Top-tier unis fail to impress

Considering the important role universities have in fostering education for the country’s future generations, such institutions are supposed to champion accountability, transparency and good governance among their students. But the 2019 Integrity and Transparency Assessment (ITA) report released by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has raised doubts about the integrity and transparency of public universities — particularly top-tier universities, which are known for their academic excellence.

The report — which assessed 80 out of 83 public higher education institutions — showed that only 54 managed to exceed the passing threshold, which was set at 85 out of 100, according to Isranews. This meant 26 of them failed.

According to the 2019 ITA report, 16 universities received scores higher than 90. Out of the top ten universities, seven are Rajabhat universities based in the provinces, while the remaining three are Mahidol, Sukhothai Thammathirat Open, and Mahamakut Buddhist universities.

What’s interesting about the report is that it showed most of the country’s top-tier universities actually failed to pass the assessment — including Chulalongkorn University (84.94), King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang (83.11), Suranaree University of Technology (82.48), Thammasat University (81.52), Srinakharinwirot University (66.94) and at the bottom, Prince of Songkla University (61.28).

The NACC assessed how these institutions prevent and solve corruption, disclose information, perform official duties, exercise power, spend budgets, achieve work goals, improve work efficiency, manage state assets, and conduct intra- and inter-organisational communication.

Under the government’s 20-year national strategy, 80% of state agencies are required to earn a score of at least 85 in the ITA before 2022.

Public universities are the sort of organisations which should maintain high integrity and transparency. With the reduction of financial support from the government, it is crucial for them to be more effective and transparent about their spending and management.

However, some universities have spent lavishly on benefits and allowances for their executives, overseas trips and unproductive projects while cutting down on academic budgets. For instance, some have significantly cut budgets earmarked to access global research databases, while increasing expenditure on salaries for more executives.

Others have also been criticised for promoting a patronage system, in which allocation of resources is made based on personal preferences, rather than merits.

Amid technological “disruption” and dwindling student enrolment figures, Thai universities must improve their academic quality and adapt to the changing world in order to survive. Unfortunately, many university executives seem to be unaware of this.

As state audits in Thailand are not as strict compared to those carried out in the United States and Europe, Thai universities must also show good governance, justice, transparency, and accountability in their management.

For years, Thai universities lagged behind in international rankings due to many factors, such as the lack of funding for research and development.

Considering existing circumstances, we cannot let the lack of integrity and transparency derail our climb up to the top.