Enhancing the Quality of Production and Developing Educational Innovation Competencies of New-Generation Teachers in the New Normal Era
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research article aimed (1) to develop a learning model to enhance educational innovation competencies of new-generation teachers, and (2) to examine the results of implementing this model. The research was conducted in four phases: Phase 1 involved studying fundamental data and concepts related to developing educational innovation competencies of new-generation teachers; Phase 2 focused on developing and validating the quality of the learning model; Phase 3 involved implementing the model; and Phase 4 examined the outcomes of its use. The research instruments included the learning model, observation forms, questionnaires, and interviews. The target group consisted of 120 new-generation teachers in Northeastern Thailand, selected through purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using basic statistics, including percentage, mean, and standard deviation.
The findings indicated that the learning model for enhancing educational innovation competencies is an instructional design aimed at promoting such competencies among new-generation teachers. It consists of six components: (1) principles, concepts, and underlying theories, (2) objectives, (3) learning procedures, (4) social system, (5) response principles, and (6) support system. The learning process was synthesized into six steps: goal setting, brainstorming, innovation design, innovation reflection, learning management, and evaluation. The results also showed that the overall educational innovation competencies of new-generation teachers were at a high level. Specifically, competencies in idea presentation, contextual interpretation, reflection, and evaluation were at a high level, while competencies in idea generation and collaboration were at a moderate level.
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
Amelink, C. T., Watford, B. A., & Scales, G. (2012). Developing Innovative Thinking among Engineering Undergraduates: Examining the Role of Slate Enabled Technology. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–6). October 3–6, 2012.
Amelink, C., Fowlin, J., & Scales, G. (2013). Defining and Measuring Innovative Thinking among Engineering Undergraduates. In American Society for Engineering Education 120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (pp. 1–5). June 22–23, 2013.
Australian National Training Authority (ANTA). (2001). Innovation: Ideas That Work for Trainers of Innovation at Work Skills. Brisbane: Australian National Training Authority.
Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). Collaborative Learning Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty. (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bender, W. N. (2012). Project-Based Learning: Differentiating Instruction for the 21st Century. United States: Corwin.
Boks, C., & Pascual, O. (2004). The Role of Success Factors and Obstacles in Design for Environment: A Survey among Asian Electronics Companies. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment (ISEE ’04) (pp. 208–213). May 10, 2004.
Davis, H., Hartshorne, R., & Ring, G. (2010). Being an Innovative Teacher: Preservice Teachers' Conceptions of Technology and Innovation. International Journal of Education, 2(1), 1–27.
Drapeau, P. (2014). Sparking Student Creativity: Practical Ways to Promote Innovative Thinking and Problem Solving. Virginia, USA: ASCD.
Edwards, A. (2012). New Technology and Education. London: A&C Black.
Keeves, J. P. (1997). Models and Model Building. In Educational Research, Methodology, and Measurement: An International Handbook. (2nd ed.). UK: Pergamon.
Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. (2nd ed.). United States: Pearson Education.
Lee, C., & Benza, R. (2015). Teaching Innovation Skills: Application of Design Thinking in a Graduate Marketing Course. Business Education Innovation Journal, 7(1), 43–50.
Lee, S. (2018). Innovation, Entrepreneurship & Sustainability Summer Program. Taipei: National Taiwan University.
Matthews, W., & Johnson, D. C. (2017). Promoting Technology-Based Collaboration among Pre-Service Music Educators: An Inter-University Project. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(3), 436–446.
Ministry of Education. (2018). The Qualifications Framework for Thailand's Higher Education B.E. 2561. Bangkok: Prime Minister's Office.
Office of the Higher Education Commission. (2007). 15-Year Long-Term Higher Education Framework No. 2 (2008–2022). Bangkok: Ministry of Education.
Phusee-orn, S. (2011). Application of SPSS in Research Data Analysis. (5th ed.). Bangkok: Mahasarakham University.
Varnhagen, C., et al. (2010). Teaching, Research, and Discovery Learning: Recommendations for a Great University. Canada: University of Alberta.
Wilson, L. O. (2016). Anderson and Krathwohl–Bloom’s Taxonomy Revised: Understanding the New Version of Bloom's Taxonomy. Retrieved October 18, 2025, from https://quincycollege.edu/wp-content/uploads/Anderson-and-Krathwohl_Revised-Blooms-Taxonomy.pdf
Wisetsat, C. (2019). The Development of Teaching Model to Promote Innovative Teaching Skills for Pre-Service Teachers. Humanities and Social Sciences Journal, Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University, 10(2), 305–320.
Wisetsat, C., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2019). Enhancing Innovative Thinking of Thai Pre-Service Teachers through Multi-Educational Innovations. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(3), 409–419.
Wu, C. H., Hwang, G. J., Kuo, F. R., & Huang, I. (2013). A Mindtool-Based Collaborative Learning Approach to Enhancing Students' Innovative Performance in Management Courses. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(1), 128–142.
