การสอนแบบสมาร์ตของครูระดับมัธยมศึกษาตอนต้นในโครงการนวัตกรรมการเรียนรู้แบบสมาร์ตของมหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่น

Authors

  • Theeradej Manakul Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Khon Kaen University
  • Kulthida Tuamsuk Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Khon Kaen University
  • Anucha Somabut Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Khon Kaen University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14456/nrru-rdi.2022.52

Keywords:

Smart teaching, Smart learning, Junior high schools

Abstract

    Changing the quality of education in Thailand A part of this emphasize on the development of teacher competencies that is important to the classroom. Learning conditions and teaching methods to lead the development of smart teaching. This research aimed to study the situations of smart teaching practices of junior higher school teachers under the KKU Smart Learning Project of Khon Kaen University that were based on four main aspects: 1) defining learning outcomes and lesson plan, 2) application of teaching methods and learning activities, 3) managing learning environments, and 4) measurement and evaluation. The study employed a quantitative research design. Data were collected by administering a questionnaire to a sample of 1,226 out of 1,500 possible respondents who were junior higher school teachers from 205 junior higher schools located in 20 provinces in the Northeastern region of Thailand. The results of the study revealed that the teachers applied smart teaching practices in all four aspects comprised of defining learning outcomes and lesson plan, the application of teaching methods and learning activities, managing learning environments, and measurement and evaluation of learning outcomes at a high level. Learning environment management, particularly, was applied in their classes most often to encourage students to share their ideas and listen to others’ opinions both in their on-site and online classrooms. In addition, digital technology and computer applications were used for managing the learning environment, recording learning outcomes, and monitoring learners’ behaviors.

References

Akhrif, O., Benfares, C., & Hmina, N. (2020). Collaborative approaches in smart learning environment: a case study. Procedia Computer Science, 175, 710-715.

Alfoudari, A. M., Durugbo, C. M., & Aldhmour, F. M. (2021). Understanding socio-technological challenges of smart classrooms using a systematic review. Computers & Education, 173, 104282, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104282

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How Learning Works: Seven Research-based Principles for Smart Teaching. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass, 1-9.

Borisova, O. V., Vasbieva, D. G., Malykh, N. I., Vasnev, S. A., & Bírová, J. (2016). Problem of using innovative teaching methods for distance learning students. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15, 1175-1184.

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R., Eds. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Expanded ed. Washington, DC : The National Academies Press.

Cheung, S. K., Phusavat, K., & Yang, H. H. (2021). Shaping the future learning environments with smart elements: challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, 1-9.

Daouk, Z., Bahous, R., & Bacha, N. N. (2016). Perceptions on the effectiveness of active learning strategies. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 8, 360-375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-05-2015-0037

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: a critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59, 423-435.

García-Tudela, P. A., Prendes-Espinosa, P., & Solano-Fernández, I. M. (2021). Smart learning environments: a basic research towards the definition of a practical model. Smart Learning Environments, 8, 1-21.

Hall, R., Atkins, L., & Fraser, J. (2014). Defining a self-evaluation digital literacy framework for secondary educators: the DigiLit Leicester Project. Research in Learning Technology, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.21440

Harris, D. N., & Rutledge, S. A. (2010). Models and predictors of teacher effectiveness: a review of the literature with lessons from (and for) other occupations. Teachers College Record, 112, 914–960.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Park Square, OX : Rutledge.

Instefjord, E., & Munthe, E. (2016). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology: an analysis of the emphasis on digital competence in teacher education curricula. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39, 77-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2015.1100602

Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. (2014). Teachers' self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59-76.

Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2008). The importance of information technology attitudes and competencies in primary and secondary education. In International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 321-331). Boston, MA : Springer.

Lund, A., Furberg, A., Bakken, J., & Engelien, K. L. (2014). What does professional digital competence mean in teacher education? Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 3, 280-298. https://doi.org/10.18561/ISSN1891-943X-2014-04-04

Ministry of Education, Thailand. (2022). Announcement on the Policy and Focus of the Ministry of Education, Fiscal years of 2022 and 2023. Retrieved February 27, 2022 from https://moe360.blog/2022/01/19/policy-and-focus-moe/ (In Thai)

Ningsih, T. (2019). Smart teachers in developing students’ character in 4.0 industrial revolution era. International Conference of Moslem Society, 3, 58-68. https://doi.org/10.24090/icms.2019.2385

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9, 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x

Radović, S., Marić, M., & Passey, D. (2019). Technology enhancing mathematics learning behaviours: shifting learning goals from “producing the right answer” to “understanding how to address current and future mathematical challenges”. Education and Information Technologies, 24, 103-126.

Saunders, G., Oradini, F., & Clements, M. (2017). SMART teaching in new and old classrooms. IAFOR Journal of Education, 5, 85-109.

Shi, L. Y. (2016). Wisdom classroom: the new direction in intelligence age. In the 3rd International Conference on Advanced Education and Management Science (AEMS 2019) (pp. 49-57). Beijing, China : Business College of Beijing Union University.

Shieh, C. J., Liao, Y., & Hu, R. (2013). Web-based instruction, learning effectiveness and learning behavior: the impact of relatedness. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9(4), 405-410.

Tuamsuk, K. (2018). Executive summary of KKU Smart Learning Project: Paper Submitted to the Minister of Education, Khon Kaen: Khon Kaen University. (Unpublished), 1-9. (In Thai)

Tuamsuk, K. (2020). Report of the KKU Smart Learning Project: Paper Submitted to the Minister of Education, Khon Kaen: Khon Kaen University. (Unpublished), 1-15. (In Thai)

Vaseghi, R., Ramezani, A. E., & Gholami, R. (2012). Language learning style preferences: a theoretical and empirical study. Advances in Asian Social Science, 2, 441-451.

Table 1 Cronbach’s alpha coefficient analysis for the questionnaire reliability

Downloads

Published

2022-07-27

How to Cite

Manakul, T., Tuamsuk, K., & Somabut, A. (2022). การสอนแบบสมาร์ตของครูระดับมัธยมศึกษาตอนต้นในโครงการนวัตกรรมการเรียนรู้แบบสมาร์ตของมหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่น. Research Community and Social Development Journal, 16(3), 152–166. https://doi.org/10.14456/nrru-rdi.2022.52

Issue

Section

Research Articles