The Causal Relationship Model for the Whole School Approach of Schools in the Office of the Basic Education Commission
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The objectives of this research article are: 1) To study the model, 2) to examine the model, and 3) to present guidelines for the comprehensive transformation of schools. The sample group consists of 560 participants, including school administrators and teachers involved in the whole-school system transformation project. The sample size was determined to be 20 times the number of variables using a multi-stage random sampling method. The research tools included interviews and questionnaires related to the model and interviews on the guidelines for the comprehensive transformation of schools. The data were analyzed using content analysis and structural relationship analysis with the Mplus software."
The research findings found that: 1. The causal relationship model for the comprehensive transformation of schools under the Office of the Basic Education Commission consists of seven latent variables, 28 observed variables, and 63 indicators. These variables include Professional Learning Networks (PLN), School Management (Man), Learning and Development of Students (LD), School Self-Development (WSAS), Professional Teachers (WSAT), Learning Networks (WSAN), and Quality Students (WSAQ). 2. The verification of the model through linear structural relationship analysis shows that it aligns with the empirical data, with indices indicating good fit. The chi-square value (χ2) is 169.058 at a significant level of p = .2416, with degrees of freedom (df) at 157. The comparative fit index (CFI) is .999, the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) is .998, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is 0.014, and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) is .018. 3. The guidelines for the comprehensive transformation of schools include establishing professional learning networks to promote school management, student learning and development, leading to self-developing schools, professional teachers, and learning networks, ultimately resulting in high-quality students.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Views and opinions expressed in the articles published by The Journal of MCU Peace Studies, are of responsibility by such authors but not the editors and do not necessarily reflect those of the editors.
References
Cheng, Y. C. (1993). Profiles of Organizational Culture and Effective School. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 4, 85-110.
Hattie et al. (2009). Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning. New York: Routledge.
Leslie, J. (1990). Risking the World's End. Interchange, 21, 49–58.
Montha, K. (2018). Factors Effecting the Quality of School under the Office of Bangkok Primary Education Service Area. (Doctoral Dissertation). Siam University. Bangkok.
Panich, V. (2020). Education Equality Fund Moves forward to Enhancing the Quality of the School: Reduce Inequality. Retrieved November 18, 2020, From https://www.eef.or.th/260920-2/
Panich, V., & Manthachit, P. (2020). World-Class High-Quality Education. Bangkok: Siam Commercial Bank Foundation.
Senge, P.M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday.
Siritrangsi, P. (2020). Research Report: Monitoring and Evaluating the Teacher and School Quality Program. Bangkok: DPU Coolprint, Dhurakij Pundit University.
Siritrangsi, P. et al. (2019). Guidelines for Being a Quality Coach in the Teacher and School Quality Program. Bangkok: DPU Coolprint, Dhurakij Pundit University.
Thacker, J. L., & William, M. D. (1992). Changing Academic Culture to Improve Student Achievement in the Elementary Schools. ERS Spectrum, 10(4), 18-23.