Effectiveness of Learning Management Model in Strengthening Reasoning Ability and Desirable Characteristics in Labor Law Subject for Vocational Students
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed to study effectiveness of the learning management model in strengthening reasoning abilities and desirable characteristics in labor law subjects for vocational students. The population includes 36 second-year vocational certificate students, from the Faculty of Industrial Technology at Nakhon Phanom University with similar backgrounds, experiences and learning contexts. The sample was randomly assigned into 2 classrooms, including 20 second-year Vocational Certificate students in group 1 a trial group who were taught by the learning management model to strengthen reasoning abilities and desirable characteristics in labor law subjects, and 20 students in class 2 as a control group who were taught by the inquiry learning management model. Research tools include the learning management model for strengthening reasoning abilities and desirable characteristics in the labor law subject with a validity index of 0.78 and the assessing reasoning abilities and desirable characteristics in the labor law subject test with a discriminant power of 0.50-0.83, content validity between 0.65-0.85, and reliability coefficient between 0.75-0.82. The research was conducted between May-October 2023. Descriptive data such as percentage, mean, and standard deviation was used to analyze the data, and the difference between the means was tested using an independent t-test, a dependent t-test, a one-way MANOVA, and a univariate test at the significance level of.05. The results found that 1) the experimental group had a post-mean score of reasoning ability, and desirable characteristics were significantly higher than the pre-mean score at the.05 level. According to the total score of 45, the average score before studying was 20.7 and after studying was 38.9, respectively. The average scores for desirable characteristics were 42.8 and 74.9 points within a total of 80 points, respectively, and 2) the experimental group had higher average scores for reasoning abilities and desirable characteristics after learning than the control group with statistical significance at the .05 level, also average reasoning ability scores were 42.8 and 29.0, respectively, and average desirable characteristics scores were 74.9 and 54.5, respectively. The results indicate that a learning management model for strengthen reasoning abilities and desirable characteristics in labor law subjects can enhance reasoning abilities and desirable characteristics of vocational education students. It should be applied as an option and expanded to raise the achievement level of this labor law subject to be more successful in the future.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Bansong, A., Isarankura Na Ayudhaya, W. and Makanong, A. (2019). Kānčhatkān rīanrū dōi chai panhā pen thān khō̜ng nakrīan nai ra dap namat yom sưksā tō̜n plāi rōngrīan ʻum mao prachā san čhangwat Nakhō̜n Phanom [The Study of the Effectiveness of an Instructional Model based on Social Cognitive Theory and Strategic Life Planning to Enhance Self-Regulation and Health Education Learning Achievement of Lower Secondary School Students in Buriram Province]. Journal of Education studies, Chulalongkorn University. 47(Supplement2),345–368.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. NJ, USA : Prentice Hall.
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human Characteristic and School Learning. New York, USA : McGraw-Hill.
Boonyoung, V. (2021). Khwāmsāmāt nai kānhai hētphon læ phon samrit thāngkān rīan khanittasāt khō̜ng nak rīan chan matthayommasưksā pī thī hā dōi chai kānčhatkān rīanrū bǣp nēn krabūankān khit yāng mī wičhāranayān rō̜wō̜ makap theknik KWDL [Reasoning Ability and Mathematics Achievment of Grade 11 Students by Using Critical Thinking Instruction with KWDL Technigue (Unpuplished doctoral dissertation)]. Valai Alongkorn Rajabhat University, Pathum Thani, Thailand.
Bruner, J. (1977). The process of Education. Cambridge: Havard University Press.
Chitman-Booker, L. and Kopp. K. (2013). The 5Es of Inquiry-Based Science. CA : Shell Education Publishing.
Coon, D. and Mitterer, J. D. (2011). Psychology: A Journey. (4th ed). Massachusetts, USA : Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Department of Volitional Education, Ministry of Education. (2019). Luk soot pra-ka-sa-nee-ya-bat Put-ta- suk-ka-rat 2019. Retrieved September 2022, from https://bsq.vec.go.th/th-th/
Dungkong, V. and Jumpaluang, M. (2022). The development of desirable characteristics indicators of student in the 21 century students under volitional education Phetchaburi Provine : Volitional Education Innovation and Research Journal. 6(1),138-149.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. D.C. : Health & co. publisher.
Gagnon, G.W. and Collay, M. (2006). Constructivist learning design: Key questions for teaching to standards. California, USA : Corwin Press.
Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. S. and Miller, S. M. (2003). Vygotsky’ s Educational Theory in Cultural Context. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Kunthong, T. (2019). Kānphatthanā rūpbǣp kānčhatkān rīanrū phư̄a sœ̄msāng khwām chalāt thāng sangkhom khō̜ng wairun [Development of A Learning Management Model for Enhancing Teenagers’ Social Intelligence (Unpuplished doctoral dissertation)]. Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Long, M., Clare W., Karen L., Terri, P. and Kieron, S. (2011). The Psychology of Education. (2nded). Oxfordshire, UK : Routledge.
