INNOVATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIMARY SCHOOL IN SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, AND TECHNOLOGY
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed to (1) analyze the development of primary schools in science, mathematics, and technology according to the IPST standards in schools with 1-120 students, and (2) create an innovation for school development based on the IPST standards. A mixed-method research approach was employed, with a sample of 374 schools selected through simple random sampling for the quantitative part, and 12 key informants chosen through purposive sampling for the qualitative part, including participation in a Professional Learning Community (PLC) process. The key informants included (1) five school administrators from the Quality School Project in Science, Mathematics, and Technology according to IPST standards, (2) five experts from IPST, and (3) two educational supervisors. Research instruments included questionnaires, PLC process recording forms, and innovation evaluation forms. The data were analyzed using frequency, mean, and standard deviation for the quantitative data, and content analysis for the qualitative data. The research results revealed that (1) the current development of primary schools was at the highest level in all aspects, and (2) regarding the innovation for primary school development, the "Six-G Innovation" was developed, consisting of 6 components and 27 indicators: 1) Policy and Planning (G1), 2) Support (G2), 3) Teacher Development (G3), 4) Learning Management (G4), 5) Supervision (G5), and 6) Participation (G6). This innovation effectively promoted the development of primary schools in science, mathematics, and technology through the PDCA quality cycle.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Each publish articles were copyright by Phranakorn Rajabhat University
Any contents which appeared in each articles in the journal were authors personal opinion. It did not relate to Phranakorn Rajabhat University and other instructors in the university. Each authors would take responsibility on their articles. If there are any mistake, the authors will take responsibility themselves
References
Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2001). Doing action research in your own organization. SAGE Publications.
Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2017). Doing action research in your own organization (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
Office of Teacher and Educational Personnel Development. (2017). Professional Learning Community (PLC). Siam Paritas Publishing Co., Ltd.
Hamel, G. (2006). The why, what, and how of management innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84(2), 72-84.
Hamel, G. (2018). The future of management. Harvard Business Review Press.
Hamel, G. (2018). The why, what, and how of management innovation. Harvard Business Review, 96(6), 58-67.
Hamel, Gary. 2006. The Why, what, and How of Management Innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84, 72-84.
Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. (2019). Handbook for quality schools in science, mathematics, and technology according to IPST standards (SMT Quality Schools by IPST). Bangkok: Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology.
Office of the Secretary of the National Strategy Committee Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board, 2018 : p.34.
Secretary of the National Strategy Committee Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board, 2018 : p.2.