Earning vs Learning: Supporting

Myanmar Migrant Education on the

Thailand Myanmar Border

By
Francis Thomas Bird

A thesis submitted to Victoria University of Wellington in partial

fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of
Education.

Te Herenga Waka - Victoria University of Wellington,

New Zealand

2023
Table of Contents

Table of Contents............................................................................................................... 1
Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 4
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................... 5
Glossary .......................................................................................................................... 6
Chapter One: Introduction ................................................................................................ 7
Personal and Academic Rationale for this Study ....................................................... 7
Aim of the Research....................................................................................................... 7
Thailand Myanmar Border ............................................................................................. 9
Myanmar Migrant Teachers ......................................................................................... 10
Research Questions..................................................................................................... 10
Outline of Thesis .......................................................................................................... 10
Chapter Two: Literature Review ..................................................................................... 12
Migrant Education Policy ............................................................................................ 12
The Size of the Migrant Education Challenge ........................................................... 13
Out of School Migrant Children .................................................................................. 13
Conflicting Agendas .................................................................................................... 15
Burden vs Benefit Debate............................................................................................ 16
Assimilation vs Return Debate ................................................................................... 17
Three Doors of Discrimination .................................................................................... 17
Migrant Learning Centres ............................................................................................ 19
History and Purpose .................................................................................................... 19
Current Challenges ...................................................................................................... 20
Uncertain Education Pathways ................................................................................... 20
The Legal Status of Migrant Learning Centres.......................................................... 22
Quality, Curriculum, Accreditation ............................................................................. 22
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 23
Chapter Three: Methodology .......................................................................................... 25
Qualitative Research .................................................................................................... 25
Case Study Research................................................................................................... 25
The Case: Marist Asia Foundation Migrant Learning Centre ................................... 26
Action Research ........................................................................................................... 27
Lewin’s Force Field Theory ......................................................................................... 28
Research Design .......................................................................................................... 30

1
 Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 31
Initial Survey ................................................................................................................. 32
Focus Groups ............................................................................................................... 32
Case Study Interviews - Teachers - Organisations ................................................... 34
Non-Case Study Interviews ......................................................................................... 34
Follow up MAF Teacher Training Research Group ................................................... 35
Coding and Content Analysis ..................................................................................... 35
Data Limitations ........................................................................................................... 36
Ethical Considerations ................................................................................................ 37
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 37
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................... 38
Education Challenges .................................................................................................. 38
Teacher Training .......................................................................................................... 40
Stress ............................................................................................................................ 40
Low Salary .................................................................................................................... 42
Organisational Challenges .......................................................................................... 43
Vocational Education and Higher Education............................................................. 44
Educational Quality ...................................................................................................... 47
Causes and Effects ...................................................................................................... 48
Discrimination .............................................................................................................. 50
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 52
Chapter Five: Discussion ................................................................................................ 53
Interconnection of Challenges and Causes............................................................... 53
A Social Analysis: Five Faces of Oppression ........................................................... 57
Exploitation ................................................................................................................... 59
Marginalisation ............................................................................................................. 61
Powerlessness ............................................................................................................. 62
Cultural Imperialism ..................................................................................................... 63
Violence......................................................................................................................... 64
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 65
Chapter Six: Teacher Training ........................................................................................ 66
Case study and Non-Case study data ........................................................................ 67
Marist Asia Foundation Teacher Training Research Group..................................... 67
Marist Asia Foundation Teacher Survey .................................................................... 68
Evaluation of Three Teacher Training Programmes ................................................. 68
Digital Technology ....................................................................................................... 73
2
 The TPaCK Model ......................................................................................................... 73
Design Features of a Teacher Training Program ...................................................... 73
Programme Length ...................................................................................................... 74
Mode of Learning ......................................................................................................... 75
Mentoring ...................................................................................................................... 75
Resourcing.................................................................................................................... 76
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 78
Chapter Seven: Policy and Practice Implications......................................................... 79
Two Directions for Migrant Education: Teachers or Students ................................ 79
The Role of a Migrant Learning Centre in a Migrant Community ............................ 82
Parallel or Complementary Education ....................................................................... 82
Post-Secondary Landscape: Vocational Education and Higher Education ........... 83
Teacher Training .......................................................................................................... 84
Technology and Content Knowledge Pathway ......................................................... 84
Future Considerations ................................................................................................. 85
Sustainability ................................................................................................................ 86
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 87
References........................................................................................................................ 88
Appendix A ....................................................................................................................... 96
Research Approval ......................................................................................................... 96
Appendix B ....................................................................................................................... 97

3
Abstract
This thesis examines a particular case study of a Migrant Learning Centre on the Thailand
Myanmar Border. Previous research has identified a variety of access to education
challenges faced by Myanmar migrants highlighting that more migrant children continue to
be out of education than in education. However, there is not enough research uncovering
the deeper causes of these continued challenges and the forces at work that push migrant
children to “earn” rather than “learn”.

Myanmar migrant teachers have a privileged window into both the migrant classroom and
the migrant community. Through an examination of literature and data from a qualitative
case study listening to the voices of Myanmar migrant teachers the following questions were
addressed: What are the challenges of Myanmar migrant education? What are the causes of
these migrant education challenges? What are the education implications for a Migrant
Learning Centre?

Findings from the literature and field research revealed several important challenges
interconnected with multiple layers of causes in policy conflicts, cultural assimilation, and
discrimination. Many of these factors remain unaddressed by a current focus on Thai
language learning. A continued reluctance to give migrant workers in Thailand more than
‘temporary worker’ status and the lack of legal recognition and support for Migrant Learning
Centres continues the status quo of poor educational outcomes for Myanmar migrants in
Thailand.

Adopting an action research design enabled Myanmar migrant teachers to identify their most
significant challenge of teacher training and evaluate three current teacher training
programmes on the Thailand Myanmar border. Following research and discussion of various
design features, Myanmar migrant teachers created a proposal for a localised teacher
training programme in the Marist Asia Foundation Migrant Learning Centre. The research
concludes with implications for an education strategy responsive to the needs of Myanmar
students and teachers in this migrant context.

4
Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the Society of Mary and Marist Asia Foundation for supporting this
thesis and their belief in education for the Myanmar migrant community in Ranong. Special
thanks to Fr Arnold Garferio and the Management Team at Marist Asia Foundation for
allowing me to do field research and the many teachers who shared their passion for
education. I hope this thesis may contribute to more people having a deeper appreciation of
the struggles endured and overcome by Myanmar migrant teachers in Migrant Learning
Centres.

Special thanks to Greg at Teacher Focus Myanmar for supporting the interviews and
research experience in Mae Sot. Your leadership in education and research has been
inspirational to me. Your team and projects are a reflection of the transforming power
education can bring in a migrant-refugee community.

Thanks to my two supervisors, Dr Anne Yates and Professor Stephen Dobson. I would like
to acknowledge your patience and constant encouragement. I remember early advice that a
Master's thesis was an apprenticeship in learning the trade of research and writing. I see
now with new awareness the gift and benefit of research to support a community. I will take
this research insight back to the community of Ranong and the Thai Myanmar Border in the
years to come.

I began my thesis by reading Freire’s (1970/2017) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. It ignited a

flame for doing research by being with an oppressed community, not on an oppressed
community. Freire notes in early chapters of his book that many people simply fold their
arms and become spectators of the oppressed. What is needed are radicals who are not
afraid to confront, to listen, to see the world unveiled, so that knowing it better they can
better transform it. I hope this research may support a further step in transforming a migrant
community through the gift of education.

5
Glossary

A Migrant Learning Centre (MLC): a Myanmar migrant community based education

initiative not financially supported by the Thailand government which typically has only
Myanmar migrant children in preschool, primary, or secondary education levels, using
mainly Myanmar language and curriculum.

A Myanmar Migrant Teacher: Most teachers in a MLC are Myanmar migrants who have
experience in education and the classroom, but are not formally trained and most do not
have a bachelor degree from a University. The work category of ‘teacher’ is not eligible for
Myanmar migrant workers who are not qualified and not in a registered school.

Non formal education: Thailand and Myanmar education systems have a non-formal
education pathway which aims to support children who are working but wish to continue their
education. Education materials and teachers outside of the formal government schools
support after work or weekend learning opportunities to get a recognised primary or
secondary education qualification. Many MLC’s use a non-formal Thai / Myanmar
curriculum.

6
Chapter One: Introduction
A concerning reality regarding Myanmar migrant education in Thailand is that there
are an estimated 200,000 migrant children out-of-school compared to 164,000 who
are in school. A large percentage of these children are estimated to be from
Myanmar (Save the Children, 2014; Tyrosvoutis, 2019). This thesis explores the
challenges of supporting Myanmar migrant education on the Thailand Myanmar
border. By listening to the voice of migrant teachers in the classroom and
community, this thesis aims to identify education challenges, their causes, and
implications to support a Migrant Learning Centre (MLC).

Personal and Academic Rationale for this Study

The primary location of research in Ranong is for both personal and educational
reasons. In 2013 I arrived in Ranong and worked at Marist Asia Foundation, a faith-
based organisation supporting Myanmar migrants with health and education. I
worked for ten years as a volunteer teacher and eventually as Director. My
educational roles provided supporting English language learning and acting as a
tutor and co-ordinator for the Australian Catholic University (ACU) Diploma in Liberal
Arts (discontinued by the university in 2021). Several years of involvement in migrant
education helped me understand the challenges of providing primary and secondary
education, and pathways toward higher learning. My work also introduced me to the
realities of the Thailand Ministry of Education Non-Formal Education pathway (Ko So
No). Involvement in research and migrant education discussions at both the local
and national levels helped me see first-hand the slow progress and multiple layers of
barriers at the national government and Thai community levels. I have learnt the
importance of listening to the voice of the migrant community highlighting their
complex context, and research that is transforming challenges rather than simply
identifying them.

Aim of the Research

While there have been a number of policy developments supporting migrant
education in Thailand over the past 20 years, particularly an increase in the number
of Myanmar migrant children attending Thai government schools (Narawat, 2012),
overall progress has been slow. Research indicates more than 50% of migrant
children in Thailand, a staggering 200,000, are estimated to be out of education
(Unicef, 2019). This figure reveals not only the need to address policy and
implementation gaps and support MLC’s, but also the need to uncover any
unresolved and less understood obstacles for Myanmar migrant children to access
and remain in education and therefore achieve a brighter future in Thailand.

This thesis seeks to go beyond general policy data and broad figures about what the
migrant education problems are, and to seek more information regarding why these
challenges continue to exist, and how an effective response can be made. There is a

7
need for research to explore the political complexity and tension between
assimilation (into Thailand) and return (back to Myanmar) and the intersectionality of
competing interests behind the politics of education, labour, economics, immigration,
and national security concerns. Beneath this complexity lie individual migrant
families and individual migrant students facing the very real pressure and decision to
“earn vs learn”. It is this tension that is the subject of the research described in this
thesis. Consequently, Earning vs Learning: Supporting Myanmar Migrant Education
has been chosen as the title for this thesis as it paints an imaginative picture of a
number of the unseen forces that are interacting upon migrant education. Research
that takes place only within an educational policy silo will not understand the political
and economic landscape significantly enough to recognise what specific levers for
change may need to be adjusted to gain real improvement in migrant education.

To help engagement and connection with the wider educational and sociological
context, four theories will be used to help conceptualise and map influences on
Myanmar migrant education (Fig 1.1 Below). Firstly, Freire’s (1970/2017) Pedagogy
of the Oppressed will help locate migrant education within an emancipatory
framework, listen to the voice of the oppressed, and recognise the importance of an
action research methodology. Secondly, Lewin’s “force-field analysis” (Johnson,
2014) will be used as a tool to help illustrate the various driving forces (positive) and
restraining forces (negative) at work upon Myanmar migrant education. Thirdly,
Young’s (1990) Five Faces of Oppression will help provide a social analysis
revealing how oppression is created, accepted, and becomes invisible to the
dominant culture. This results in many migrants remaining fixed in 3-D (dirty, difficult,
dangerous) (Pangsapa, 2015) work environments and ultimately enslaved to vested
interests that seek to maintain these conditions and roles. Finally, Biesta’s (2009;
2015) three domains of education will support a critical analysis of what education is
needed in the context of a MLC and provide a helpful frame of reference pointing to
the purpose of education in the midst of a challenging educational context.

8
Figure 1.1

Four Theoretical Constructs

Thailand Myanmar Border

This research proposes the large centres of Myanmar migrants on the Thailand
Myanmar border at border crossing points in Mae Sot (Northern Tak Province) and
Ranong (Southern Ranong Province) and also Samut Sakhon (Central region) are
likely places that exhibit the main challenges of supporting migrant education. It is
precisely in these three geographical locations that most of the 110 MLC’s in
Thailand exist (Tyrosvoutis, 2019). Within these locations on the Thailand Myanmar
Border exists an educational pathway which I will refer to as “MLC”. These MLC’s
invite special attention because they are responsive to the challenges of enrolment
and support of migrant children. Both Mae Sot and Ranong are border crossing
locations with a very close geographical proximity to the migrants’ homeland in
Myanmar.

International migrant and refugee education contexts do not always correspond to

those of the Thai Myanmar border. It is useful to highlight a distinction between the
terms immigrant, migrant and refugee. An immigrant is usually understood as

9
someone who is leaving their homeland and seeking work and a permanent
destination in another country. This is in contrast to a migrant who may be
understood as someone who is seeking work, but may aim to return to their
homeland. A refugee is considered to be someone who because of fear of
persecution is now unable or unwilling to return to their homeland (International
Organisation for Migration, 2019). The reality of an immigrant or refugee seeking to
stay permanently in a new country, and a migrant seeking one day to return home, is
an important distinction in the education debate. Careful consideration is required in
the transfer of global immigrant, refugee, and migrant education contexts onto the
Thai Myanmar border. Status in Thailand as a Myanmar migrant worker is legally
temporary and cannot be ‘permanent’ or ‘long term’ (Chan, 2022). A return route
home is always needing preparation and is always present in the migrant
consciousness. This reality has significant consequences for Myanmar migrant
education.

Myanmar Migrant Teachers

Studies have reported on the experience and challenges faced by migrant students
both within Thai government schools and MLC’s (Arphattananon, 2012; 2022;
Austin, 2012). However there has been limited research specifically attending to the
voices of migrant teachers. Myanmar migrant teachers in a MLC can offer a special
insight into the educational complexity of the classroom and the wider migrant
community context and its challenges. This perspective can be a helpful window into
the intersectionality of classroom, culture, host and home communities, and the
conflicting tensions and causes of low educational enrolment and achievement for
Myanmar migrant children. Myanmar migrant teachers, many of whom have grown
up or lived in Thailand for a number of years, are the key informants for this
research.

Research Questions
This thesis aims to understand the challenges of supporting Myanmar migrant
education on the Thailand Myanmar border. The three sub-research questions
posed to explore these challenges are: (1) What are the main education challenges
for Myanmar Migrant Teachers and organisations to support Myanmar Migrant
Education? (2) What are the structural causes of these educational challenges? (3)
What are the practical implications for Marist Asia Foundation’s (MAF) educational
strategy?

Outline of Thesis
This thesis will be presented in seven chapters. Chapter One has provided an
introduction to the study and its context. Chapter Two is a literature review regarding
the current context of Migrant education on the Thailand Myanmar border and
presents key theoretical concepts to frame the migrant education debate. Chapter
Three outlines the study, design, and method, as well as the instruments used to
10
gather the data. Chapter Four will discuss the findings and highlight the Myanmar
migrant education challenges and their structural causes. Chapter Five will analyse
the findings using Young’s (1990) Five Faces of Oppression to provide a sociological
analysis of a migrant community, the consequences of oppression, and its impact on
education. Chapter Six will examine the specific area of teacher training which
emerged from the research, evaluate some currently available teacher training
resources on the Thailand Myanmar border, explore the scope of teacher training
using the Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPaCK) Model (Koehler
& Mishra, 2009), and consider the implications for a localised teacher training
programme design at a MLC. Chapter Seven will conclude by examining future
education implications for Marist Asia Foundation’s MLC.

11
Chapter Two: Literature Review
An initial review of literature using keyword searches of Myanmar migrant education
and Thailand Myanmar border revealed a significant amount of research. Research
ranged from the size of the migrant education challenge, education policies and
implementation gaps within Thailand Government schools, to the numerous
challenges of MLC’s. A more thorough and systematic search reduced literature to
the research within the past five years, and identified research by both Thai and
Non-Thai authors that pointed to causes of challenges. Research that involved both
Ranong (Southern Thailand) and Mae Sot (Northern Thailand) was identified along
with reports that provided a contextual analysis of migrant education.

This chapter will summarise key policies of the Thailand Government education
policy relevant to Myanmar migrant education, investigate the size of the challenge,
and the various debates regarding Myanmar migrant education. Focus will be given
to the assimilation versus return debate and its implications for Myanmar migrant
education and MLC’s.

Migrant Education Policy

Thailand’s migrant educational policy is frequently framed in the literature by its
involvement and support of the 1990 World Declaration on Education for All (EFA),
the subsequent framework developed in Dakar (World Education Forum, 2000), and
the passing of the Thailand governments cabinet resolution in 2005 ensuring
educational access for all non-Thai children regardless of legal status (Austin, 2012;
Tyrosvoutis, 2019; Unicef, 2019). Policy strengthening continued through Thailand’s
signing the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Declaration on
Strengthening Education for Out of School Children and Youth in 2016, the Ministry
of Education produced a Handbook and Guidelines for Providing Education for
Persons without Legal Status or Thai Citizenship in 2017, and the Ministerial
Proclamation in 2018 saying documentation was no longer required and all children
were to receive a 13 digit identification number giving access to education
(Tyrosvoutis, 2019).

Each of these policy milestones have led some authors to state that Thailand’s
education policy mandating 15 years of free education for all is “progressive and
generous” (Unicef, 2019, p. 1), and that the Thailand government should be
congratulated on its “admirable universalism” (Austin, 2012, p. 411). While
Thailand’s education policies reveal a direction of support toward migrant children
being integrated into the Thai government school system, Nawarat (2019) suggests
taking a more critical view pointing out that a government's policy in official
statements does not necessarily give “coherent expressions of the mind of the state”
(p. 235). Nawarat’s view on Thailand’s education policy is that it is fragmented and
reveals a persistent gap between statements and actual outcomes. Gaps in policy
and real outcomes indicate either poor policy and implementation failures, or vested
12
interests hiding behind systematic failures. Seeking to understand the large number
of migrant children continuing to remain outside of education, Austin (2012) points to
a failure to collect and publish data as a basis for serious policy implementation,
which may have root causes in the high political and economic costs. Educational
failures on the part of migrant children could also be functional in creating a source
of cheap labour of out-of-school children enabling employers to evade minimum
wage and other labour laws (Nawarat, 2018). Unicef (2019) reports and invites the
Thai government to recognise that because of the complexity of migrant education,
effective solutions cannot be resolved in the silos of a particular ministry alone.

