1. Supporting Multilingual Education for
Ethnic Minority in Northern Thailand:
An Evaluation Study

2. Evaluation Team
 Dr. Wiyada Lemtrakul
 Dr. Jutima Methaneethorn
 Mr. Pongwat Fongkanta
 Mr. Setthawit Chanowan
Faculty of Education
Lampang Rajabhat University
Advisor
Dr. Suchin Petcharugsa

3. Introduction
 MLE for Ethnic Minorities in
Northern Thailand Project was
implemented by the Foundation for
Applied Linguistics (FAL) with the
support from Pestalozzi Children’s
Foundation (PCF)
 Total project planning period is
from 2007 – 2015 (Phase I 2007 –
2009, Phase II 2010 – 2012, and
Phase III 2013 – 2015)

4. MTB-MLE Project
 Valuing and using their local
languages along with the national
language in Thai schools
 Bringing the local languages and
culture into the classroom
 Local teaching assistants who
know the community languages are
trained to teach in partnership with
qualified national teachers

5.  Helping children to move
successfully from the ethnic to the
national language and culture
 Maintaining pride and confidence in
their dual ethnic and national
identity

6.  The project aims to establish pilot
schools in three language
communities:
◦ Mon community, Kanchanaburi
province
◦ Karen community, Chiang Mai province
◦ Hmong community, Chiang Rai
province

7. The evaluation was made on
Phase II of this project (2010–2012)
 Aims of the MTB-MLE project (phase
II)
◦ MLE program is strongly established in
early primary years in six pilot schools
across three ethnolinguistic minority
communities (Mon, Karen, and Hmong)
◦ MLE program helps students in the
project learn the national language better
and thus achieve national learning
standards in every subject.

8. Evaluation Objectives
 To evaluate the output, outcome
and impacts of the project.
 To evaluate the project
implementation.
 To learn about factors and
conditions effecting the project
success and/or failure.

9. Theoretical Framework
 Theory–based evaluation (TBE)
◦ explores the how and why of
program success or failure.
Advocates of TBE claim that it
produces information unavailable in
traditional process and outcome
studies
◦ an evaluation based on a model,
theory or philosophy about how the
program works; a model, theory, or
philosophy which indicates the
causal relationships supposedly

10.  Logic model is a graphic
representation of a program’s planned
resources, activities, and results.
 Inputs are the resources that are
made available for the planning,
implementation and evaluation of
projects; examples of inputs are
human resources, funding, facilities,
equipment, and community resources.
 Process are what the program does
with the resources. These
interventions are used to bring about
the intended outputs or outcomes.

11.  Outputs are the direct products of
program activities and may include
types, levels, and targets of services
to be delivered by the program (Bellini
et al, 2011).
 Outcomes are the change that
occurred because the program
outputs.
 Impact is the fundamental intended or
unintended change occurring in
organizations, communities, or
systems as a result of program
activities.

12. 3 Stages of the Evaluation

13. Logic Model for MTB-MLE
Project

14.  Sources of data were:
◦ project documents
◦ project holder
◦ personnel, school district
administrators
◦ educational supervisors,
◦ school administrator, teachers,
students, parents and villagers in 3
areas

15. Developing Method of Project
Evaluation
◦ The evaluation team studied the logic
model components of the project in order
to design the evaluation framework.
◦ The evaluation framework was reviewed
by the evaluation team together with an
advisor to consider its compatibility and
relatedness in the logic model.
 Evaluation Framework of the
MTB-MLE Project

16. The Result of Data Analysis
1. Evaluation result of output, outcome,
and impact of the project.
1.1) Output following the project objective.
• curriculum and lesson plan were developed
in 6 pilot schools
• project staffs, local and Thai teachers, and
supervisors improved/developed their
capacities through the training processes

17.  stake-holders in the project, local
communities, pilot schools, and Ministry of
Education supported and participated in the
project
 students in pilot schools showed their
 self-confidence
 enjoyed learning
 reached better learning achievement than
their parallel schools

21. 1.2 Project Outcome
Project Outcome Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
1. MTB-MLE project was
launched in 3 areas
covering 7 pilot schools
with its attempt to help
the students to learn Thai
language better and to
reach educational
achievement through O-NET
test at the national
level.
• Pilot schools in the
project became model
schools in terms of
teaching and learning for
indigenous students.
• Students in pilot schools
enjoyed learning and
showed happiness coming
to school with self-confidence.
• Students understood and
communicated in Thai
and local language
skillfully
• Educational achievement
of the students in the
MTB-MLE project
passed the O-NET test
criteria at the national
level.
  
