CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS OF DIGITAL COMPETENCY COMPONENTS OF BASIC EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS UNDER UDON THANI EDUCATIONAL SERVICE AREA OFFICE

Main Article Content

RONG PUNSUNGKA
PUNYARAT CHANKONG
MESAK SAENGSILA
THIRADET JIRATHANATHAT
WORAPON KLONGCHERNGSON
PRAYAD RUECHAKUL
MILINT SIRINKANYA
KESAREE WIWATTANAPATAPEE

Abstract

This research aimed to analyze the confirmatory factor structure of digital competency among basic education school administrators. The sample consisted of 400 administrators under the Udonthani Educational Service Area Office for the academic year 2025, selected through proportional stratified random sampling and simple random sampling by drawing lots from all schools. The research instrument was a five-point Likert scale questionnaire with a reliability coefficient at .997. Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis, Pearson correlation coefficient, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure, Bartlett’s test of sphericity, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).


The results showed that:


  1. The correlation coefficient, KMO, and Bartlett’s test indicated that all main components of digital competency were positively correlated at the .01 significance level, with correlation coefficients exceeding .30. The KMO value was .911 (greater than .60), and Bartlett’s test produced an approximate Chi-square value of 2398.859 significant at the .05 level. These findings confirm strong inter-variable relationships and suitability for factor analysis.

  2. The confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to construct a structural equation model (SEM) to examined the consistency between the theoretical model and empirical data. Indicators were grouped under 8 main components, 29 subcomponents, and 70 indicators. After model adjustment, the model demonstrated excellent fit with empirical data: χ² = 268.355, df = 240, χ²/df = 1.118, P-value = .101, RMSEA = .017, CFI = .996, TLI = .993, GFI = .957, AGFI = .922, RMR = .006, and Hoelter index = 413.000 at the .001 significance level.

          All statistical indicators met acceptable criteria, confirming that each indicator properly aligned under its subcomponent, and each subcomponent corresponded to its main component. Therefore, the digital competency model for basic education school administrators was found to be highly consistent and well-fitted with the empirical data.

Article Details

How to Cite
PUNSUNGKA, R., CHANKONG, P., SAENGSILA, M., JIRATHANATHAT, T., KLONGCHERNGSON, W., RUECHAKUL, P., SIRINKANYA, M., & WIWATTANAPATAPEE, K. (2026). CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS OF DIGITAL COMPETENCY COMPONENTS OF BASIC EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS UNDER UDON THANI EDUCATIONAL SERVICE AREA OFFICE. Santapol College Academic Journal, 12(2), 44–55. retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/scaj/article/view/285642
Section
Research Articles

References

เกียรติพงษ์ อุดมศิริ. (2564). ภาวะผู้นำเชิงดิจิทัลกับการบริหารจัดการสถานศึกษาในศตวรรษที่ 21. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์แห่งจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย.

ขจรศักดิ์ สุขสวัสดิ์. (2564). การสร้างสมรรถนะดิจิทัลสำหรับผู้บริหารสถานศึกษาไทย. วารสารวิชาการครุศาสตร์, 15(2), 55–72.

จันทนา ศรีสุข. (2565). การนำนวัตกรรมทางการศึกษาสู่การเปลี่ยนแปลงโรงเรียนยุคดิจิทัล. วารสารบริหารการศึกษา, 13(1), 101–119.

นงลักษณ์ วิรัชชัย. (2542). การวิเคราะห์องค์ประกอบเชิงยืนยัน: ทฤษฎีและการประยุกต์ใช้. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย.

สมชาย อินทร์ทอง. (2565). การสร้างเครือข่ายการเรียนรู้ดิจิทัลของผู้บริหารสถานศึกษา. วารสารการวิจัยการศึกษา, 27(3), 77–95.

สำนักงานคณะกรรมการการศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน. (2563). กรอบสมรรถนะดิจิทัลสำหรับครูและบุคลากรทางการศึกษา. กรุงเทพฯ: สพฐ.

Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2020). School leadership and information technology : Supporting teachers’ use of technology. Journal of Educational Administration, 58(1), 39–55.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Teaching and learning for understanding. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.

Digital Promise. (2024). School infrastructure and digital transformation. Washington, DC : Digital Promise Press.

Fullan, M. (2013). The new meaning of educational change. (4th ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Fullan, M. (2014). The principal : Three keys to maximizing impact. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2018). ISTE standards for education leaders. Washington, DC : ISTE.

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA : Harvard Business School Press.

Kotter, J. P. (2012). Accelerate : Building strategic agility for a faster-moving world. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

Lee, J. (2022). Instructional supervision in the digital age: A systematic approach. Journal of School Leadership, 32(2), 155–173.

Likert, R. (1967). The method of constructing an attitude scale. In Attitude measurement (pp. 90–95). New York, NY: Free Press.

Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2014). A systemic view of implementing data literacy in educator preparation. Educational Researcher, 43(1), 30–37.

Martinez, A. (2021). Unstructured supervision for teacher growth in digital schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(4), 601–619.

Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy?. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065–1078.

Nguyen, P. (2023). Cybersecurity and school IT infrastructure: Challenges in developing countries. International Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 201–219.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). OECD skills outlook 2019 : Thriving in a digital world. Paris : OECD Publishing.

Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators : DigCompEdu. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Schwab, K. (2016). The fourth industrial revolution. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

Sheninger, E. (2019). Digital leadership : Changing paradigms for changing times. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Trust, T. (2016). New model of teacher learning in online communities. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 32(2), 63–77.

Wang, Y., & Chen, H. (2025). Teacher professional development in digital competence : Evidence from China. Computers in Human Behavior, 142, 107–125.

Warschauer, M. (1995). E-mail for English teaching. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., & McAfee, A. (2014). Leading digital : Turning technology into business transformation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.