The Size of the Migrant Education Challenge

While it is difficult to identify current numbers because most migrant children are not
officially registered or counted with their migrant parents, Stange and Sasiwongsaroj
(2020) estimate there are between 300,000-400,000 migrant workers’ children in
Thailand, of whom 200,000 are estimated to be Out of Education (Save The
Children, 2014). 2018-2019 MLC and Thai Government Education data regarding
Migrant Children In Education is taken from the 2019 Bridges Report (Tyrosvoutis,
2019) and illustrated below in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1

Migrant Students In and Out of School in Thailand

Migrant Education in Thailand

In Education Thai Government Formal Schools 145,379

Thai Government Non Formal 2,562

Education Learning Centres

Migrant Learning Centres 16,350

In School Education total 164,291

Out of Education Out of School Children 200,000

Out of School Education total 200,000

Out of School Migrant Children

Reasons for the large number of out-of-school children in Thailand and their potential
to access and continue in education are questions that have been the focus of recent
research (Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022; Save the Children, 2014; Tyrosvoutis,
2019). Significant research effort has gone into identifying the ‘problems’ in terms of
policy and implementation gaps, the lack of financial and educational resources

13
specifically available for migrant children, and the lack of data to identify target areas
of out-of-school children (Austin, 2012). There are also significant Thai language
learning challenges for migrant children needing primary level Thai before entry into
formal or non-formal Thai education pathways, and the unregistered legal status of
MLC’s (Tyrosvoutis, 2022; Unicef, 2019). Research has also highlighted the
predominant pattern of Myanmar migrant children leaving education around age 12
to work (Save The Children, 2014).

Research has repeatedly focussed upon two challenges revealed by the data in
Table 2.1: (1) How to help out-of-school migrant children access education. (2) How
to assist migrant children who are in education. While both questions are important,
a variety of perspectives emerge in the research. Unicef (2019) summarises the
education policy and the implementation gaps to resolve the access and inclusion
problem into Thailand Government Schools. Harkins (2019), Tyrosvoutis (2022), and
Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis (2022), summarise the support needed for MLC’s to
ensure a quality education pathway is accessible and available in Myanmar
language, and this requires legal recognition and financial support by the Thailand
Government.

Evidence of low access and low retention of Myanmar migrant children in education
(Save the Children, 2014; Stange & Sasiwongsaroj, 2020) raises the question of
whether Thailand’s national education policy can be truly effective in meeting the
needs of particular groups and regions because of their specific circumstances. In
response, the nature and function of MLC’s and their ability to facilitate a more
effective access and inclusion for out-of-school Myanmar migrant children than Thai
Government schools has been researched comprehensively in the three reports:
Tyrosvoutis (2019); Lowe, Chan, & Tyrosvoutis (2022); and Lowe, Win, &
Tyrosvoutis (2022). A general conclusion advocates for dual support: for Thailand
government schools to allow migrant parents a choice for an accredited and
recognised education within Thailand for their children; and strengthening support for
MLC’s as the most inclusive, flexible, and culturally supportive pathway.

What is obvious from an overview of the literature is a continued lack of progress

regarding including out-of-school children in education, the reluctance of the
Thailand government to support MLC’s, and the inflexibility of the Thailand
government schools to adapt to the needs of the migrant community. The reasons
for this lack of progress may be found in the various conflicting agendas of education
stakeholders, and more hidden political and economic interests causing what
Narawat (2018) calls a functional failure. This literature review will now seek to
examine these underlying concerns using Austin’s (2012) concept of conflicting
agendas.

14
Conflicting Agendas
Lewin’s (Johnson, 2014) force field analysis is a useful theory to map out the key
forces identified in the categories of positive “driving forces” and negative “restraining
forces”. Figure 2.1 illustrates key incentives and disincentives for migrant children in
education.

Figure 2.1

Myanmar Migrant Education: Force Field Analysis (Simplified)

While significant research has been devoted to the policy and implementation gaps
trying to get Myanmar migrant children into Thailand government schools (Unicef,
2019), there are also wider cultural, linguistic, poverty, and discriminatory economic
forces at work which create conflicting agendas. Shlasko (2015) proposes looking
from a wider viewpoint of intersectionality which allows us to see the ways that
various parts of a system are shown to connect. From these connections one can
see more clearly the whole system which ultimately may produce a system of
oppression (Shlasko, 2015).

Within the context of migrant education, researchers frequently investigate the issue
of access to Thailand government schools with the resulting focus on the importance
of identity documents and Thai language learning as key to welcoming more migrant
children into Thailand schools (Save the Children, 2014; Unicef, 2019). However,
when looked at from a wider perspective Thailand’s education policy intersects with
employment policy which also intersects with migration policy. The result is
conflicting agendas where migrants are perceived as either a burden or benefit.
Seen as a burden, migrants are purported to bring social ills of disease and poverty
related crime costing the Thai taxpayer and government money and putting Thai
safety and nationalism at risk. Seen in a positive light, are the benefits of migrants
supporting Thailand's ageing social structure and its need for labour to support future
economic growth (Austin, 2012; Harkins, 2019; Stange & Sasiwongsaroj, 2020).

15
This “burden vs benefit” debate characterises the underlying arguments for or
against support of migrant education.

Burden vs Benefit Debate

Evidence of the burden perspective comes from the large numbers of migrant
workers with undocumented and uneducated children who are frequently referred to
as a social challenge and a burden (Austin, 2012). Many Thai see Myanmar
migrants as “others”; dangerous aliens, a source of crime, disease, a threat to Thai
people's lives and property. Consequently, Thai principals and education
administrators are often torn between accepting migrant students and receiving
threats from Thai parents about withdrawing their children (Arphattananon, 2022;
Stange & Sasiwongsaroj, 2020).

In contrast, the positive perspective toward migrants recognises it is this large

number of mostly Myanmar migrant workers and their children who fill the 3-D
migrant jobs and significantly contribute to Thailand's economy (Stange &
Sasiwongsaroj, 2020). It is estimated migrants make up over 10% of Thailand’s total
labour force (Harkins, 2019), contribute up to 6-10% of Thailand’s gross domestic
product, and represent more than 80% of the total workforce in sectors such as
fishing and construction (Tyrosvoutis, 2019). From this perspective, a number of
authors and reports challenge the burden perspective and contend the narrative
needs to be reframed toward a benefit perspective. Based on human capital theory,
not only do migrants currently support Thailand's economy, but investing in the
education of migrant children will benefit and ultimately serve as a catalyst to sustain
economic development for Thailand’s future (Harkins, 2019; Lowe, Win, &
Tyrosvoutis, 2022).

It can be perceived by some as advantageous to keep migrant workers and their

children uneducated, undocumented, and low paid to ensure continuity of cheap
labour. Nawarat (2018) refers to this as a functional failure of the Thai education
system and invites the question: whose hidden interests are being served by the
failure of migrant education? This failure of education serving an oppressive function
of migrants is pointed to in the 2019 Thailand Migration Report (Harkins, 2019).
Maintaining this system keeps the large migrant population and the local Thai
population in a position of continually enduring various social ills of poor health and
low education with the side effects of fracturing social cohesion. As Austin (2012)
comments, Thailand’s management of migrant workers seems “torn between
sympathy and hostility; between a concern to protect and a pressure to punish” (p.
414).

Earning vs Learning Debate

Connected with the “burden vs benefit” debate is what I describe as the “earning vs
learning” debate. While Myanmar migrant parents would like to prioritise education

16
and learning for their children, low wages and debt incurred through expensive legal
immigration requirements force children to begin earning. This is evidenced by the
high dropout rate of Myanmar migrant children from education around age 11-12 and
the failure to complete a transition from primary to secondary education (Stange &
Sasiwongsaroj, 2020). Failure to complete a lower or upper secondary education
with an accredited education certificate blocks migrant students' future chances of
post-secondary or higher education. Consequently, dreams of higher education and
breaking out of the poverty trap become unattainable. Austin (2012) refers to this
dropping out of education as a family financial survival strategy. This intersectionality
between education, culture, economics, and politics produces the reality of “earning
vs learning”. This reality has been chosen as the title of the thesis as it provides a
summary of the overarching narrative of the Myanmar migrant education context and
two basic pressures upon a migrant student and their family.

Assimilation vs Return Debate

Another debate reflected in the literature refers to “assimilation vs return” because of
Thailand’s policy for temporary migrant workers (Arphattananon, 2021; Austin,
2012). Thailand does not allow a long-term pathway to residency or citizenship for
Myanmar migrant workers beyond a four year temporary passport (Harkins, 2019;
Ramani & van Uden, nd). This leaves many migrants in a state of continued
temporary vulnerability. While evidence shows families do stay for longer periods, it
is also clear that migrant workers are constantly uncertain of their ability to stay
(Tyrosvoutis, 2019). While Thailand’s education policy is based on assimilation and
the potential long-term stay of Myanmar migrant children, immigration policy is based
on the short-term stay and return of temporary migrant workers. Chan (2022)
analyses this contradictory policy direction referring to this issue as a “transnational
opportunity trap” (p. 146). Migrants come to Thailand seeking work and education
(opportunity), yet are coerced to return home because of their immigration status.
When education in the host country was not suited to their children’s needs, and is
not recognised on their return home, they realise that what was considered an
opportunity has actually become a “trap” (p.146).

Three Doors of Discrimination

I would like to further develop Chan’s (2022) idea of the hidden traps migrant families
experience. I propose for the reader the image of “three doors of discrimination” with
each door representing a particular obstacle; the document curse, the education
trap, and the employment gate. The first door, the document curse, is lived by
migrant parents while seeking to obtain a variety of identity, visa, and work
documents for themselves and their children. Research refers to this reality as
having regular or irregular status (Harkins, 2019). While migrant children are at
school, whether in a Thai government school or a MLC, their irregular status is
frequently overlooked by the provision of a student ID card or Thai government 13-
digit ID number. But when a Myanmar migrant student leaves education and no

17
longer has a student ID card they are immediately confronted by their irregular
document status (Chan, 2022). The only solution is to buy documents or to find work,
which requires prior identity documents and a valid visa. This document curse is a
significant expense and has educational effects on migrant children as they are
forced to earn rather than continue to learn.

This document curse is compounded by a second hidden door: the educational

opportunity trap (Chan, 2022). While in most countries a higher level of education
corresponds to a wider range of higher employment opportunities, a migrant family
with a child seeking to continue studies risks further expense in time spent learning
without the real possibility of benefit in obtaining a higher paying job. From a migrant
parents’ perspective, the opportunity cost is ultimately not beneficial to the family.
This may be an underlying cause of Myanmar migrant students leaving education
when they are big enough physically for work.

The education trap is compounded further by a third door: the employment gate.
Thai law stipulates only a narrow range of eight categories of work is possible for
Myanmar migrant workers. This work is primarily in the low paid sectors of
agriculture, forestry, fishing and construction (Unicef, 2019). This employment gate
acts as a further disincentive for Myanmar youth to pursue learning. Chan (2022)
paints a picture of a young Myanmar migrant stuck on a bridge with the exit closed.
What was once seen as an opportunity is now seen as an illusion. Having walked
through the open door of the Thai government education pathway, learnt Thai
language, adapted to Thai social norms, and hoping for further education and better
employment opportunities, migrant students now meet an employment gate which is
relatively closed. These three networked doors of discrimination act as very real
disincentives to learning and the consideration of one's ability to stay long term in
Thailand. Harkins (2019) makes reference to the reality of the three doors of
discrimination pointing to the need for the temporary status of Myanmar migrant
workers to be adjusted:

policies that treat them only as short-term labourers may no longer be

sufficient. Supporting migrants to become more active members in the
economic, social, cultural and political life of Thailand would benefit not only
migrants themselves but also Thai society as a whole (p, XII).

Beneath the particular challenges of Myanmar migrant education is the complex

intersection of migration politics and education politics. As a result of conflicting
policy agendas and resulting uncertainty regarding assimilation or return for
Myanmar migrant families, there is both the evidence and voice demanding a more
flexible education response and the support of MLC’s (Lowe, Chan, & Tyrosvoutis,
2022; Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022).

18
Figure 2.2

The Three Doors of Discrimination for Myanmar Migrant Workers in Thailand

Migrant Learning Centres

History and Purpose

A current summary of the purpose and need for the 110 MLC’s along the Thailand
Myanmar border serving an estimated 16,350 Myanmar migrant students is provided
in recent research (Tyrosvoutis, 2019). A primary benefit of education in a MLC is
providing flexibility for migrant families to return to Myanmar and knowing their
children can more easily continue with their education on return to Myanmar. In
addition to a more flexible mother tongue curriculum from the students’ country of
origin, there is also more multilingual learning, a culturally safe and encouraging
environment, supported by Myanmar teachers (Lowe, Chan, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022;
Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022; Tyrosvoutis, 2019; 2023). Research also points to
educational challenges of accreditation, relevant curriculum, transferability of
qualifications gained in Thailand (Narawat, 2014), along with financial sustainability
where many MLC’s are reliant on donations and charity (Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis,
2022).

From the Thai Government, Ministry of Education and EFA perspective there has
been the invitation and preference for migrant children to be directed toward the Thai
State school. The aims of the Thai government toward Myanmar migrant children are
noted as being assimilationist in nature. They have been shown to be vested in their
learning Thai language and culture and preserving nation building for Thailand
(Arphattananon, 2022; Austin, 2012). While the principles of inclusive and free
education for all is stated in policy, what emerges on the ground is a gap between

19
principle and practice. The Thai government does not allocate sufficient resources to
support the necessary Thai language learning and other costs associated with
effective support of migrant children in Thai schools (Unicef, 2019). There is also
some cultural resistance at both administrative and parental levels to accepting
Myanmar migrant children into their schools (Tuangratananon et al., 2019). The
realisation of these gaps between policy and practice, and also cultural resistance
from both the Thai and Myanmar community explains the continued existence of
MLC’s. These can be understood to be a result of diverse compromises between the
hopes of the migrant community and tensions in adopting Thai language and
curriculum from the Thai government. Nawarat (2014) concludes that MLC’s can be
viewed as “a temporary and semi-official fix for the problem” and are left operating
on the “goodwill of Thai authorities” (p. 875). The current lack of effective advocacy
and support for the registration and legalisation of MLC’s highlights this current
status quo.

Current Challenges
Following Covid-19 and the 2021 military coup in Myanmar, the current situation with
MLC’s could be viewed as an existential crisis because opportunities to access
learning resources from and return back to Myanmar have become more fragile. This
ability to learn and return has been seen as the primary purpose of the existence of
MLC’s. Research data from 2013 to 2022 shows 60-80% of migrant families intend
to return to Myanmar but do not know when (Chan, 2021; Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis,
2022). The high level of uncertainty expressed by migrant parents about their
expected stay in Thailand has also been compounded by changes in Myanmar
following the coup. As a result of the current tensions and instability in Myanmar
some educational leaders are thinking there will be an increased trend both to MLC’s
and Thai government schools. Migrant families will not return to Myanmar in the
short term, and those staying longer in Thailand may decide in favour of a Thai
education pathway.

Uncertain Education Pathways

Previously, seven accredited pathways (Thai and Myanmar) were available to
Myanmar migrant children inside the Thailand Myanmar border. Currently there is a
breakdown in the provision of the Myanmar curriculum, both formal and non-formal
pathways, accessed inside Thailand (the Myanmar Non Formal Primary Education
(NFPE), the Non Formal Middle Education (NFME), the MLC Formal Education
Program, and the Home Based Learning option of the National Unity Government
(NUG). As a result of recent disruptions across the border and uncertainty regarding
if, when, and with whom educational collaboration with Myanmar will return the
accredited education pathway options now available are reduced to two Thai
pathways as illustrated in Figure 2.3 (column 6 Thai Formal Education- Thai
government school, and column 7 Thai Non-Formal Kor Sor Nor - which can take
place within a MLC).

20
Figure 2.3
Mapping of Migrant Education Pathways in Thailand

Note: Figure 2.3 retrieved from Lowe, Chan, & Tyrosvoutis (2022). Safety nets: A situational analysis of non-formal educational
pathways for migrant children in Tak Province, Thailand. Teacher Focus and Help without Frontiers Thailand Foundation. p, 3.

21
The Legal Status of Migrant Learning Centres
Beyond migrant parents’ vulnerability regarding their length of stay in Thailand and
its impact regarding education choices, research also highlights the continued legal
vulnerability of MLC’s themselves (Harkins, 2019; Tyrosvoutis, 2023). Almost all
MLC’s have not entered the formal registration process to be recognised under Thai
law as a Learning Centre (Tyrosvoutis, 2023). There are a number of legal
documentation and financial challenges that make this too complex and
unsatisfactory for the migrant community. MLC’s are not seeking to become another
Thai school - Learning Centre which the law is designed for in more rural community
areas of Thailand. This unregistered status is a cause of continued vulnerability for
many children and educational organisations supporting migrant education on the
Thai Myanmar Border. The Thailand Migration Report 2019 recommendations to the
Thai Government highlight this within a dual need: “Develop bilateral recognitions for
the educational credentials of migrant children and provide accreditation for Migrant
Learning Centers” (Harkins, 2019. Recommendation 11, p. 18). Connected with the
registration issue is an important side effect of a MLC being able to provide legal
work documents for Myanmar teachers. This is raised as a significant safety and
security concern by migrant teachers affecting their ability to stay and work as
teachers (Tyrosvoutis, 2019).

Quality, Curriculum, Accreditation

In addition to the access challenge, there is the issue of quality education for
Myanmar migrant children. Quality education is dependent on a suitable curriculum
and accreditation. While a strength of MLC’s is their flexibility, there has been an
increased awareness of the importance of granting students recognised learning
certificates. As Lowe states, referring to the migrant education context: “Quality
education is not defined by accreditation, however, accreditation drives quality and
brings greater opportunities to students” (Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022. p. 11).

Unfortunately, the 2021 Military Coup inside Myanmar has created a curriculum and
accreditation dilemma. The Myanmar formal and non-formal pathway was primarily
accessible as it was in the students' mother tongue language for learning. However,
the ability to access the Myanmar course material and receive accreditation is now
uncertain inside Thailand. A further challenge is that the Thai formal and non-formal
pathway has reduced accessibility because of Thai language learning challenges for
migrant children. This challenge exists within both Thai schools and MLC’s for Thai
teachers, funding, and suitable learning resources. While the Thai language learning
challenge has been referred to in research for a number of years (Unicef, 2019,
Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022), the need to create an effective response has
become more urgent as migrant communities and MLC’s turn towards Thai
government schools and the Thai non-formal education curriculum within a MLC.

22
A curriculum that is accepted and recognised between Thailand and Myanmar
governments (Harkins, 2019) has been a topic of research as has the issue of
learning transcripts (Ball, 2016). The Migrant Education Integration Initiative is an
example of an attempt at collaboration, but progress is slow. Some researchers,
reflecting on the complicated processes of intergovernmental agreement, suggest
that an ASEAN General Education Diploma (GED) programme recognised by the
wider 16 countries of the ASEAN community could be an enlightened pathway
forward (Purkey & Irving, 2019). This also intersects with research suggestions for a
more multicultural and global citizenship curriculum to be taught within Thai schools
and MLC’s as a way of going beyond the mono-cultural systems of either Thailand or
Myanmar. Considering the educational context and future, migrant students need to
be learning to live not in one but three cultures for their future (own community, host
community, global community) (Arphattananon, 2021; Purkey & Irving, 2019; Unicef,
2019).

An appropriate curriculum that is accredited for MLC’s also intersects with

professional development, accreditation, and recognition of migrant teachers.
Accreditation of teachers may be a presumption in a stable education system within
a government mandated curriculum and teacher competency framework. This is not
the case in MLC’s on the Thai Myanmar border where estimates of between 600-800
migrant teachers are located (Teacher Focus Myanmar, 2020). Research by
Tyrosvoutis (2019) and Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis (2022) highlights
professionalisation opportunities for migrant teachers could also bring system-wide
benefits of improved educational quality and help resolve safety and financial
security concerns of migrant teachers who are looked upon as unqualified to teach.
This is an issue highlighted by the voices of migrant teachers and migrant education
providers in Chapters Three and Six.

