A Model of Teacher Development to Promote Active Learning Management of Teachers that Affects Students' Learning Achievement

Abstract

Background and Aims: This research examines a model of teacher development to promote active learning management and its effects on students’ learning achievement at the Pak Thong Chai District Learning Promotion Center. The objectives of the study are: (1) to examine basic information regarding the causes, problem-solving approaches, and needs for teacher development; (2) to develop a teacher development model that promotes active learning management affecting students’ learning achievement; and (3) to investigate the results of implementing the teacher development model. This study employed an action research approach.

Methodology: The researcher defined the scope and implementation of the study as follows: The population in this research consisted of 24 teachers from the Pak Thong Chai District Learning Promotion Center, selected through purposive sampling, and students from the Center in the first semester of the academic year 2023 (1/2566), totaling 1,587 students, including 32 at the primary level, 610 at the lower secondary level, and 945. In the second semester of the academic year 2023 (2/2566), there were 1,635 students: 29 at the primary level, 625 at the lower secondary level, and 981 at the upper secondary level, also selected through purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using basic statistics, including percentages, means, standard deviations, and content analysis.

Results: Findings from Objective 1 indicated that teaching practices were not aligned with the institution’s goals, as the learning management system did not meet learners’ needs and teachers lacked suitable techniques and processes. It was suggested that teacher development should focus on workshops and follow-up supervision through Professional Learning Communities (PLC). The analysis of needs revealed that the necessity for teacher development to promote Active Learning was low in the current situation (µ = 2.33, σ = 0.94) but highest in the expected condition (µ = 4.62, σ = 0.49), especially in teacher development methods, Active Learning management, and supervision. Findings based on Objective 2 revealed that a teacher development model and supporting documents were developed through expert seminars and consensus validation, showing quality and appropriateness for practical use. Findings based on Objective 3 showed that the implementation of the teacher development model to promote Active Learning yielded excellent results. Teachers’ teaching behaviors were rated at an excellent level. Student achievement met or exceeded the 80% passing criteria, and student satisfaction with Active Learning instruction was at the highest level ( = 4.55, SD = 0.79). Likewise, teacher satisfaction with the development model was also at the highest level ( = 4.83, SD = 0.50).

Conclusion: The teacher development for promoting active learning at the Pak Thong Chai District Learning Promotion Center demonstrated a high level of necessity, consistent with both the current and expected operational conditions. The developed model comprised complete components and was validated for accuracy, appropriateness, feasibility, and usefulness, receiving certification from experts.