Ministry of Education. (2017). Tūa chī wat læ laksūt kǣn klāng klum sāra kānrīanrū witthayāsāt (chabap prapprung Phō̜.Sō̜. sō̜ngphanhārō̜ihoksip) [Indicators and Core Curriculum Science learning subject group (Revised Edition B.E. 2017)]. Bangkok : Agricultural Cooperative Association of Thailand Printing House Co., Ltd.
Nitko, A. J. and Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational Assessment of Students. (6th ed). Boston, USA : Pearson Education, Inc.
Palmer, D. A. (1991). Behavioral Interpretation of Memory. In Chase, P. & Hayes, L. (Eds.) Dialogue on verbal behavior. Mississippi, USA : Context Press.
Paul, R. (1993). Teaching Critical Thinking. Rohnert Park, CA : Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique.
Paungmalit, P. (2016). Khunnalaksana thī phưng prasong khō̜ng naksưksā laksūt nitisāt nai kān fưk prasopkān wichāchīp kotmāi [Desired characteristics of law students in training experience Legal Profession]. Bangkok : Suan Dusit University.
Phengwan, S., Prasertsang, P. and Kalam, S. (2022). Kānphatthanā kitčhakam kānrīanrū tām thritsadī kānrīanrū thāng sangkhom klum sāra kānrīanrū sukkhasưksā læ phalasưksā samrap nak rīan namat yom sưksā pī thī nưng [Management According to the Social Learning Theory in Health Education and Psysical Education for Grade 7 students]. Journal of MCU Ubon Review. 7(2),470-482.
Piaget, J. (1979). The Child’s Conception of the World. New Jersey, USA : Littlefield, Adams.
Samon, S. and Levy, S. T. (2019). Interactions between reasoning about complex systems and conceptual understanding in learning chemistry. J Res Sci Teach. 57(1),58-86.
Sangthong, S. (2020). Kānphatthanā rūpbǣp kānčhatkān rīanrū bǣp MECCA phư̄a sœ̄msāng khwāmsāmāt nai kā raʻā nō̜ yā ngō̜mī wičhāranayān samrap nak rīan namat yom sưksā tō̜n plāi [The Development of MECCA Model to Enhance Critical Reading Abilities for Upper Secondary School Students]. Journal of Graduate Studies and Social Sciences, Uttaradit Rajabhat University. 10(1),105–117.
Santrock, J. W. (2008). Educational Psychology. (3rd ed.). New York, USA : McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.
Siegler, R. S. and Alibali, M. C. (2005). Children’s Thinking. New Jersey, USA : Prentice Hall.
Srisutham, W. (2019). Kānphatthanā kānčhatkān rīanrū bǣp sāngsan pen thān phư̄a songsœ̄m kān kǣ panhā yāng sāngsan læ phon samrit thāngkān rīan khō̜ng nak rīan namat yom sưksā pī thī sī [The Development of Students’ Creative problem and Learing of 10th Grade Students by Creative based Learning approach]. Maha Sarakham : Sciences Education, Rajabhat Mahasarakham University.
Srisunakrua, A., Khamhaengpol, A. and Pansuppawat, A. (2023). Kānphatthanā khwām chalāt rū dān witthayāsāt khō̜ng nak rīan namat yom sưksā pī thī sām rư̄ang watsadu nai chīwit pra wan dōi kānčhatkān rīanrū bǣp sư̄pso̜ hākhwām rū hā nō̜rō̜wō̜ makap khwāmrū nai nư̄ahā phanūak withīkān sō̜n læ theknōlōyī [Development of Scientific Literacy of Mathayomsuksa 3Students on the Topic of Daily Materials UsingInquiry Model (5E) Combined with TPACK]. .Journal of Humanity and Social Sciences NakhonPhanom University. 13(3),295-309.
Tagasilo, S. Mahahing, S. and Charungsirawat, R. (2019). Kānčhatkān rīanrū dōi chai panhā pen thān khō̜ng nakrīan nai ra dap namat yom sưksā tō̜n plāi rōngrīan ʻum mao prachā san čhangwat Nakhō̜n Phanom [Problem-based learning management for students at the upper secondary level, Ummao Prachasan School Nakhon Phanom Provinc]. Pimontham Research Institute Journal. 6(2),59-68.
Whitney, D. R. and Sabers, D. L. (1970). Improving Essay Examinations III, Use of Item Analysis, Technical Bulletin II, (Mimeographed). Iowa City : University Evaluation and Examination Service.
Woolfolk, A. (2010). Educational psychology. (11thed). Columbus, OH : Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.