Conclusion
To conclude the literature review of Myanmar migrant education, Figure 2.4 (below)
provides a more detailed force field analysis of Figure 2.1. It is important to
adequately diagnose the restraining forces at work and recognise the restraining
impact of the assimilation-return debate. Despite the positive efforts of both
educational policies, MLC’s, and Thai Schools, the restraining forces continue to
exert a stronger influence on Myanmar migrant education and force migrant children
into earning and not learning.

23
Figure 2.4

Myanmar Migrant Education: Force Field Analysis (detailed)

24
Chapter Three: Methodology
This chapter will explore the theoretical underpinnings of the qualitative method,
explain the particular case study of Marist Asia Foundation MLC, and how a two-
stage process was followed using an action research approach. The steps used in
data collection and analysis will also be explained.

Qualitative Research
Within the field of qualitative research there are a number of philosophical
foundations which align with the adoption of a particular research method. Merriam
(2009) notes positivist, interpretative and critical traditions have emerged. This
research adopts an interpretative and constructionist position, holding that meaning
is created and interpreted from within the social reality of the individual, their
interaction with others, and their cultural and historical environment. As a researcher
influenced by ten years working in a Myanmar migrant community, I also adopt a
critical approach based on “Freire’s transformative and emancipatory education”
(Merriam, 2009. p, 10). Not only is this research seeking to understand migrant
education challenges from the perspective of the migrant teacher, it also seeks to
support change. It is for this reason interviews and focus groups are used to uncover
how migrant teachers experience and understand the challenges and causes; to
uncover their views, values, beliefs and assumptions, and not just the facts
(Creswell, 2013). Following an action research design, selected teachers were
engaged in a process of reflection toward action (Chapter Six) and the implications
of this were considered (RQ3) (Chapter Seven).

Case Study Research

Research using a case study design aims at understanding a phenomenon of real
life in its complexity, depth, and context (Yin, 2009). Looking closely at a particular
case can provide a deeper insight into the context of a particular problem, in this
case Myanmar migrant education. According to Yin, an important issue in case study
research is identifying the research purpose which guides the researcher to use
either an intrinsic, instrumental, or comparative case study approach. Is the research
undertaking an intrinsic case study aimed at understanding one particular case; or
an instrumental case study seeking to examine an issue and draw an external
generalisation as a result of the data; or a ‘collective case study’ where an
instrumental case study is extended to several cases for comparison? There is an
inherent tension where the benefits of thick description and illuminative detail of an
intrinsic case study explored in depth can be lost when a researcher seeks to identify
comparative descriptions and identify what is transferrable and generalisable across
cases (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003).

The issue is whether one is studying a case as representative of other cases to build
a theory (instrumental case study), or one is studying a case because the case itself

25
is of interest and illuminative of the phenomenon (intrinsic case study) (Johnson,
2014). While the instrumental, intrinsic, or comparative case study distinctions are
helpful in clarifying data collection methods and particularly issues of external validity
and generalisation, the realities of research are sometimes more nuanced.
Sometimes a researcher has both particular and general interests and “there is no
line distinguishing intrinsic case study from instrumental; rather, a zone of combined
purpose separates them” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003, p.137).

While the purpose of this research is to understand in more depth the particular
intrinsic case of the Marist Asia Foundation MLC located on the border crossing town
of Ranong, Southern Thailand, this researcher also has an instrumental interest in
learning if the challenges of migrant education (RQ1), the causes of migrant
education challenges (RQ2), and the consequences and implications for this on
educational design (RQ3) are also echoed by other MLC’s. It is for this reason
interviews were conducted with other selected Myanmar teachers and educational
leaders involved with migrant education in Ranong and Mae Sot. As Denzin and
Lincoln (2003) note, the study of a particular phenomenon can then be left to the
reader to make their interpretation and judgement if the particular case is similar to
others and potentially useful giving both “propositional and experiential knowledge”
(p. 145). It is for this reason that data are presented as both case study, non-case
study, and combined totals to illustrate that certain themes and challenges emerged
in common and may potentially be instrumentally useful.

The Case: Marist Asia Foundation Migrant Learning Centre

In any case study, the boundaries of the case and its context are important to
describe: ‘what is this a case of’? (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003; Johnson, 2014). A MLC
requires clarity and definition so as to separate it from other organisations that are
also providing education for Myanmar migrant children, such as Royal Thai
Government schools or vocational training programmes of various NGO’s.

The Marist Asia Foundation MLC can be understood as a particular case as it meets
the general characteristics of a MLC as defined most recently in a policy discussion
document prepared for Unicef (Tyrosvoutis, 2023). The Marist Asia Foundation MLC
is specifically for migrants, is community based, provides mother tongue-based and
often multilingual education, uses curricula from the children’s country of origin
(Myanmar) and is financially supported by national and international charities and
donors. It is located at the southern border crossing town between Kawthaung
(Myanmar) and Ranong (Thailand). The MLC has a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with the Office Non-Formal Informal Education (ONIE) with permission to
operate a Non-Formal Education Learning Centre. This has allowed the MLC to be
able to integrate its curriculum within the Thai Non-Formal Education pathway
supporting the achievement of primary and secondary education certificates in

26
Thailand, as well as providing the Myanmar curriculum and other subjects such as
English and Digital Technology.

Action Research
In addition to using a qualitative case study, this research followed an action
research methodology aimed at overcoming an identified challenge with a supportive
action. Action research, which emerged in social research during the 1930’s and
1940’s by Kurt Lewin (1890-1947), is aimed at generating knowledge but also
creating change by focussing on solving specific problems that local practitioners
experience in their communities (Johnson, 2014). This methodology is essentially
practical and developmental along the lines of Paulo Freire’s (1970/2017) Pedagogy
of the Oppressed where the research goal is to support the community of teachers to
identify and come up with solutions to their own problems; to move from being
spectators to actors and gaining autonomy and responsibility for the education
challenges experienced within their community (Freire, 1970/2017).

In its most emancipatory form, the researcher in action research seeks to be with
and for the participants and community, as opposed to conducting research on
participants and community (Kindon, Pain, & Kesby, 2007). This bottom up rather
than a top down mode of research seeks to replace an extractive and imperial model
of social research with an approach that seeks to benefit the actual communities
involved rather than the researcher. Engagement rather than simply extraction aims
to empower the local community and participants to learn from a reflection, research,
action, reflection cycle. Such an engagement experience can then potentially
become an ongoing process used by the participants to continually support and
enhance their educational practice.

Within the field of action research there are two types of research: practical action
research and participatory action research. Practical action research normally relates
to a specific teacher or group reflecting on and changing their practice. This is in
slight contrast to participatory action research which may likely involve a group or
groups or a whole community seeking to bring about a wider social or liberational
change (Creswell, 2018). This particular research straddles the two approaches.
While it engaged a small group of teachers to focus on a particular challenge
(practical action research), it also involved the engagement and participation of the
migrant community in the hope of addressing migrant education challenges and their
causes in a wider context of oppression and discrimination on the Thailand Myanmar
border. As a result, the research is also participatory and liberational in nature.
Having spent ten years working in Ranong and experiencing the challenges of
migrant education, my aim was to inform a practical project that will provide an action
with direction and momentum. The findings of the study and identification of a
particular need are presented in Chapters Four and Five. Implications for practical

27
action are discussed in Chapter Six and those for future education strategy are
considered in Chapter Seven.

Lewin’s Force Field Theory

The use of Lewin’s force field theory in this research serves not only a theoretical but
also a practical purpose. Action research, which is grounded upon Lewin’s force field
theory (Figure 3.1), proposes that the way things currently are is a result of multiple
dynamic forces. Forces for change (driving forces) meet the resistance of forces
against change (restraining forces)(Johnson, 2014). This theory is useful as it is
immediately accessible to people’s experience of struggle and change. Migrant
teachers and those involved in education can instinctively relate to positive forces
and negative forces on students, teachers and organisations.

Lewin’s force field theory proposes three phases as illustrated in Figure 3.1:
Stage 1
Unfreezing: identifying and removing resisting forces.

Stage 2
Changing: creating an unbalance of forces such that driving forces are greater
than the restraining forces.

Stage 3
Refreezing: reaching a new equilibrium and way of doing things

28
Figure 3.1

Lewin’s Force Field Analysis and Three Stages of Change

Note. Lewin’s Force Field as cited in Johnson, 2014. Educational research:

Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. p. 118. Figure 3.1.

The force field theory when conceptually grasped by teachers can support not only a
statement of problems and challenges, but also a consideration of the forces,
reasons, and structural causes of the problems. To bring about real community
change involves the community in awareness raising of the various issues at work
creating the current status quo. The use of the force field theory concept of driving
and restraining forces was an important part of the focus group introduction, case
studies, interviews, discussion and analysis.

A potential weakness of the force field theory can be the implication that the status
quo equilibrium is at a fixed point or stagnant. The fact that there are over 200,000
migrant children in Thailand out-of-school, which is greater than the number of
migrant children in-school, and the known restraining pressures of family poverty,
lack of resources, and conflicting policies, indicates more of a continual pushing and
sliding movement. The ‘now’ of migrant education is never fixed and is constantly
impacted by newly emerging factors. However, the general theory can be usefully
adopted to illustrate the general trend in literature and this research, that overall the
restraining forces are greater than driving forces and are pushing migrant children
towards earning and away from learning.

A full action research cycle would attempt to follow the three stages of unfreezing,
positive change, and refreezing. Due to time and financial limitations this research
project is limited to only the first stage of the process with the development of an
action plan referred to by Johnson (2014) as the Dialectic Action Research Spiral.

29
Figure 3.2

Dialectic Action Research Spiral

Note. Action Research Spiral taken from (Johnson, 2014, p. 118).

Research Design
Qualitative research has become an important mode of inquiry for the social
sciences such as education where a major objective is to uncover the rich narrative
of peoples’ lived experience and their interaction with their social world to gain
understanding (Johnson, 2014). Consequently, a qualitative case study research
design was considered best suited to provide a deeper insight into the context of
migrant education on the Thailand Myanmar border. Qualitative survey responses,
semi-structured interviews, discussion focus groups, and personal conversations
within their context, provided access to a ‘window’ of the migrant experience. The
narrative stories of migrant teachers can provide a rich insight into the social
phenomenon of both a migrant student in a MLC classroom, and an adult awareness
of a migrant community's experience of oppression.

A criticism of qualitative case study research is that it suffers issues of reliability,

validity and generalisability. Denzin and Lincoln (2003) respond to this criticism
remarking why a case study is of merit only if it is generalisable and not valued as a
particular case. Yin (2009) suggests a researcher involved in case study research
can limit some concerns regarding trustworthiness of the data and internal validity by
the use of multiple methods of data collection and multiple sources of evidence, as
well as a chain of evidence that could be used by another researcher to track
through each step of the case. It is for this reason that the boundaries of the
particular case study have been described in detail regarding a MLC, as have details
of the data collection process which were followed. This allows for the reader to
make their judgement, identify points of similarity and difference with a particular
case and context, and decide whether the conclusions reached are relatable or
applicable to their particular context and case.

30
Data Collection
Data collection took place primarily during a five-week period in Ranong (Southern
Thailand) and a one-week period in Mae Sot (Northern Thailand) in August -
September 2022. Due to time constraints and the restricted availability of teachers at
Marist Asia Foundation, an initial online survey was undertaken to help identify early
and quickly what were regarded as the main challenges for Myanmar migrant
education teachers. This early identification of the most significant challenges
allowed for a narrower and deeper focus upon the most repeated challenges, their
causes and potential solutions to be discussed in focus groups and interviews. The
following table outlines the data collection method used for this case study and
resultant data archive.

Table 3.1

Sources of Data Collection

31
Initial Survey
An initial exploratory survey (Appendix B) to identify the main challenges of Myanmar
migrant teachers was conducted with 11 of the 19 Myanmar migrant teachers (57%)
at Marist Asia Foundation (MAF) who voluntarily agreed to be participants in the
survey. The survey required Myanmar migrant teachers to spend approximately 60
mins completing a Google form survey of 8 questions: 5 multi choice questions with
a request for short explanation for the reason of their choice, and 3 long answer
questions. These data were collected anonymously and the written responses, when
given in Myanmar or Thai language, were translated into English. Some of the
survey questions regarding identification of challenges experienced by Myanmar
migrant teachers were taken from a previous research report (Tyrosvoutis, 2019)
which identified particular challenges of migrant education.

Focus Groups
The aim of the initial survey and focus group process was to align with an action
research design methodology of listening to and giving voice to the community.
Encouraging the Myanmar migrant teachers to reflect on the structural causes of the
challenges they experienced attempted to help the local community not become

32
prisoners of “a circle of certainty within which reality is also imprisoned” (Freire,
1970/2017, p.13). For an oppressed migrant community, what looks fixed and certain
is the result of driving and restraining forces. The action researcher can support a
process and awareness “to see the world unveiled” (Freire, 1970/2017, p.13).
Unveiling the forces at work that create the status quo can empower teachers and
migrant organisations to recognise that the current dehumanising historical facts are
“not a given destiny but the result of an unjust order” (1970/2017. p.18) that can be
changed.

The responses from the survey were translated where necessary by a MAF teacher,
collated, and presented to the three focus groups. The focus groups size was
purposefully kept small to one group of three, one group of four, and one group of
five teachers, to ensure active discussion took place in Myanmar or Thai or English
depending on which each teacher felt most comfortable speaking. Because of the
sensitive nature of the topics for discussion, particularly around issues of
discrimination, two focus groups of Myanmar teachers and one focus group of Thai
teachers were facilitated. The focus group discussion began with a brief presentation
of Lewin’s force-field theory regarding positive driving forces and negative restraining
forces. Each of the four questions / answers of the survey was printed on a large
paper and placed on the desk in front of the focus group teachers. Teachers spent
15 mins for each question discussing both the identified challenges and their causes.
Sticky notes captured discussion points and further contributions which were
translated into English by a translator present at the focus group. Figure 3.3 below
illustrates the printed focus group discussion format as a result of the initial MAF
case study teacher survey.

33
Figure 3.3

Illustration of Focus Group Discussion: Question 2 - Teacher Challenges and

Causes

Case Study Interviews - Teachers - Organisations

Three MAF case study teacher interviews sought to gain a deeper insight into the
individual teacher experience of a Myanmar migrant teacher. This involved the
selection of three teachers to provide a representative voice of MAF Myanmar
teachers regarding both age, number of years teaching, and primary and secondary
education programmes. Marist Asia Foundation education managers were not
involved in the Focus Group discussions to ensure teachers freedom to share
honestly. MAF primary and secondary education managers, and MAF Director and
MAF Thai Manager were interviewed separately without knowledge of survey results
or focus group discussions from teachers.

Non-Case Study Interviews

While this research focussed on the particular case of Marist Asia Foundation MLC,
other voices and data were collected in two other MLC’s in Ranong (Guiding Star
MLC and Ranongthani MLC) and four Educational Organisations in Mae Sot
(Teacher Focus Myanmar, Help Without Frontiers, Minmahaw Higher Education
Program, and Youth Connect) to determine if there were echoes of the same
challenges and causes as the case study of Marist Asia Foundation. Due to time,
financial, and logistical constraints, it was only possible to interview educational

34
leaders, not Myanmar teachers at MLC’s in Mae Sot. However, both Teacher Focus
Myanmar (Mae Sot) and Help Without Frontiers (Mae Sot) were specifically chosen
as significant Myanmar educational support organisations responsible for teacher
training and support of over 65 MLC’s in Tak Province. This ensured as much as
possible reliability of data from experienced educationalists supporting Myanmar
migrant education.

Follow up MAF Teacher Training Research Group

Following the process of content analysis and identification of a particular challenge
experienced by the teachers in the case study of Marist Asia Foundation, a small
team of five MAF case study Myanmar teachers was engaged in a discussion about
the identified need for teacher training. A reflection process together created a
survey that was shared with MAF teachers. This data was collected as well as
downloading of three teacher training programme resources currently available
online and on the Thai Myanmar border: (British Council: Towards Results in
Education and English (TREE), Mote Oo: New Teacher Program, Teacher Focus
Myanmar: Learn, Choose, Use). These teacher training programmes were analysed
by the MAF Teacher Training Research Group and a teacher training action proposal
was developed with the researcher for Marist Asia Foundation. This practical action
research methodology and process is detailed further in Chapter Six and its
implications discussed in Chapter Seven.

Coding and Content Analysis

A total of 26 files generated over 53,000 words of data from surveys, focus groups,
and interviews. Following the six phases of thematic analysis (Braun & Clark, 2006),
the data were read over to familiarise myself with the whole context of the data and
begin to search for both meaning and patterns. The data were translated (from
Myanmar or Thai into English, when necessary, by a teacher at Marist Asia
Foundation), transcribed, and entered into NVivo software. This allowed for
generation of initial codes and the emergence of key themes. NVivo software
allowed for the highlighting of sentences or words in each data set and assigning
these passages to themes which corresponded to the three research questions.
Within education challenges (RQ1), subcategories were identified around parents
(10 themes), organisations (11 themes), students (9 themes), and teachers (24
themes) with sub-themes around frequent and significant themes of teacher training,
stress, low salary, and negative student behaviour. Within causes of education
challenges (RQ2), sub-categories were identified (6 themes) with a sub-theme of
discrimination (5 themes). Finally, within implications (RQ3) 3 subcategories were
identified around curriculum, policy (10 themes), education design (11 themes) of
which a particular sub-theme of higher education had 2 sub-themes.

NVivo allowed for statistical repetition of themes to emerge clearly, as well as

providing rich narrative descriptions of particular themes. Content analysis was

35
conducted using visualisation and numerical features of the software identifying
emergence of key themes, where they were located, and their numerical frequency.
A comparison of case study and non-case study data was made possible by isolating
data sets. The quantification (numbers) of qualitative (narrative) data helped identify
the number and significance of certain challenges and their causes, and enabled
tables and the visualisation of data to be presented accurately and clearly. Short
narrative excerpts aimed to “tell the complicated story of your data in a way which
convinces the reader of the merit and validity of your analysis” (Braun & Clarke,
2006, p. 93). Overall, the qualitative case study approach used in this research
aimed at achieving the use of multiple sources of evidence to justify claims and
achieve “warranted assertability” (Johnson, 2014, p. 470).

Data Limitations
There are limitations that need to be identified prior to the presentation of the
findings in Chapter Four. As indicated with an intrinsic case study methodology,
technical care needed to be exercised in distinguishing between what data was
referring to the intrinsic case and what data was from outside the case. NVivo
software provided for the ability to individualise reports of specific themes and to
separate case study and non-case study data sets. This limitation was managed and
findings are shown with data sets separated between case and non-case study data.
The sharing of two data sets side by side seeks to highlight when particular themes
of Marist Asia Foundation MLC also found an echo in interviews and discussions
with other MLC’s and educational organisations supporting Myanmar migrant
education. While the data is presented in tables in Chapter Four, the common
occurrence of themes and frequency of occurrence is given to offer a suggestion that
the themes may be prevalent across the wider group of MLC’s, but the claim of
statistical reliability would have required an instrumental and comparative design
which was not possible due to time, financial and logistical constraints of this study.

As reflected in Table 4.1, the main education challenge which emerged was the
need for teacher training. Total grouped data revealed the occurrence of teacher
Training markedly above the next two occurrences of stress and low salary. Further
analysis is considered and discussed in Chapter Four. A statistical test to compare
the similarity of the two data sets (case study and non-case study teacher training)
revealed a t-test score of 1.66 and a p value of 0.061 indicating strong evidence to
suggest teacher training may be a need in more MLC’s on the Thailand Myanmar
Border.

