The Development Model of Learning Leadership in the New Era of School Administrators under Kalasin Secondary Education Service Area Office
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The research article consisted of the following objectives: 1) to investigate the current and desirable conditions, as well as the needs for developing learning leadership in the new era of school administrators under Kalasin Secondary Education Service Area Office. The key informants consisted of 7 experts chosen through purposive sampling. The sample group consisted of 159 school administrators chosen by stratified random sampling. 3 experts selected through purposive sampling served as key informants in providing guidance for developing the model; 2) to create the development model of learning leadership in the new era of school administrators under Kalasin Secondary Education Service Area Office. The key informants included 7 experts who were chosen by purposive sampling; 3) to experiment the model. The target group was 15 school administrators who were willingly to join the study; and 4) to evaluate the model. The key informants were 15 school administrators who were chosen by purposive sampling. The tools used were 1) suitability assessment questionnaire of factors; 2) questionnaire inquiring about current and desirable conditions; 3) interview form; 4) focus group discussion record form; 5) test; 6) behavioral questionnaire; 7) efficiency survey; and 8) satisfaction survey. The statistics used were percentage, mean, standard deivation, and PNI (Priority Needs Index).
From the study, the following results were found: 1) The current conditions are moderate, whereas the desirable conditions are at the highest level. The first priority needs index is the courage to think creatively; 2) The model consists of the following 5 parts namely, (1) model principles and objectives, (2) model content, which includes the courage to think creatively, the use of technology and learning innovation in the new era, and change appropriate to the context in the new era, (3) development process, (4) evaluation, and (5) conditions for success. The model is of propriety and feasibility at the highest level; 3) The posttest of knowledge and the posttest of behavioral level are both higher than the pretest; and 4) The utility level of the model and the satisfaction level are at the highest.
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
Ampai, T. (2021). Development of Internal Supervision Model to Raise the Quality of Education in Small Schools under the Office of the Basic Education Commission. (Doctoral Dissertation). Maha Sarakham University. Maha Sarakham.
Asavapoom, S. (2007). Using Research to Develop Models in Doctoral Theses. Journal of Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University, 2(2), 76-85.
Bowonchaidet, R. (2017). Development of a Program to Strengthen Effective Leadership of School Administrators under the Provincial Administrative Organization. (Doctoral Dissertation). Maha Sarakham University. Maha Sarakham.
Chaemchoi, S. (2018). Educational Institution Administration in the Digital Age. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Charoenchai, W. (2019). Development of a High-Performance Organization Management Model to Develop the Quality of Education in Educational Institutions under the Provincial Administrative Organization. (Doctoral Dissertation). Maha Sarakham University. Maha Sarakham.
Crawford, J. (2004). Educating English Learners: Language Diversity in the Classroom. (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Bilingual Education Services.
Crompton, H. (2018). Education Reimagined: Leading Systemwide Change with the ISTE Standards. USA: International Society for Technology in Education.
Deming, E. W. (1995). Out of the Crisis. USA: The Massachusetts Institue of Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study.
Elliott, T. (2017). Digital Leadership: A Six-Step Framework for Transformation. Retrieved November 27, 2023, from https://1th.me/ZQPLH
Haseesuk, S. (2022). Teaching and Learning Management Model Based on the Concept of Understanding, Access and Development of Ban Muang Kae School under the Buriram Primary Educational Service Area Office, Area 4. Journal of Social Innovation and Mass Communication Technology, 5(2), 1-10.
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
Leenalad, P., Phabutra, C., Suwantrai, W., & Duangchatham, S. (2017). Effective Leadership Development Model of Administrators of International Standard Schools in the Northeastern Region. Journal of Educational Administration Khon Kaen University, 13(1), 11-20.
Misdee, P. (2019). Development of a Program to Strengthen Transformational Leadership of First-Level Executives Rajabhat University. (Doctoral Dissertation). Maha Sarakham University. Maha Sarakham.
Pakotang, J. (2018). Leadership in the Digital Age for Professional School Administrators. Ubon Ratchathani: Faculty of Education, Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University.
Phapabutr, C., Duangchathom, S., & Hansuri, S. (2020). Technological Leadership Development Model of School Administrators in the Digital Era. Journal of Educational Administration and Leadership Sakhon Nakhon Rajabhat University, 9(33), 1-11.
Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organizational Behavior. (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Runcharoen, T. (2014). Professionalism in Organizing and Administering Education in the Era of Educational Reform for Reform Round 2 and External Evaluation Round 3. (8th Printing). Bangkok: Khao Fang.
Sairam, B. (2016). Development of a Program to Enhance Leadership Skills in Team Building for School Administrators. (Doctoral Dissertation). Maha Sarakham University. Maha Sarakham.
Secondary Educational Service Area Office Kalasin. (2022). Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2022. Kalasin: Secondary Educational Service Area Office Kalasin.
Sheninger, E. (2014). Digital Leadership Changing Paradigms for Changing Times. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Sinlarat, P. (2011). A New Educational Framework. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Somprat, K. (2017). Learning Leadership of Administrators of Basic Educational Institutions: A Study of Foundational Theory. Journal Academic and Research Faculty of Education Social Science Khon Kaen University, 12(34), 51-65.
Srisa-at, B. (2017). Preliminary Research. (10th ed.). Bangkok: Suviriyasan.
Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F (2001). Foundations of Human Resource Development. San Franciso: Berrett-Koehler.
Thammatasananon, S. (2019). Model for Developing Creative Leadership of Administrators of Basic Educational Institutions. Journal of Educational Research, 14 (2), 149-162.
Wansri, J. (2021). Educational Management in the Digital Age. Phitsanulok: Rattanasuwan Printing 3.
Yossomsak, S. (2006). Human Resource Management: Principles and Concepts. Bangkok: A.T. Press.
