ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPING COMPETENCY-BASED ACADEMIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LEARNERS IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed (1) to analyze the current and desired states of competency-based academic administration and to prioritize needs using the PNI_modified index; (2) to develop competency-based academic administration strategies appropriate for the context of primary schools; (3) to implement the strategies in a school setting and evaluate the pre–post results in terms of student learning achievement, students’ active engagement, and teachers’ competencies in digital skills and competency-based instructional design; (4) to assess the appropriateness, feasibility, and practical effectiveness of the strategies by experts, school administrators, and teachers; and (5) to synthesize policy recommendations and a roadmap for scaling up in primary schools. The research employed a four-phase research and development process: (1) needs analysis through a survey of the current and desired states among 120 administrators and teachers; (2) strategy development and validation by seven experts; (3) implementation of the strategies in a medium-sized primary school with pre-post evaluation among Grade 4–6 students; and (4) evaluation of the strategies’ effectiveness by 11 experts, administrators, and teachers in terms of appropriateness, feasibility, and practical effectiveness. Research instruments included questionnaires, and data were analyzed using percentage, frequency, mean, standard deviation, and the modified priority needs index. The results revealed that (1) the current state of competency-based academic administration was at a moderate level, while the desired state was at a high level, with the greatest needs in curriculum development and active, competency-based instruction; (2) the developed strategies consisted of four core components—curriculum, competency-based instruction, media and technology, and assessment and supervision—all of which were validated at a high level; (3) implementation of the strategies led to clear improvements in student achievement, student active engagement, and teacher competencies; (4) the strategies were rated highly in appropriateness, feasibility, and practical effectiveness; and (5) recommendations for scaling up included curriculum enhancement, teacher competency development, and the use of e-Portfolio systems to sustainably enhance student quality.
Downloads
Article Details
References
กนกวรรณ จิตต์สดุดี. (2564). การพัฒนาหลักสูตรฐานสมรรถนะในระดับประถมศึกษาเพื่อยกระดับการเรียนรู้ในศตวรรษที่ 21. มหาวิทยาลัยศรีนครินทรวิโรฒ.
นฤมล ศรีบุญเรือง. (2564). การใช้แฟ้มสะสมงานอิเล็กทรอนิกส์ (e-Portfolio) เพื่อพัฒนาสมรรถนะครูด้านเทคโนโลยีและการประเมินผลผู้เรียนในระดับประถมศึกษา. มหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่น.
ประภัสสร โสภณ. (2565). กลยุทธ์การพัฒนาหลักสูตรและการสอนเชิงสมรรถนะในโรงเรียนประถมศึกษาไทย. มหาวิทยาลัยบูรพา.
ศิริพร ชาญประเสริฐ. (2565). การพัฒนาระบบประเมินผลเชิงสมรรถนะโดยใช้เทคโนโลยีดิจิทัลในสถานศึกษาระดับประถมศึกษา. มหาวิทยาลัยมหาสารคาม.
สุรางค์ ศรีรักษา. (2565). การจัดทำคู่มือหลักสูตรฐานสมรรถนะและระบบ e-Portfolio เพื่อส่งเสริมพัฒนาการผู้เรียนอย่างยั่งยืนในโรงเรียนประถมศึกษา. มหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏนครราชสีมา.
อริยา วัฒนวิเชียร. (2565). การบริหารวิชาการเชิงสมรรถนะโดยใช้ชุมชนการเรียนรู้ทางวิชาชีพ (PLC) และการนิเทศเชิงคลินิกในโรงเรียนประถมศึกษา. มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Prospects and challenges for inquiry-based approaches to learning. In H. Dumont, D. Istance, & F. Benavides (Eds.), The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 199–225). OECD.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Empowered educators: How high-performing systems shape teaching quality around the world. Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2021). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 25(2), 97–140.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71.
Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: Three keys to maximizing impact. Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. (2016). The new meaning of educational change (5th ed.). Teachers College Press.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Pearson.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3/4), 381–391.
Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125–142.
Hattie, J. (2015). What works best in education: The politics of collaborative expertise. Pearson.
Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (2009). Models of teaching (8th ed.). Pearson.
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Springer.
Leithwood, K. (2012). The Ontario leadership framework 2012: With a discussion of the research foundations. Institute for Educational Leadership.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., Love, N., & Hewson, P. W. (2010). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (3rd ed.). Corwin.
Marzano, R. J. (2017). The new art and science of teaching. Solution Tree.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). OECD learning compass 2030: A series of concept notes on future student competencies. OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Future of education and skills 2030: OECD learning compass 2030. OECD Publishing.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization (Rev. ed.). Doubleday.
Stoll, L., & Louis, K. S. (Eds.). (2007). Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas. McGraw-Hill / Open University Press.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). The understanding by design guide to creating high-quality units. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