Having lived in Ranong for the past 10 years, I was aware this experience and
knowledge could cause a particular bias to the research. Thematic coding and
content analysis through the use of NVivo software helped support an objective
process where conclusions and propositions needed to be backed up by the
research data. As a researcher familiar with the field, I was surprised that teacher

36
training featured so dominantly. This reinforces the relevance of research listening to
teachers.

Ethical Considerations
Ethics approval was granted by the Human Ethics Committee of Victoria University
of Wellington (See Appendix A). The data collection methods for this research
involved a large number of interviews and discussions with a potentially vulnerable
group of Myanmar migrant teachers. A particular concern raised in the application to
the Human Ethics Committee related to my previous role as Director of Marist Asia
Foundation and as a teacher of many of the staff. This posed a tension as a
researcher being too involved and possibly viewed by participants as someone who
had potential (or past) authority over them. Would they be saying what “I” wanted to
hear? Would they be afraid to share their real concerns and problems?

A decision was made not to request an external interviewer both for financial and
relational reasons. Special care was taken to emphasise and repeat the voluntary
nature of participants' involvement, and that the data would in no way connect
personalised data back to MAF Management. Overall, my experience was of
teachers and educational leaders being very welcoming and honest in their
responses and discussions. I can identify with the hope and experience of
Sjøbakken and Dobson (2013) as being experienced as a ‘guest’, a ‘co-discussant’,
a ‘catalyst of coherence’ (p. 219).

I was aware of interviews of educational leaders, both in government and in NGO’s,

involving delicate topics of discrimination between Thai and Myanmar people, and
differences of opinion regarding educational policy and implementation within Thai
schools and MLC’s. While not named, local people in local contexts may be able to
decipher whose voice is being referred to. A sensitive portrayal of their voice has
been attempted to ensure both accurate context and interpretation. No interviewees
requested a copy of their interview which was one of the options required to be
available for ethics approval.

Conclusion
To support a deeper understanding of Myanmar migrant education, a qualitative
research method was chosen to best achieve an insight into the lived experience of
migrant teachers. Their unique voice and experience as educators in the classroom
and as migrants in the community was sourced and valued from a constructionist
perspective seeking to understand challenges and causes and implications. A
particular case study of Marist Asia Foundation MLC in Ranong was chosen to
highlight the reality of Myanmar education on the Thailand Myanmar border, and
further research was conducted beyond the case study in Ranong and Mae Sot to
research if similar findings were also present.

37
Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter seeks to answer RQ 1 (challenges) and RQ2 (causes) by examining the
data shared by teachers and educational leaders. In presenting the findings, the
Marist Asia Foundation MLC will be referred to as the “case study”. Other MLC’s in
Ranong and other learning organisations in Mae Sot will be referred to as “non-case
study”. The total grouped number of occurrences of themes will also be shown to
highlight patterns from the data.

A total of 26 files involving one initial survey, three focus groups, 17 semi structured
interviews, and five conversations, gathered over 53,000 words and were entered
and coded using NVivo data analysis software. A thematic analysis of the data
created 24 themes (nodes) under the three research questions of (1) education
challenges, (2) causes, and (3) implications. Content analysis counting the frequency
of words and phrases within each theme and research question provided the
following findings.

Education Challenges
The top 10 education challenges by themes for Myanmar teachers (RQ1) with
frequency of occurrence are shown in Table 4.1

Table 4.1
Challenges of Myanmar Migrant Education for Teachers
Education Challenges for Frequency of Case Study Non-Case Study
Burmese Migrant Teachers occurrence (MAF)

Teacher Training 171 149 22

Stress 43 36 7

Low Salary 41 39 2

Lack of subject content knowledge 22 16 6

Not good communication and 17 17 0

planning

Teachers Lack recognition / 16 10 6

accreditation

Traditional Myanmar Teaching 15 12 3

Style

Not enough support from 13 13 0

Management

Negative student behaviour 13 13 0

Need more activities 12 12 0

38
The theme of teacher training occurred 171 times and was broken into sub themes
to support further clarity about what was actually meant within the broad category of
teacher training. The teacher training sub themes (Table 4.2) emerged under the
broad category of teacher training. The challenges and needs expressed by teachers
have deliberately not been merged so as to allow a more detailed examination of
what teacher training themes are considered important in chapter Six. Most
Myanmar migrant teachers have not had formal pre-service teacher training such as
a bachelor degree at university and a teacher training program, and have limited
opportunities for in-service professional learning development.

Table 4.2

Teacher Training Sub Themes

Teacher Training Frequency of Case Study Non-Case Study

occurrence (MAF)

Young teachers not experienced 27 23 4

Need subject content training 20 18 2

No monitoring of teachers ability 16 16 0

Need student centred learning 15 11 4

Need classroom management 14 12 2

training

Need technology training 13 12 1

No skilled trainers 12 9 3

Need psychology of student 12 10 2

development

Lack connections with training 9 7 2

organisations

Need lesson planning 6 5 1

Need leadership training 6 5 1

Need critical thinking skills 5 5 0

Managers not recognising teacher 4 4 0

interests

Need counselling training 3 3 0

Need Teacher identity training 3 3 0

Need time management training 2 2 0

39
While teacher training emerged as a dominant challenge and need, the links
between the top 5 themes can also be seen as interconnected. The lack of teacher
training results in lack of qualifications and recognition as a teacher. This may have
consequences with a low salary and feelings of stress in not being confident as a
teacher. Further consequences of the lack of teacher training may also involve the
lack of subject knowledge and the skills to manage student learning and negative
classroom behaviour. Beyond teacher training there are also more external
vulnerability issues from the migrant community regarding the legality of a Migrant
Learning Centre with the consequent inability to support legal documentation of
migrant teachers. There was also the lack of financial resources for activities, the
required change from Myanmar traditional rote learning teaching methods toward
student centred learning, and critical thinking. Young Myanmar migrant teachers also
expressed particular cultural challenges.

Teacher Training
Consistent mention was made of the lack of teacher training and the need to develop
teachers. Examples were shared from both younger and older Myanmar migrant
teachers from all MLC’s. A young migrant teacher commented:

I feel my skill is not enough. I am still young and I don’t really know how to
manage behaviour in the classroom.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

A qualified teacher from Myanmar, who is now managing a MLC in Ranong,

comments:

Some teachers think, if I can control a classroom, I can qualify to be a

teacher. But that is not correct. Don’t just come to class and school and just
“open the book”. That is not ok.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Reflecting on the current situation and the challenge of teachers and their training, a
Director of a MLC states:

We need quality teachers. Even though they do not hold a bachelor degree,
we need something so that they are recognised to have the skills to manage
the classroom and our setting.
[Migrant Learning Centre Manager]

Stress
Stress was identified as a significant challenge for teachers. Stress was also multi-
faceted with various sub themes specific to education: trying to teach too much, too
many responsibilities, not a proper curriculum. Stress was also related to external

40
migrant community factors; no valid documents, role model for the community,
favouritism, and discrimination. While not specifically stated in interviews, perhaps
because it is regarded as “normal”, Myanmar migrant education takes place most
often in a low resourced and fragile learning context. The combination of mother
tongue (Myanmar) and multilingual (Thai and English) learning, the lack of a clear
and sometimes relevant curriculum, the lack of trained teachers, and inadequate
funding, creates a daily stress level for migrant teachers beyond what may ordinarily
be experienced in developed countries. Stress factors also differed according to
particular MLC’s depending on their legal status and levels of funding support.

One young Myanmar migrant teacher reflecting on her previous experience working
in a MLC shared:

Everyday I had to teach 14 subjects. I didn’t have any break time. I couldn't
rest. Even at lunch time I had to do marking.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Teachers in a focus group shared a particular stress of trying to push students

through a curriculum to meet the schedule of the education programme.

The stress is forcing 2 years of curriculum into one year. This puts pressure
on both teachers and students. And we don’t have a proper curriculum.

One Myanmar teacher shared about the frustration and stress between what was
expected of students and their teachers, and the students' real educational level.

They cannot do what we are teaching. They are jumping two classes. They
don’t understand the subject. When the teachers are giving the homework,
they cannot do it. So the teacher gives the homework and they are coming to
class and cheating with someone who has done the homework.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Some MLC’s had document challenges

The most difficult challenge as a teacher is the safety challenge. The problem
is that migrant teachers are being told you don’t have the right to be a
teacher, you don’t have the right to teach here. You only have the normal
passport and visa. This is a safety challenge. This is not related to education
but the safety of the teachers themselves.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Another MLC communicated the stress of so many migrant children needing

education in the community, but not enough resources to meet the need.
41
 We welcomed 600 students, but we did not have enough room because of our
small building for 300, and we do not have enough teachers because we do
not have enough budget. There is no rest for teachers, they sometimes have
to run between 2 classrooms.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Younger Myanmar migrant teachers communicated the stress of a cultural challenge

where Myanmar teachers are traditionally held up as role models for the community,
and the high expectations for them to be perfect role models for students.

We are young and not perfect, but we are representing Myanmar teachers in
the community. We should have a good ethic and good teacher training.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Low Salary
The interviews took place during the midst of challenging financial circumstances
with the consequences of Covid-19, the closure of the Thai Myanmar border
crossing between Ranong (Thailand) and Kawthaung (Myanmar), the Military Coup
2021, lack of fish-related industry work in the low season of fishing, increasing
inflation, and increasing demands on the main worker in the migrant household. This
was reflected in a consistent tension that emerged in comments related to salary
being paid based on qualifications, experience, or responsibilities.

References to low salary had five sub themes of managers not listening, having to
leave to get better salary, salary being based on qualifications not experience,
should be paid for extra work, and salary was not considered enough to support
family. Some Myanmar teachers pointed out they were receiving the same low salary
as a fish factory worker and this was a problem considering the extra hours of
learning and support teachers offered for the children and the community.

Personally, salary is the biggest problem and because of this I cannot work for
a long-term here even though I love being part of the team and am passionate
about my work. I think the current salary is not enough. I am afraid of teachers
quitting their job to find another better-paid job.

[Myanmar Migrant Teacher Survey]

While Myanmar migrant educational leaders shared concern and compassionate

understanding about salaries of teachers and even wanted to increase salaries, they
also referred to the wider funding challenge and the wider migrant labour context in a
migrant worker community.

42
 But teachers are not going to stay as teachers unless they know there is a
professional option for them. The turn-over rate is around 40%. It’s always
been around 30-40%. The amount of institutional knowledge we lose every
year is crazy….Right now, teachers can see… I can get another job that pays
double in a factory somewhere… I need money… I’m out of here. I would say
there are a number of organisations that are supporting a structured salary,
maybe 5,000-6,000 THB per month ($US 130-160 per month) but they are
more rare. I think those schools see less turnover and have higher quality
because they retain their teachers. They provide them with security with
documents, and a stable wage. Even if it is low, it is stable.
[Manager Migrant Education Organisation]

A particular tension was revealed in a teacher pay scale based on age or

qualifications or experience. Accredited qualifications as a criteria for a starting
salary disadvantaged migrant teachers as they were not able to get accredited
teacher qualifications or frequently lacked accredited secondary education
qualifications. With insecure funding sources, the challenging request to increase
salary based on time and experience working as a teacher would require significant
financial capacity which many MLC’s were not able to do. While references were
made to Thai government school teachers getting an annual increase, one MLC
manager shared:

But how can we provide that financially and be sustainable? We are

dependent on outside funding. We are always uncertain about funding. There
is no security of work.
[Migrant Learning Centre Manager]

Organisational Challenges
Organisational challenges were identified predominantly from interviews with
directors or managers of organisations connected with Myanmar migrant education
in Ranong and Mae Sot. It is interesting to note the difference in themes that
emerged between teachers (teacher training) and organisational leaders
(educational goals and quality education). The dominant challenges for organisations
involved with supporting Myanmar migrant education were as follows:

43
Table 4.3

Challenges for Myanmar Migrant Educational Organisations

Education Challenges for Frequency of Case Study Non-Case

Organisations occurrence (MAF) Study

Vocational Education and 22 11 11

Higher Education

Quality Education 20 10 10

Collaboration with 17 2 15
Government

Collaboration with Migrant 17 3 14

Learning Centres

Funding Challenges 13 1 12

Needs Assessment 13 3 10

Document Problems 11 8 3

Provide Teacher Training 8 3 5

Need better facilities 6 2 4

The data reveals questions are raised by educational leaders about what level of
education to support: vocational education and/or higher academic education, the
challenges of providing quality education, and the subsequent underlying challenges
of MLC’s working with the government, and each other, regarding questions of
legality, curriculum, and training support. Because of the unregistered status of
MLC’s, there are subsequent issues of their inability to get government accreditation
and funding, lack of legal documents for teachers and employees, and an education
system that is under-resourced with staff, training, and facilities.

Vocational Education and Higher Education

The literature review identified underlying forces that encourage young migrants to
earn rather than learn. The document curse, the education trap and the employment
gate inevitably force migrants toward skills for work rather than the pursuit of
accredited and higher education pathways. One migrant worker in Ranong, reflecting
on years of education in the refugee camp near Mae Sot, then seeking further
education in Ranong stated:
As refugees and migrants we spend many years in education, and yet at the
end of it all we often have no recognised qualification to show for it. Nothing. It
is hopeless.

44
 [Migrant Worker conversation, Ranong]

The reality of migrant education on the Thailand Myanmar Border is sitting in an

educational gap between two countries. Neither governments nor education systems
can respond adequately to the large numbers of students who either cannot access
or fail to survive in the formal education system of Government schools. Myanmar
Post Secondary Education Consortium (2022) reports this as a large gap that needs
to be filled: “What the Ministry of Education (MOE) does not provide, post-
secondaries will do themselves” (p, 5). Unfortunately, most of these post-secondary
education programmes are “self-accrediting” (p, 20) leaving a continual experience
of migrants not having education certificates recognised within Myanmar or Thailand.

Young MLC graduates and teachers share their awareness of the reality of being a
Myanmar migrant and trying to get work after school. Two Myanmar migrant young
teachers who completed the Thai Ko So No Upper Secondary Non-Formal
Education pathway shared their reason for continuing to chase a higher education
certificate when many of their peers stopped and just began to work.

The real motivation for continuing study is to get a high education level with a
certificate which is important for employment and salary. Jobs in Thailand are
based on the first question: what level is your education? What certificates do
you have? If you do not have a certificate you automatically get a low salary.
[Myanmar Ko So No Graduates]

Some Myanmar migrant teachers shared the viewpoint that accredited education or
certificates to show a completed course of education did not necessarily mean
quality or readiness for life and work.
Life and employment requires much more than becoming good at Thai and
reading and writing.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Tension and confusion were revealed in various responses as to whether the

curriculum at school was supporting getting students ready for work or aiming at
higher education. Some Myanmar migrant education managers' responses
recognised migrant students and families are probably more concerned with
employment than further education.

We should do training for young workers - sewing class, Sunday classes, Thai
and Computer and English. We could do other vocational skills - making bags,
things to sell, cooking, hospitality (drinks), motorbike mechanics. We should
provide education in a practical way and add more life skills. We should do
practical work and preparation for work. After they finish Burmese Migrant
Secondary Programme, they are ready to work…
[Myanmar Migrant Learning Centre Manager]
45
Yet, while acknowledging the usefulness of skills and practical preparation for work
and employment, the education manager also talks of the need to pursue an
accredited academic pathway.

Both are important. We need to do a higher education pathway also….many

want a university graduation…. They can get a job because of that certificate.
Their skill is higher. There is a very strong desire to have a university bachelor
education. After they finish secondary education automatically they can
continue to higher education. No need to wait. They can also choose to work.
They have a choice. No need to worry.
[Myanmar Migrant Learning Centre Manager]

One Director of an educational organisation referred to a bottleneck of migrant youth.

Following their basic education migrant youth are still not ready for work.

There are many Myanmar migrant youth who finish their basic education, but
they may not have a recognised certificate for that. They generally might have
some pieces but not a full toolbox of skills or languages to get a decent job.
[Manager Migrant Education Organisation]

Another organisation supporting Burmese migrant youth in Mae Sot recognised the
urgency for young migrants to begin work after school but they were not actually
ready for work with the education they had received.

After high school, where do students go, what do they do? Only very few can
go to university. They want and need to support their family, they need work
to bring money to parents, support younger brothers and sisters - go to
school. But to work they need skills. They need preparation to go to work.
They need Thai language, maths, basic computer skills, they don’t know
knowledge around documents and processes. As a result their income is low.
[Manager Migrant Education Organisation]

In contrast with focusing on vocational skills for work training, one Myanmar
education organisation decided its focus was to meet the education needs where
most migrant education programmes finished. They developed a one-year education
programme for students after Grade 10, and then another General Education
Diploma (GED) programme which is a 12 month course in preparation for a test
verifying proof of secondary education completion. Passing the GED test would
provide access to a higher education pathway to university for Myanmar migrants
and refugees.

In the GED programme, in addition to social studies, English, maths, science,

we have a student mentoring programme. They prepare for scholarship and
46
 university applications. They get students focussed on what they want,
prepare for interviews, and scholarship applications.
[GED Teacher. Migrant Education Organisation]

An exploration of the first research question regarding identification of the challenges

of Myanmar migrant education, and the specific challenge of training teachers who
are frequently not qualified also intersects with the issue of a quality curriculum
designed for what community purpose.

Educational Quality
Migrant teachers and educational leaders refer to a balancing act between an
accredited education and quality; between mother tongue language learning and
quality curriculum, and the fragility of low resource settings of migrant learning
centres. As one education manager summarised: access to education is the first
challenge of Myanmar migrant education; the next challenge is quality.

The way that I see it, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG’s) on
education was about access. All children have access. Then, the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDG) came along and changed to quality. I think in a
context like this on the border, we’ve never left the access challenge… we’re
not ready to move on quality yet. We are still getting kids into school and
keeping them there; retaining them without them dropping out to work or
families or whatever. I think we are still in the MDG’s over here.
[Manager Myanmar Education Organisation]

Even in more urban areas, access to Thai schools is frequently limited by the Thai
language ability of the child to survive and learn in a Thai school. There are also
many obstacles based on the lack of documents. Even with access to an accredited
education the quality concerns are not resolved:

I have definite quality concerns about Thai school. I think I’m not alone in that.
Look at the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) ratings for
Thailand. Any kind of International assessment says it's abysmal. That is not
hidden. But I think it serves a strong purpose. That certificate means
something here. I think Thai language and literacy means and opens up
doors.
[Manager Myanmar Education Organisation]

The findings of the research for RQ1 from Myanmar migrant teachers point to the
main challenge as teacher training and this is within a context of managing stress at
both the classroom professional teaching level (subject content knowledge), and the
migrant community level (low salary). Education challenges from the perspective of
Myanmar educational leaders revealed challenges around education purpose and

47
curriculum, vocational training and/or higher education, and the ability for a MLC to
provide quality education. The lack of training and lack of resources in MLC’s
combined with document challenges, financial insecurity and a lack of a recognised
professional pathway results in a fragile education system for Myanmar migrants.
While the identification of these challenges is not new and has been previously
identified, the continued existence of these challenges raises the important question
as to what factors are causing these challenges.

