THE TEACHING METHODS, ACTIVE LEARNING MODELS (ACTIVE LEARNING) P.I.L. MODEL IN TEACHING AND LEARNING THAI LANGUAGE COURSE ON LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION OF 1ST YEAR STUDENTS OF MAHAMAKUT BUDDHIST UNIVERSITY YASOTHON BUDDHIST COLLEGE

Abstract

This research were aim to 1) compare the learning achievement of the Thai language course with communication. 1^st year student of mahamakut buddhisti university yasothon buddist college by using teaching methods, proactive learning styles and traditional teaching-learning management styles. 2) to study the satisfaction of the first year students of mahamakut buddhist university yasothon buddhist college towards learning management by using teaching methods, proactive learning styles in Thai language course on language and communication. 3) to study the learning management model by using the teaching method, the proactive learning model that is suitable for the teaching and learning management of the faculty of education. department of teaching thai Language. and 4) to apply the learning management model by using the teaching method, the proactive learning model of the thai language course on language and communication of the faculty of education. teaching thai language to apply in teaching and learning management of the university. by using the research target group of 30 person.

The results showed that The mean of the learning achievement scores using the teaching method, the proactive learning model in teaching and learning management. Thai language course on language and communication For first year students, the pre-study test result was mean (m= 13.80), and the post-study test result was mean (m= 27.06). When considering the comparison of development using the Independent Sample t-test, it was found that it was higher. before class statistically significant at the .05 level. The actual assessment model and satisfaction assessment form is an assessment for students to consider their level of feeling and performance in the proactive learning model. The researcher assigned 5 instructors in charge of the program and 15 students in the experimental group, totaling 20 people. The results were discussed as follows: 1) Proactive learning style in the curriculum. with a moderate mean (m= 3.50) 2) a content proactive learning style. They had a high level mean (m= 4.12). 3) a proactive learning style in teaching and learning management. with a moderate mean (m= 3.62) 4) an aggressive learning style in cognitive They had a high level mean (m= 4.20). They had a high level mean (m= 4.12) and 6) a skill-based proactive learning style. They had a high level mean (m= 4.00), respectively. The students' satisfaction towards the proactive learning style was moderate (m= 3.92), possibly because the proactive learning style was suitable for the curriculum, content, teaching and learning management. This is in line with Bloom's Taxonomy theory and the proactive learning model is appropriate. can be applied in learning.