IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/mjsosc/v8y2017i6p73-80n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Project Evaluation for Development the Learning Integrated Model between the International Program (IP) and the Fundamental Level Curriculum in Education Hub Project of the Ministry of Education, Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • Chuenpraphanusorn Teeradet
  • Boonchart Jongkon
  • Snguanyat Ongorn
  • Wachirawin Amuka
  • Chimbuathong Sarawut
  • Moonlapat Kanchulee
  • Thitipetchkul Chanin

    (Graduate School, Suan Dusit University, Nakhon Ratchasima Rd, Khwaeng Dusit, Krung Thep Maha Nakhon 10300, Thailanda)

Abstract

The objectives of these investigation were: 1) evaluate the input process and the out-put of the International Program in Thailand, 2) study, analysis and synthesis the educational management, 3) develop the integrated model between the international classroom and the national curriculum classroom, 4) evaluate the model and 5) present and submit the model to the relevant educational organization. The mixed research methods: the qualitative and quantitative were used for this research methodology. The sampling group consisted of students, program leaders, school committees, teachers and school officers, total 827 people from 8 schools in the Education Hub Project. The tool for gathering the quantitative data was the questionnaire the reliability was in 0.950. Then the data was analyzed by the statistic in term of the percentage, mean and standard deviation. The in-depth interview and structural interview form was the main tool for the qualitative method. The results of this investigation were; 1) The result of the quantitative method was informed that 1.1) the In-Put process of the international program management especially the quality of the teachers were in the high ranking of demand in 4.15, furthermore, a) the classroom and supporting materials or teaching aids were in the high ranking in 3.98, and b) the area of teaching and learning were in the high ranking in 4.17. On the other hand, 1.2) the process factor: a) the students, program leaders, school committees, teachers and the school officers were participated in educational management in the high ranking in 3.96 b) the program management and the correlation with the community were in high ranking in 4.01 c) the quality of the teacher was in high ranking in 4.17 and d) the quality of the school officer was also in high ranking in 4.12. Moreover, 1.3) the out-put of the program can be seen as: a) the result of the student development and the progress of the Education Hub Project were in high ranking in 4.06 2) The result of the qualitative method was found that 2.1) the supporting of the school budget from the department of education was also insufficient, 2.2) the capacity of the school teachers and school officers were in high ranking too, and 2.3) the management, the correlation of any parts of the school within the teacher, classroom and the supporting material or teaching aids were in the high ranking. 2.4) the result of the model’s evaluation can be confirmed in the highly quality, especially; the model’s capacity that it was including both of In-Put, Process and Out-Put.

Suggested Citation

  • Chuenpraphanusorn Teeradet & Boonchart Jongkon & Snguanyat Ongorn & Wachirawin Amuka & Chimbuathong Sarawut & Moonlapat Kanchulee & Thitipetchkul Chanin, 2017. "The Project Evaluation for Development the Learning Integrated Model between the International Program (IP) and the Fundamental Level Curriculum in Education Hub Project of the Ministry of Education, ," Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Sciendo, vol. 8(6), pages 73-80, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:mjsosc:v:8:y:2017:i:6:p:73-80:n:7
    DOI: 10.1515/mjss-2017-0043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/mjss-2017-0043
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/mjss-2017-0043?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:mjsosc:v:8:y:2017:i:6:p:73-80:n:7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.