Causes and Effects

The second research question, what are the causes of these migrant education
challenges, was discussed in three focus group discussions and specifically in
organisational interviews Question 7 and Question 8 (See Appendix B). In identifying
causes of migrant education challenges, the following themes and frequency of
occurrence were as follows

48
Table 4.4
Causes of Myanmar Migrant Education Challenges

Causes Frequency of Case Study Non Case

occurrence (MAF) Study

Discrimination 31 16 15

Funding 11 3 8

Lack effective advocacy 9 3 6

Lack proper documents 6 6 0

Lack of Migrant Learning 4 3 1

Centres

Illegal status of Migrant 3 3 0

Learning Centres

Change of leaders - local 1 1 0

and national government

Within the theme of discrimination, a number of sub themes emerged which are
provided in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5
Causes of Myanmar Migrant Education Challenges - Discrimination Sub Themes

Discrimination Frequency of Case Study Non-Case

occurrence (MAF) Study

Discrimination 31 16 15

Not value migrant 10 8 2

contribution

Not inclusive education 6 3 3

(not mother tongue
language)

Security concerns 2 1 1

Only for Thai citizens 2 0 2

Historical grievances 2 2 0

49
Discrimination
While there were a variety of identified causes (RQ2) of migrant education
challenges (RQ1), including lack of funding for the migrant community, lack of
effective advocacy to protect and promote rights of migrants, and the complex
challenge of getting and maintaining legal documents as migrants, discrimination
scored most significantly with 31 occurrences. As a deeply rooted cause of the
educational challenges facing migrant education, discrimination is worthy of
examination as it could hold a key to explain the chain of events that result in the
current and unsatisfactory migrant education status quo (Figure 2.4). The theme of
discrimination was revealed in the literature particularly around migrant children’s
experience in Thai schools (Arphattananon, 2022; Chan, 2021), the lack of funds to
support language learning (Nawarat, 2018; Unicef, 2019) and Thai communities’
reservations and fears of more Myanmar students entering Thai schools
(Arphattananon, 2022; Stange & Sasiwongsaroj, 2020).

Discrimination can be viewed from positive and negative perspectives. From a Thai
perspective the maintenance of a system to protect “legal migration” and protect the
host country from being overwhelmed (security), leads to penalties imposed on
illegal migrants. These protective mechanisms are based on the host country trying
to ensure their nationals are not put out of work and their taxes support Thai not
Myanmar people. A number of interviews repeated the link between government
funding and nationality:

I have worked many times with the government. One thing they say is “no
budget” for helping the migrant people (except social insurance). No training.
(The Thai Government) only gives budget and money for people who have
Thai nationality and a 13 digit ID card. Everybody I talk with, central level, to
provincial level to practical level, they think in the same way, why should Thai
people's tax money go toward these people because they are not Thai. They
should not benefit from this money.
[Thai Education Manager]

Another Thai education manager refers to government unwillingness to identify the

deeper causes of the migrant education challenge or take responsibility for the
obvious education challenges within MLC’s:

When the Migrant Learning Centres have problems, they don’t see their
problem. The government does not see it as their problem, it is an NGO
problem. Your problem not my problem. They just feel responsible for Thai
school. If you want to come, come. They allow the Migrant Education
Coordination Committee, the coordination centre, but they will give no money.
[Thai Education Manager]

50
A Thai government education official sees the need, but feels constrained by the
underlying resistance both of the government and Thai public attitude toward the
Myanmar Migrant community.

When government departments give more favour to them (Myanmar

migrants), Thai people criticise us and are negative about this. For example
they always complain in the media, they say “Thai children are not yet full (of
food)”. “Why are we giving more to Burmese when we do not have enough to
eat’’. They are critical and angry at the government who does that.
[Thai Education Director]

A UNESCO education official framed the migrant education challenge as being one
of equity for marginalised groups with particular needs for schools on Thailand’s
borders.

So there is a need for teachers - teachers assistants to help provide the

mother tongue education. And also to gradually support the students to learn
Thai. But I haven’t seen this. The issue is how the government can change
the budget calculation and budget methodology toward an equitable
approach. This is not an issue of equality. We cannot provide everyone with
the same services. But with the marginalised they need more support. The
budget will have to be increased for these groups. So I think for these schools
with more marginalised students, they should receive more budget support,
cost per head. If the government can see this approach, schools on the
border could receive more budget to accommodate more students with their
backgrounds.
[Unesco Education Official]

In attempting to provide a summary of the multifaceted aspects of discrimination

there is also the daily experience of low salaries received by Myanmar migrant
workers.

I think in my opinion Thailand benefitted by having all of its neighbour

countries destabilised and colonised… so when all of their home countries are
a total economic mess, they come to Thailand. They (migrants) know they are
going to get a low but stable wage and they are not going to be in physical
danger like they may be in their home country - or less physical danger. I
don’t know if that is acknowledged or taken for granted. Tak province has
some of the lowest wages in all of Thailand. That is well documented and
researched how abysmally migrant people are paid.
[Myanmar Education Manager]

Discrimination is most painfully felt in the daily experiences of being treated as

second class and made to do the 3D jobs of migrants.
51
 I feel the government just ignores the migrants. I don’t know why they don’t
like us. I think it is in our history because our countries fight each other. I don’t
know in their heart if that is still painful. I don’t know. I heard information about
Thai children that make a dirty mess in the toilet. Then Burmese workers must
clean, not Thai workers. Children know. It is in their mind. Many Burmese
migrants feel that some Thai are good, but some are not good for us. They
hate us because of our history.
[Myanmar Education Manager]

Myanmar workers' experience of not being valued for their work and not being
respected as “Myanmar” finds itself translated also from a Thai perspective as a
“national security issue” where government resources and support are carefully
defined to keep Myanmar migrants in their place.

Even if we really need and want Burmese teachers for the children, we cannot
do it because in Ranong the Government is also keeping an eye on us about
what we do. We cannot create a policy by ourselves, we need to listen to
them (the government). This is about national security.

[Thai Education Director]

Conclusion
The findings from the research have identified teacher training as a significant
challenge and discrimination as a significant cause. While the need for teacher
training at MLC’s was in the literature, the interviews and research data in Ranong
and Mae Sot revealed this need in a particularly clear and voiced way. Similarly,
discrimination was present in the literature but the research focus tended toward
identification of poverty, documentation, and language learning challenges causing
access obstacles to Thai government schools. Some of the literature referred to the
deeper policy conflicts underlying migrant education and discrimination. The
interviews and research in Ranong expanded on migrant teachers' lived experience
of discrimination providing insight into how systems of discrimination were at work in
the community which affected family decisions about which education pathway their
children should follow.

52
Chapter Five: Discussion
In this chapter a discussion of the findings will explore the various relationships
between the identified challenges (RQ1) and causes (RQ2) from the research
literature and data, as illustrated in Figure 5.1. Implications (RQ3) will be examined
in Chapters Six and Seven. A deeper analysis of the interconnections between
causes and effects can help unveil the status quo and identify the various hidden
restraining forces (Freire, (1970/2017) that are at work in a migrant community.
Young’s (1990) Five Faces of Oppression will be used as a theoretical framework to
provide insight into how systems of discrimination and oppression are constructed as
normal and therefore become accepted.

Interconnection of Challenges and Causes

The research literature and data gathered in 2022 in Ranong and Mae Sot illustrated
in Figure 5.1 helps situate migrant education research beyond an education silo and
connects the migrant classroom experience with the migrant community experience.
Figure 5.1 reveals a complex educational context where migrant students are forced
into earning and not learning. Educational quality is shaped by teachers who are not
fully trained, lack subject knowledge, and experience a variety of stress factors
connected with a high need and low resource environment. The lack of government
engagement to support MLC’s is revealed as multi-faceted. Education and
immigration policy conflicts and an underlying nationalism expressed in
discrimination also affect education quality. Positive driving forces such as
educational policy advances are hindered by negative restraining forces of migrant
family poverty, communication and cultural barriers, and conflicting immigration
settings and attitudes toward Myanmar migrants.

53
Figure 5.1

Myanmar Migrant Education: Challenges and Causes

Note: Figure 5.1 provides a summary and illustration of the literature review and the research data revealing the complex
interconnection between multiple challenges and multiple causes.

54
Figure 5.1 illustrates clusters of migrant education challenges and causes using
colours. Orange reveals the no budget cluster and consequences from a lack of
financial support. Green reveals the lack of effective advocacy cluster and the
consequences of no collaboration and effective problem solving. Red reveals the
document cluster and the consequences of documentation challenges and
immigration barriers.

A particular gap I have noted in the literature is the poor linkage of the migrant
educational challenge in the classroom with wider challenges existing in the migrant
community. Figure 5.1 highlights the interconnection between the migrant community
and the migrant classroom. The underlying discrimination cluster in blue reflects a
set of deeper root causes which impact education but are not resolved simply by
addressing the challenges. Underlying factors of not valuing migrants and their
contribution to the Thai economy and society, and fearful attitudes and cultural
transmission of these fears in Thai society are referred to in significant reports by the
United Nations (Harkins, 2019) and Unicef (2019). The Unicef report supports the
need for a wider perspective regarding children’s well-being and refers to the need to
approach migrant challenges from an holistic manner and not from operating
disconnected in “sectoral silos” (p. 13).

The current poor funding of MLC’s has a direct effect on migrant education. The lack
of stable government funding ultimately results in MLC’s being dependent on poor
migrant families' school fee donations. As a result, the MLC’s do not have money for
suitable classrooms, buildings, resources, and teacher salaries. Because Myanmar
migrant education is reliant upon international donors for support, migrant education
continues to be constantly vulnerable regarding financial sustainability. This
vulnerability has been noted in frequent requests and reports to the Thai government
to support MLC’s (Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022; Tyrosvoutis, 2019), and
language learning needs (Unicef, 2019).

A significant turnover of staff is related to low salaries and a challenge to attract and
retain qualified Thai or Myanmar teachers (Tyrosvoutis et al., 2021). Research
revealed the flow-on effects: young teachers, a lack of subject content knowledge, a
lack of accredited teacher training pathways, and a low quality of education for
migrant children. The Thai government's response for Myanmar children to go to
Thai school to ensure stability and quality is not experienced as inclusive. Children
from Myanmar require support and assistance to learn Thai language. This is not
funded by the government and financial and documentation challenges continue to
block easy access (Unicef, 2019). Sending Myanmar migrant children to Thai
government schools is also revealed in the literature as following an assumed
assimilation pathway toward long-term settlement in Thailand, but this contradicts
immigration policy settings regarding short-term return to Myanmar (Chan, 2022). As
a consequence, particularly in border areas such as Mae Sot and Ranong, a clear

55
preference is shown by Myanmar parents to send their children to MLC’s (Lowe,
Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022; Tyrosvoutis, 2019).

Research identified a lack of effective advocacy causing a lack of collaboration with

Government and MLC’s. While literature (Unicef, 2019) pointed to the Migrant
Education Coordination Committee (MECC) operating in Mae Sot as a good
example of collaboration (this is not present in Ranong), some have viewed the co-
ordination of MLC’s in Tak Province more critically as monitoring. In the voice of a
Thai NGO Director, “its focus is the collection of data, understanding and giving
approval of activities rather than supporting.” The Thai government's unwillingness to
financially support the funding of this coordination committee, the reliance on NGO’s
and charitable donors to fund and provide education activities and responses, and
the lack of progress around legal documentation and solutions regarding registration
of MLC’s points toward deeper and more hidden discriminatory factors at work.
Deeply embedded attitudes toward not valuing migrants and seeing them as a
potential national security issue continues to support discrimination between Thai
and Myanmar. This reality was stated by a Thai NGO Director:

‘They (Thai government) know they have problems, but they don’t try to find
solutions. They think: why is it important? The migrants who are living here
are not Thai citizens. They are not our problem.’

This underlying discriminatory attitude results in a lack of effort or will by the

government to support and collaborate with MLC’s.

The documents challenge revealed in this research also reveals the wider context
explored in the literature review of the host country seeking to control and manage
the push and pull flow of migrants (Van Hear, 2012). Not only do many migrants
have difficulties maintaining legal status to stay and work in Thailand, but most of the
MLC’s in Thailand are unregistered as they have not been able to follow the financial
and document requirements of the registration process (Harkins, 2019; Tyrosvoutis,
2023). This has consequences for their ability to provide legal documentation and
safety for teachers. The connections can be seen between restrictions on
documents, the unregistered status of MLC’s, and low wages for migrants. This
structure maintains the economic benefit and social control of the host country. The
challenge of document problems which flow on to MLC’s being unregistered, low
wages, and students going to work at an early age, is reflected in the literature
around the “assimilation vs return” debate (Chan, 2022) and what I have labelled the
“three doors of discrimination”: the document curse, the education trap and the
employment gate.

Both the literature and the current study reveal underlying currents of discrimination
in which migrants are viewed as a burden, not valued, and a national security
concern. These are acting as significant restraining forces of Myanmar migrant
56
education. In response to the first research question around what are the challenges
of migrant education, the answer could be captured in the two ends of Figure 5.1.
Migrant education is challenged by migrant teachers who are teaching without
training and migrant students who are forced into earning not learning.

In response to the second research question regarding causes of migrant education

challenges, discrimination was identified as a major theme. However, the general
term discrimination hides a clear description of the variety of forces at work on the
migrant community. According to Lewin’s force field analysis model (Johnson, 2014),
the first step of unfreezing requires an identification of the forces at work. Young’s
Five Faces of Oppression (1990) is proposed as a useful tool to assist digging more
deeply into the causes of migrant education challenges. This sociological tool will
use research data, literature, as well as personal observations from ten years of
living and working in the Myanmar migrant community of Ranong.

A Social Analysis: Five Faces of Oppression

As a migrant, we can walk but we cannot run
[Myanmar Migrant Teenager]

Discrimination is revealed in the research and literature under several labels:

national security, not valued, fear, history, taxes, cheap labour, 3-D jobs, temporary
migrant workers. However, discrimination is of itself not necessarily negative. It can
describe a status or category which is used to manage and identify persons or
groups. Young (1990) uses the term oppression and its five faces rather than the
concepts of discrimination and injustice to describe more adequately the systematic
oppression of a particular group.

57
Figure 5.2

Five Faces of Oppression: Social Analysis of Migrant Education Context in Ranong

In introducing the concept of oppression and its five faces, Young (1990) explores
how people who are benefitting from the goods of society do not easily notice the
experience of those who do not enjoy the goods of society. Citing Simone Weil,
Young writes:

Someone who does not see a pane of glass does not know that he does not
see it. Someone who, being placed differently, does see it, does not know the
other does not see it (p. 39).

What can be seen by one group as order can be seen by another group as
oppression. Young refers to the link between obedience and oppression:

Rape is a terrible caricature of love from which consent is absent. After rape,
oppression is the second horror of human existence. It is a terrible caricature
of obedience (p. 39).

Reflecting on Simone Weil’s idea from the perspective of a Ranong fish factory: a
Thai fish factory owner does not waste time and attention in examining whether
(migrants) have consented’…. Their (owner) attention is given entirely to the
success of the undertaking, and is not claimed by them (migrants) as long as they

58
(migrants) are docile. A Thai factory owner sees obedience, whereas a migrant
worker experiences being used and abused.

In the Myanmar migrant context of Ranong, the surface experience of obedience and
meeting legal document requirements, enduring low wages, labelled as temporary
and enduring daily discrimination, hides what is not adequately described by
injustice. Young (1990) prefers to use the term oppression because justice is often
framed in economic terms of distribution or allocation of resources. What is required
is a way of facilitating a viewpoint for the reader of the migrant experience from
‘behind the pane of glass’ as they see and experience it. This is important because
we are often present inside a system, following unquestioned norms, habits,
assumptions, and underlying institutional rules.

The conscious actions of many individuals daily contribute to maintaining and

reproducing oppression, but those people are usually simply doing their jobs
or living their lives, and do not understand themselves as agents of
oppression (Young. p. 42).

Young’s Five Faces of Oppression will now be used as a tool for social analysis of
the migrant context in Ranong to unveil the experience of discrimination, and provide
a deeper insight into the research data and literature around underlying causes
(RQ2). A quote from the research data will start as a window into each of Young’s
Five Faces of Oppression: exploitation, marginalisation, powerlessness, cultural
imperialism, and violence.

Exploitation
When I look at my Myanmar migrant community, everyone is outside doing hard
labour work in the hot sun. Why is that?
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Young (1990) proposes the first face of oppression is exploitation. A Myanmar

migrant teacher reflects on the lived experience of her community and is curious why
so many in her migrant community are labourers under the hot sun. Why are so
many migrant workers working primarily as labourers? The conversation quickly
turns to the dominant economic problems faced by migrant families and a
recognition that parents arrive in Thailand relatively uneducated. Because of family
poverty, migrant children leave education early to work and support the family. This
is the first face of oppression. Young refers to this as exploitation which occurs
“through a steady process of the transfer of the results of the labour of one social
group to benefit another '' (p. 49).

In the specific context of Ranong, the young Myanmar workers in the fish factories
and charcoal factories are the have-nots who are “continuously expended to

59
maintain and augment the power, status, and wealth of the ‘haves’” (Young, 1990, p.
49). Within Thailand, this oppression can be seen as structured specifically around
racialized groups such as those from Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos who perform
the 3-D cheap labour migrant jobs in Thailand. What is created is a restricted labour
market that tends to reserve skilled, high paying, and unionised jobs for Thais and
white foreigners. These controls around the migrant labour market and their
employment opportunities refer to the document curse, the education trap, and the
employment gate discussed earlier in Chapter Two. This system is maintained by
what the Thailand Migration Report (Harkins, 2019) indicated as the temporary
worker status that holds many Myanmar migrants in a position of vulnerability and
uncertainty about whether they are able to stay and assimilate into Thailand, or
return back to Myanmar.

Typically, this labour market control pushes certain groups to menial servant roles,
creating an inherent racism and assumption “that members of the oppressed racial
groups are or ought to be servants of those, or some of those, in the privileged
group” (Young, 1990, p. 52). Thai society and their view of Myanmar migrants is
typically seen through this lens. Racism and exploitation is also evidenced in
literature with a reluctance of many Thai parents to support Myanmar children to
enter and access Thai government schools (Arphattananon, 2012), and conflicting
policy settings between Thailand’s long-term education policy supporting assimilation
and the short-term immigration policy coercing migrants to return (Chan, 2022).
Herein lies hidden forces at work illustrated in Figure 5.1 by themes of cheap labour,
illegal status, low wages, and students going to work. Restrictions around the labour
market and limited employment inevitably point students toward leaving school early.
For those who do remain in education, earning vs learning is still a strong motivation
as they look toward vocational training rather than higher academic education.
Vocational training skills in language, computers, mechanics, hairdressing, sewing,
may allow them to escape the fish factory, or jobs in the hot sun, to work at home or
in an office.

When higher employment opportunities and salaried positions are not accessible to
Myanmar migrants because of the labour restrictions within a narrow eight
categories, primarily around construction, agriculture and fishing (Unicef, 2019), this
creates what Chan (2022) refers to as the “educational trap”. The long periods of
time pursuing higher education is considered not worth the risk or benefit: why study
longer when you can’t get a better job than the factory? In Ranong, it is normal to
see truck loads of young Myanmar workers travelling to and from fish factories with
coloured shirts defining which factory they work at. Similarly, trucks carrying young
and old men and women being taken to a construction site are a daily feature of
morning traffic in Ranong. Myanmar migrants predominantly work only in the servile
sectors of the 3-D jobs. Therein lie the reasons for the migrant teachers’ question:
why do so many Myanmar migrant workers continue to work daily under the hot sun?

