PROBLEMS AND DEVELOPMENT NEEDS OF THE DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PROGRAM IN EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION (REVISED CURRICULUM B.E. 2572 [2029]), FACULTY OF EDUCATION, NAKHON RATCHASIMA COLLEGE
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed to: 1) examine the existing problems in the administration and management of the Doctor of Philosophy program in Educational Administration in terms of curriculum structure, learning management, assessment, and curriculum quality assurance; 2) investigate the needs for developing the Doctor of Philosophy program in Educational Administration to align with changing educational contexts, educational leadership competencies, and higher education qualification standards; and 3) propose guidelines for developing the Doctor of Philosophy program in Educational Administration (revised curriculum B.E. 2572 [2029]) with respect to curriculum structure, courses, learning management processes, and the curriculum quality assurance system. The informants consisted of 11 lecturers, 16 students, and 5 experts. The research instruments included a five-level rating scale questionnaire and a semi-structured interview. Data were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, frequency, and percentage.
The findings revealed that: 1) the problems and needs for developing the Doctor of Philosophy program in Educational Administration to align with changing educational contexts, educational leadership competencies, and higher education qualification standards were overall at a high level; 2) there was a strong need for comprehensive development in educational administration, encompassing leadership competencies, curriculum structure and courses, assessment, and the development of knowledge, skills, ethics, and personal attributes; and 3) the curriculum structure should be revised to adhere to high-level standards, emphasizing researcher competencies and leadership capable of generating new knowledge and responding to global changes. Course design and learning management should integrate theory, practice, technology, and research through active and experiential learning processes. Assessment and quality assurance should focus on learning outcomes and authentic performance, benchmarked against international standards, to concretely reflect the quality of graduates.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
กระทรวงการอุดมศึกษา วิทยาศาสตร์ วิจัยและนวัตกรรม. (2565). มาตรฐานคุณวุฒิระดับอุดมศึกษา พ.ศ. 2565. กรุงเทพมหานคร: กระทรวงการอุดมศึกษา วิทยาศาสตร์ วิจัยและนวัตกรรม.
พงศ์ศักดิ์ นาคะวงศ์, ธนพล สุวรรณศรี และ อรทัย บุญเรือง. (2566). สมรรถนะผู้นำทางการศึกษากับประสิทธิผลการบริหารสถานศึกษา. วารสารสหศาสตร์ศึกษาการพัฒนาสังคม, 6(1), 71–88.
ศิริชัย ใจดี, สมพร แสงทอง และ วราภรณ์ คงมั่น. (2564). การบริหารจัดการหลักสูตรระดับบัณฑิตศึกษาในบริบทการเปลี่ยนแปลงทางการศึกษา. วารสารสหศาสตร์ศึกษาการพัฒนาสังคม, 4(2), 45–60.
สุภาวดี พรหมอินทร์, ชาญชัย ศรีสุข และ กนกวรรณ บุญส่ง. (2565). การพัฒนาหลักสูตรฐานสมรรถนะในระดับบัณฑิตศึกษา. วารสารสหศาสตร์ศึกษาการพัฒนาสังคม, 5(1), 23–38.
AUN-QA. (2020). Guide to AUN-QA assessment at programme level (Version 4.0). ASEAN University Network.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2019). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2019). Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term. Routledge.
Bush, T. (2020). Theories of educational leadership and management (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Fullan, M. (2020). Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass.
Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2020). Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. Higher Education Academy.
Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Sage Publications.
OECD. (2019). Future of education and skills 2030: OECD learning compass 2030. OECD Publishing.
Teichler, U. (2021). Higher education and the world of work: Conceptual frameworks, comparative perspectives, empirical findings. Springer.