The O-NET test scores have
not been disclosed until the
students finish Grade 3

22. Project Outcome Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
2. Students in pilot
schools showed affection
and respect to their local
language and culture.
• Students in pilot schools
made use of their local
language in everyday life.
• Students in pilot schools
were proud of their local
culture.
  
3. Students, parents, and
community members
were aware of benefit
from the project that it
helped to reach
educational achievement
of the students.
 Parents saw the benefit
of the use of local
language in school.
  

23. Project Outcome Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
4. Community members
showed their need of the
project and prepared to
become owners of the
project.
• Community members
participated in project’s
work.
  
5. Related educational
agencies have adjusted
the local teachers
recruitment system to get
along well with the
project.
 Related educational
agencies have adjusted
the local teachers
recruitment system.
  

24. 1.3 Project Impact
Project Impact Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
Government policy has
been formulated in
support of the
development of Thai
language learning kits
using local language.
• Government policy in
support of multilingual
education should have the
following important
features:
o A clear identification
was made that at what
level of schooling should
be added to the MLE
project.
o An agency has been set
up to coordinate,
develop, and support the
work of the MLE
project.
o The budget has been
allocated to support the
work in relation to the
  

25. 2. Evaluation Result on the Methods of
Project Implementation
Project Input Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
1. Characteristic of the
project staff
The project staff should have
the following characteristics:
1. Teachers:
• Good command of speaking,
reading, and writing both
local and Thai languages.
• Understanding and
appreciation of local culture.
• Clear and easy to read
hand-writing.
• Being selected and approved
by the community.
  
Two teachers have been
assigned for one class:
one Thai and one local
teacher in charge of
teaching in each
classroom. The Thai
teacher was officially
recruited, while local
teacher passed the
criteria through the
selection process. Both
Thai and local teachers
have undergone the
training (on teaching
method, lesson planning,
and developing learning
kit, for example) to join
the project.

26. Project Input Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
1. Characteristic of the
project staff
2. Committee members on
language/media production:
• Good command of speaking,
reading, and writing the first
language.
• Understanding and
appreciation of local culture.
• Being accepted by the
community as good story
tellers and/or picture
drawers.
• Capable of reading out loud
in the second language and
transcribed the text from the
second to the first language
and vice versa.
  
It was about working
together between Thai
and local teachers, local
wise people, and the
Foundation for Applied
Linguistics. The Thai
teachers invented stories,
local teachers and wise
people contributed their
drawings and proof-reading
of local language,
while the FAL helped in
the development of some
teaching materials,
including the making of
alphabet chart.

27. Project Input Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
1. Characteristic of the
project staff
3. Supervisor/resource person:
• Good command of speaking,
reading, and writing the first
and the second languages.
• Equipped with knowledge
about local history and
culture.
• Capable of coordinating with
government and school
personnel, local leaders, and
NGOs.
• Capable of communicating
abstract and technical
aspects of good teaching with
the teachers.
• Good experience in teaching
of the first language.
  
Supervisors came from
the Office of Primary
Education School District
overseeing pilot schools
in the project. Resource
persons (for the training)
came from FAL. To work
with school and
community, contact was
made to a group of
school administrators,
School Committee
members, Thai and local
teachers to carry out the
project implementation
continuously.

28. Project Input Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
1. Characteristic of the
project staff
4. Advisors:
• Understanding the Goals and
Objectives of the
programme.
• Well determine to work
together towards the success.
• Being selected and approved
by the community.
  
Advisors here are the
school committee
members comprising of
community leaders and
members who are mostly
familiar with both Thai
and local languages. They
understand and approve
the project. However,
some Committee
members do not
understand, nor accept
the project that they send
their offspring to school
elsewhere.

29. Project Input Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
2. Needs and the
preparation of the
parents and
community
members.
 Parents and community
members were in need of
and prepared for the
project participation.
  
3. Support from
school
administrators,
teachers, and
other educators
involved.
 School administrators,
teachers, and the first line
of command agency
provided support and
played their clear roles in
the project.
  

30. Project Input Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
4. The budget
allocation from
supportive
agencies.
 Each supportive agency has
allocated the budget as it
was planned.
 The project was equipped
with enough budgets to
cover all activities.
  