60
Marginalisation
I finished school and now I sit at home doing nothing and I worry about my
future
[Myanmar Migrant Young Adult]

I don’t know why they don’t like us… why they hate us… why they treat us like
that. Maybe it is past history. Thai people always make money from us. They
sit and collect money from us as we use their name on our documents to
become legal. Burmese have to work hard all day long and just earn a little bit
of money.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

The second face of oppression is marginalisation which Young (1990) describes as

the system of labour that keeps people in a permanent underclass. Many young and
not so young migrants sit at home doing nothing. They worry about the future waiting
for access to a job where they will work hard all day long for just a little bit of money.
Underneath this experience, which is referred to as the document curse, are the
many challenges involved in getting legal documents and maintaining one’s legal
status to reside in the host country. It is normal to pay between 2-3 months’ salary to
get a valid work permit. Frequently this is a burden that creates indebted labour and
significant family debt (Harkins, 2019). Again, parents experience the tension
between earning vs learning for their children. Migrant parents, seeking to keep their
children safe with legal documents after age 16, make their children go to work to
pay for their documents. As a result of illegal crossing into Thailand, or financial
difficulties paying for documents, large numbers of migrants are or become illegal or
undocumented. The result of their vulnerable undocumented status is being forced
into 3-D jobs, low wages, or needing to return to Myanmar. Young Myanmar migrant
children, born at home rather than a Thai hospital, frequently do not have any
personal identification document or birth certificate. This results in an inability to
begin the work documentation process as it requires a prior identity document
(Harkins, 2019).

With little or no social welfare system in place for Myanmar migrants who cannot
work, the young, elderly, those with health challenges, and the undocumented,
become marginalised and are continually vulnerable to living in severe deprivation. A
migrant youth without identification, without legal documentation, and without
education, can easily become marginalised. Such harsh realities breed conditions for
trafficking, prostitution, and enslavement as survival pathways. These realities are
effectively hidden behind the causes of lack of effective advocacy, and the inability to
obtain and maintain legal documents. The consequences of such a context creates
marginalisation where young migrants are unable to enter the system resulting in
vulnerability and exploitation.

61
Powerlessness
I want to go to university and get a job working in an airconditioned office
[Myanmar Migrant Youth]

The third face of oppression is powerlessness. Young (1990) highlights how

powerlessness occurs within societies because of a division of labour which usually
correlates to a certain level of power and wealth. Achieving a higher education and
better employment opportunities are choices not easily available to Myanmar
migrants in Thailand. Controlling restraining forces are at work to put many barriers
in place. Most Thai employers are not interested in employing part time Myanmar
migrant workers. Or, with their migrant worker status and work permits limiting their
movement to a particular district such as Ranong, they are not able to travel to cities
such as Bangkok without local government permission and permission of their
employer. Access to university for migrants becomes available only to a privileged
few who can gain a scholarship. And even these privileged few require correct
documentation and accredited proof of secondary education.

Education and power, or the lack of education and powerlessness, are ultimately
connected to cheap labour and low wages. Young refers to class analysis theory as
providing a window into the experience of oppression and powerlessness.
Employment restrictions create a class of non-professionals who suffer a form of
oppression in addition to exploitation, which can be termed powerlessness. The
powerless lack authority or power. Power is exercised over them. “They must take
orders and rarely have the right to give them” (p. 57). This place in the social division
of labour is associated with their social position in society with little opportunity to
develop and exercise skills. In particular the climb up from the labouring/non-
professional to professional class requires acquiring the necessary skills and
qualifications to enter and practice in a profession. Typically, these qualifications are
obtained by a higher-university education. Yet it is the three doors of discrimination:
the document curse, education trap, and employment gate, which block access to
achieve higher education.

Powerlessness as a face of oppression is revealed behind challenges in Figure 5.1

of document problems, vocational vs higher education, earning vs learning, as well
as the default setting of many Thai to not value migrants and view them as a national
security threat. Herein lie a variety of restraining forces that create the distinction
between mental versus manual work, inside versus outside work, having authority
over others versus not having authority over others. Powerlessness emerges when
young migrants share what they hope for their future and describe “I want to go to
University and get a job working inside an airconditioned office”. This qualification
distinction gets reinforced with social and lifestyle boundaries where people live and
work within segregated neighbourhoods and schools, where Thai parents do not
want their children going to school with Myanmar children, and where parts of town

62
are designated as “Myanmar” and “Thai”. Young notes that generally the structures
of society transition the children of professionals to become professionals while the
children of non-professionals do not. The lived reality and the face of powerlessness
for the majority of Myanmar migrants is experienced as the lack of choices and
opportunities to pursue education and particular employment.

Cultural Imperialism
Why do they look down upon Myanmar people and treat us badly?
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

The fourth face of oppression is cultural imperialism. Young (1990) refers to this as
the awareness of daily walking in two worlds; “double consciousness” (p. 60). Young
quotes De Bois (1969) describing the experience as a “sense of always looking at
one’s self through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world
that looks on in amused contempt and pity” (p. 60). From within, the migrant as a
true subject and person desires recognition as human, capable of activity, full of
hope and possibility, yet they receive from the dominant culture only the judgement
that they are different, marked, or inferior (p.60). Cultural imperialism and the daily
reality of living with a double consciousness is experienced by many minorities living
within a dominant group or culture.

In the context of Thailand as the host country, the dominant group or culture marks
the minority culture as other (Draper et al., 2019). As a consequence, Myanmar
migrants and their culture are defined and marked from the outside. Arphattananon
(2022) refers to this dynamic when he states “both ‘assimilation’ and ‘integration’ are
grounded within the nationalist discourse that regards the cultures of host countries
as superior to the cultures of migrants” (p. 411). Cultural imperialism is implied in a
number of studies citing the negative experience of name calling “Burma” and
behaviours that put down, ridicule, or discriminate negatively toward students from
Myanmar within Thai government schools (Tuangratananon et al., 2019). This
negativity toward Myanmar migrant students coming into Thai government schools is
also evidenced in parents threatening to withdraw their children. Cultural imperialism
is revealed in interviews with school teachers and government officials. The quote
from Arphattananon’s (2022) interview of a Thai school principal is one example:

Since they (migrant students) live in Thailand, they should learn about
Thailand. They should learn our national anthem, learn to be loyal to our
country. They might be here forever. We teach them our culture and our way
of life so that they can function well in Thai society. If we do not teach them,
they will remain barbarians (p. 418).

Arphattananon (2022; 2012), Tuangratananon, et al. (2019), and Unicef (2019) refer
to the need for Thai government schools to adopt a more culturally inclusive

63
approach toward migrant students. They point toward a way out of this cultural
imperialism mindset by recognising the need for a more multicultural education in
Thailand. Rather than assimilation into a dominant culture, education today needs to
help students understand diversity in today's globalised and multicultural society.

Underneath the query why Myanmar migrant parents send their children to MLC’s is
a common reference to a culturally safe and supportive environment in their own
language and with Myanmar teachers (Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022; Tyrosvoutis,
2019). The reasons why Myanmar migrant children do not simply go to Thai school
are varied, but cultural imperialism and cultural resistance to discrimination and
assimilation are evident as factors from this research (see Figure 5.1).

Violence
I don’t know why some Thai people hate Myanmar people. For example,
when we go to the hospital to do the health card application, they divide the
place to do x-ray. Here is for Burmese. There is for the Thai. You cannot enter
the Thai room. They don’t speak in a polite way. They have a bad energy in
their voice. They scold the Burmese.. don’t sit like that, don’t do like that. They
do not act in a polite way. Sometimes they use very low and bad words. Why
do they treat us like that?
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

Young’s (1990) fifth face of oppression is violence. This is experienced “as a

knowledge that they must fear random, unprovoked attacks on their persons or
property, which have no motive but to damage, humiliate, or stigmatise group
members” (p. 61). As a direct consequence of their group identity as Myanmar,
migrants live daily under the threat of attack; on themselves, their family, or their
friends. This consciousness weighs heavily on their personal sense of dignity and is
a daily tiring experience because of the constant alertness and energy expended to
survive. One migrant teacher shared:

I don’t really know why this happens. Many years ago there was fighting
between Thai and Myanmar people in Ayutthaya. There is history. Mother
shares to her children. Children take it. Maybe because of that. Also,
Myanmar is in poverty and Myanmar people come to Thailand. Thai people
feel that this is our ‘home’ our ‘house’ and you are just a visitor. They look
down on us.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

This violence under many subtle forms is illustrated in Figure 5.1 themes of fear and
history. It represents the violence of humiliating words and unprovoked attacks which
happen so frequently and without consequence on those who perpetrate these acts,
that it is tolerated and approaches legitimacy. Young refers to this dynamic of

64
legitimacy. When something happens constantly, by the very fact of frequency, it
becomes normal and even acceptable: “It is a social given that everyone knows what
happens and will happen again. It is always at the horizon of social imagination,
even for those who do not perpetrate it” (Young, p.62). A view of Myanmar migrants
as a threat, an issue of national security, as cheap labour to serve Thai people,
combined with historical hurt and fear, causes violence in both subtle and overt
ways, and is experienced daily by Myanmar migrants.

Conclusion
Literature regarding Myanmar migrant education has drawn attention to Thai
education policy gaps to ensure access, and explores reasons why Thai government
schools are not seeing large numbers of Myanmar migrants entering and completing.
A conclusion frequently reached has been to focus on obstacles of family poverty
and the lack of Thai language learning support along with documentation and
communication challenges. However, this research has revealed a wider contextual
analysis with complex interconnections between Thai education, immigration, and
labour policy that have significant effects on educational choices and pathways for
Myanmar migrant families.

Literature has also focussed attention upon MLC’s; their history, curriculum, funding
challenges, and reasons for and against their support and recognition by the
Thailand government. This research conducted in Ranong and Mae Sot, primarily
with teachers and educational leaders of MLC’s, revealed a significant list of
challenges with underlying causes of lack of funding, documentation, and
discrimination. What has been recognised in this project is that research and
analysis conducted only within an education silo, or only within Thai schools or
MLC’s, fails to adequately explain the whole migrant context and educational
experience as to why many migrant families do not send their children to Thai
government schools. Young’s (1990) Five Faces of Oppression was used as a tool
and window into the experience of discrimination which emerged from the research
data. Attempts at solving Myanmar migrant education challenges will not be truly
successful unless there is an adequate understanding of the real causes.
Oppressive and discriminatory attitudes along with education, immigration, and
labour policies are significant factors which need to be included in the migrant
education debate.

65
Chapter Six: Teacher Training
The primary aim of this research was to understand and support Myanmar migrant
education through understanding education challenges (RQ1), their causes (RQ2)
and practical policy implications (RQ3). This chapter will now explore how an action
research design process was followed with Myanmar migrant teachers to propose an
action for Marist Asia Foundation MLC. While the research reveals many challenges
and a complexity of causes, a clear theme identified by teachers was the lack of
teacher training.

The lack of teacher training (Figure 6.1) was the highest occurring education
challenge identified in the case study and non-case study data. These research
findings also echo research undertaken previously in Mae Sot and Ranong
identifying teacher training as an urgent need (Tyrosvoutis, 2019). This is particularly
significant in the context of Myanmar migrant education as most migrant teachers in
MLC’s are not formally trained or have access to professional development.
Following an action research methodology, rather than focussing on the wider
theoretical and more politically charged issues of legal documentation and advocacy
for policy and legislative change, teacher training was voiced by migrant teachers
and recognized as potentially more solvable and within the sphere of influence of a
particular Migrant Learning Centre. Teacher training was considered not just one of
the challenges to support Myanmar migrant education, but a driver to support wider
changes to help both teachers and students. This lack of teacher training now directs
and influences the rest of the thesis.
Figure 6.1

Teacher Training ‘Cluster of Challenges’

66
Case study and Non-Case study data
Teacher training was recognised as connected with a cluster of challenges shown in
Figure 6.1. As discussed in Chapter 4, there are many demands placed upon
migrant teachers. They work in stressful low resource settings, with a low salary, and
as migrant workers may frequently not have a recognised education qualification to
be teachers. The illegal status of MLC’s and lack of accreditation also affects a
migrant’s personal safety in terms of incorrectly assigned work permit
documentation, and the lack of specific subject content knowledge. This cluster of
challenges is also referred to in Bridges’ research (Tyrosvoutis, 2019) which
identified formal recognition by a government (76%), training (65%), increased salary
(63%) and legal documentation (44%) as needs stated by MLC teachers.

From these findings I propose that provision of teacher training for MLC teachers
could be a transformative key to support the resolution of a number of challenges
experienced by Migrant teachers. Teacher training has the potential to address the
need for accreditation which may support security and safety concerns with teachers
being allowed to work in a MLC. Accreditation could be a solution toward improving
low salary and a potential salary progression pathway. Teacher training could also
support the admitted lack of subject content knowledge. The multi-dimensional
nature of the stress factors experienced by migrant teachers could be better
managed as they acquire both teacher skills and competencies through a teacher
training programme.

Marist Asia Foundation Teacher Training Research Group

Having identified the lack of teacher training as the major challenge, the Marist Asia
Foundation Management Team selected five teachers to form a small Teacher
Training Research Group. This involved the education manager of the primary
programme, the education manager of the secondary programme, and three
Myanmar migrant teachers who had all completed a Certificate in Teaching and
Learning through the Australian Catholic University (ACU) and who had more than
three years teaching experience. Four discussions took place: (1) Development of a
MAF teacher survey to identify what teacher training content MAF teachers
considered was most important. (2) Identification and evaluation of currently
available teacher training programmes. (3) Discussion of results and the Technology
Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPaCK) Model (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). (4)
Discussion of important design features of a future directed MAF teacher training
programme.

67
Figure 6.2

Marist Asia Foundation Teacher Training Research Group Process

Marist Asia Foundation Teacher Survey

The Teacher Training Research Group conducted a voluntary survey among all MAF
teachers seeking to identify what they thought were the most important teacher
training needs and topics. While not definitive in matching up voiced needs with
programmes, feedback from MAF teachers was considered an important initial
reflective step in the process. A mis-match could easily be created by adopting a
programme that did not correspond to the expressed needs of teachers. This survey
was completed by 14 of the 19 MAF Teachers (74%) and discussion of the results by
the research group identified the 12 themes considered most important.

1. Student Centred Learning (78%)

2. Classroom Management (78%)
3. Critical Thinking Skills (78%)
4. Time Management (71%)
5. Student Assessment (71%)
6. Lesson Planning (64%)
7. Student behaviour management (57%)
8. Student Learning Styles (57%)
9. Special needs and learning difficulties (57%)
10. Teacher mentor - observation (57%)
11. Asking questions (57%)
12. Student human development (57%)

Evaluation of Three Teacher Training Programmes

Following the MAF teacher survey, further research was undertaken by the
researcher identifying six teacher training programmes and resources currently
available and / or used by MLC’s on the Thai Myanmar border.

68
The MAF Teacher Research Group discussion recognised that while there were a
number of possible teacher training possibilities a few factors required careful
consideration. Online opportunities to learn were primarily English based. Language
accessibility was a factor that significantly restricted access as not all migrant
teachers have enough English language for online learning. Additionally, the
advantages of a programme to provide books and facilitate group learning were
considered important by the Research Group. The course adaptation to Myanmar
culture and low resourced settings were regarded as significant issues for
consideration on the Thailand Myanmar Border.

The initial consideration of six programmes was then reduced to three. The
Commonwealth Education Trust Program (Foundations for Teaching and Learning)
and the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organisation (SEAMEO) have an
English level requirement that limited accessibility, and SEAMEO did not respond to
requests for further information and access to the programme resources. The
UNICEF Supporting Teacher Education in Myanmar (STEM) programme had only
one-two modules available online and was still considered to be in the development
stage. The remaining three programmes were considered potential programmes for
further evaluation.

Table 6.1

Myanmar Teacher Training Programmes

Organisation Programme Name Number of Units

British Council Towards Results in English 15 Modules - Units

and Education (TREE)

Mote Oo New Teacher Programme 5 Modules - Units

Teacher Focus Myanmar Learn, Choose, Use 129 teaching strategies,

class activities and
educational approaches for
teachers

Each of the programmes was discussed, with strengths and weaknesses

commented upon. Based on feedback and comments from teacher interviews and
teachers in the MAF Teacher Training Research Group, an evaluation criteria of six
areas was created by the researcher and the Research Group with each criteria
scoring a maximum of 3 points with a total maximum score of 18 points.

69
Table 6.2

Teacher Training Programme Evaluation Criteria

Criteria 1- does not meet needs. 2- meets training needs. 3 - meets training
needs well

1 Relevant - the topics for teacher training meet needs of teachers

2 Culturally sensitive - the programme design is culturally aware of

Myanmar teachers and their cultural context

3 Development of learning progression - the programme progresses from

basic to more advanced teacher training skills and concepts

4 Group - the programme supports group learning and application of

learning

5 Accessible - the programme has multiple language translations

(Myanmar, Thai, English) and few entry requirements

6 Certificate - the programme has a certificate of completion as proof of

learning

The results of the MAF Teacher Training Research Group evaluation are shown in
Table 6.3 The Mote Oo programme scored highest with 13 points. The Teacher
Focus Myanmar programme scored second with 10 points. The British Council
TREE programme scored third with 7 points. Table 6.3 columns can be understood
from left to right as 13 topics MAF Teachers considered important which
corresponded to particular topics in Teacher Training Programs 1, 2, and 3. Orange
coloured cells signify a gap in the topics covered in a particular training programme.

70
Table 6.3

MAF Teacher Research Group Assessment Results of Teacher Training

Programmes

71
Discussion identified that extra resources needed to be created to respond to the
topics of using technology in the classroom, time management, special needs and
learning difficulties, student behaviour management, and student human
development. Discussion recognised the focus of each programme was primarily
upon pedagogy whereas the MAF teachers also recognised the need for subject
content knowledge, digital technology knowledge, and processes and practices to
become a reflective teacher. Significant discussion centred around the concepts of
certificate of completion versus certificate of accreditation. The final conclusion of the
MAF Teacher Training Research Group was to combine the Mote Oo (programme 2)
and the Teacher Focus Myanmar (programme 3). The integration of both teaching
theory (Mote Oo) and practising teaching and learning skills (Learn Choose Use)
was considered to be better than choosing one or the other programme.

72
Digital Technology
A result of the evaluation of three teacher training programmes was the recognised
priority of each programme around pedagogy. However, data from Marist Asia
Foundation teachers and research literature revealed two further needs of access to
and development of digital technology skills for education (Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis,
2022), and content knowledge for Myanmar migrant teachers in Migrant Learning
Centres, of whom 65% did not have the benefit of a bachelor degree or accredited
teacher training (Tyrosvoutis, 2019). This is also specifically noted in the Southeast
Asian Teacher Competency Framework (SEAMEO, 2018) and the Myanmar
Teacher Competency Standards Framework (Myanmar Ministry of Education, 2020).
The reference to Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in both teacher
competency frameworks recognises the increasing importance of teachers being
able to use and integrate educational technologies into teaching and learning
methodologies and in different subject areas and contexts.

The TPaCK Model

The Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPaCK) Model developed by
Koehler and Mishra (2009) helpfully explores what is recognised as a potential gap
in the teacher training programmes evaluated above which are primarily focussed on
pedagogy (P). The literature and MAF staff research data pointed to the need for
subject content knowledge and the ability to use technology in the classroom. While
the interrelationship between subject content knowledge (CK) and how this is taught
pedagogically (P) is a basic starting point of teacher training, the introduction of
educational technologies (T) can still be viewed as an add on, costly, a distraction,
and not deeply part of the current ecology of education and teacher’s pedagogical
beliefs (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). While each factor of technology, pedagogy and
content is important, the interrelationship and integration of each of these factors
together is a current educational challenge.

