A Comparison of Matthayomsuksa 2 Students’ Consuming Behavior and Analytical Thinking Ability on the Topic Entitled, “Food and Livelihoods,” Learning Area of Science, Using Constructivism and Six Thinking Hats

การเปรียบเทียบพฤติกรรมการบริโภคและความสามารถในการคิดวิเคราะห์ เรื่อง อาหารกับการดำรงชีวิต กลุ่มสาระการเรียนรู้วิทยาศาสตร์ ของนักเรียนชั้นมัธยมศึกษาปีที่ 2 ที่ได้รับการสอนแบบสรรค์สร้างความรู้ กับการคิดแบบหมวกหกใบ

Abstract

The purposes of this research were to compare Matthayomsuksa 2 students’: 1) consuming behavior on the topic entitled, “Food and Livelihoods”, before and after using Constructivism; 2) consuming behavior before and after using Six Thinking Hats; 3) consuming behavior after using Constructivism and Six Thinking Hats; and 4) analytical thinking ability after using Constructivism and Six Thinking Hats. The sample consisted of 60 Mathayomsuksa 2 students from Suphan Buri College of Dramatic Arts. They were chosen by two-stage sampling. During the first stage, 2 out of 3 Matthayomsuksa 2 heterogeneous classrooms of 30 students each were randomly selected. Then they were randomly assigned to the either Constructivism or Six Thinking Hats instruction. The research instruments were: 1) learning management plans using Constructivism, 2) learning management plans using Six Thinking Hats, 3) a questionnaire on consuming behavior with a reliability value of 0.794, and 4) an analytical thinking ability test with a reliability value of 0.899. Data were analyzed in terms of mean, standard deviation, and t-test.
Findings showed that: 1. The students’ consuming behavior on the topic entitled, “Food and Livelihoods”, after using Constructivism was significantly higher than that before using it (p<.05). 2. The students’ consuming behavior after using Six Thinking Hats was significantly higher than that before using it (p<.05). 3. The students’ consuming behavior using Constructivism was significantly higher than that of the students using Six Thinking Hats (p<.05). 4. The students’ analytical thinking ability using Constructivism was significantly higher than that of the students using Six Thinking Hats (p<.05).