AN EVALUATION COMPETENCY BUILDING MODEL FOR THE PRELIMINARY EXECUTIVES OF UNIVERSITY: AN APPLICATION OF PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY APPROACH

Main Article Content

Onjira tumchaiyangkul
Siridej sujiva
Pongthep Jiraro

Abstract

In this article, the researcher presents an evaluation competency building model for the executives of university with the objectives to explore and create a competency evaluation model for the executives.  The researcher had studied various evaluation skills and applied them together with the concept of professional learning community approach in order to enable the evaluation competency to analyze and solve specific problems in the university.  This research study is a mix-method research which is integrating quantitative and qualitative analytical methods to confirm the results. The results of this study show that the evaluation competency building model for the executives of university comprises four components: input, process, output, and feedback. The process has 5 sub-steps which are: group meeting, analyzing problems, designing activities, exchanging of learning, and innovation, all of which must be implemented within the framework of supports and shared leadership, the having of supporting conditions, and the exchange of learning between people.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
tumchaiyangkul, O., sujiva, S., & Jiraro, P. (2020). AN EVALUATION COMPETENCY BUILDING MODEL FOR THE PRELIMINARY EXECUTIVES OF UNIVERSITY: AN APPLICATION OF PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY APPROACH. Panyapiwat Journal, 12(1), 221-233. Retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/pimjournal/article/view/236757
Section
Research Article

References

Canadian Evaluation Society. (2009). Competencies for Canadian evaluation Practice national council brief professional designation core committee. Retrieved January 15, 2019, from https://evaluationcanada.ca/txt/20090531_compe tencies.pdf

Coryn, C., Noakes, L. A., Westine, C. D. & Schröter, D. C. (2010). A systematic review of theorydriven evaluation practice from 1990 to 2009. American Journal of Evaluation, 32(1), 1-28.

Dechakupt, P. (2000). A Compilation of Innovative Articles to Stimulate Learning for Teachers in the Era of Reform. Bangkok: Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University. [in Thai]

Donprasit, S. (2006). Competency of teachers and educational administrators. Thai Journal of Education, 17, 10-21. [in Thai]

Duignan, P. (2002). Building social policy evaluation capacity. Retrieved January 2, 2019, from https://www.msd.govt.nz/publications/journal/19-december-/19-pages179-194.html

Ghere, G., King, J. A., Stevahn, L. & Minnema, J. (2006). A professional development unit for reflecting on program evaluator competencies. American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 108-123.

Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. New York: Teacher College Press.

Harnar, M. A. & Preskill, H. (2007). Evaluators descriptions of process use: an exploratory study, New Directions for Evaluation, 116, 27-44.

Hord, S. M. (1997). Professional Learning Communities: Communities of Continuous Inquiry and Improvement. Retrieved on April 28, 2016, from https://www.sedl.org/siss/plccredit.html

International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and Instruction. (2006). Evaluator competencies. Retrieved June 5, 2019, from https://www.ibstpi.org/Competencies/evaluator

Intrararoon, Ch., Urwongs, S. & Sujiva, S. (2008). The Development of Performance Appraisal System of Governmental Teachers. KKU research journal, 8(4), 63-76. [in Thai]

King, J. A. (2007). Making sense of participatory. New Direction for Evaluation, 114, 83-86.

Kirkhart, KE. (2002). Reconceptualizing evaluation use: An integrated theory of influence. In Caeacelli VJ. And Preskill H. (Eds.). The expanding scope of evaluation use, new directions for evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Larpmala, S. (2000). The Report of Hong Kong Education. Bangkok: Pimdee. [in Thai]

Louis, K. S. & Kruse, S. D. (1995). Professional and Community: Perspectives on Reforming Urban Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Moon, C., Lee, J. & Lim, S. (2010). A performance appraisal and promotion ranking system based on fuzzy logic: An implementation case in military organizations. Applied Soft Computing, 10(March), 512-519.

Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation, the new century text (3rd ed.). CA: Sage.

Phosrithong, N. (2007). Competency model for chief of child development center in Local administrative organization, Department of local administration. Ministry of Interior. Research documents, Suan Dusit University. [in Thai]

Sangthong, N. (2004). Let's get to know the Completency. Bangkok: HR Center. [in Thai]

Sergiovanni, T. (1994). Building community in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Somerville, I. & Mroz, J. E. (1997). New Competencies for a new world. In F. Hesselbein, M. Goldsmith, & R. Beckhard (Eds.), The organization of the future, 65-78.

Thamromdee, S., Chanin, T. & Traiyawong, K. (2010). The Research and Development of the Community of Learning on Contemplative Education. The Academic Document Project of Learning for Change No.8. Nakhon Pathom: Emy Enterprise Co., Ltd. [in Thai]

Thompson, S. C., Gregg, L. & Niska, J. M. (2004). Professional learning communities, leadership, andstudent learning. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 28(1), 1-15.

Watts, G. D. & Castle, S. (1993). The time dilemma in school restructuring. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(3), 306-310.