Practical implications of the TPaCK model as a framework for Marist Asia

Foundation were discussed and it was debated whether each component of the
TPaCK model should be treated equally. In the context of Myanmar migrant teachers
in MLC’s, there is obviously a need for pedagogy (P) and content knowledge (CK).
While technology (T) was a priority for MAF teachers, it may also need to be
gradually developed with available funding and resourcing. The development of a
content (C) and technology (T) knowledge pathway is a factor discussed more in the
implications for Marist Asia Foundation in Chapter Seven.

Design Features of a Teacher Training Program

Research indicates important design features which support an effective teacher
education programme. In a summary of effective in-service training programmes in
low resource contexts, evidence suggests embedding teacher training in school is
likely to be more effective as it can deal with the real concrete problems faced in the

73
local environment (Arancibia, Popova, & Evans, 2016; Timperley, 2008).
Additionally, training courses of between 30-100 hours are more effective than the
one shot workshop model as learning is cyclical not linear (Arancibia et al., 2016).
Both Mote Oo and Teacher Focus Myanmar, with significant experience in
supporting Myanmar teacher training on the Thai Myanmar border, highlight the
benefit of an experiential learning design which is more active and engaging for
learning and can provide the benefits for teachers seeing new teaching approaches
and methods in practice (Ei Mon Kyaw, 2022; Tyrosvoutis et al., 2021). The
importance of using qualified professional teachers as leaders and mentors of
teacher training programmes is also highlighted. Teaching is complex and both
technical skill and experience is required to help teachers become reflective
practitioners and uncover resistance to new teaching methods and concepts.
Creating a learning classroom is supported by creating the conditions that support a
learning culture among staff, students, and the wider community. This requires
sufficient resources and access to expert assistance (Arancibia et al., 2016;
Timperley, 2008).

When MAF Teacher Training Research Group were asked how they would design a
teacher training programme ready for implementation, a total of 23 design features
were discussed. These can be summarised into six features: length of time, mode of
learning, mentoring, resourcing, educational leadership responsibility, and
accreditation.

Programme Length
MAF Teacher Training Research Group proposed a one-year (12 month) programme
because “what we learn needs to be put into practice” and “the curriculum is taught
over one year and we need to reflect on the whole experience”. They did not favour
workshops that were not connected with their real issues and experiences as
teachers. Teachers’ reflections around programme length echoed research that
suggests the goal of teacher training is deeper knowledge and integration of subject
knowledge with how to teach it. This involves a process of re-learning and trying, and
where current practice is both challenged and supported to change (Timperley,
2008). MAF Teacher Training Research Group teachers shared it could be possible
to do three workshops on teacher training during holiday periods but this needs to be
“connected to their needs and not random”. This points to careful consideration of
teacher training in a workshop mode which is disconnected from where teachers are
at and their actual teaching practice of the curriculum. Discussion recognised the
heavy workload of teachers, proposing one meeting per week for the training group
and one monthly meeting for teachers in subject areas to meet, discuss, and solve
challenges together. Teachers in the training programme should be allowed time for
study inside the weekly teaching schedule of work hours.

74
Mode of Learning
Feedback from MAF Teacher Training Research Group revealed teacher training in
a group context was favoured because studying in a group gave “more energy to
learning” and allowed “peer teacher observation and peer feedback which is very
helpful learning”. Practical components of video recording teaching, having others
give feedback, and personal reflection on strengths and weaknesses, was regarded
as one of the most helpful tools they had experienced. While not using the phrase
reflective practitioners, MAF Teacher Training Research Group teachers shared
about the powerful experience of being in a community of teachers who are learning
together through reflection. Having taught for a number of years they recognised the
significant learning of observation and sharing, and wanted this experience for new
teachers. While nervous at first, they appreciated honest feedback from peers and
could now see how challenging teaching moments were positive. As a Mote Oo
educator Ei Mon Kyaw (2022) refers to it: teachers can be supported to recognise
setbacks, and feedback is seen and experienced as an opportunity to grow.
Experiential and practical learning was considered a more interesting and practical
mode of learning. Tyrosvoutis et al (2021) points to the benefit of group learning
particularly in adopting any new teaching or classroom practices because teachers
can “first gain knowledge of the innovation, see the potential benefits it has for their
classroom, implement it regularly to evaluate whether it ‘works’, and confirm its value
through everyday use” (p.19). This discussion, and the preferences of the MAF
Teacher Training Research Group, reveal a challenge in simply adopting a teacher
training model via online learning alone if it is not immersed in the real context of a
particular school, the particular classroom experiences of teachers, teaching a
particular curriculum, and without immediate feedback and support from peers.

Mentoring
The importance of an experienced teacher or senior subject teacher as mentor was
recognised as significant as new teachers may not have confidence with the
curriculum, or their subject content knowledge may need to be supported. The MAF
Teacher Training Research Group supported new teachers having a special period
of orientation: “It would be good for their first month to complete a set of learning
modules - observations-experiences”. A query regarding who would be the Tutor -
Trainer of the course created discussion about the positives and negatives of
volunteers from overseas and whether they are knowledgeable about the local
context. This conversation entered into a debate about the perception that local
(Myanmar) teachers may not be accepted as qualified trainers because they had not
been to university and were therefore not considered professional. This is a resource
and cultural challenge for educational organisations to consider carefully. The cost of
a university scholarship teacher training model sending young teachers to university
at great expense, now exchanged for a localised teacher training model, still requires
a financial investment for a qualified professional teacher mentor, or at least
accessing expert assistance from an educational organisation with capacity for

75
teacher training. At the heart of the challenge is not just completing a book or
replacing old ideas with new ideas, but to uncover current practices, limitations, and
resistance to new ideas. The focus is on learning, not just trying a skill which can
easily be lost or not followed through. A group process with professional expertise
better supports this teaching and learning goal for a teacher training programme
(Timperley, 2008).

The MAF Teacher Training Research Group also referred to the possibility of visiting
outside organisations for training and even internships for teachers who could then
return and bring this knowledge and training back to the organisation. Arancibia et al
(2016) offers a cautionary note about the dynamic of teaching of trainers or cascade
model where one person trains a number of people, who then return back to train
their communities. While this mode of training may find favour with funders for its
efficiency, it may also result in the dilution of educational quality which needs to be
kept clearly as the goal.

Resourcing
The MAF Teacher Training Research Group, while acknowledging the desirability
and benefit of a trained educational specialist to support teacher training, was aware
of resource limitations in a MLC. The importance of educational partnerships with
outside organisations was noted as a particular need for Marist Asia Foundation
(MAF). Developing a learning partnership with Mote Oo and Teacher Focus
Myanmar who created the preferred teacher training materials was proposed.
Additionally, a learning partnership with a teacher training university such as Asia
Pacific International University (Bangkok) which offered a Bachelor of Education to
Myanmar students for many years could be developed as a sustainable and
potentially accreditable teacher training pathway. The group commented on the
relevance of the three levels for on-going competency development: (1) learning on
the job, (2) learning from others, and (3) structured learning (SEAMO, 2018, p. 23).
Marist Asia Foundation (MAF) could intentionally support learning on the job with
resource books, materials, and subscriptions to online learning content providers.
Learning from others could be supported with a senior subject teacher who has
experience and knowledge to mentor new teachers. Structured learning could be
supported by sponsoring specific subject content learning and accreditation.
Developing a partnership with a local Thai school, International School, Community
College, University (such as Asia Pacific International University, Chiang Mai
University), or accredited content provider, could be a potential pathway for specific
subject content material for teachers. Financial incentives such as a salary increase
following the completion of the teacher training programme in recognition of the
hours and the learning achieved was considered important. Specific pay scale
increases could be tagged to completion of both teacher training and successful
achievement of specific subject content accreditation such as GED and Test of
English as Foreign Language (TOEFL).

76
Educational Leadership Responsibility
Wider educational issues beyond just teacher training emerged. Educational leaders
needed to take real responsibility for the goal of quality education which extends
beyond the teacher. Teacher training is important, but so are the support of
education pathways toward teaching, and resourcing of equipment. The balance of
curriculum loading in a multilingual learning context also requires attention.
Tyrosvoutis et al (2021) refers to the band aid solution of seeking a quick policy fix to
a deep educational problem and cautions educational leaders to be careful of trying
to demand external accountability without first building capacity. Global Partnership for
Education (2020) refers to the sin of donor funded teacher professional development
programmes measured by numbers of teachers trained not educational quality.

Ei Mon Kyaw (2022) from Mote Oo recognises that while teacher training can often
focus on the teacher, the ecological environment of the teacher in an educational
organisation needs careful attention. Lasting results require time and appropriate
support. Curriculum, resources and processes, need to be contextualised so that
training can be implemented practically, with assessment and application in the
classroom. Management needs to support the development of a community of
practice so that teachers can be supported to engage with educational practice,
discuss questions, and share resources together.

Accreditation
The topic of accreditation was discussed by the MAF Teacher Training Research
Group. They acknowledged the difference between a certificate of completion and a
more highly valued and recognised certificate of accreditation from a government or
university. Their preference was for an accredited course from a recognised
university, yet the complexities and challenge in finding a university partner to
provide such a training programme has not yet to be overcome. Accreditation
requires connections and funding. As a result of the lack of government engagement
on both sides of the Thailand Myanmar border, limited donor funding, and the politics
of education accreditation, most post-secondary institutions reported themselves as
self-accrediting (Myanmar Post-Secondary Education Consortium, 2022). Kyaw
Moe Tun, Director of Parami University, which is trying to implement an accredited
university online learning pathway for Myanmar youth, notes the large number of
post-secondary sector education initiatives seeking to fill the gap left by Government
inaction, but points to certificates of accreditation giving not only recognition but
“assurance of a certain minimum quality of instruction” (Myanmar Post Secondary
Education Consortium, 2022, p. 20).

While accreditation is a long-term hope, a more localised educational network of

NGO’s supporting Myanmar MLC’s could be more realistic. Such a network could
utilise currently available resources (such as Mote Oo and Teacher Focus Myanmar
Teacher Training Programs) and educational specialists to ensure quality oversight
77
and assurance. This choice could require adoption of the principle of not making the
perfect (accredited programme) the enemy of the good (certificate of programme
completion).

Conclusion
The purpose of a teacher training programme requires careful attention. Is it to
support the educational quality of teaching and learning in a MLC, or is it to seek
teacher accreditation for the purpose of security and immigration documentation?
Initially, teacher training could achieve the first goal of improving quality teaching and
learning. Research data from the MAF Teacher Training Research Group proposed
a localised teacher training model could be attained by the combination of using the
Mote Oo (New Teacher Program) and Teacher Focus Myanmar (Learn, Choose,
Use) programmes alongside approved local teacher competency frameworks
(Southeast Asia Ministers of Education Organisation, 2018; Myanmar Ministry of
Education, 2020). Specific education pathways in subject content and digital
technology also require careful consideration. Monitoring and assessment of skills
and standards could be facilitated by an NGO or education provider with the
necessary technical skill and capacity. Accreditation at the level of licence to teach
in Thailand currently involves further layers of government and institutional
recognition and the challenging entry requirement of a university graduate diploma
(Tyrosvoutis, 2023). Creating a localised pre-service and in-service teacher training
programme potentially involves an unfortunate trade-off between the educational
benefits to the teacher and students of a course that ensures more competency in
teaching, and the desirable outcome of government accreditation for the teacher.
Creating such a working model on the Thailand Myanmar border could be the first
step forward. Effective advocacy might build upon this success toward government
recognised accreditation.

78
Chapter Seven: Policy and Practice Implications
In this final chapter the implications (RQ3) of the educational challenges (RQ1) and
their causes (RQ2) will be discussed, particularly around the educational purpose,
quality and sustainability of a MLC. While various causes of challenges are
acknowledged in this research, this chapter will focus upon practical implications that
are within the sphere of influence of Marist Asia Foundation (MAF) MLC. Future
areas for research will also be considered.

In the teacher surveys, focus groups, and semi structured interviews of both
teachers and educational leaders, two directions and implications for migrant
education emerged from responses to the challenges and their causes. In the semi-
structured interviews questions 7-11 focussed particularly on policy and practice
issues (see Appendix B).

Two Directions for Migrant Education: Teachers or Students

Figure 7.1

Implications of Migrant Education Challenges and Causes

Note. For MAF, two directions are revealed (A) student vocational and higher
education pathways (24), and (B) teacher training (15) + Develop leadership (13) =
(28).

Figure 7.1 reveals two directions. For students, the MAF case study reveals an
important education direction is supporting students in both working (vocational) and

79
learning (higher education). For teachers, the MAF case study reveals the
importance of teacher training and leadership development to build capacity within
MAF. The importance of language learning is revealed in ensuring two accredited
pathways (Thai pathway and English (GED) pathway) are supported. MAF’s lack of
engagement with the government compared to non-case study data is noted as an
area for future consideration.

From the perspective of educational policy and practice, significant financial and
human resourcing is required to achieve both vocational and higher education goals.
One option is to focus on the quality of education being provided in MLC’s and
enabling higher learning and teacher training to support education quality. Another
option is to focus on the majority of students who need to earn and therefore teach a
curriculum that helps them prepare for work. These two directions are visible in the
left and right side of Figure 7.2

Figure 7.2

Myanmar Migrant Education Challenges (from Figure 5.1)

When aligned with the list of migrant education challenges from Figure 5.1, this
contextual educational challenge for MAF MLC is whether to pursue teacher training
for teachers (left side), or vocational and/or higher education pathways for students
(right side). One migrant teacher considering what is the one most important change
to support education at MAF MLC stated:

What is the greatest thing to change? It is very clear. The most important
thing to change is to develop teachers. This is the most important thing.
Develop the curriculum and use technology as a school and as a teacher.
[Myanmar Migrant Teacher]

A Myanmar migrant education manager, while agreeing with the need for teacher
training, turns the conversation toward students and their needs.

We should provide education in a practical way and add more life skills. We
also need to do a higher education pathway because many want a university
graduation. They can get a job because of that certificate. Their skill is higher.
[Myanmar Migrant Education Manager]

80
The emerging policy and practice question for MAF is whether to support an
academic pathway toward higher education and teacher training and also a
vocational and more practical education pathway. Considering financial and
sustainability issues, prior to attempting to provide two education directions some
fundamental questions about the nature and purpose of education in a MLC needs to
be addressed. This could involve a needs analysis with parents and the community.
Two important education questions are: What do they want? Why do they want it?
Ultimately the purpose of education and a particular learning organisation needs
clarity and a clear vision to align the content and curriculum to achieve the purpose.
A migrant community educational needs analysis also needs a guiding framework
and a process to determine both content and curriculum.

The ‘What’ and ‘Why’ of Education

Biesta (2015), proposes a helpful framework to consider the MLC challenge. For
Biesta, a good education involves three domains: qualification, socialisation, and
subjectification. These three education domains could guide both students, teachers
and parents and frame a critique of current education pathways.

The first educational domain is qualification. This involves the acquisition of

knowledge, skills and dispositions; a student becomes qualified to do something.
This connects with the concept of accredited education pathways for migrant
children whether in Thailand, Myanmar or an internationally recognised accreditation
such as GED; giving them proof of having a certain level of skill, and knowledge to
be able to do something. The second educational domain is socialisation. This
involves representing and initiating young people in ways of being and doing; our
cultural, religious and political traditions. Socialisation is connected to assimilation or
return for migrant children, language learning and their cultural well-being and
identity. The third education domain is subjectification. This involves young people
growing to become subjects of initiative and responsibility; learning autonomy,
independence, capacity for judgement. This involves learning styles, teaching
pedagogy, and enabling students to become critical and independent life-long
learners.

Some migrant parents may value socialisation, for example through Myanmar
language and culture in a MLC, above qualification in a Thai school, or vice versa.
Subjectification may be looked upon with caution by parents wary of a western
education model seeking the priority of the individual and critical thinking over the
community and its cultural and religious traditions (Guthrie, 2011; Lall, 2021).
However, these educational domains and questions need to be discussed within
each migrant community and their intent for their MLC. While Biesta (2015)
recognises the goal is a balance and achievement of all three domains, in most
MLC’s socialisation may be recognised as the primary and predominant goal with the
transmission of Myanmar language and culture. Qualification and skills, and a higher
level of critical thinking and independence in terms of subjectification may be
81
recognised as secondary goals. Biesta’s three domains provide a helpful framework
supporting discussion about education purpose and quality as they point to the
bigger educational context of preparing students for life and not just work. Marist
Asia Foundation MLC will need to identify carefully with the community the what and
why and how many education gaps it aims to fill as part of its future educational
strategy.

The Role of a Migrant Learning Centre in a Migrant Community

Parallel or Complementary Education

Considering the significant educational challenges in a low resourced context, a
policy and practice challenge for educational leaders is whether their particular MLC
is connected (complementary) or disconnected (parallel) to government education.
Perhaps based on reasons of assimilation or return, some MLC’s operate primarily
on a parallel model that does not seek to connect or integrate with the host country
(Thailand). While from a Thai perspective they are operating as parallel and
disconnected, they could be understood as operating a complimentary model to that
of their home country (Myanmar), using Myanmar textbooks, curriculum, and exams.

If advocacy efforts with the host government are poor or ineffective, the migrant
community and MLC’s move increasingly toward a parallel model which lacks points
of intersection and sustainability with government funding and accreditation. This
moves migrant education toward vulnerability and continued dependence on
charitable funding and outside donors. Operating in a complementary model, the
MLC seeks to meet gaps in the government education pathway. If the government
pathway is not responsive to the needs of Myanmar migrant children, the more
MLC’s are in need of providing further education opportunities for their migrant
community.

The issue of building a parallel or complementary pathway is evident in Tyrosvoutis'

(2023) policy preparation document regarding legalisation of MLC’s. It is also a
sustainable education policy question for Marist Asia Foundation MLC. Should MAF
MLC run a full primary and secondary education programme in parallel mode, or
operate in a complementary mode filling gaps in the government accredited
education pathway? To ensure the provision of a quality and sustainable education
pathway from primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary education, and to then
provide a localised teacher training programme requires significant financial and
resource commitment. In particular, support of a teacher training programme would
require post-secondary education opportunities for the necessary language and
subject content learning prior to pre-service and in-service teacher training.

82
Post-Secondary Landscape: Vocational Education and Higher Education
Meeting educational gaps is not uncommon inside Myanmar and on the Thailand
side of the Myanmar border. The Myanmar Post-Secondary Education (2022) report
states there are 25 different organisations inside the Thai Myanmar border reported
as offering post-secondary education. This reality is described as a response to
inadequacies of government led education: “What the Ministry of Education does not
provide, post secondaries will do themselves” (p.5 ).

Filling in the gaps of an education pathway where young migrants may not have
completed high school, or have completed but may not be ready for either work or
university, can also be understood as filling in the deficits of Biesta’s (2015) three
educational domains of qualification (skills to do tasks), socialisation (acquisition of
language, culture, personal skills), and subjectification (critical thinking, independent
learning). Marist Asia Foundation’s particular context of Ranong, which does not
have the educational organisations and capacities of Mae Sot, would require careful
consideration of what post-secondary gap education is sustainably possible.

