lack of world-class institutions could cause a brain drain of students to neighbouring countries.
Despite these potential benefits, the creation of a National Research University begs several important questions that deserve further scrutiny.
First is the question of "purpose". Given the concerted efforts and concentrated investment, the proposal hopes to boost Thailand's international ranking on the Times Higher Education Supplement within three years.
Many argue that improving Thailand's position in educational league tables will enhance Thailand's ranking in the IMD World Economic Competitiveness Yearbook. The obsession with hiking international rakings in various league tables illustrates how narrow and simple the national goal currently is.
Secondly, the proposed allocation of resources needs further consideration. As part of the government's second stimulus package, the overall budget for this project is Bt12 billion. That increase is impressive and necessary, especially when compared to the Bt1 billion a year or so allocated to the Thailand Research Fund, a leading national institution supporting research and development across the country.
Unfortunately, Bt9 billion of the new budget is limited to the nine universities selected as participants in the National Research University project. Due to the limited selection criteria requiring that institutions be among the top 500 of the Time's Higher Education Supplement, many universities are excluded from attaining research status.
The National Institute of Development Administration, a leading graduate school, is a case in point.
Block grants to the group of nine will surely expand the research capacity of those selected universities, but there is a danger that excluding others will hamper their research growth.
Some argue that funnelling the government's limited resources to the select few is more efficient and productive. As policymakers point out, several Asian countries have selectively invested in their leading institutions to boost performance - China with its 985 Project with US$234 million (Bt7.9 billion) funding to selected universities, or South Korea with its "Brain Korea 21", with the budget of 2.03 trillion won (Bt59.4 billion) for funding its top universities.
Not only is this the "regional and global trend", but the Second 15-Year Higher Education Development Plan clearly argues that the diversification of institutions is important to overall development.
While universities with robust postgraduate studies should build up their research capacity, others should focus on teaching undergraduate programmes and strengthening university-industry linkage and community services.
If Thailand is committed to these guiding principles, more resources will be needed to ensure that other tracks are better funded. Without adequate funding to promote teaching or other learning activities necessary to improve other institutions, the establishment of a National Research University could potentially aggravate the reputation and resources gap among all institutions in the country.
Undoubtedly improving the quality of higher education is necessary and empowering more local research capacity is definitely needed. Selective funding might promise short-term gain. But Thailand needs a long-term national research framework providing more resources to more institutions and more researchers.
More consistent funding to the Thailand Research Fund and other existing national centres of excellence is essential to provide more opportunities for researchers and institutions and to ensure that new policies are not simply reinventing the wheel.
Lastly, "more research" is not synonymous with "healthier" development. The more elusive goals of fostering a knowledge economy or nurturing sustainable development require a greater link between the national research agenda and national development plans. It requires greater cooperation among various stakeholders including the government, industry and universities.
Making Thai universities "World Class" holds much promise. Simply pumping more money into the system and re-branding a few institutions is just the tip of the iceberg.
