Parental Perspectives on Selecting the Intensive English Program for Their Children. A Case Study : Witayanont School

Main Article Content

Rachapol Witayanont

Abstract

           This research examines parental perceptions of Intensive English Programs (IEP) in primary education at a private school in Bangkok, Thailand. The study aims to understand motivations for enrolment and expected social impacts. A survey of 89 parents whose children are currently in an IEP was conducted.
           The results indicate that nearly all of the parents (88.8%) believe IEP improves their children's social standing, with 67.4% strongly agreeing with this statement. The primary expectation from IEPs was overwhelmingly improved English performance (97.8% of respondents), followed by better academic results (42.7%) and increased foreign cultural awareness (32.6%). The perception that IEP was a more advanced form of education emerged as the most impactful enrolment motivator (74.2% rated it very important or extremely important). Notably, 71.9% of parents intend to extend their child's IEP beyond primary school, indicating a strong belief in its long-term benefits.
           This study provides valuable insights into parental perspectives on IEPs in the context of Thai education. These findings may be useful for education policymakers and IEP providers in Thailand, highlighting the need to develop curricula that address

Article Details

How to Cite
Witayanont, R. (2024). Parental Perspectives on Selecting the Intensive English Program for Their Children. A Case Study : Witayanont School. Journal of Roi Kaensarn Academi, 9(10), 1413–1429. retrieved from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JRKSA/article/view/273168
Section
Research Article

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. University of Chicago Press.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. D.C. Heath & Co.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30 (3), 607-610https://doi.org/10.1177/ 001316447003000308

Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22 (140), 1-55.

Piller, I., & Cho, J. (2013). Neoliberalism as language policy. Language in Society, 42 (1), 23-44. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404512000887

Reay, D., Crozier, G., & Clayton, J. (2013). 'Fitting in' or 'standing out': Working‐class students in UK higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 39 (1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2011.652074

Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69 (1), 99-118. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884852

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley.

Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. University of California Press.