A Study of Learning Achievement on Polymers Learning Unit and Analytical Thinking Ability of Grade 10 students by Active Learning with Cause and Effect Technique
Keywords:
Active learning, Analytical thinking ability, Cause and effect techniqueAbstract
The purpose of this research aimed to compare 1) the learning achievements of grade 10 students on polymers learning unit and analytical thinking ability before and after by active learning with cause and effect technique 2) the learning achievement and analytical thinking ability after the learning with the 70% criterion. The sample was selected by cluster random sampling. There were 35 students of grade 10 who studied in the second semester of the academic year 2017 at Thepsatitwittaya School, Thepsatit District, Chaiyaphum Province. Secondary Education Service Area Office 30. The sample was selected by cluster random sampling process. The research instrument was 4 lesson plans. The data collection was a achievement test and analytical thinking ability test. The data were statistically analyzed for Mean (), Percentage (%), Standard Deviation (S.D.), and t-test for dependent statistics.
The results showed that
- The comparison of learning achievement and analytical thinking ability before and after learning management was found that after learning was higher than before learning management at the .05 level differences.
- The comparison of learning achievement and analytical thinking ability after learning management was significantly higher than the 70% criterion at the .05 level differences.
References
Akinoglu, O. & Tandogan, R. O. (2006). The effect of problem-based active learning in science education on students’ academic achievement, attitude and concept learning.Retrieved from http://www.ejnste.com/v3m/EJMSTEV3M_Akinoglu. [in Thai]
Bloom, (1956). Toxonomy of Educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Hanbook I, cognitive domain. New York: Longman.
Bonwell, C. C. & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ERIC Disigest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse and Higher Education.
Boonchom, S. (2002). Research Primary. Bangkok: Suveeriyasan. [in Thai]
Bu-nga, W. (2003). Active Learning. Academic journal, 10(9), 30–34. [in Thai]
Bureau of Academic Affairs and Educational Standards. (2008). Learning Management Approach by Core Curriculum for Basic Education in 2008. Bangkok: Shipping and Packing Organization. [in Thai]
Cherdsak, P. (2013). The Effect of Organizing Active Learning in Mathematical Process Skills on Mathematical Problem Solving Ability, Critical Thinking Ability and Self Confidence of Mathayomsuksa 3 Students. Bangkok: Srinakharinwirot University. [in Thai]
Chiangrai Provincial Administrative Organization School. (2017). Teach like new Zealand’s Thinking School. Chiangrai: Chiangrai Provincial Administrative Organization. [in Thai]
Chuanpit, S. (2017). Effect of Using the Cause and Effect Instructional Model on Learning Achievement and Group work Skills in Social Studies of Eleven Grade Students. Bangkok: Ramkhamhaeng University. [in Thai]
Meyers, C. & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning Strategies for the collage classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ministry of Education. (2008). Core Curriculum for Basic Education in 2008. Bangkok: Shipping and Packing Organization. [in Thai]
National Institute of Educational Testing Service. (2014). Annual Report 2014. Bangkok: National Institute of Educational Testing Service. [in Thai]
Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment. (2011). Automate QA (2011-2015). Bangkok: Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment. [in Thai]
Patiwat, B. (2013). Active Learning Through Constructivism by Students to Develop their Analytical Thinking Skills A Case Study of Banwangtadee School in Phetchabun Primary Education Office Area Service 3. Bangkok: Rangsit University. [in Thai]
Rasita, R. (2014). The Achievement of Integrated Learning Management by Active Learning Method A Case Study of Modern Management and Leadership Course King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi. Bangkok: King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi. [in Thai]
Somboon, T. (2013). Educational Research Methodology. Nakhon Ratchasima: Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University. [in Thai]
The Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. (2014). Assessment of PISA 2009. Bangkok: The Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. [in Thai]
Thepsatitwittaya School . (2014-2016). Strategic Plan Thepsatitwittaya School. Chaiyaphum: Registration. [in Thai]
Vivek, A. D. (2008). Cause and effect diagram for a teaching learning process (CEDTLP) - A case study. Industrial Engineering Journal, 1(2), 41-42.
Wanrat, J. (2006). 17 of Thinker tool. Bangkok: Thailand Productivity Institute. [in Thai]
Yuphadee, K., Methinee W. R. & Ratchadakorn P. (2018). Instructional Management by Using SWOT Analysis Activities to Strengthen Analytical Thinking Skill for Mathayomsuksa 1 Students in Business Subject in Learning Area of Occupations and Technology of Bodindecha (Sing Singhaseni) Nonthaburi School. Kasetsart Education Review, 33(3), 37-46. [in Thai]
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
บทความทุกบทความเป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของวารสารคณะศึกษาศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร์ วิทยาเขตบางเขน
วารสารศึกษาศาสตร์ปริทัศน์ (Kasetsart Educational Review)