Figure 7.3

The Migrant Educational Landscape: Vocational and Higher Education Learning

Figure 7.3 depicts a tension noted in research responses in educational

organisations (Figure 7.1) between vocational education and higher education. Is the
education being provided for Myanmar migrant children fit for purpose? If most
migrant students leave education around 12 (primary-lower secondary) to begin
work, are they ready for work? If a MLC is primarily aiming to prepare the majority of
students for earning - working which inevitably involves more practical skills in
readiness for construction, mechanical, agriculture work, or hairdressing, sewing,

83
cooking, hospitality, should this not be reflected in the curriculum of MLC’s following
a pathway 1 to 2 in Figure 7.3?

Or is a MLC preparing students for ‘learning - higher education’ which inevitably

involves a higher level of language learning, maths, science, critical thinking, and
digital technology ability following a pathway of A to B. This question is particularly
relevant when considering the implications of providing teacher training C in Figure
7.3 which rests on the presumption of providing A and B. An additional question
requiring facts on the ground is understanding if migrant students are actually
staying in the host country Thailand (assimilation) or returning back to their
homeland Myanmar (return). Here lies another potential area of future research to
understand the facts on the ground in the local context of Ranong as part of an
educational needs analysis.

Faced with the hope of supporting both students and teachers with work and higher
learning pathways (1-2 and A-B-C), the added financial and human resources
required for upper secondary and a post-secondary education available in a small
community are significant. The very nature of providing upper secondary and post-
secondary education requires local capacity of teachers and training. A sustained
financial and human resource challenge in building a higher education eco-system is
English language learning from intermediate to academic levels, competency in
subject knowledge in maths and science for the internationally recognised General
Education Diploma (GED) programme, and the professional education mentoring
and support involved with the commitment to have a quality teacher training
programme.

Teacher Training
If the Marist Asia Foundation were to support a teacher training pathway, it would be
necessary to consider either a university based or locally-based teacher training
model. A university-based model frequently presumes either a Bachelor of Education
or a bachelor in a particular subject area as well as teacher training. For most
migrants on the Thailand Myanmar border this would require proof of secondary
education completion for acceptance into a local Thai University along with a
scholarship opportunity. This pathway is not feasible considering the significant
language, education, documentation, and financial barriers. A more locally based
teacher training model combining pre-service training and in-service professional
development would still require an education ecosystem to enable both subject
content knowledge, and the necessary acquisition of language, culture, leadership
development, digital technology, and eventually specific teacher training skills.

Technology and Content Knowledge Pathway

As discussed in Chapter Six: Teacher Training, the TPaCK model helpfully frames
the required technological, pedagogical skills and content knowledge required for

84
effective and quality teaching. While this model idealistically promotes a full
integration by a teacher of all three dimensions of technology, pedagogy and
content, prioritisation and progression of skills and competencies needs to be
recognised within a training model in a fragile and low resourced context. As the
evaluation of three teacher training programmes in Chapter Six revealed, the focus
on pedagogy (P) is understandable, but it cannot overlook the necessity of
technology (T) and content knowledge (CK). One need noted in the research is the
lack of subject content knowledge with migrant teachers, a varied experience level in
teaching, a high turnover of teachers, and an identified need in digital technology
(Lowe, Win, & Tyrosvoutis, 2022; Tyrosvoutis, 2019). Another increasing need is
multilingual teachers to support Thai language learning inside Thai schools and
MLC’s. Migrant students need a primary Thai language level prior to successfully
entering and being able to complete a primary non-formal education pathway.
English language acquisition is also a slow process that needs to be effectively
incorporated as a third language for migrant students enabling further work and
study opportunities to be accessible in the future.

The TPaCK pathway for teacher training on the Thai Myanmar border would need to
be understood as starting and developing within a secondary and post-secondary
environment where gaps in technology, language, and specific subject content are
supported prior to a teacher training programme which could then be primarily
focussed on Pedagogy and the integration of technology (T) pedagogy (P) and
content knowledge (CK). A potential TPaCK teacher training pathway could be
envisaged as five steps (1) Completion of upper secondary education where a
certain level of digital literacy and competency is achieved for students. (2)
Achievement of intermediate-upper intermediate English level (B1-B2 Common
European Framework Reference). (3) Completion of GED or equivalent study to
have an established level of subject content knowledge in science, maths, English
and social studies. (4) A localised teacher training programme that was supported by
a local mentor and an external professional mentor. (5) A gradual progression of
technological skills such as the European Digital Competencies of Educators
(DigiCompEdu) framework (Redecker, 2017), and subject content through mentoring
by a senior teacher or access to physical or online resources and courses to develop
specific subject competency. Not only is a carefully considered strategy and
education pathway needed, but a whole learning community is needed for this to be
local, sustained, and effective.

Future Considerations
A number of educational issues arise from this research. While references are made
to research conducted in Ranong, the experience and closure of nine MLC’s in
Ranong in 2019, the impact of Covid in 2020, and the Myanmar military coup in 2021
have likely changed the number of migrant children both in and out of education in
Ranong. Further research could help identify and map the number and locations of

85
out of school children to more clearly identify the needs of migrant education in
Ranong. With only three MLC’s currently open in Ranong and all at full capacity, the
potential increase in migrant students attending Thai government schools implies the
need for language support and potentially an opportunity for MLC’s to rethink their
role in meeting the educational gaps in a complementary way. This could be an
opportunity for both government agencies and MLC’s to not just consider post-
secondary learning but after school activities, weekend learning, and summer camps
in support of a complementary mode with Thai government schools in meeting the
needs of the migrant community.

Marist Asia Foundation MLC could also engage in an educational needs analysis to
understand education goals the community considers important and realisable.
Research among students and parents regarding their earning vs learning
educational hopes would provide informative data to helpfully assess the current
Marist Asia Foundation curriculum and also highlight gaps and needs for post-
secondary education. It could also evaluate the success and quality of integration
with the Thai non-formal curriculum, attempting to identify and measure educational
results beyond the qualification, socialisation, and subjectification domains of
educational achievement.

This research has highlighted the best way for Marist Asia Foundation to support
Myanmar migrant education is to respond to the need for teacher training. Careful
consideration is needed to support teacher training pathways such as what
partnerships with international schools, university partnerships, teacher training
organisations and online education platforms could be developed. Advocacy and
networking with local government and Thai education pathways, such as are being
done in Mae Sot on behalf of the migrant community, could engage a more
sustainable and community wide response beyond Marist Asia Foundation.

Sustainability
It is important to note a continued vulnerability exists in the lack of legal recognition
by the Thai government of MLC’s, a lack of coordination and effective advocacy at
the local level in Ranong, and the lack of financial support by the Ministry of
Education and Office of Non-Formal Informal Education (ONIE) for Thai teacher’s
salary and language learning support in MLC’s. The underlying legal vulnerability
and financial fragility of MLC’s being financially dependent on charity, whose funds
are vulnerable according to changing international needs, requires MLC’s and
educational stakeholders to carefully consider a government collaboration strategy
and engage in intentional dialogue of mutual recognition regarding how to best
support Myanmar migrant children together.

86
Conclusion
This research listened to the voice of Myanmar migrant teachers working in a MLC
context on the Thailand Myanmar border. Myanmar migrant teachers have a
valuable perspective of understanding the challenges of education in their
classroom, and also the challenges of migrant life in their community. The research
uncovered a rich description of their experience and provided a deeper
understanding of the various education challenges and their causes. Previous
research had clearly identified obstacles of poverty, access to government schools,
language learning, and discrimination, as well as the legal vulnerability of MLC’s and
their curriculum and accreditation challenges. However, solutions to the challenges
of Myanmar migrant education cannot be resolved by looking at them from an
education silo or classroom context alone.

Listening to the experience of Myanmar migrant teachers highlighted how the impact
of nationalism, immigration, labour policies, and discrimination impacts Myanmar
migrant education. The result of many education challenges and their discriminatory
causes creates a functional failure for Myanmar migrant children; pushing them to
earn rather than learn. Whilst this narrative proved to be an overarching theme in the
research, supporting Myanmar migrant education involved engagement with the
voice of Myanmar migrant teachers. The particular challenge of teacher training
emerged as a priority that could be supported. A closer analysis of the data
recognised a cluster of challenges could be resolved with a localised teacher training
programme that was contextualised for a MLC, supporting teachers with specific
skills and competencies aligned with recognised standards. Advocacy efforts with
the government need to be intentional to support the legal recognition of MLC’s and
to work collaboratively in partnership to achieve accredited education pathways.
Within Marist Asia Foundation MLC, the creation of a localised teacher training
model in collaboration with an education partner, using the feedback and design
suggestions from this research, could provide a helpful prototype for other MLC’s
and the 800 Myanmar migrant teachers on the Thailand border.

87
 References
Arancibia, V., Popova, A., & Evans, D. (2016). Training teachers on the job: What works

and how to measure it (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 2848447).

https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2848447

Arphattananon, T. (2012). Education that leads to nowhere: Thailand’s education policy

for children of migrants. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 14(1),

Article 1. https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v14i1.537

Arphattananon, T. (2021). Teaching migrant students from Myanmar: Professional

development program to facilitate multicultural competence for teachers. Advances

in Southeast Asian Studies, 14(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-

0059

Arphattananon, T. (2022). Education of migrant children from Myanmar in Thai

government schools. Manusya: Journal of Humanities, 24(3), 409–425.

https://doi.org/10.1163/26659077-24030008

Austin, M. (2012). From entitlement to experience: Access to education for children of

migrant workers from Burma. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 21(3), 405–432.

https://doi.org/10.1177/011719681202100307

Ball, J., & Dim, A. (2016). Migrant learning centers on the Thai-Myanmar borderland:

Giving new meaning to “live and learn.” Childhood Education, 92(3), 200–209.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2016.1180893

Biesta, G. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement: On the need to reconnect

with the question of purpose in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and

Accountability, 21(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9064-9

Biesta, G. (2015). What is education for? On good education, teacher judgement, and

educational professionalism. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 75–87.

https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12109

88
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative

Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

British Council Teacher Training Program. Towards results in education and english.

Retrieved from

https://www.open.edu/openlearncreate/course/index.php?categoryid=401

Chan, O. N. (2021). Reconsidering inclusive migrant education: The case of Burmese

migrant youth in Thailand. In F. Peddie & J. Liu (Eds.), Education and Migration in

an Asian Context (pp. 137–152). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-

6288-8_7

Chan, O. N. (2022). A transnational opportunity trap? The missing link between

educational attainment and future prospects for Myanmarese migrant students in

Thailand. In A. Lee Atterberry, D. Garfield McCallum, S. Tu, A. Lutz, & L. E. Bass

(Eds.), Children and Youths’ Migration in a Global Landscape (Vol. 29, pp. 141–

166). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1537-

466120220000029009

Creswell, J. (2013). Educational research: Pearson new international edition PDF

EBook: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research.

Pearson Education, Limited.

http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/vuw/detail.action?docID=5175977

Creswell, J. W. (2018). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education.

http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/vuw/detail.action?docID=5812713

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). Strategies of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.). Sage.

Draper, J., Sobieszczyk, T., Crumpton, C. D., Lefferts, H. L., & Chachavalpongpun, P.

(2019). Racial “othering” in Thailand: Quantitative evidence, causes, and

consequences. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 25(3), 251–272.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2019.1639425
89
Ei Mon Kyaw. (2022, August 2). Planning and Delivery of Sustainable Teacher Training

Programs (Mote Oo Education). [Video] YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSf9Ctf7ECc

Freire, P. (1970/2017). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Penguin Books. Penguin Classics.

Global Partnership for Education. (2020). The 7 deadly sins of donor-funded teacher

professional development. Retrieved from https://www.globalpartnership.org/blog/7-

deadly-sins-donor-funded-teacher-professional-development

Guthrie, G. (2011). The Progressive education fallacy in developing countries. Springer

Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1851-7

Harkins, B. (Ed). (2019) Thailand migration report. United Nations thematic working

group on migration in Thailand. Retrieved from

https://thailand.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl1371/files/documents/Thailand%2520Rep

ort%25202019_22012019_HiRes.pdf

International Organisation for Migration (IOM). (2019). International Migration Law.

Glossary on migration. Retrieved from

https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/iml_34_glossary.pdf

Johnson, B. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed

approaches (Fifth edition.). Sage Publications.

Kindon, S., Pain, R., & Kesby, M. (Eds). (2007). Participatory Action Research

Approaches and Methods.

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge

(TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–

70. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/29544/

Lall, M. (2021). Myanmar’s Education Reforms: A pathway to social justice? UCL Press.

https://doi.org/10.14324/111.9781787353695

Lowe, T., Chan, L. and Tyrosvoutis, G. (2022). Safety nets: A situational analysis of

non-formal educational pathways for migrant children in Tak Province, Thailand.

TeacherFOCUS and Help without Frontiers Thailand Foundation. Retrieved from

90
 https://www.teacherfocusmyanmar.org/_files/ugd/ded038_11c6decea68144389610

a127ee193f39.pdf

Lowe, T., Win, N., & Tyrosvoutis, G. (2022). Stepping stones: The impact of twin crises

on the future of migrant education in Thailand. The Inclusive Education Foundation.

Mae Sot. Thailand. Retrieved from

https://www.teacherfocusmyanmar.org/_files/ugd/ded038_1f84ed1eaec145e088cd

e0f334520418.pdf

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.

Wiley. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/vuw/detail.action?docID=1662771

Mote Oo. New Teacher Program (Modules 1-4, 5 in private correspondence). Retrieved

from https://moteoo.org/en/teacher-education

Myanmar Post Secondary Education Consortium (2022) Myanmar post secondary

education in 2022: Historical gains and contemporary challenges. Retrieved from

https://psecmyanmar.com/sites/psecmyanmar.com/files/publication-

file/myanmar_post-secondary_education_in_2022_-_report_english.pdf

Myanmar Ministry of Education. Myanmar teacher competency standards framework.

(2020) (M - TCSF) Retrieved from

https://mmteacherplatform.net/en/elibrary/resource/teacher-competency-standards-

framework-tcsf

Nawarat, N. (2012). Thailand education policy for migrant children from Burma.

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 956–961.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.763

Nawarat, N. (2014). Negotiating curricula for Burma migrant schooling in Thailand.

Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 143, 872–878.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.494

Nawarat, N. (2018). Education obstacles and family separation for children of migrant

workers in Thailand: A case from Chiang Mai. Asia Pacific Journal of Education,

38(4), 488–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2018.1530191

91
Nawarat, N. (2019). Discourse on migrant education policy: Patterns of words and

outcomes in Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 40(1), 235-242.

Retrieved from

http://kasetsartjournal.ku.ac.th/abstractShow.aspx?param=YXJ0aWNsZUlEPTYyM

TF8bWVkaWFJRD02NDU1

Pangsapa, P. (2015). When Battlefields become Marketplaces: Migrant Workers and

the Role of Civil Society and NGO Activism in Thailand. International Migration,

53(3), 124–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2435.2009.00559.x

Purkey, M., & Irving, M. (2019). The importance of access and accreditation: Learning

from the Thailand–Myanmar border. Forced Migration Review, 60, 68–71.

Retrieved from https://go.openathens.net/redirector/wgtn.ac.nz?url=https://www-

proquest-com.helicon.vuw.ac.nz/scholarly-journals/importance-access-

accreditation-learning-thailand/docview/2263275119/se-2

Ramani, A., & van Uden, E. (n.d.). Migrant children left behind: A legal and policy

analysis to address migrant child labour in Thailand. Retrieved from

https://shapesea.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Migrant-children-left-behind-

Ananya_Evie.pdf

Redecker, C. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators:

DigCompEdu. In JRC Working Papers (No. JRC107466; JRC Working Papers).

Joint Research Centre (Seville site). Retrieved from

https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc107466.html

Save the Children. (2014). Migrant education annual report. Pathways to a better future:

A review of education for migrant children in Thailand. Retrieved from

https://thailand.savethechildren.net/sites/thailand.savethechildren.net/files/library/Mi

grant%20education%20annual%20report_full_resized.pdf

92
Shlasko, D. (2015). Using the five faces of oppression to teach about interlocking

systems of oppression. Equity & Excellence in Education, 48(3), 349–360.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2015.1057061

Sjøbakken, O. J., & Dobson, S. (2013). School self-evaluation in the longer time scale.

Experiences from a small Scandinavian state. In M. Lai & S. Kushner (Eds.),

Advances in Program Evaluation (Vol. 14, pp. 213–232). Emerald Group Publishing

Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7863(2013)0000014013

Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organisation (SEAMEO). (2018) Southeast

Asia teachers competency framework (SEA-TCF). Retrieved from

https://www.seameo-innotech.org/portfolio_page/sea-tcf/#

Stange, G., & Sasiwongsaroj, K. (2020). Transcultural lives of Myanmar migrant youths

in Thailand: Language acquisition, self-perceived integration, and sense of

belonging. International Quarterly for Asian Studies, 51(3–4), Article 3–4.

https://doi.org/10.11588/iqas.2020.3-4.13614

Teacher Focus Myanmar. (nd). Learn-choose-use: An approach to teacher professional

development that empowers teachers with options. Retrieved from

https://www.teacherfocusmyanmar.org/learn-choose-use

Teacher Focus Myanmar. (2020). The Education Quality Framework. Retrieved from

https://www.teacherfocusmyanmar.org/teacher-resources

Timperley, H. (2008). Teacher professional learning and development. Retrieved from

http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Educational_Practice

s/EdPractices_18.pdf

Tuangratananon, T., Suphanchaimat, R., Julchoo, S., Sinam, P., & Putthasri, W. (2019).

Education policy for migrant children in Thailand and how it really happens: A case

study of Ranong province, Thailand. International Journal of Environmental

Research and Public Health, 16(3), 430. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030430

Tyrosvoutis, G. (2016). Taking the sage off the stage identifying obstacles to student-

centered instruction on the Thai-Myanmar border. International Education Journal:

93
 Comparative Perspectives, 15(4), Article 4. Retrieved from

http://openjournals.library.usyd.edu.au/index.php/IEJ/index

Tyrosvoutis, G. (2019). Bridges: Participatory action research on the future of migrant

education in Thailand. Teacher Focus Myanmar. Retrieved from

https://www.teacherfocusmyanmar.org/_files/ugd/ded038_8fccedd171ef426a93f90

7e70847b562.pdf

Tyrosvoutis, G., Sasaki, M., Chan, L., Win, N., Zar, T., Win, N. N., Moo, N. T., & Paw, N.

N. Y. (2021). Deep change in low-resource classrooms: Data-driven teacher

professional development for educators from Burma using a choice-based

approach. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 20(3), Article

3. Retrieved from

https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/IEJ/article/view/14982/13798

Tyrosvoutis, G. (2023). Migrant Learning Center Registration in Thailand: The Policy

Landscape and Ways Forward. Unicef Thailand. Shared with permission.

Unicef. (2019). Education knows no border: A collection of good practices and lessons

learned on migrant education in Thailand. Retrieved from

https://www.unicef.org/thailand/media/3696/file/Education%20knows%20no%20bor

der%20-%20report.pdf

Van Hear, N., Bakewell, O., & Long, K. (2018). Push-pull plus: Reconsidering the

drivers of migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. Vol 44. No. 6. 927-

944. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1384135

World Education Forum. (2000) The Dakar framework for action: Education for all:

Meeting our collective commitments (including six regional frameworks for action).

Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000121147

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Fourth edition.). Sage

Publications.

94
Young, M. (1990). Five Faces of Oppression. In Justice and the Politics of

Difference (REV-Revised, pp. 39–65). Princeton University Press.

https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4g4q.7

95
Appendix A

Research Approval

96
Appendix B

97
98
99
100