Executive Empowerment Model for Working Efficiency of Teachers Under the Office of the Basic Education Commission in Nakhonchaiburin Area

Authors

  • Anusak Dalunchim Faculty of Education, Vongchavalitkul University
  • Sanguanpong Chuanchom Faculty of Education, Vongchavalitkul University
  • Somboon Tanya Faculty of Education, Vongchavalitkul University
  • Chookiat Wisetsena Faculty of Education, Vongchavalitkul University

Keywords:

Executive Empowerment, Administrator of Basic Education Institutions, Working Efficiency of Teachers

Abstract

The objectives of this research were: 1) to study the condition of executive empowerment; 2) to construct the executive empowerment model; and 3) to evaluate the feasibility and usefulness of the executive empowerment model for the working efficiency of teachers under the Office of the Basic Education Commission in the Nakhonchaiburin area. The research was conducted in 3 phases: Phase 1:  The researcher studied the condition of executive empowerment. The samples were school directors, deputy school directors, and teachers, for a total of 381. Multi-stage random Sampling. Data were collected using questionnaires. The item consistency index was 0.60-1.0. The reliability value of the questionnaires was 0.897, and quantitative data was analyzed by percentage, mean, and standard deviation. Phase 2: The researcher constructed the executive empowerment model. The target group to approve the model was seven experts. Data were collected by interviewing and using the model suitability assessment form. Qualitative data were analyzed by content analysis. Quantitative data were analyzed by mean and standard deviation. Phase 3: The researcher evaluated the feasibility and usefulness of the executive empowerment model. The targets were 30 school administrators. Data were collected using a feasibility and usefulness assessment of the model. Quantitative data were analyzed by means and standard deviation.

The research results were as follows: 1) The condition of executive empowerment overall was at a high level. When examining individual aspects, they were all at a high level. The item with the highest score was empowerment through honors and respect, followed by empowerment through training and development and empowerment through recognition. The item with the lowest score was empowerment through the assignment of roles and responsibilities and empowerment through setting standards and excellence, respectively. 2) The executive empowerment model consisted of five aspects, namely: (1) concept and principal; (2) objective of the model; (3) content of the model; (4) guidelines for implementation of the model; and (5) conditions for successful implementation of the Model. The evaluation score of the executive empowerment model by experts was at a high level. 3) The feasibility of the executive empowerment model overall was at its highest level. The usefulness of the executive empowerment model overall was at its highest level, too.

References

ธีระ รุญเจริญ. (2550). ความเป็นมืออาชีพของผู้บริหารในการจัดและบริหารการศึกษายุคปฏิรูปการศึกษา. กรุงเทพฯ: ข้าวฟ่าง.

พรฐิตา ฤทธิ์รอด. (2555). รูปแบบการบริหารสถานศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐานแบบเสริมพลังอำนาจ (วิทยานิพนธ์ปรัชญาดุษฎีบัณฑิต). มหาวิทยาลัยนเรศวร, พิษณุโลก.

วิน เชื้อโพธิ์หัก. (2547). การพัฒนาบุคคลและการฝึกอบรม. กรุงเทพฯ: โอ.เอส. พริ้นติ้งเฮ้าส์.

สมาน อัศวภูมิ. (2557). รูปแบบการบูรณาการระบบการประกันคุณภาพภายในกับการบริหารสถานศึกษา สำหรับสถานขั้นพื้นฐานขนาดกลาง. กรุงเทพฯ: โรงพิมพ์แห่งจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย.

สำนักงานเลขาธิการสภาการศึกษา. (2560). แผนการศึกษาแห่งชาติ พ.ศ. 2560–2579. กรุงเทพฯ: พริกหวานกราฟฟิค.

สุชีพ ชั้นสูง. (2557). การพัฒนารูปแบบการประเมินตนเองโดยใช้วิธีเสริมพลังอำนาจเพื่อแสดงความรับผิดชอบในการดำรงวิทยฐานะชํานาญการพิเศษสำหรับครู สังกัดสำนักงานคณะกรรมการการศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน (วิทยานิพนธ์ปรัชญาดุษฎีบัณฑิต). มหาวิทยาลัยสุโขทัยธรรมาธิราช, นนทบุรี.

อาคม วัดไธสง. (2547). หน้าที่ผู้นำในการบริหารการศึกษา (พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 2). สงขลา: มหาวิทยาลัยทักษิณ.

Eisner, E. W. (1976). Educational Connoisseurship and Criticism: Their Form and Functions in Educational Evaluation. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 10(3), 135-150.

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating Professional Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Keeves, P. L. (1988). Model and Model Building Education Research Methodology and Measurement: an International Handbook. New York: Pergamon.

Krejcie, R. V. & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.

May. (1997). How Multinational and National Firms Compete: A Case study of the Hospitality Industry. New Yor: The Free Press.

Rappaport, J. (1984). Studies in Empowerment: Introduction to the Issue. Prevention in Human Services, 3(2-3), 1-7.

Tracy, D. (1992). Ten Steps to Empowerment: A Common-Sense Guide to Managing People. New York: William Morrow.

Downloads

Published

2024-03-13

How to Cite

Anusak Dalunchim, Sanguanpong Chuanchom, Somboon Tanya, & Chookiat Wisetsena. (2024). Executive Empowerment Model for Working Efficiency of Teachers Under the Office of the Basic Education Commission in Nakhonchaiburin Area . SIKKHA Journal of Education, 11(1), 203–212. retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/sikkha/article/view/263790

Issue

Section

Research Article
Share |