5. Expenditure for
individual student
The budget for hiring local
teachers was underpaid (lower
than the minimum of 300 baht
per day).
2010:
Overall expenditures 4,286,662.- baht.
Per capita of students on average 2,873.10 baht.
2011:
Overall expenditures 6,610,427.- baht.
Per capita of students on average 4,430.58 baht.
2012 (Jan. – Jul.):
Overall expenditures 3,926,273.- baht.
Per capita of students on average 2,631.55 baht.
Totaling 2010 -2012 (Jan. – Jul.):
Overall expenditures 14,823,362.- baht
Per capita of students on average 9,935.23 baht

31. 2.2 Project Implementation Process
Implementation
Process
Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
1. Relevant study
and/or basic
research
 Study and/or basic
research has been
made to gather the
data enough for
planning and
developing the MLE
programme.
• OBEC helped in the selection of pilot schools
by using the following criteria:
o The students must share the same ethnicity in
one school.
o Communities were ready to accept the
project.
o Schools were ready to accept the project.
• FAL has made relevant documentary study on
the following topics:
o The nine components that should appear in
the MLE programme.
o Research works on MLE overseas.
o Teaching method emphasizing the students
and Total Physical Response (TPR)
instructional technique.
o The process to bring communities into
Participatory Method.
o Intercultural Education.

32. Implementation
Process
Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
2. Interpersonal
awareness raising
and mutual
understanding.
• There have been activities
that helped raising
awareness and mutual
understanding about the
values of multilingual
education.
  
3. Development of
standard writing
system for
language with no
alphabets.
• Writing system has been
developed by the linguists
together with local people.
• This writing system has
been approved by its users
and government agencies.
  

33. Implementation
Process
Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
5. The
development and
production of
reading materials
at different levels,
including the
teaching manual.
 Community members were
invited to participate in the
development and
production of reading
materials in bilingual
education.
 Teaching manual has been
developed for a complete
bilingual education.
 The teaching materials that
have been developed with
the following features:
o Its content is
interesting.
o Using clear and easy
language.
o The pictures are
relevant to the text and
appropriate to the local
  

34. Implementation
Process
Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
6. The selection
and training of
teachers (and local
teachers).
 The selection process of
local teachers was to
ensure the good
qualification as determined
in the project.
 Trainings have been
provided for school and
local teachers regularly.
  
7. Follow-up and
evaluation.
 There has been an internal
evaluation process in the
project.
 An evaluation of
community appreciation
was made on the project to
measure the level of
project achievement in
terms of educational and
cultural goals.
  
• A compared test was done between the
pilot school and its parallel school in order
to see the learning achievements before
students took part in the NT-O-net exam.
• Evaluation of parents’ and community
members’ appreciation was launched
through participatory method or
questionnaire/informal interview by
community member who acted as
coordinator in the project.
• School supervisor or teachers discussed
with the parents.

35. Implementation
Process
Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
8. Inter-agencies
collaboration.
Inter-agencies collaboration
network has been created
covering both government and
non-government sectors.
  
9. Influencing the
state policy on
language and
education.
There has been influencing
activities towards policy level
of the state on the issue of
language and education.
Collaboration between OBEC,
Office of Primary Education
School District, pilot schools, SIL,
and Life Skill Development
Foundation has been set up.
  
Efforts have been made to
push to the policy level of the
state, but so far, there was no
clear policy in writing on the
issue.

36. 3. Evaluation Result on Causal Relationship
between Input, Process, Output, Outcome,
and Impact of the Project
Evaluation List Evaluation Criteria Mon Karen Hmong
Causal
relationship
between input,
process, output,
outcome, and
impact of the
project.
Causal relationship
between input, process,
output, outcome, and
impact of the project
conforms to the logic
model of the project.
  
Awareness raising and the sense of
ownership of the project could not be
met as expected. Because some
villagers did not understand and
disagreed with the project. They kept
waiting for the result when the students
finished Grade 3. There was
communication gap with the School
Committee members and villagers.
School administrators could not create
social rapport with the community as
well as the absence of project
coordinator with local background.

37. Recommendations for the
Project Holder
 Data/information collected by other
research networks whose work was
among the indigenous people can be
used for the development of
curriculum which is responsive to the
local situation.
 The supervisor/resource person for
the project should be proficient in
speaking, reading, and writing both in
the first and second languages.

38.  Information and communication
technology should be introduced for
multilingual education. This will reduce
expenditure on the production of
learning materials.
 Creating cohesion through Thai and
local teachers working together can
affect the quality of teaching and
learning in the classroom.

39.  FAL and its network should launch a
campaign together to lobby the agency
overseeing schools to formulate a clear and
transparent policy that can be examined
and to allocate a budget for the sustainable
operation of the MTB-MLE project.
 Efforts should be made to bring into the
network of PCF partners representatives
from different indigenous organizations in
Thailand. This would help create
awareness of MTB-MLE among indigenous
communities and the state in order to
influence the making of policy at the

40. Recommendations for Further
Study
 Based on the experience and results
of this evaluation, this systematic
approach to project evaluation
appears to be a viable and useful
option for other MTB-MLE projects.
 Situation analysis and assessment of
language usage should be studied in
each geographical area.