Science Education in Thailand: Moving Through Crisis to Opportunity



Both globalization and Westernization have influenced the Thai education system and have led to educational reforms. This chapter begins with a brief overview of the science educational reforms that have occurred in Thailand since 1868. Based on empirical research and our personal perspectives and experiences as Thai science educators, we go on to provide a synopsis of the status of the current educational context, including the aims of science education, student performance, and teacher preparation and development. In the main body of the chapter, we discuss the challenges and complexities of helping Thai students achieve scientific literacy and encouraging science teachers to shift their traditional teaching style to a constructivist-based approach. We then describe the process of moving Thai science education through crisis to opportunity and of creating a balance between sociocultural factors and the needs of today’s knowledge-based society.


Educational reform Inquiry Nature of science Scientific literacy Sociocultural factors Teacher education 


  1. Abell, S. K., Appleton, K., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2009). Designing and teaching the elementary science methods course. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Amornvivat, S. (2002). Learning process reform of the pilot schools: The selected models. Bangkok: Office of the National Education Commission.Google Scholar
  4. Bell, B. (1993). Children’s science, constructivism and learning in science. Australia: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Boontim, S. (2004). Evaluation of school curriculum management, basic education, education region 6. In Bureau of inspection and evaluation, office of the permanent secretary (Ed.), Report for education evaluation and development (B.E. 2541–2546). Bangkok: The Express Transportation Organization of Thailand.Google Scholar
  6. Buaraphan, K. (2010). Pre-service and in-service science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Science Educator, 19(2), 35–47.Google Scholar
  7. Capobianco, B. M., & Feldman, A. (2010). Repositioning teacher action research in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(8), 909–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chuleekan, V. (2006). Research summary: Evaluation of school curriculum management, Education region 1–12. Retrieved November 13, 2006, from vijai.htm
  9. Coble, C. R., & Koballa, T. R. (1996). Science education. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 459–484). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. Coll, R., Dahsah, C., & Faikhamta, C. (2010). The influence of educational context on science learning: A cross-national analysis of PISA. Research in Science & Technological Education., 28(1), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corcoran, T. (2015). Improving science teaching in Thailand. Retrieved September 28, 2015, from
  12. Dangyai, N. (2004). Factors that effect to school curriculum of school in education region 1. In Bureau of inspection and evaluation, office of the permanent secretary (Ed.), Report for education evaluation and development (B.E. 2541–2546). Bangkok: The Express Transportation Organization of Thailand.Google Scholar
  13. Faikhamta, C. (2013). The development of in-service science teachers’ understandings of and orientations to teaching the nature of science within a PCK-based NOS course. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 847–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Faikhamta, C., & Roadrangka, V. (2005). Problems in professional experience training of student teachers in the project for the promotion of science and mathematics talented teachers (PSMT). Songklanakarin Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 11(2), 151–164.Google Scholar
  15. Fry, G. W. (2002). Synthesis report: From crisis to opportunity, the challenges of educational reform in Thailand. Paper prepared for the Office of the National Education Commission and the Asian Development Bank as Part of TA 3583-THA.Google Scholar
  16. Hallinger, P., & Kantamara, P. (2001). Exploring the cultural context of school improvement in Thailand. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(4), 385–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology (IPST). (2002). Thai science teachers standards. Bangkok: The Institute of Promotion of Science and Technology Teaching.Google Scholar
  18. Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology (IPST). (2008). Science instruction: Basic education curriculum. Accessed January 12, 2014
  19. Tobin, K. D. Tippins, J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In. D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 45–93). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Kanklang, V. (2005). Research report: A study of perceptions of education administrators on trend of effectiveness of education management according to the 2001 Basic Education Curriculum. Bangkok: Bureau of Academic and Educational Standard Office, Office of the Basic Education Commission, Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  21. Ketsing, J., & Roadrangka, V. (2010). A case study of science teachers’ understanding and practice of inquiry-based instruction. Kasetsart Journal: Social Sciences, 31(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  22. Ladachart, L., & Suttakun, L. (2012). Exploring and developing tenth-grade students’ understandings of nature of science. Princess of Naradhiwas University Journal, 4(2), 73–90.Google Scholar
  23. Ladachart, L., Suttakun, L., & Faikhamta, C. (2013). A critical difference between the promotion of “Nature of Science” instruction outside and inside Thailand. Kasetsart Journal: Social Sciences, 34(2), 269–282.Google Scholar
  24. Ladachart, L., & Yuenyong, C. (2015). Scientific inquiry as a means to develop teachers’ and supervisors’ scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Educators and Teachers, 1(1), 60–73.Google Scholar
  25. Mahalee, K., & Faikhamta, C. (2010). Seventh grade students’ understandings of nature of science. Songklanakarin Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 16(5), 795–809.Google Scholar
  26. McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 3–39). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Narot, P. (2004). A synthesis of education research and trends of future research. Consulting report prepared for office of the National Education Commission. Bangkok: ONEC.Google Scholar
  28. National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB). (2002). The ninth national economic and social development plan. Bangkok: SuksapanPanitch.Google Scholar
  29. National Institute of Educational Testing Service (NIETS). (2012). Research: ONET. Accessed February 21, 2014
  30. OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 in focus: What 15-year olds know and what they can do with what they know. Accessed June 12, 2014
  31. Office of the Education Council (2004). Education in Thailand 2004. Bangkok: Amarin Printing and Publishing.Google Scholar
  32. Office of the National Education Commission. (1999). National education act 1999. Bangkok: Office of National Education Commission.Google Scholar
  33. Office of the National Education Commission. (2001). Report of research and development of science education reform in Thailand. Bangkok: Office of the National Education Commission.Google Scholar
  34. Pillay, H. (2002). Teacher development for quality learning: The Thailand education reform project. Bangkok: ONEC.Google Scholar
  35. Roadrangka, V., Yutakom, N., & Tippins, D. (2010). Thai science educators’ visions of reform: Personal journeys. In Y. J. Lee (Ed.), World of science education: Science education research in Asia (pp. 103–120). The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  37. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Silpabanlaeng, R., Roadrangka, V., Chaiso, P., Yutakom, N., & Phanwichien, K. (2006). The trend of pre-service science teacher education in the fifth years period (2002–2016). Kasetsart Journal (Social Sciences), 27(1), 39–50.Google Scholar
  39. Suttakun, L., Yutakom, N., & Vajarasathira, B. (2011). A case study of understanding of the nature of science by elementary teachers and their teaching practices. Kasetsart Journal: Social Sciences, 32(3), 458–469.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kasetsart UniversityBangkokThailand
  2. 2.Ministry of EducationBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations