RiskManagementSystem to Improve the Quality ofBasicEducation Based on the Concept ofDesiredOutcome of Education

Abstract

This study has threepurposes: 1) to investigate the needs for developing a risk management system to improve the quality of basic education based on the concept of desired outcomes, 2) to develop a risk management system to improve the quality of basic education based on theconcept of desired outcomes, and 3) to test and assess the quality of the developed risk management system for improving basic education quality, also based on desired outcomes. The research employed a research and development methodology and was divided into three phases, aligning with its stated purposes. Information was gathered from various sources: three school affiliation administrators provided insights through interviews, 241 school directors completed questionnaires, and 22 staff members from threebasic education schools participated in the system's trial. The research instrumentsincluded a semi-structured interview form, an open-ended questionnaire, and a form for assessing the quality of the risk management system. Data analysis involved calculating frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, and performing content analysis. The main results are summarized below:

1. Significant risks in improving the quality of basic education, based on each domain of desired educational outcomes, included:1) lack of life skills, work skills, and self-learning skills; 2) lack of media literacy; and 3) lack of civic consciousness. Basic education schools needed a risk management system with the following attributes: improved readiness through staff knowledge provision, continuous monitoring and evaluation of work performance, establishment of committees and responsible individuals with clearly defined roles, and continuous improvement of work processes.

2. The developed risk management system, named Pa-Vicids, demonstrated attributes aligned with six major principles: 1) Value Creation, 2) Integration, 3) Participation, 4) Communicationand Information, 5) Dynamism, and 6) Sustainable Development. It consisted of five components: external environment, input, process, output, and feedback.

3. The three schools that trialed the system were able to implement their risk plans/action plans fully and effectively. The levels of all identified risks were reduced to low and moderate levels, which were deemed acceptable.All three schools plan to continue managing risks in the following academic year to further lower risk levels from moderate to low. Additionally, no new risks were reported in any of the three schools, indicating that the investigations and analyses of risks had been conducted comprehensively, covering all domains of the desired outcomes.

4. The Pa-Vicids system achieved the highest level of quality across all four standards. The average overall quality assessment score was 4.67. The quality levels in allfour standardswere at the highest, with average scores ranging from 4.61 to 4.72. The standard with the highest quality level was the propriety standard (average score: 4.72), followed by the utility standard (4.68), the accuracy standard (4.66), and thefeasibility standard (4.61).