The Learning Management Model for Higher Education Students for Learning Outcomes with Integrated Buddhism
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed to investigate the context of outcome-based education (OBE), identify relevant Buddhadhamma principles, and ultimately develop and propose the WOCA (Wisdom, Origination, Conscience, Agility) Model, a Buddhadhamma-integrated pedagogical framework for enhancing learning outcomes in Thai higher education. A qualitative methodology was employed, gathering data through in-depth interviews with 20 key informants and a focus group discussion with 5 purposively selected experts. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis. The research identified three core Buddhadhamma principles suitable for integration: Paṭisambhidā 4 (Four Analytical Knowledge), Pubbanimitta 7 (Seven Preconditions), and Hiri-ottappa (Moral Shame and Fear). The integration of these principles with the four KSEC domains (Knowledge, Skills, Ethics, Character) revealed that: (K) Knowledge aligned with Paṭisambhidā 4; (S) Skills aligned with Pubbanimitta 7 and Niruttipatisambhidā; (E) Ethics aligned with Hiri-ottappa (moral shame and moral fear); and (C) Character with Paṭibhāṇapaṭisambhidā and Yonisomanasikārasampadā. The WOCA Model operationalises these alignments into a systematic pedagogical approach that cultivates cognitive competence, applied skill, ethical awareness, and adaptive character, thereby reframing higher education as a process of holistic life development. Implications for curriculum design, teacher development, and assessment practices are discussed, and recommendations are provided for piloting and evaluating the model in diverse higher education contexts.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Journal of TCI is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence unless otherwise stated. Please read our Policies page for more information on Open Access, copyright and permissions.
References
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. https://knoware.com/blooms-digital-taxonomy
Biggs, J. (2014). Constructive alignment in university teaching. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 1, 5–22.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay Co.
Gallagher, S. (2017). Enactivist interventions: Rethinking the mind. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198794325.001.0001
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books. http://tip.psychology.org/gardner.html
Higher Education Standards Committee. (2022). Notification of the Higher Education Standards Committee on details of learning outcomes in accordance with higher education qualification standards B.E. 2565. Royal Thai Government Gazette.
Kenett, Y. N. (2025). The role of knowledge in creative thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 37(2), 242–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419. 2024.2322858
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University. (2019). Tipiṭaka: Thai edition, Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya edition B.E. 2562. Mahachulalongkorn- rajavidyalaya University Press.
Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation. (2019). Thai higher education philosophy and system. MHESI.
Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation. (2022). Ministerial regulation on standard criteria for higher education qualifications 2022. Royal Thai Government Gazette, 139(20A), 28–31.
Office of the Council of State. (2022). Announcement of the National Economic and Social Development Plan No. 13 (B.E. 2566–2570). Royal Thai Government Gazette.
Office of the Higher Education Standards and Quality. (2022). Learning outcomes according to higher education standards 2022 for doctoral degree.
Phakaphol, P. (2022). Development of a theoretical teaching model linking knowledge with the concept of applying the phenomenon to be based to promote strong citizenship characteristics and media literacy skills of students in higher education [Doctoral dissertation, Silpakorn University].
Phra Brahmagunabhorn (P. A. Payutto). (2008). Buddhawithī nai kān sō̜n [Buddhist teaching methods]. Sahamitr Printing & Publishing.
Rivas, S. F., Saiz, C., & Ossa, C. (2022). Metacognitive strategies and development of critical thinking in higher education. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 913219. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.913219
Sensiper, S. (2023). Teaching meditation to college students within an historical and cultural context: A qualitative analysis of undergraduate reflections on contemplative practice. Current Psychology, 42(18), 15356–15367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02811-x
Sihotang, H., Murniarti, E., Kia, A., Timothy, G., & Henri, A. (2025). Counseling and training: Transformation of higher education through Outcome Based Education (OBE) curriculum development at STT Arastamar Wamena. Asian Journal of Community Services, 4(6), 453–464. https://doi.org/10. 55927/ajcs.v4i6.181
Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-based education: Critical issues and answers. American Association of School Administrators.